Are Youth Rights Taken Seriously in Times of Crisis?

 

Are Youth Rights Taken Seriously in Times of Crisis? - By Vartika

When the world goes into crisis mode, young people are usually told two things: “You’re the future” and “Stay patient.”

But crises do not pause our lives—they shape them.

Whether it is a pandemic, armed conflict, economic collapse, or climate disaster, young people are not just bystanders. We are students whose schools close, workers who lose entry-level jobs first, activists who are silenced under emergency laws, and citizens whose futures are negotiated without our presence at the table. The question is not whether crises affect youth—they clearly do. The real question is: are youth rights taken seriously when governments declare emergencies?

Crises Expand Power — But Shrink Youth Voice

During emergencies, governments often activate extraordinary legal powers. Under public health or national security laws, authorities may restrict movement, close institutions, limit protests, or fast-track legislation. While these measures can be necessary, they often reduce civic space.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, over 190 countries closed schools at the peak of the crisis, affecting more than 1.6 billion learners, according to UNESCO. Education shifted online almost overnight. But not all students had stable internet, devices, or safe study environments. The digital divide became painfully visible. In lower-income countries, millions of students never fully returned to school, increasing dropout rates and long-term inequality.

Education is a right recognized under international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Yet in crisis responses, youth voices were rarely consulted on how learning should continue or how mental health should be supported. Decisions were made for young people, not with them.

This pattern repeats across crises. Emergency laws may temporarily limit protests. But for youth-led movements—often centered on climate justice, gender equality, or political reform—protest is one of the few accessible tools of influence. When civic space shrinks, youth advocacy is often the first to be dismissed as “disruptive” rather than democratic.

A Concrete Example: Youth Climate Action

Consider the global climate movement inspired by Greta Thunberg and the Fridays for Future strikes. What began as a single student protest outside the Swedish parliament became a global youth-led movement demanding urgent climate policy reform. Young people across continents organized school strikes, legal challenges, and public demonstrations to pressure governments into meeting climate commitments.

In several countries, youth activists have even brought legal cases against governments for failing to protect their right to a safe environment. These cases argue that climate inaction violates constitutional rights and international obligations. Whether or not courts rule in their favor, the message is clear: young people are not passive victims of crisis—they are legal and political actors.

Yet during the pandemic, many of these protests were suspended under public health restrictions. While health measures were necessary, they also limited youth-led mobilization. The tension reveals something important: crises can unintentionally sideline youth participation, even when youth are advocating for long-term survival.

Mental Health: The Invisible Crisis Within the Crisis

Beyond education and protest rights, crises deeply affect youth mental health. The World Health Organization reported significant increases in anxiety and depression among young people during COVID-19. Social isolation, uncertainty, and economic instability disproportionately affected adolescents and young adults.

But mental health is often treated as an afterthought in emergency policy. Young people are told to “be resilient” without structural support systems being strengthened. Counseling services remain underfunded. School reopening debates focus on logistics more than emotional recovery. Again, youth experience the consequences but rarely shape the solutions.

Youth as Stakeholders, Not Symbols

There is a recurring narrative that young people are “too inexperienced” to participate meaningfully in crisis governance. Yet crises define our generation’s trajectory. Climate change, global debt, education disruption, and democratic backsliding will outlast temporary emergency declarations.

The United Nations has increasingly emphasized youth participation through initiatives such as youth advisory councils and the Office of the Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth. These efforts signal recognition. But recognition is not the same as power.

Youth inclusion must move beyond token panels or symbolic representation. It means structured consultation in policy-making, youth seats in local decision-making bodies, civic education that includes legal literacy, and transparent accountability mechanisms during states of emergency.

So, Are Youth Rights Taken Seriously?

Sometimes. But not consistently. And not systematically.

In times of crisis, governments often prioritize speed and stability. That is understandable. But rights should not become flexible simply because circumstances are difficult. If anything, crises test the strength of democratic systems. They reveal whose voices are considered essential and whose are considered optional.

Young people are not the future in waiting. We are citizens now. We study under disrupted systems now. We work in unstable economies now. We inherit policy decisions now.

If youth rights are to be taken seriously in times of crisis, young people must be treated not as vulnerable populations to be managed, but as informed stakeholders capable of shaping solutions.

Because crises will continue to happen. The real measure of progress is whether, the next time one does, young people are already in the room when decisions are made.