This article aims to highlight the contradiction between the fact that the Convention on the Rights of the Child is supposed to be addressed to all those able to understand it (“à tout entendeur”; Cornu, 2005, p. 227-228) and yet the editorial constraints to which the text was submitted (De Saint Robert, 2013), make it difficult to interpret for the reader who is not a specialist of Onusian speak. This is why Arab citizens find the Convention difficult to appropriate, even though the translation is considered an authentic international juridical instrument with a universal vocation, in accordance with the principle of equal authenticity of the translated text (Sauron, 2009). At a formal level, we note that the tendency to standardize the phraseology and the terminology by a process of superposition of the translated versions with the original texts written in English and French—in order to respect the neutrality of a UN discourse—contributes to creating a style that marks a stark contrast with language habits and lexicon of native speakers. At a conceptual level, we note a referential shift caused by some denominative options which, in the field of juridical systems and practices specific to the Arab world, refer to standards and principles of law which could be very different from international law.