Amid the intensity of the campaign trail and the daily political confrontation dominating headlines, one question continues surfacing from organizations defending children’s rights: Where exactly do children and adolescents fit into Colombia’s future?
As Colombia moves closer to another presidential election, public debate has once again become dominated by promises surrounding security, corruption, economic recovery, health care reform, and employment. Candidates travel across the country speaking about crime, inflation, taxes, institutional reforms, and political polarization, while social media amplifies slogans carefully designed to emotionally connect with voters in an increasingly divided nation.
That concern has increasingly been raised by NiñezYa, a coalition made up of more than 200 civil society organizations and networks focused on protecting the rights of children and adolescents across Colombia.
Through public statements, reports, and analyses of government plans presented by presidential candidates, the coalition has argued that none of the current proposals truly presents a comprehensive or sufficiently ambitious strategy capable of transforming the realities faced by millions of minors throughout the country.
While some candidates mention education, subsidies, or nutrition programs, the organization insists that childhood continues to be treated as a secondary matter rather than as a central pillar for national development and long-term peacebuilding.
For NiñezYa, the issue is not simply the absence of children from campaign speeches. The coalition believes Colombia continues carrying a historical and structural debt with childhood that goes far beyond isolated social programs.
In their view, many government proposals continue lacking measurable goals, implementation mechanisms, territorial approaches, and stable financing capable of guaranteeing long-term protection for children living in contexts marked by poverty, violence, forced displacement, and institutional abandonment.
The organization has repeatedly warned that without serious investment in childhood policies, the country risks reproducing the same cycles of inequality and violence generation after generation.
Children in Colombia remain one of the country’s deepest social debts
One of the strongest concerns raised by NiñezYa revolves around the continued impact of armed conflict and insecurity on children across the country.
Although public debate frequently focuses on military strategies, public order, and negotiations with illegal armed groups, the coalition argues that many candidates fail to directly address how violence continues shaping the daily lives of children in rural and marginalized territories.
According to figures cited by the organization, on average, one child is recruited by illegal armed groups every 20 hours in Colombia, while approximately 80 children and adolescents become victims of forced displacement every 24 hours because of confrontations between armed actors.
For organizations working directly with vulnerable communities, those numbers reveal that childhood remains trapped in the consequences of a conflict that has never fully disappeared. In many territories, children continue growing up surrounded by fear, instability, and the constant threat of recruitment, extortion, or displacement.
Entire families are forced to abandon their homes due to clashes between armed groups, while educational processes are interrupted by violence and insecurity. Despite this reality, NiñezYa argues that current presidential proposals rarely include strong or detailed child protection mechanisms specifically designed for conflict-affected regions.
The coalition has also emphasized that the absence of territorial strategies becomes especially concerning in municipalities included within the PDET programs created after the 2016 peace agreement to help rebuild regions most affected by armed conflict, poverty, violence and state abandonment.
Many of these regions continue facing deep poverty, weak institutional presence, and growing armed activity. For childhood advocates, protecting children in those territories requires much more than generalized promises of security. It demands coordinated state responses involving education, health care, mental health support, recreational spaces, and long-term family assistance programs capable of reducing the conditions that make children vulnerable to violence and recruitment.
Beyond the impact of armed conflict, the coalition insists that Colombia continues to normalize different forms of violence against children inside homes, schools, and communities.
According to figures repeatedly highlighted by NiñezYa, approximately 217 minors suffer some form of violence every day in the country. Despite the alarming magnitude of the problem, the organization argues that most presidential campaigns still fail to present robust proposals focused on promoting nonviolent parenting, emotional well-being, and safe environments for childhood development.
For child advocates, violence against minors continues to be treated too often as an isolated domestic issue rather than as a major public policy crisis requiring urgent national attention.
The coalition has questioned why discussions surrounding security during electoral campaigns tend to focus almost exclusively on organized crime, gangs, or armed groups, while less attention is paid to the violence many children experience inside their own homes and schools.
Organizations defending children’s rights insist that preventing violence requires comprehensive strategies involving mental health services, family support systems, community programs, and educational initiatives promoting respectful and nonviolent forms of upbringing.
Without those interventions, they argue, many children remain exposed to cycles of abuse capable of deeply affecting their emotional development and future opportunities.
Education gaps continue, leaving vulnerable children behind
Education is another area where the coalition believes presidential proposals continue falling dangerously short. Although candidates frequently promise expanded educational coverage and better access to universities, NiñezYa argues that there is still insufficient attention being given to early childhood education, particularly in rural and conflict-affected regions where institutional gaps remain severe.
The coalition has stressed the importance of universalizing preschool education, including pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, and transition programs, warning that thousands of Colombian children still lack access to quality educational opportunities during the most critical years of cognitive and emotional development.
For childhood experts, the early years of life are essential for building social skills, language development, emotional stability, and future learning capacity.
Yet in many rural communities, educational infrastructure remains precarious or inaccessible. Some children must travel long distances to attend school, while others grow up in areas where violence constantly interrupts educational continuity.
According to NiñezYa, the absence of clear investment plans and territorial strategies inside many presidential programs reflects how childhood education still fails to receive the level of urgency it requires.
The coalition has also criticized the limited attention being paid to the so-called Education in Emergencies policy, a pedagogical model designed to guarantee educational continuity for children living in areas affected by armed conflict or humanitarian crises.
According to figures cited by the organization, more than 20 children abandon school every day because of violence in Colombian territories. For NiñezYa, the lack of concrete budget allocations and implementation plans surrounding this policy demonstrates how disconnected many political proposals remain from the realities experienced by vulnerable communities across the country.
Another issue strongly emphasized by the coalition is the right of children to play, participate, and access safe recreational spaces. Although often underestimated in political discussions, childhood advocates insist that recreation and play are essential components of healthy emotional and psychological development.
According to data highlighted by NiñezYa, approximately 43% of children in Colombia play one hour or less per day, while 60% lack access to adequate nearby parks or recreational environments.
For organizations defending children’s rights, those figures reveal how inequality also manifests itself through access to public spaces and opportunities for healthy social interaction. In vulnerable urban neighborhoods, parks are often unsafe or deteriorated, while in rural regions, recreational infrastructure may simply not exist.
The coalition argues that children cannot develop fully in environments dominated by insecurity, overcrowding, or neglect. Yet despite the importance of recreation for mental health and social well-being, presidential campaigns rarely treat play and participation as fundamental rights deserving public investment and long-term policy planning.
Health care and nutrition are still absent from the center of debate
Health care policies have generated additional concern among children’s organizations. While candidates frequently discuss broad health care reforms during campaigns, NiñezYa argues that concrete measures focused on maternal health, breastfeeding, nutritional monitoring, and infant mortality prevention continue to be largely absent from many proposals.
Those omissions become especially serious in territories where families still face enormous barriers accessing pediatric services, vaccinations, specialized care, or prenatal attention.
The coalition insists that childhood nutrition should occupy a central place in any national development strategy, particularly because malnutrition and inadequate health care during the first years of life can generate irreversible long-term consequences affecting physical growth, cognitive capacity, and educational performance.
In many rural and Indigenous communities, families continue to struggle with food insecurity and limited access to quality health care services. For NiñezYa, those realities demand structural state responses rather than temporary electoral promises.
The organization has also warned that public discussions surrounding health care reform often become trapped in ideological disputes between political sectors, while the concrete realities experienced by children receive far less visibility.
For families living in remote territories, the crisis is frequently not about abstract political models but rather about the absence of doctors, delayed appointments, poor nutrition, and limited institutional presence. Child advocates argue that any serious health care proposal should prioritize preventive care and territorial equity if the country hopes to reduce long-term social inequality.
One of the coalition’s strongest criticisms concerns public investment levels dedicated to childhood policies in Colombia. According to figures cited by the organization, the country currently invests only around 0.83% of its GDP in childhood-related policies, despite requiring a significantly larger annual increase through 2030 to fulfill existing national goals regarding early childhood and adolescence.
For NiñezYa, many government proposals ultimately fail because they present generalized intentions without explaining how programs will actually be financed, monitored, or sustained over time.
The organization has repeatedly warned that Colombia cannot continue to treat childhood policies as secondary social spending, subject to political cycles or fiscal convenience. Instead, child advocates argue that investing in childhood should be understood as one of the country’s most urgent long-term development priorities.
They insist that reducing violence, inequality, and poverty in future generations depends heavily on guaranteeing safe, healthy, and dignified childhoods today.
Why is childhood marginalized in Colombian politics?
Behind the coalition’s warnings lies a broader criticism of Colombian political culture itself. For many analysts and organizations, childhood continues to occupy a marginal place in electoral campaigns because children do not represent immediate political capital in the same way as other issues that dominate public debate.
Security crises, corruption scandals, and ideological polarization often generate stronger emotional reactions among adult voters, leaving childhood discussions pushed toward the margins of political discourse.
However, NiñezYa argues that overlooking children ultimately means overlooking Colombia’s own future. The coalition insists that no country can seriously aspire to reduce violence, improve educational outcomes, or strengthen democracy while millions of children continue growing up under conditions marked by fear, poverty, displacement, and exclusion.
For organizations defending children’s rights, the next government will inevitably face enormous pressure to demonstrate whether childhood protection truly represents a national priority or merely another campaign talking point temporarily repeated during election season.
As Colombia approaches another decisive presidential election, the debate raised by NiñezYa continues exposing uncomfortable questions about the country’s long-term priorities. Beyond campaign slogans, ideological disputes, and promises of institutional reform, the coalition believes the real measure of political leadership will ultimately depend on whether future administrations are willing to confront the structural conditions that continue placing millions of children at risk.
Because for childhood advocates, protecting children is not simply a social obligation, it is one of the most important tests of whether Colombia is capable of building a more equal, peaceful, and sustainable future.