Not at all. In fact, it's our view that what the Optional Protocol does require is that in any action taken with respect to a child soldier, consistent with the general Convention on the Rights of the Child standard of being in the best interests of the child, any action, any rehabilitative objective, must be consistent with the best interests of the child. For example, I point you to the precedent of Sierra Leone, where even though, ultimately, no child soldiers were prosecuted, the prosecution was authorized, but only in that special chamber that was juvenile-appropriate and that had rehabilitative objectives. That's not a military commission. A military commission is a one-size-fits-all process.
On April 29th, 2008. See this statement in context.