A/HRC/11/7/Add.2 page 13 unaccompanied minors. Also, the Ministry of Social Development implements policies to combat rural poverty (there are also a significant number of internal migrants, Mexican children who move within the country to work in the agricultural industries as young as age 6) and acute manifestations of urban poverty. These policies include immigrant support clubs, child-care facilities (schools or crèches), social assistance and credit programmes in the poorest municipalities and activities to raise awareness among employers and migrant families of the need for children to attend school. This is of particular importance in the state of Chiapas, where there are many children of immigrant parents in the agricultural industry (mainly coffee plantations). 41. While the Special Rapporteur welcomes the many efforts being made by the Government of Mexico to focus on protecting the human rights of migrant children, including unaccompanied minors, he expresses various concerns. First of all, it is unclear that there is a uniform policy at the federal level or across states to protect migrant children. Despite clear standards established by the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Mexico is a party, the Special Rapporteur received inconsistent information about what age defined a “minor”, and therefore who deserve additional protection. This seemed to vary according to state and sex (i.e. there was a lower age for adulthood for boys, 13-15 in various cases, whereas girls could in certain circumstances be considered minors until age 17). Considering the mobility across states of many minors, and that there is no evidence to suggest that a 15-year-old boy would not need as much protection and assistance as a 15-year-old girl, for example, this policy leaves gaps for protection. This is especially important considering the high instances of violence towards girls and boys, including prostitution, other forms of sexual exploitation and trafficking (see A/HRC/7/12/Add.2). 42. Moreover, despite notable initiatives to attend to victims, Mexico has no effective centralized system to protect and provide assistance to children and adolescents who have been victims of offences of sexual exploitation or any form of trafficking. While shelters and holding centres have medical care available, the average stay of a minor can be a matter of days, even hours, limiting the types of long-term care necessary to treat the psychological and medical traumas associated with migrating. Social rehabilitation or reintegration programmes are practically non-existent. This lack of assistance to child victims of sexual exploitation and trafficking is one of the causes of re-victimization. Only 3 of the 31 Mexican states punish child prostitution as a serious offence. Although the Government of Mexico seems aware of what is necessary, there are gaps in capacity and resources, as well as impunity among law-enforcement officials, and more comprehensive policies for migrant children victimized by sexual offences or trafficking have yet to be developed. 43. Additionally, it is unclear from the visits of the Special Rapporteur to official government migrant-holding centres and shelters that children receive protection to the extent necessary while in the custody of Mexican authorities or during the return process. This raises questions about the length of stay, deportation procedures, relationship with consular officers, and reintegration and rehabilitation measures. While the state authorities seem to be making efforts to return children to their places of origin as soon as possible (some within hours), there were no clear signs that the children would be returned to a safe environment (not all children underwent an investigation of whether they were fleeing abuse) and whether, once they reached the border of their country of origin, that the journey to their home would be safe or that they would be safe upon arrival.