ohchr training guide crpd and op (1)

8/21/2019 OHCHR Training Guide CRPD and OP (1)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ohchr-training-guide-crpd-and-op-1 1/134

The Convention on the Rights of

Persons with Disabilities

Training Guide

Professional Training Series No. 19

New York and Geneva !"1!



Note

The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do notimply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United

Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities,

or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

*

* *

Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with

figures. Mention of such a figure indicates a reference to a United Nations document.

!"#"#T"$%

& '($' United Nations

)ll worldwide rights reserved



Contents

Page

Professional Training Series No. 19........................................................................................i

New York and Geneva, 2012...................................................................................................i

ABOUT T! T"A#N#NG GU#$!.............................................................................................%

&O$U'! 1...........................................................................................................................10

&O$U'! 2...........................................................................................................................22

&O$U'! (...........................................................................................................................%1

&O$U'! %...........................................................................................................................)1

&O$U'! )...........................................................................................................................*(

&O$U'! +...........................................................................................................................

&O$U'! *...........................................................................................................................99

&O$U'! ......................................................................................................................... 119

(



#$%&T T'( TR#)N)NG G&)D(

1. $a*kground

The United Nations eneral )ssembly adopted the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons

with isabilities and its -ptional #rotocol in '(( as a means of improving respect for the

rights of persons with disabilities, who, according to the latest figures, comprise some $/ per

cent of the world0s population. Since '((, ratification of the +onvention and -ptional

#rotocol has proceeded at a rapid pace. owever, 1nowledge about the +onvention and

how to implement and monitor it has not necessarily 1ept up. This in turn has led to an

increase in re2uests for training courses to build capacities of national sta1eholders3

representatives of overnment, civil society, national human rights institutions 4N!5s6 and

others.

The -ffice of the United Nations igh +ommissioner for uman !ights 4-+!6 hasdeveloped this Training Guide in response. 5t see1s to provide basic information on a rights7

based approach to disability, on the fundamental elements of the +onvention and its

-ptional #rotocol, and on the processes and issues underlying their ratification,

implementation and monitoring. +onse2uently, the materials are particularly appropriate for

introductory courses on the +onvention.

The materials were first prepared in '($( and revised over '($$. 5n )ugust '($$, -+!

held a validation course comprising participants from United Nations human rights

presences, the United Nations epartment of 8conomic and Social )ffairs and

representatives of the 5nternational isability )lliance. -n this basis, the Guide was finali9ed

and published.

!. %verview of the Training Guide

+a, -hat is this Training Guide

The Training Guide is for facilitators of training courses on the +onvention on the !ights of

#ersons with isabilities and its -ptional #rotocol. 5t can be used to develop a training

course on the +onvention and"or the -ptional #rotocol, but is also helpful as a general

information resource on these instruments. The Training Guide promotes interactive training

sessions, intended ideally for relatively small groups of maximum '( participants, and

comprises a mix of computer slide presentations and group activities intended to encourage

dialogue and exchange between facilitators and participants and among the participants

themselves.

+b, -ho/ is the Training Guide for

The Training Guide is primarily for training facilitators and others who already have

1nowledge of the international human rights system and are called upon to provide training

on the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities. 5n other words, the Guide

assumes some 1nowledge of human rights standards, terminology and mechanisms but not

necessarily 1nowledge of the +onvention itself. The Training Guide assumes that any

training course will be underta1en by a lead facilitator, who would ideally be assisted.

%



+*, -ho is the target audien*e of the training /odules

The target audience of the training modules is broad. 5t could be any individual or

representative of an organi9ation or institution that is involved in promoting, implementing

and monitoring the +onvention. The principal beneficiaries of the training courses are

therefore:

• overnment representatives, particularly focal points and coordination mechanisms

related to the +onvention

• #arliamentarians

• ;udges

• !epresentatives of United Nations speciali9ed agencies, funds and programmes

•!epresentatives of national human rights institutions

• #ersons with disabilities and their representative organi9ations

• +ivil society organi9ations

• Media representatives

• #rofessionals in related areas such as health, education, support services and so on.

+d, 'ow to use this Training Guide

The sessions are based on the training methodology adopted by the -+! Methodology,8ducation and Training Section. 8ach module comprises four principal documents:

• The note for the facilitator explains the se2uence of the training session, the

documents re2uired, bac1ground reading as well as tips for the presentation of the

computer slides<

• The computer slide presentation provides a series of slides to help the facilitator

present the various concepts in the module<

• The group activity note provides explanations of the group activity as well as the

particular re2uirements for the activity, such as venue and materials.

The sessions generally follow a se2uence of computer slide presentation incorporating

2uestions and answers, followed by a group activity.

The methodology underlying the Training Guide is interactive and promotes a participatory

approach. 5t is important to respect this approach throughout. =acilitators should use the

computer slide presentation to encourage a discussion and exchange of information and

experience with and among participants. The facilitator should avoid a one7way monologue

presentation style where the facilitator imparts information and the participants ta1e note.

The Training Guide see1s to fill in any 1nowledge gaps facilitators might face and in thissense is a support for facilitators before the session. owever, facilitators should avoid using

)



the Training Guide as a prop during the sessions to ensure that the presentation does not

turn into a lecture rather than a discussion with the participants.

=acilitators should adapt the materials in the Training Guide to suit each specific audience.

Not every training course needs to cover all eight modules, nor do the modules need to be

presented in a particular order or all aspects of each module covered. The important issue tobear in mind is that the facilitator provides a training course that meets the needs of the

participants.

Similarly, the facilitator should prepare the course in advance with examples and materials

which are relevant to the country and region where the course ta1es place. The facilitator

therefore needs to learn about the region, identify the main advances and challenges facing

the +onvention0s ratification, implementation and monitoring, and find locally relevant cases

and situations. Sometimes materials and group activities may have to be changed

completely to suit the context.

0. Planning our *ourse

+a, Carr out a training needs assess/ent to find out what 2arti*i2ants need fro/

the *ourse1

) training needs assessment enables the facilitator to fully understand the needs of potential

learners and the context in which they wor1, in order to ma1e informed decisions related to

the design of the training course. ) training needs assessment will also help inform

decisions about the most appropriate content, methods, techni2ues and time frame of the

planned training course.

5t should enable the facilitator to gather the necessary information to build an ade2uatepicture of the context of disability rights< develop a profile of potential learners< and identify

capacity gaps or needs of learners in relation to promoting a rights7based approach to

disability.

) pre7course 2uestionnaire should ideally be sent to the participants one month before the

course. This information can help design and fine tune the course plan"agenda. The pre7

course 2uestionnaire serves multiple purposes. 5t:

• 5nforms course design and informs facilitators of their audience

• 8ncourages participants to engage with the course before their arrival and to dosome preparatory homewor1

• #rovides a baseline of participants0 capacities, which will their increase in 1nowledge,

experience and confidence to be trac1ed

• +ontributes to the sharing of experience throughout the training course.

The pre7course 2uestionnaire should include 2uestions such as:

1

=or more information on training needs assessment, see 82uitas > 5nternational +entre for uman!ights 8ducation and -+!, Evaluating Human Rights Training Activities: A Handbook for Human

Rights Educators, #rofessional Training Series No. $? 4eneva and Montreal, '($$6.

+



• @hat do participants 1now about disability rights and the move to a rights7based

approach to disabilityA

• @hat do participants 1now about the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with

isabilities and its -ptional #rotocolA

• =ind out how much experience the participants have, how confident they are and

how comfortable they are with the subBect matter.

• ow do they expect to increase their 1nowledge and understanding of disability

rightsA

• @hat practical s1ills do they want to developA

• @hat have they already done, what do they want to focus on now when it comes to

disability rightsA

• @hat outputs3plans and analysis3do participants need from the courseA @hat

level of detail is re2uired and what is achievableA

• @ho will be responsible for ta1ing the outputs forward and what is their capacityA

+b, Sele*t the right sessions

) training course will always comprise an opening and closing session, but the rest of the

agenda should reflect the participants0 specific needs.

@hich modules to focus on will depend on the participants0 level of understanding of

disability rights and the extent to which they have already developed their strategies to ratify,

implement and"or monitor the +onvention. There will generally no be sufficient time to cover

all eight modules so some will have to be left out. )t the same time, particular aspects of

some modules might be left out 4if participants are already aware of the information6, while in

other situations, additional slides and materials might be necessary or activities adapted.

The facilitator should read through all the materials first to decide what to use and what to

amend or tailor, depending on the participants0 needs.

+*, Draw u2 a *ourse agenda

-nce the facilitator has selected the modules relevant to the participants0 needs, he or sheshould develop the agenda. The notes for the facilitators in the Guide can help. They provide

indicative times for the computer slide presentations and for the group activities, which the

facilitator should adapt in the light of the participants0 capacities as gleaned from their

responses to the 2uestionnaire. 5f the facilitator is wor1ing with interpreters, around C( per

cent of extra time will be necessary and should be reflected in the agenda.

+d, Sele*t the training tea/

The selection of trainers and resource persons should be based on the following criteria:

• 8xpertise in the subBect matter and experience with the target audience

*



• )bility to apply the interactive training methodology of the training pac1age

• #rofessional credibility and appropriate reputation among other practitioners.

5n choosing the training team, consideration should be given to gender balance and to the

participation of persons with different types of disability. 5n addition, when training aparticular target audience, it is very helpful to include in the training team one of its members

who is in a position to establish a good rapport with the learners. =inally, the training team

should be complemented by experts in human rights and"or disability rights.

+e, Gather additional infor/ation

The facilitator should ensure he or she has:

• Sufficient bac1ground information about specific targets, policy processes and power

structures 4which might include the use of local resource persons6

• 5nformation on the status of ratification, implementation and monitoring of the

+onvention in the country and region

• 5nformation on challenges and opportunities facing the rights of persons with

disabilities in the country and region

• 5nformation on domestic case law, legislation and media stories where relevant

• 5nformation on the institutional context in which the participants wor1

+f, S2e*ifi* language 2re2aration

5f the course is ta1ing place with interpretation, the facilitator should be sure to consult

people who 1now the local terminology related to disability and how to translate some 1ey

terms from 8nglish into local languages, as there is always a direct translation.

+g, Conte3t4s2e*ifi* 2re2aration

This Guide should be adapted to different socio7political contexts, including the most

pressing developmental and human rights challenges. @here possible, local resource

persons who are well prepared and briefed should be integrated in the course planning

process and the agenda.

+h, #**essibilit

Thin1 about accessibility issues prior to the course. 5s the venue accessibleA 5s the lunch

area accessibleA )re there accessible toiletsA )re course materials accessibleA )nd so on.

@hen thin1ing about accessibility, remember to thin1 of different disabilities so that, for

example, the course is accessible not only to persons with physical disabilities, but also

those with visual or hearing impairments.

+i, (valuation'

2 =or detailed practical guidance on evaluating human rights training activities, see Evaluating Human

Rights Training Activities: A Handbook for Human Rights Educators.



8valuation provides the training team with information about the impact of the training in

relation to the goals that the team set out to achieve. 8valuation should be incorporated

throughout the training course, including during planning, design, delivery and follow7up.

8valuation can help facilitators answer some important 2uestions about the results of their

training activities, for example: why are we offering this trainingA oes the content of the

training respond to the needs of the learnersA @hat did the learners learnA @hat actions willthe learners ta1e as a resultA @ill the learners apply what they have learned in their wor1A

ow will their wor1 contribute to change in the broader community"societyA

9



5%D&6( 1

-'#T )S D)S#$)6)TY

)ntrodu*tion

Module $ explains the concept of disability, a fundamental step in understanding why the

+onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities was necessary. The module identifies

the modern concept of Dhow disability wor1sE and then places this in the historical context of

various approaches to disability based on charity or on the medical diagnosis of

impairments. The module examines some of the latter0s conse2uences and then introduces

the human rights approach, which paves the way for module '. There is some duplication of

slides in modules $ and ', because module $ could potentially be presented independently

of module ' or similar concepts could be raised in both modules to reinforce them,

depending on the training course and the participants. The facilitator can always pic1 the

slides that fit the presentation.

'ow disabilit works

Many people see disability as a condition that is inherent in the person3for example, a

medical condition that re2uires the person to be in a wheelchair or to ta1e medication.

owever,>as becomes clear in this module, the modern concept of disability perceives

disability as an interaction between an individual0s personal condition 4such as being in a

wheelchair or having a visual impairment6 and environmental factors 4such as negative

attitudes or inaccessible buildings6 which together lead to disability and affect an individual0sparticipation in society. =or example:

• Feing in a wheelchair 4personal factor6 combined with living in a city with accessible

buildings 4environmental factor6 leads to participation in the community on the same

terms as someone who is not in a wheelchair: there is little or no disability.

• aving an intellectual impairment 4personal factor6 combined with a belief in the

community that persons with intellectual disabilities lac1 the capacity to vote

4negative environmental factor6 leads to exclusion from society and denial of the right

to vote: there is a disability.

#ersonal factors are multilayered and can be both physical and socioeconomic. =or

example:

• Physical factors: gender, ethnicity, impairment 4physical, visual, hearing, intellectual,

mental6, si9e and weight, and so on<

• Socioeconomic factors: wealth, class, inclusion in society, education level and so on.

#hysical factors can interact to exacerbate disability or alleviate it. =or example, someone

with a physical disability who is wealthy might be able to access tertiary education and so

find a Bob. This might increase participation in society and alleviate disability to an extent.

10



8nvironmental factors can relate to at least four sub7factors as follows:

• Accessibility : hilly or flat cities, accessibility of buildings 4ramps, toilets, braille signs

etc.6, accessible information 4websites, documents in easy7to7read formats6,

accessible public transport, etc.

• egal!policy : existence of protection from discrimination compared with denial of

rights on the basis of disability, pro7poor policies, policies that refer explicitly to

disability rights compared to policies that ignore persons with disabilities, etc.

• Socioeconomic : rural"urban 4present different accessibility issues6, rich"poor, positive

community awareness of disability, openness of society to change, etc.

• Services: inclusive services or segregated services 4health, education, youth

centres6, community7based rehabilitation 4+F!6 services, social support services,

affordability of services, etc.

8nvironmental factors can also combine to exacerbate or alleviate disability. @ith the

increasing awareness of disability, there is often a mix of both positive and negative

environmental factors. =or example, a school might be made accessible by including ramp

access. owever, public transport is still not accessible, which means that a child with a

physical impairment cannot ma1e it to school, in spite of the openness of the school

environment.

)ll these factors combine to determine the extent to which an individual can participate in

society and, as a result, the extent to which disability exists.

Different a22roa*hes to disabilit

ifferent approaches to disability exist in the world, some being more dominant in someparts of the world than in others.

The charity approach

The charity approach treats persons with disabilities as passive obBects of 1ind acts or of

welfare payments rather than as empowered individuals with rights to participate in political

and cultural life and in their development. @hat characteri9es this approach is that persons

with disabilities are not considered able to provide for themselves because of their

impairment. +onse2uently, society provides for them. No environmental conditions are

considered under this approach< disability is an individual problem. =rom this perspective,

persons with disabilities are the target of pity and they depend on the goodwill of society. 5n

addition, persons with disabilities depend on duty bearers: charity houses, homes,

foundations, churches, to which society delegates policies on disability and responsibility

towards persons with disabilities. Under this model, persons with disabilities are

disempowered, not in control of their lives and have little or no participation. They are

considered a burden on society. Fecause charity comes from goodwill, the 2uality of DcareE

is not necessarily consistent or even important.

• 5f society0s responses to disability are limited to care and assistance for persons with

disabilities through charity and welfare programmes, opportunities for advancementare very limited. The ris13as with the medical approach3is that persons with

11



disabilities will remain at the margins of society. This approach does not support theirparticipation.

• 5f persons with disabilities continue to be considered as DunfortunateE, re2uiring

compassion, depending on contributions and assistance and on the goodwill ofothers, their opportunities for empowerment become very limited.

The charity approach increases the distance between persons with disabilities and society

rather than promoting e2uality and inclusion.

The medical approach

5n the medical model, the focus is very much on the person0s impairment, which isrepresented as the source of ine2uality. The needs and rights of the person are absorbed oridentified with the medical treatment provided to 4or imposed on6 the patient. 5n the medicalmodel, individuals can be DfixedE through medicine or rehabilitation to get bac1 to society.#articularly for persons with mental impairments, the medical treatment can be an

opportunity for a DbadE patient 4persons with mental disabilities are often considereddangerous6 to become a DgoodE patient. To be considered able to provide for themselves,persons with disabilities have to be DcuredE of the impairment or at least the impairment hasto be reduced as much as possible. No environmental conditions are considered under thisapproach and disability is an individual problem. #ersons with disabilities are sic1 and haveto be fixed to reach normality.

5f disability is handled primarily as a medical problem, experts such as doctors, psychiatristsand nurses have extensive power over persons with impairments< the institution0s staff ta1edecisions for the patients, whose aspirations will be dealt with within a medical framewor1. 5fcomplete rehabilitation is not possible, persons with disabilities will not be able to go bac1 tosociety and will remain in institutions. )chievements and failures experienced within the

walls of the institution will be understood as related to the impairment and, as a result, Bustified. 5n the worst cases, such an approach can legitimate exploitation, violence andabuse.

This model is often mixed with the charity approach. =or example, charities raise funds forand run rehabilitation facilities. The duty bearers in this model are the medical industry andthe State. @hen combined with a charity approach, charity houses, homes, foundations andreligious institutions also play an important role. Under this model, persons with disabilitiesare disempowered, not in control of their lives and have little or no participation. The medicalindustry, professionals and charities usually represent the interests of persons withdisabilities as they are seen as possessing the 1nowledge of what is in the best interests oftheir patients.

The social approach

The social approach introduces a very different thin1ing: disability is recogni9ed as theconse2uence of the interaction of the individual with an environment that does notaccommodate that individual0s differences. This lac1 of accommodation impedes theindividual0s participation in society. 5ne2uality is not due to the impairment, but to the inabilityof society to eliminate barriers challenging persons with disabilities. This model puts the person at the centre, not his"her impairment, recogni9ing the values and rights of personswith disabilities as part of society.

Moving from the medical to the social model does not in any way deny the importance of

care, advice and assistance, sometimes prolonged, provided by medical experts andmedical institutions. 5n many cases persons with disabilities re2uire medical treatment and

12



care, exams, constant monitoring and medicines. 5n the social model, they continue going tohospitals and centres providing specific treatment if re2uired. @hat is different is the overallapproach to treatment: it responds to the expectations of the patient, not those of theinstitution. The social model attributes to nurses, doctors, psychiatrics and administratorsnew roles and identities. Their relation with persons with disabilities will be based on adialogue. The doctor will not be on a pedestal, but on the side of the person with disabilities.82uality starts in the hospital, not outside. =reedom, dignity, trust, evaluation and self7evaluation are all features of the social model.

@ith the social model, disability is not a Dmista1eE of society but an element of its diversity.isability is a social construct3the result of the interaction in society between personalfactors and environmental factors. isability is not an individual problem but the outcome ofa wrong organi9ation of society. )s a conse2uence, society should restructure policies,practices, attitudes, environmental accessibility, legal provisions and political organi9ationsand therefore dismantle the social and economic barriers that prevent full participation ofpersons with disabilities. 5t opposes the charity and medical approach by establishing that allpolicies and laws should be designed with the involvement of persons with disabilities. Theduty bearers under this model are the State3involving all ministries and branches ofgovernment3as well as society. Under this model, persons with disabilities are empowered,in control of their lives and enBoy full participation on an e2ual basis with others. The burdenof disability is not on them but on society.

Human rights approach

The human rights approach to disability builds on the social approach by ac1nowledgingpersons with disabilities as subBects of rights and the State and others as havingresponsibilities to respect these persons. 5t treats the barriers in society as discriminatoryand provides avenues for persons with disabilities to complain when they are faced withsuch barriers. +onsider the right to vote. ) person who is blind has the right to vote Bust as

anyone else in society. Get, if voting material is not in accessible formats such as Fraille andthe person cannot ta1e a trusted individual into the voting booth to help indicate herpreferred candidate, the person who is blind cannot vote. ) human rights approach todisability recogni9es the lac1 of voting material and the inability to have assistance in votingas discriminatory, and places a responsibility on the State to ensure that such discriminatorybarriers are removed. 5f not, the person should be able to ma1e an official complaint.

) rights7based approach to disability is not driven by compassion, but by dignity andfreedom. 5t see1s ways to respect, support and celebrate human diversity by creating theconditions that allow meaningful participation by a wide range of persons, including personswith disabilities. 5nstead of focusing on persons with disabilities as passive obBects ofcharitable acts, it see1s to assist people to help themselves so that they can participate in

society, in education, at the wor1place, in political and cultural life, and defend their rightsthrough accessing Bustice.

The human rights approach is an agreement and a commitment by persons with disabilities,States and the international human rights system to put into practice some primary aspectsof the social approach. This approach is binding to all States that have ratified the+onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities. States must eliminate and preventdiscriminatory actions. The human rights approach establishes that all policies and lawsshould be designed with the involvement of persons with disability, mainstreaming disabilityin all aspects of political action. =ollowing this model, no DspecialE policies should bedesigned for persons with disabilities, notwithstanding the particularities needed to complywith the principle of full participation.

1(



The main duty bearer under this model, in which society delegates the policies on disability,is the State > involving all of its ministries and branches. There are certain provisions thatinvolve the private sector and there is a specific role for civil society, in particular personswith disability and the organi9ations that represent them. Under this model, persons withdisabilities have rights and instruments that can empower them to claim their rights. Theyhave the tools to be in control of their lives and fully participate on e2ual terms with others.The human rights approach provides that persons with disabilities are closely involved inpolicyma1ing by law.

"hich approach is dominant today#

The charity approach is the oldest of the four, followed by the medical approach. The socialand human rights approaches are more recent. Get, all continue till today. 5n spite of theadoption of the +onvention, the charity and medical models are still very prevalent3evenamong the human rights community.

The *onse7uen*es of the *harit and /edi*al a22roa*hes to disabilit

Fy approaching persons with disabilities as DobBects of pityE or Dproblems to be fixedE, theburden of disability falls on the individual and, as a result, social transformation is virtuallyimpossible. Moreover, it can give rise to certain social norms which can ma1e it even moredifficult for persons with disabilities to participate in society and enBoy their rights.

Perception that persons $ith disabilities are %special&

The main difference between the medical"charity approach on the one hand and thesocial"human rights approach to disability on the other is reflected in the difference betweenDspecialE and DinclusiveE treatment. The term DspecialE often arises in connection withpersons with disabilities: children with special needs, special schools, special services,

special institutions. Get, DspecialtyE is exactly what the +onvention distances itself from.Feing special in the context of disability is not necessarily rewarding< it may lead tomarginali9ation.

Ta1e special schools for example: special schools enable persons with disabilities to interactonly with other persons with disabilities or with certain DprofessionalsE. This forces them tolive a situation which is not realistic since it does not reflect the diversity of the society.@hom does this benefit thenA #ersons with disabilitiesA #ersons without disabilitiesA 5t isdifficult to see the benefits of actions"decisions aimed at 1eeping human beings separate.uman beings are social beings, and children have the right to study and play together.iversity and inclusion must be the norm.

) segregated school is not a genuine mirror of society. iversity is very limited there.#roblems discussed among DspecialE students and Dspeciali9edE teachers are influenced bya setting focused on disability. The confrontation of ideas and opinions lac1s a more diverseaudience, including persons without disabilities not challenged by physical or attitudinalbarriers.

The right to education is an important right, interrelated with other human rights. )t school,persons with and without disabilities learn what society0s expectations and opportunities are.They learn theories, s1ills and discipline< they elaborate values they may have developed intheir circle of family and friends< and they develop new values. The school itself is acommunity where children share the same timetables, venues and obligations. Fy interacting

with teachers and others, pupils learn to live in a society independently and in constantinteraction with other members. School represents an embryonic opportunity for

1%



independent living that later in life will include gainful employment, participation in politicaland public life, home and family, access to Bustice, as well as business opportunities. Thediversity of the classroom offers a uni2ue opportunity to discuss human rights and opinions.

)nother example of how persons with disabilities have been perceived as DspecialE under themedical"charity approach concerns institutionali9ation. #ersons with disabilities3in particularpersons with psychosocial and intellectual disabilities3have often been committed by forceto psychiatric institutions, away from the community and without freedom to choose theirmedical treatments.

Under the human rights approach, persons with disabilities have the right to liberty on ane2ual basis with others, and deprivation of liberty cannot be Bustified on the basis ofdisability. =orced institutionali9ation or hospitali9ation on the basis of disability is prohibited.No one should be institutionali9ed against his"her will unless the reasons for suchinstitutionali9ation apply to others in the community without disabilities 4for example,imprisonment as a result of committing a crime and being sentenced by a Budge6.

#ersons with disabilities have the right to live in the community, and to choose where andwith whom to live, on an e2ual basis with others. 5ndependent living does not necessarilymean living alone. Many people live in constant contact with others, including in the samehouse. #eople live with other members of the same family, with friends and with colleagues.Such cohabitation is usually seen as independent living.

-nce a person can ma1e his"her own decisions3including where and with whom to live3and to be respected for these decisions, that person is living independently. The same goesfor persons with disabilities. Support is still possible while living independently. #ersons withdisabilities have the right to receive support if they re2uest it. 5ndependent living constitutesa frame for the enBoyment of several human rights: the right to ade2uate housing, the right toparticipate in public and political affairs, the right to privacy, the right to free movement, the

right to vote, etc.

Perception that persons $ith disabilities are dangerous

istorically, persons with mental and intellectual disabilities have been mistreated andneglected in most societies. They have been subBected to such atrocities as overnment7sponsored hallucinogenic drug experiments on un1nowing individuals, forced treatment,electric as well as insulin shoc1 therapies, and even attempted genocide during the Second@orld @ar.

Today, stigma and myths around mental illness persist and the result is often discriminationand exclusion. Stereotypes of persons with mental"intellectual disabilities ma1e them appear

unintelligent, DweirdE, unable to wor1, with no chance of recovery, unpredictable anddangerous.

News reporting on violent acts"crimes committed by Dmentally ill offendersE usually has astrong impact on readers< it reinforces the belief that persons with psychological disabilitiesare dangerous.

Such generali9ations not only sustain a sense of ris1, lac1 of safety and general discomfortin society"the community, they also affect the self7perception of persons with mental andintellectual disabilities. Hac1 of self7esteem often exacerbates stigma and myths. )ccordingto organi9ations such as the @orld Networ1 of Users and Survivors of #sychiatry, Done of thegreatest losses we experience is the loss of our sense of who we are in the context of our

1)



community. )n experience of forced treatment causes us to abandon our lives, and wereturn to a community that sees us as dangerous, vulnerable, volatile and Iill0.EC

iscrimination against persons with mental and intellectual disabilities has created a class ofpeople who have been systematically disempowered and impoverished. Fecause of thestigma surrounding mental illness, many persons with disabilities become homeless,

unemployed, undereducated and socially isolated and lac1 ade2uate health care or they are1ept secluded under strong medication.

Most persons with mental and intellectual disabilities are not violent, nor are they more li1elyto commit violent actions or crimes than those without mental disabilities. #ersons withpsychological disabilities are as intelligent as everyone else and are able to function li1eothers in a wide variety of settings.

Saying that persons with mental disabilities are not more violent than people without suchdisabilities recogni9es the existence of violence as a social problem, not as amental"psychological one. 5t also ac1nowledges mental illness as being caused byenvironmental and social factors, and not merely by genetic and"or organic ones.

Perception that persons $ith disabilities are superhuman

The media often portray persons with disabilities as somehow superhuman. @hile ostensiblyattempting to promote positive images of them 4which is of course welcome6, the result canbe the same as with other myths, namely that persons with disabilities become one7dimensional. They are courageous, powerful and somehow able to overcome a greatdifficulty3namely, a disability. @hen analysed more closely, this potentially positive imagealso implies that the maBority of persons with disabilities have difficult and miserable lives4with most having to rely on charity6. isability becomes an 4almost6 insurmountabledifficulty. The hero is presented as the person who was able to overcome the plight of many.

The thing to bear in mind is that a person with a disability is a human being with strengthsand wea1nesses, Bust li1e anyone else. 5t is important that persons with disabilities areportrayed in a positive way in public, particularly through the media, and this is referred to inthe +onvention 4art. ?, awareness7raising6. This includes highlighting the lives of personswith disabilities that have achieved a significant level in politics, sport, literature or any otherfield of endeavour. owever, overcoming a disability need not be this person0s onlyachievement. 5nstead, the person has managed to overcome a whole range of barriersfacing anyone see1ing the spotlight, e.g., excellence in education, competition fromcolleagues, expectations from the community or family and so on.

Perception that persons $ith disabilities are a burden

5n contrast to the myth of the superhuman, persons with disabilities are often portrayed as aburden3to society, to family, to friends. This is the flip side of the superhuman approachand, again, intrinsically related to the charity approach to disability. This perception persistsparticularly in the media. ow many times have we seen an apparently sensitivedocumentary on television which concentrates on the parents of a child with a disability, thestruggles those parents are going through, the difficulties they face due to the attitudes totheir child, the way their lives have changed and so on. The focus on the parents0 strugglesis generally not intended to promote a negative myth about persons with disabilities, but theimmediate effect is three7fold. =irst, in this case the child with a disability, her concerns,struggles, interests and dreams tend to melt into the bac1ground and becomes secondary.Second, as a result, the child appears one7dimensional and the cause of her parents0

( 'mplementation (anual for the )nited *ations +onvention on the Rights of Persons $ith ,isabilities 4=ebruary

'((?6, p. C'.

1+



distress. Third, there seems to be little way out for the child. +onse2uently, negative mythsand stereotypes emerge.

This can have negative implications for persons with disabilities. =or example:

• They might believe that they are indeed a burden<

• They might come to expect that they are not meant to live independently<

• #arents and teachers might not expect them to be self7sufficient and accept

responsibility for carrying the burden<

• The combination of the beliefs of persons with disabilities and parents, teachers and

other carers might then reinforce the myth that persons with disabilities are a burden.

)ll of this can combine to prevent social change.

8e 2rin*i2les of a hu/an rights a22roa*h to disabilit

PR)NC)P6( D)SC&SS)%N

!espect for the inherent dignity

and individual autonomy,

including the freedom to ma1e

one0s own choices, and the

independence of persons

5nherent dignity refers to the worth of every person. @hen

the dignity of persons with disabilities is respected, his or

her experiences and opinions are valued and are formed

without fear of physical, psychological or emotional harm.

5ndividual autonomy means to be in charge of one0s own

life and to have the freedom to ma1e one0s own choices.

!espect for individual autonomy means that persons with

disabilities have, on an e2ual basis with others, reasonablelife choices, are subBect to minimum interference with their

private life and can ma1e their own decisions, with

ade2uate support if re2uired.

Non7discrimination Non7discrimination is a fundamental principle of all human

rights treaties and the basis of the +onvention on the

!ights of #ersons with isabilities. 5t essentially prohibits

discrimination against anyone on the basis of disability,

given that discrimination prevents people enBoying their

rights on an e2ual basis with others. owever, today, non7

discrimination is understood as a much broader principle

which encompasses not only prohibiting discriminatory

acts but also ta1ing steps to protect against potential future

discrimination and hidden discrimination and promoting

e2uality.

=ull and effective participation

and inclusion in society

The concepts of full and effective participation and of

inclusion mean that society, both in its public and in its

private dimensions, is organi9ed so as to enable all people

to ta1e part fully. They mean that society and relevant

actors value persons with disabilities and recogni9e themas e2ual participants3for example, in processes related to

1*



decisions that affect their lives or in the freedom to run for

public office. #articipation goes beyond consultation and

includes meaningful involvement in activities and decision7

ma1ing processes, the possibility to voice opinions, to

influence and to complain when participation is denied.

5nclusion re2uires an accessible, barrier7free physical and

social environment. 5t is a two7way process that promotes

the acceptance of persons with disabilities and their

participation, and encourages society to open up and be

accessible to persons with disabilities.

!espect for difference and

acceptance of persons with

disabilities as part of human

diversity and humanity

!espect for difference involves accepting others in a

context of mutual understanding. espite some visible and

apparent differences between people, all have the same

rights and dignity. 5n relation to disability, it involves

accepting persons with disabilities for who they are, rather

than pitying them or seeing them as a problem that needs

to be fixed.

82uality of opportunity 82uality of opportunity is closely lin1ed with non7

discrimination. 5t refers to a situation where society and the

environment are made available to all, including persons

with disabilities. 82uality of opportunity does not always

mean that the exact same opportunities are made

available to all, as treating everyone the same might result

in ine2ualities. !ather it recogni9es difference between

people and ensures that, despite this difference, everyonehas the same opportunity to enBoy rights.

)ccessibility Ma1ing accessibility 4and e2uality6 a reality means

dismantling the barriers that hinder the effective enBoyment

of human rights by persons with disabilities. )ccessibility

enables persons with disabilities to live independently and

to participate fully in all aspects of life. )ccessibility is

important in all areas of life, but in particular in the physical

environment, such as buildings, roads, housing and so on,

transport, information and communications, and other

facilities and services open to or provided to the public.

82uality between men and

women

The principle of e2uality between men and women

indicates that the same rights should be expressly

recogni9ed for men and women on an e2ual footing, and

suitable measures should be ta1en to ensure that women

have the opportunity to exercise their rights. espite the

overlap with the principle of non7discrimination, the

reiteration of e2uality between men and women is

expressly included in treaties, especially because there

are still many preBudices preventing its full application.

!espect for the evolving !espect for the evolving capacities of children is a

1



capacities of children with

disabilities and for their right to

preserve their identities

principle set out in the +onvention on the !ights of the

+hild. 5t should be seen as a positive and enabling process

that supports the child0s maturation, autonomy and self7

expression. Through this process, children progressively

ac2uire 1nowledge, competences and understanding,

including about their rights. Their participation in decision7

ma1ing processes that affect them, including their right to

preserve their identities, should be expanded over time in

step with this evolution.

The Conventions disabilit *on*e2t

The +onvention preamble states that disabilit is an evolving *on*e2t. Nevertheless, itdoes reflect a social model of disability as it clarifies that disability results from the interactionbetween persons with impairments and external barriers that hinders their participation in

society 4preambular para. 4e66.

5n this perspective, the framewor1 reflected in the +onvention is built on the understandingthat it is the external environment, and the attitudes that are reflected in its construction, thatplays a central role in creating the condition termed Ddisability.E This contrasts sharply withthe medical model of disability, which is instead built on the concept of the Dbro1en bodyE,with disability being the obvious result of a physical, mental or sensory deficiency of theperson.

Fecause of this approach, the notion of :disabilit; *annot be rigid but rather depends onthe prevailing environment and varies from one society to the next. @hile the +onventionrecogni9es disability as an evolving concept, it clearly endorses the understanding of it as asocial construct, when it states that disability Dresults from the interaction between personswith impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders their full andeffective participation in society on an e2ual basis with othersE.

5n line with this understanding, the Convention does not 2rovide a *losed definition ofwho persons with disabilities are, but states that they DincludeE those who have long7termphysical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with variousbarriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an e2ual basis withothers 4art. $, purpose6.

Some important elements to consider are:

4a6 (volving v. fi3ed *on*e2t. The +onvention recogni9es that DdisabilityE is anevolving concept resulting from attitudinal and environmental barriers. +onse2uently,the notion of DdisabilityE is not rigid and can be adapted to the prevailing environmentin a particular society 4the focus will be on the type of attitudinal and environmentalbarriers present in those societies and ways to overcome them6<

4b6 Disabilit not as a /edi*al 2roble/ but as an intera*tion between ani/2air/ent and the surrounding environ/ent. The focus of the +onvention is noton disability as a medical problem< for the +onvention, persons become disabledwhen they clash with an unwelcoming or inaccessible environment. #ersons withdisabilities do not re2uired to be DfixedE before accessing an environment 4society6< it

is instead the environment that needs to be uniformly open to all its members. 5t does

19



so by dismantling attitudinal and environmental barriers so that everyone can activelyparticipate and enBoy the full range of rights.

4c6 The Convention in*ludes all disabilities. The +onvention does not restrictcoverage to particular persons< rather, it identifies persons with long7term physical,mental, intellectual and sensory disabilities as its beneficiaries. The reference toDincludeE in article $ could therefore extend the application of the +onvention to allpersons with disabilities, e.g., those with short7term disabilities or persons who areperceived to be part of such groups.

4d6 Categori<ing barriers rather than hu/an beings. +ategori9ing a person can bethe first step towards excluding that person and violating his or her inherent dignity.The +onvention does not preclude the use of definitions in national legislation<definitions might be particularly necessary in some sectors, such as employment orsocial security. @hat is important is that definitions informing policies and laws reflect

the social model of disability where the challenge facing a person with a disability ismeasured in terms of the existing barriers and not on the category or percentage ofthe impairment.

The explicit reference to barriers e3ternal to the sub=e*t as *onstituting fa*tors ofdisabilit represents an important step away from notions that e2uated disability withfunctional limitations.

# note on ter/inolog

,oes interaction $ith persons $ith disabilities re-uire special skills#

5nteraction with persons with disabilities is a matter of persons, not of disabilities. @heninteraction with persons with disabilities occurs under conditions of e2uality, no special s1illsare re2uired< persons with disabilities are not special persons< they may feel special 4or mostli1ely discriminated6 when there is no accommodation in place to facilitate their interactionwith others. owever, if the environment has been adBusted appropriately 4e.g., assistivedevices, sign language interpreters, support persons6 and attitudes are in line with asocial"human rights approach, interaction can be smooth. )rrangements should not beconsidered special but normal or, using a concept from the +onvention, universal .

5n the street, interaction with persons with disabilities re2uires common sense and respect<within a professional context, interaction with persons with disabilities re2uires

professionalism. Nothing more and nothing less of what our clients or ac2uaintances withoutdisabilities would expect. 5nteraction is easier when the rules are the same for everyone andeveryone is welcome.

epending on the person we need to meet, interview or wor1 with, some arrangementsand"or preparation might be needed. This is something we should be used to as part of ourdaily wor1 and for all types of interviews and meetings. )re all physical and linguistic barrierseliminatedA @hat about the psychological onesA

o not assume or act as if persons with disabilities are heroic or courageous Bust by virtue ofhaving a disability. This emphasi9es difference. #ersons with disabilities have strengths andwea1nesses Bust as persons without disabilities.

20



Terminology

Terminology that is used to refer to or interact with persons with disabilities is nonethelessimportant. +ertain words and phrases can be offensive, undermining and"or superficial.#eople are not definable on the basis of their disability. )ppropriate terminology promotesrespect and reflects deeper understanding of disability. #roper communication is importantwith all types of interlocutors. This s1ill is 1ey for participants who develop daily contact withpersons with disabilities, intervene with authorities advocating and reaffirming their rights,carry out interviews or draft reports.

#ersons with disabilities and their representative organi9ations have chosen certainterminology, such as Dpersons with disabilitiesE, in which case it is important to use suchterms. Get, when defining acceptable terminology there is always a ris1 of moving towardspolitical correctness, which in turn can be a barrier to free and fluid speech. Nonetheless, beaware of the fact that some language can reinforce stereotypes and be offensive to personswith disabilities. 5f we do not use appropriate language, how can we expect credibleattitudinal changeA

• )lways thin1 before you tal1.

• )s1 the person you are tal1ing to about anything you are unsure about.

• 5f a person prefers one term to another, then use that term.

• There is no need to be afraid of saying D5 see what you meanE to someone who is

blind. This expression is perfectly understandable and conveys a clear message thatgoes beyond vision in the narrow sense< it is not offensive.

21



5%D&6( !

# S'%RT )NTR%D&CT)%N T% T'( C%N>(NT)%N

$a*kground

The United Nations eneral )ssembly adopted the +onvention on the !ights of #ersonswith isabilities and its -ptional #rotocol on $C ecember '((. -n C( March '((J bothwere opened for signature at United Nations ead2uarters in New Gor1. )n unprecedented?$ countries signed the +onvention on the opening day. Fut what led to this momentouseventA

Fefore the adoption of the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities, otherhuman rights instruments already addressed disability, either as part of a general focus ormore specifically. Some, such as the Universal eclaration of uman !ights, the5nternational +ovenant on 8conomic, Social and +ultural !ights and the 5nternational

+ovenant on +ivil and #olitical !ights3which together constitute the )nternational $ill ofRights3promote and protect the rights of everyone, including persons with disabilities,through the non7discrimination clause. 5n all three instruments, article ' obliges States toguarantee human rights without distinction of any 1ind, such as race, colour, sex, language,religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. The reference to other status encompasses disability as grounds for protection fromdiscrimination.

S2e*iali<ed hu/an rights treaties li1e the +onvention against Torture, the +onvention onthe 8limination of iscrimination against @omen, the +onvention on the !ights of the +hildand others, contain provisions protecting against discrimination. The +onvention on the!ights of the +hild specifically recogni9es the need to protect against discrimination on the

grounds of disability. 5t also specifically recogni9es the right of the child with a disability toenBoy a full and decent life.

The authoritative state/ents by the committees supervising the application of humanrights treaties 4the United Nations treaty bodies6 are also important. The most relevant topersons with disabilities are general comments No. '( 4'((%6 of the +ommittee on8conomic, Social and +ultural !ights, which includes disability among the grounds coveredby Dother statusE, and No. / 4$%%K6, which defines factors causing discrimination againstpersons with disabilities< general recommendation No. $? 4$%%$6 of the +ommittee on the8limination of iscrimination against @omen, which addresses the double discriminationaffecting women with disabilities 4as women and as persons with disabilities6< and generalcomment No. % 4'((6 of the +ommittee on the !ights of the +hild on the rights of children

with disabilities.

There have also been regional developments in )frica, the )mericas and 8urope, such asthe 5nter7)merican +onvention on the 8limination of )ll =orms of iscrimination against#ersons with isabilities 4$%%%6.

%ther relevant hu/an rights instru/ents are the eclaration on the !ights of isabled#ersons 4$%J/6< the @orld #rogramme of )ction concerning isabled #ersons 4$%?'6< andthe Standard !ules on the 82uali9ation of -pportunities for #ersons with isabilities 4$%%C6. )lthough not legally binding, these instruments, adopted by the United Nations eneral )ssembly, symboli9e the moral and political commitment of States to ta1e measures toprotect persons with disabilities, including through national legislation and policies.

22



So, if an international legal framewor1 already existed, why was it necessary to have aconvention on the rights of persons with disabilitiesA

There were different reasons:

•The +onvention was necessary to reaffirm the human rights of persons withdisabilities and to ensure their participation in society as e2ual members and subBectsof rights. #ersons with disabilities continued to be perceived as passive recipients ofassistance rather than rights holders. Foth progress and challenges related to thedevelopment agenda failed to ta1e into account the reality of persons with disabilities.8conomic growth did not always result in social e2uality< and subsistenceeconomies, such as in poor countries, sometimes marginali9ed groups with lesspower and fewer means. #ersons with disabilities faced numerous patterns ofexclusion. @hile standard7setting led to some improvements, the overall situationremained very unbalanced. enerally, persons with disabilities continued to beinvisible in their societies and their marginali9ation often increased the ris1 of humanrights abuse.

• The +onvention was necessary to address /ore *o/2rehensivel the *hallenges

fa*ing 2ersons with disabilities and to better protect and promote their rightsthrough a legall binding instru/ent. 5n '(($, -+! commissioned a study onthe rights of persons with disabilities and the existing human rights system. The studyconcluded that existing instruments and mechanisms were not paying sufficientattention to the promotion and protection of the rights of persons with disabilities< thatthe absence of an explicit legal protection of persons with disabilities represented agap< that a human rights approach re2uired reinforcing certain concepts to replace orclarify previous standards. =or example, the right to free and compulsory educationfor persons with disabilities means the right to an inclusive education, to be enBoyedwith the other members of the society. 8xisting treaties did not ma1e this clear. 5t was

therefore crucial to review some of the previous approaches and adopt a legallybinding instrument that could provide clarity to human rights concepts and standardsas well as set out clear legal obligations on States. The study also underlined that2ersons with disabilities and their re2resentative organi<ations were not usingexisting human rights standards and mechanisms, such as petitions systems underhuman rights treaties, to protect and promote their rights. This reaffirmed the need fora disability7specific human rights treaty.

• The +onvention was the result of a strong advocacy strategy put in place by

organi9ations of persons with disabilities, civil society and States. +ivil society,particularly organi9ations of persons with disabilities 4#-s6, international

organi9ations and academics supporting the disability movement were at theforefront of efforts to advocate and lobby for the +onvention. Their action defined theoverall approach towards the +onvention, ma1ing it clear from the beginning that anydevelopment in the area of disability had to be fully comprehensive, which ensuredthe involvement of all relevant participants rather than States only. The participationof persons with disabilities in important international forums and activities whichpreceded the +onvention, such as the first international review of the implementationof the @orld #rogramme of )ction concerning isabled #ersons, was 1ey inpreparing the path for a different approach.

2(



-hat is the Convention

The +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities is a human rights treaty, i.e., an

international agreement among States setting out human rights and the corresponding

obligations on States.

• The +onvention recogni9es the rights of persons with disabilities3these are the

same rights as everyone else3but reaffirms that persons with disabilities must also

enBoy these rights. This in itself is significant as persons with disabilities are often

denied their rights or are simply not aware that they have rights. The treaty

underlines that persons with disabilities should enBoy those rights without

discrimination and on an e2ual basis with others.

• The treaty sets out obligations on States to promote and protect the rights of persons

with disabilities. @hile persons with disabilities have the same rights as persons

without disabilities, sometimes States must ta1e different or additional steps to

ensure the reali9ation of those rights. The +onvention sets out these obligations inconsiderable detail.

• The treaty also sets out the national and international institutions necessary for

implementing and monitoring the +onvention. )t the national level, these could be

overnment focal points and coordination mechanisms as well as independent

implementation and monitoring mechanisms. )t the international level, the

+onvention establishes the +ommittee on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities to

assist States in implementing the +onvention and a +onference of States #arties to

consider any aspect of implementation.

-hat is the 2ur2ose of the Convention

The purpose of the +onvention is set out in its article $: to promote. protect and ensure thefull and e-ual en/oyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons $ithdisabilities. and to promote respect for their inherent dignity .

Several elements merit further examination:

• Promote. protect and ensure rights: this underlines the multiple layers of State

obligations under the +onvention which are to promote 4e.g., raise awareness aboutthe rights of persons with disabilities6, protect 4e.g., adopt laws and policies that

recogni9e the rights of persons with disabilities and provide remedies for violations6and ensure rights 4e.g., promote physical and informational accessibility to services6.

• 0ull and e-ual en/oyment of all human rights: this asserts that persons with

disabilities have the same rights as others and that they should be able to enBoythose rights on an e2ual basis with everyone in society.

• Respect for inherent dignity : this underlies all aspects of human rights as it

emphasi9es the notion that respect for human rights is the bottom line which in manyways defines our humanity. ) failure to respect rights is a failure to respect anindividual0s dignity and this is the experience of many people with disabilities aroundthe world.

)rticle $ also explains what is meant by Dpersons with disabilitiesE, which is examined below.

2%



-h is the Convention i/2ortant

The +onvention:

+larifies the rights of persons with disabilities. )s noted already, many persons withdisabilities are unaware of their rights and these rights are often neglected. The

+onvention recogni9es that persons with disabilities have the same rights aseveryone else and that they should enBoy them on an e2ual basis with people withoutdisabilities.

Sets out responsibilities to respect those rights. 5t recogni9es that asserting rights isnot enough on its own and that it is e2ually important to identify the various steps thatStates 4and others6 should ta1e to respect those rights. 5n this sense, the +onventionis very comprehensive as it sets out in some detail the responsibilities to respect,protect and fulfil the rights of persons with disabilities.

!ecogni9es disability as a social construct and society should dismantle the barrierspreventing persons with disabilities from participating fully in society.

#romotes inclusive and accessible development. 5t is often described as a humanrights treaty and a development tool. This continues a trend in human rights law thatrecogni9es the need for States to ta1e positive steps to guarantee rights andhighlights the role of the international community in helping States to achieve thoserights. 5ndeed, development is essential if the +onvention is to be implementedproperly. =or example, many provisions re2uire improvements in access to goodsand services which rely, in part, on having effective development strategies andpolicies. 5mportantly, development should be inclusive of and accessible to personswith disabilities 4art. C'6. This re2uires a twin7trac1 approach: specific programmesfor persons with disabilities coupled with mainstreaming their rights into developmentproBects, programmes and other interventions.

8nsures national and international monitoring of rights. @hile this is not the same asensuring legal enforceability, the fact that the +onvention establishes national andinternational mechanisms to support implementation and monitoring is a way tosupport rights as well as the implementation of the +onvention.

:Disabilit; and :2ersons with disabilities;

The +onvention does not provide a closed definition of disability. 5ts preamble states thatdisabilit is an evolving *on*e2t. Nevertheless, the +onvention does reflect a socialmodel of disability as it clarifies that disability results from the interaction between personswith impairments and external barriers that hinders their participation in society.

5n this perspective, the framewor1 reflected in the +onvention is built on the understandingthat it is the external environment, and the attitudes that are reflected in its construction, thatplays a central role in creating the condition termed Ddisability.E This contrasts sharply withthe medical model of disability, which is instead built on the concept of the Dbro1en bodyE,with disability being the obvious result of a physical, mental or sensory deficiency of theperson.

Fecause of this approach, the notion of :disabilit; *annot be rigid but rather depends onthe prevailing environment and varies from one society to the next. @hile the +onventionrecogni9es disability as an evolving concept, it clearly endorses the understanding of it as asocial construct, when it states that disability Dresults from the interaction between personswith impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders their full andeffective participation in society on an e2ual basis with othersE.

2)



5n line with this understanding, the Convention does not 2rovide a *losed definition ofwho persons with disabilities are, but states that they DincludeE those who have long7termphysical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with variousbarriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an e2ual basis withothers 4art. $, purpose6.

Some important elements to consider are:

4a6 (volving v. fi3ed *on*e2t. The +onvention recogni9es that DdisabilityE is anevolving concept resulting from attitudinal and environmental barriers.+onse2uently, the notion of DdisabilityE is not rigid and can be adapted to theprevailing environment in a particular society 4the focus will be on the type ofattitudinal and environmental barriers present in those societies and ways toovercome them6<

4b6 Disabilit not as a /edi*al 2roble/ but as an intera*tion between an

i/2air/ent and the surrounding environ/ent. The focus of the+onvention is not on disability as a medical problem< for the +onvention,persons become disabled when they clash with an unwelcoming orinaccessible environment. #ersons with disabilities do not re2uired to beDfixedE before accessing an environment 4society6< it is instead theenvironment that needs to be uniformly open to all its members. 5t does so bydismantling attitudinal and environmental barriers so that everyone canactively participate and enBoy the full range of rights.

4c6 The Convention in*ludes all disabilities. The +onvention does not restrictcoverage to particular persons< rather, it identifies persons with long7term

physical, mental, intellectual and sensory disabilities as its beneficiaries. Thereference to DincludeE in article $ could therefore extend the application of the+onvention to all persons with disabilities, e.g., those with short7termdisabilities or persons who are perceived to be part of such groups.

4d6 Categori<ing barriers rather than hu/an beings. +ategori9ing a personcan be the first step towards excluding that person and violating his or herinherent dignity. The +onvention does not preclude the use of definitions innational legislation< definitions might be particularly necessary in somesectors, such as employment or social security. @hat is important is thatdefinitions informing policies and laws reflect the social model of disability

where the challenge facing a person with a disability is measured in terms ofthe existing barriers and not on the category or percentage of the impairment.

The explicit reference to barriers e3ternal to the sub=e*t as *onstituting fa*tors ofdisabilit represents an important step away from notions that e2uated disability withfunctional limitations.

=or example, the United Nations Standard Rules on the E-uali1ation of 2pportunities forPersons $ith ,isabilities define disability as the Ddifferent functional limitations occurring inany population in any country of the world. #eople may be disabled by physical, intellectual

or sensory impairment, medical conditions or mental illnessE. The +onvention upgrades thisapproach.

2+



The +onvention does not deny the existence of physical, mental, intellectual or sensoryimpairments 4art. $6< what it reBects is an approach which limits or deprives persons withdisabilities from fully participating in society because of such impairments.

The impairment 4limit or restriction6 has instead to be found in the various barriers, whichmight include physical barriers, but also attitudes leading to discriminatory legislation andpolicies. 5gnorance about disability can be deleterious and that is why wide awareness7raising is one of the main goals of the +onvention.

The +onvention identifies two categories of persons with disabilities who might beparticularly vulnerable to discrimination and abuse of rights: women with disabilities andchildren with disabilities 4arts. and J6.

"omen $ith disabilities

The +onvention recogni9es that women with disabilities often face multiple forms of

discrimination on the basis not only of disability but also of sex 4art. 6. +onse2uently,specific attention might be needed to develop programmes ta1ing into account genderaspects as well as the rights of persons with disabilities, e.g., to boost the percentage of girlsor women with disabilities enrolled in the school system in view of their right to education.

-ne area where women and girls are vulnerable is gender7based violence. The UnitedNations #opulation =und 4UN=#)6 estimates that persons with disabilities are up to threetimes more susceptible to physical and sexual abuse and rape. @omen and children withdisabilities are more li1ely to be victims of violence than their male counterparts.K

The +onvention on the 8limination of )ll =orms of iscrimination against @omen is thespeciali9ed human rights treaty on women0s rights. 5t can be read together with the

+onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities to understand more fully theresponsibilities of States to prevent discrimination and promote e2uality for women withdisabilities.

+hildren $ith disabilities

isability itself cuts across all aspects of a child0s life and can have very differentimplications at different stages in life. 5t is very important to ensure that the rights of childrenwith disabilities are ta1en into account in laws, policies, programmes and other interventionsin a way that no child is left out.

)rticle J of the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities re2uires State parties tota1e all necessary measures to ensure the full enBoyment by children with disabilities of allhuman rights and fundamental freedoms on an e2ual basis with other children. 5t borrowsthe term Dthe best interests of the childE from the +onvention on the !ights of the +hild andre2uires that this be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children withdisabilities.

The +ommittee on the !ights of the +hild0s general comment No. % 4'((6 on the rights ofchildren with disabilities provides comprehensive guidance on the rights of children withdisabilities in the context of the +onvention on the !ights of the +hild. )dopted at the time of

% =or more information, see epartment of 8conomic and Social )ffairs, UN=#), @ellesley +enters

for @omen, ,isability Rights. Gender and ,evelopment: A Resource Tool for Action. )vailable fromwww.un.org"disabilities"documents"#ublication"UN@+@L'(M)NU)H.pdf 4accessed ? -ctober'($'6.

2*

http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/Publication/UNWCW%20MANUAL.pdf

http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/Publication/UNWCW%20MANUAL.pdf



negotiations on the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities, its guidance isrelevant to article J.

2thers

-ther persons with disabilities might also be subBect to multiple forms of discrimination, suchas indigenous persons with disabilities or older persons with disabilities.

# rights4based a22roa*h to disabilit

The main concept behind the +onvention is the move away from a charity or a medical

approach to disability to a social"human rights approach. 5f you understand this concept, you

are in a position to understand the entire +onvention and what it see1s to achieve. =or a full

explanation of the charity, medical, social and human rights approaches, see module $.

The stru*ture and *ontent of the Convention

The +onvention contains /( articles, which can be bro1en down as follows: /

#reamble

Sets the general context and identifies important bac1ground issues,such as the relation between disability and development.

)rt. $ Pur2ose Sets out the goal of the +onvention, which is to promote, protect andensure the full and e2ual enBoyment of all human rights andfundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promoterespect for their inherent dignity.

)rticle $ also explains who is included in the term Dpersons withdisabilitiesE.

)rt. ' Definitions efines the +onvention0s 1ey terms, namely communication,language, discrimination on the basis of disability, reasonableaccommodation and universal design. @hen in doubt, it is useful torefer to the definitions.

The terms Dpersons with disabilitiesE and DdisabilityE are not defined assuch, because there was a conscious decision to treat them asevolving concepts.

)rt. C General2rin*i2les #rinciples are very important for interpreting and implementing therights and other articles in the +onvention. @hen in doubt about the

meaning of an article, you can refer to the principles and use them asguides, e.g., when building supported decision7ma1ing services,policyma1ers should be guided by respect for the autonomy of theperson to ensure the individual has maximum autonomy in decision7ma1ing.

)rt. K Generalobligations

)part from recogni9ing the rights of persons with disabilities, the+onvention also identifies who is responsible for meeting those rightsand what they have to do and when 4e.g., immediately orprogressively6.

) Ma1e sure that training participants have the +onvention in front of them and actually go through the

text while you spea1 about this slide.

2



)ll the obligations are important. They are discussed in more detailbelow. ere are two examples:

State parties must progressively ta1e measures to reali9e economic,social and cultural rights to the maximum extent of their availableresources. This is an important recognition that a country0sdevelopment level can affect the rate at which it implements somearticles in the +onvention. 5t serves as a built7in reality chec1. Note thatthe -ptional #rotocol to the +onvention rendered economic, social andcultural rights Busticiable, even before the adoption of the -ptional#rotocol to the 5nternational +ovenant on 8conomic, Social and+ultural !ights on $( ecember '((?.

a6There is also an obligation to consult persons with disabilities closelyand actively involve them in the development and implementation oflegislation and policies to implement the +onvention and in otherdecision7ma1ing processes that concern them. This reflects the

general principle of participation and inclusion in article C and ma1es itstronger by placing an obligation on the State to respect it. uestionsfor discussion are: ow can it be measuredA @hen did effectiveconsultation occurA

)rts. />

C(

Cross4*uttingissues

The +onvention comprises a robust non7discrimination and e2ualityframewor1, which applies across all its rights, civil, cultural, economic,political and social. )rticle / re2uires State parties to ensure thee2uality of individuals with disabilities, as well as prohibit anydiscrimination because of disability. This general prohibition is furtherdetailed in the context of specific rights, which explain both whatamounts to discrimination on the basis of disability in their respective

contexts as well as measures, including positive measures, to achievede facto e2uality. The +onvention further stipulates that suchmeasures may not be deemed discriminatory.

=ollowing article / are thematic articles of general application to beintegrated across the +onvention. These include article on womenwith disabilities and article J on children with disabilities. uestionsarise such as: @hy have children and women been referred toexpresslyA )re there other cross7cutting issues that could be relevantA )re there other individuals or groups that are relevant, e.g., olderpersons, indigenous peoplesA

S2e*ifi* rights The +onvention covers the full spectrum of human rights. 5n a clearexpression of the interdependence and e2ual status of all humanrights, it mixes civil and political with economic, social and culturalrights. 5ts substantive articles clarify the content and scope of thehuman rights to which all persons are entitled, as applicable to personswith disabilities.

The +onvention is novel in that it sets out a range of measures thatplace obligations on States to do something which is necessary toguarantee rights< however, these measures are not directly related toany one right in particular. They include:

)wareness7raising

)ccessibilitySituations of ris1 and humanitarian emergencies

29



)ccess to Bustice#ersonal mobilityabilitation and rehabilitationata and statistics5nternational cooperation

)rt. C' )nternational*oo2eration

Underlining the importance of international cooperation, includingdevelopment cooperation, to meet the rights set out in it, the+onvention has a stand7alone article on this subBect. This builds on thepractice previous human rights treaties which referred to internationalcooperation, normally in articles related to the progressive reali9ationof economic, social and cultural rights. )rticle C' also spells out ingreater detail the sorts of actions through which internationalcooperation can help promote the +onvention 4e.g., cooperation inresearch, ensuring that development cooperation is inclusive of andaccessible to persons with disabilities6.

Note that the article on international cooperation and the other articlesare interrelated and interdependent. 5n other words, internationalcooperation, including development cooperation, is a way to reali9erights and improve the +onvention0s implementation< development andhuman rights are not separate parts of the +onvention but interrelated.

)rts. C$and CC

)/2le/entationand /onitoring/easures

These articles set forth implementation and monitoring measures. )rticle C$ re2uires State parties to collect appropriate information,including statistical and research data, to enable them to formulate andimplement policies to give effect to the +onvention. )rticle CC sets forththe various measures that State parties have to adopt to establishnational implementation and monitoring framewor1s.

)rts. CK>C%

Co//ittee Starting from article CK, the +onvention details its institutionalstructure. 5t establishes the +ommittee on the !ights of #ersons withisabilities with authority to receive and review periodic reports fromState parties.

)rt. K( Conferen*e ofStates Parties

The +onvention establishes a +onference of States #arties to meetregularly to consider any matter with regard to the +onvention0simplementation.

=rom art.K$onwards

?inal *lauses The +onvention sets out the procedures for signature, ratification,entry into force and other relevant re2uirements.

Under the %2tional Proto*ol to the Convention, individuals and groups of individuals maysubmit allegations of breaches of any of the provisions of the +onvention to the +ommittee.The -ptional #rotocol also permits the +ommittee, with the countries0 consent, to underta1ein2uiries in countries where there has been reliable evidence of grave or systematicviolations of the rights of persons with disabilities.

(0



Prin*i2les

#rti*le 0 of the Convention identifies a set of general principles to assist States inunderstanding and implementing its provisions effectively. =or a fuller overview, see thetable in module $.

'u/an rights in the Convention

)rticle $( > !ight to life )rticle $' > 82ual recognition before the law )rticle $K > Hiberty and security of the person )rticle $/ > =reedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment )rticle $ > =reedom from exploitation, violence and abuse )rticle $J > 5ntegrity of the person )rticle $? > Hiberty of movement and nationality )rticle $% > To live independently and be included in the community

)rticle '$ > =reedom of expression and opinion, and access to information )rticle '' > !espect for privacy )rticle 'C > ome and family )rticle 'K > 8ducation )rticle '/ > ealth )rticle 'J > @or1 and employment )rticle '? > )de2uate standard of living and social protection )rticle '% > #articipation in political and public life )rticle C( > #articipation in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport

@hile the +onvention does not create new rights, it does define with greater clarity theapplication of existing rights to the specific situation of persons with disabilities.

=or example, some appropriate measures to ensure freedo/ of e32ression and o2inionand a**ess to infor/ation are:

• #roviding information in accessible formats and technologies appropriate to different

1inds of disabilities in a timely manner and without additional cost< and

• )ccepting and facilitating the use of sign languages, Fraille, augmentative and

alternative communication, and all other accessible means of communication inofficial interaction.

)n ade7uate standard of living and so*ial 2rote*tion re2uire, among other things:

• )ccess to appropriate and affordable services, devices and other assistance for

disability7related needs< and

• )ccess by persons with disabilities and their families living in poverty to assistance

from the State with disability7related expenses.

The +onvention also includes a series of obligations on States in relation to a range ofissues which are necessary for the full enBoyment of human rights. These are:

5easure (32lanation

)wareness7raising4art. ?6

)wareness7raising involves both increasing understanding ofdisability rights as well as combating stereotypes through public

campaigns, education, encouraging responsible media reporting andtraining

(1



)ccessibility 4art. %6 To enable independent living, accessibility is important in relation tothe physical environment, transport, information and communications,and other facilities and services open or provided to the public

Situations of ris1and humanitarian

emergencies 4art.$$6

5n recognition of the particular vulnerabilities of persons withdisabilities during situations of ris1 and humanitarian emergencies,

States underta1e to ensure their protection and safety

)ccess to Bustice4art. $C6

) fundamental part of ensuring the enBoyment of rights is access to Bustice to enBoy the right to a remedy. This re2uires accommodationsin the legal system as well as training for legal professionals.

#ersonal mobility4art. '(6

#ersonal mobility promotes independence and States can foster thisby facilitating access to mobility aids and assistive technologies,providing training to specialist staff, encouraging producers of mobilitydevices to ta1e into account the needs of persons with disabilities andso on.

abilitation andrehabilitation 4art.

'6

)gain, to attain maximum independence, States underta1e tostrengthen and extend comprehensive habilitation and rehabilitation

services, which go beyond health services and include employment,education and social services.

Statistics and datacollection 4art. C$6

5n order to help formulate and implement policies for theimplementation of the +onvention, States should collectdisaggregated information in a way that respects human rights andethical standards of data collection and analysis.

5nternationalcooperation 4art. C'6

The +onvention recogni9es that most States will benefit frominternational cooperation to meet their commitments. =or instance byensuring that development cooperation is inclusive and accessible,through information exchange and training, through research andtechnology transfer, and technical and economic assistance.

These measures focus on actions that States must ta1e to ensure an environmentconducive to the fulfilment of specific rights of persons with disabilities.

%bligations

-bligations appear at two levels: article K sets out general obligations and each subse2uent

article sets out obligations in relation to specific rights.

) first 2uestion to as1 is who is responsible for meeting these commitmentsA )s with all

human rights treaties, the +onvention places obligations on States. owever, several

articles also highlight the role of private enterprises in reali9ing the rights of persons with

disabilities. @hile it is up to States to ensure that private enterprises respect the +onvention4i.e., obligations are not placed directly on private enterprises6, it is important to ac1nowledge

the role of private enterprises and underline the need to engage this part of society in

partnerships to promote disability rights. -ther human rights treaties mention the private

sector as well and the responsibility of business enterprises in relation to human rights is an

area that has attracted considerable attention in recent years. owever, the +onvention

certainly goes further than other treaties in identifying specific areas for action by the private

sector. The private sector or private entities"enterprises are mentioned in the articles on:

general obligations 4art. K 4$6 4e66< accessibility 4art. % 4'6 4b66< personal mobility 4art. '( 4d66<

freedom of expression 4art. '$ 4c66< health 4art. '/ 4d66< and wor1 4art. 'J 4$6 4h66.

(2



5n addition to private enterprises, it is possible to identify other actors, beyond States, with

responsibilities to respect the rights of persons with disabilities. =or example, article '/

refers to health professionals. Several articles refer to support services and community

services 4for example, art. $' in relation to support for exercising legal capacity and art. $%

on independent living6. )rticle 'K refers to the employment of 2ualified teachers to promote

inclusive education. So even though the legal responsibility to respect the +onvention lieswith the State, many other actors have a role to play.

-hat then are the obligations on StatesA ere is a summary of these obligations, which are

discussed in greater detail in later modules:

• Revie$ e3isting la$s and policies3to ensure that they respect the +onvention and do

not set out inconsistent rules and standards3and adopt new ones to ensure that the

legal and policy framewor1 supports the +onvention0s implementation. Such laws could

be anti7discrimination laws and comprehensive disability laws 4if they exist3it is not a

re2uirement6 but also guardianship laws, education laws, mental health laws and so on.

Secondary legislation and regulations are also covered. #olicies could be national

development strategies, national disability strategies or social inclusion strategies, as

well as departmental and ministerial strategies to improve disability rights.

• Provide funding 3it is not enough simply to pass legislation. @hile some prohibitions on

discrimination might not have financial implications, others will re2uire funding 4e.g.,

ma1ing public spaces accessible for persons with disabilities6. Haws and policies which

are not funded are unli1ely to be fully implemented.

• (ake goods and services accessible3much of the +onvention relies on access to

goods and services, such as assistive technologies and health care and education. Suchservices must be accessible to persons with disabilities if these persons are to enBoy

their rights on an e2ual basis with others. This may re2uire disability7specific services,

while at other times it may re2uire mainstream services 4e.g., education6 to be accessible

to persons with disabilities.

• A$areness4raising 3many of the barriers facing persons with disabilities are negative

attitudes. !aising awareness of the rights of persons with disabilities, as well as the

capabilities of persons with disabilities, is important to reduce such negative attitudes.

• Training 3training on the +onvention for professionals, such as teachers and health

professionals, is important to reali9e many of the rights of persons with disabilities, inparticular those related to access to services. =or example, teachers need to have the

1nowledge necessary to support inclusive education and health professionals need to

understand the shift to a social"human rights approach so that persons with disabilities

can access health services on an e2ual basis with others.

• ,ata collection3good data are necessary to develop good laws and policies to

implement the +onvention. +onse2uently, States should underta1e research and collect

data so that the situation of persons with disabilities and the barriers they face to enBoy

their rights are better understood.

((



• 5uild capacity 3in 1eeping with a human rights approach to development, building the

capacity of States to meet their obligations under the +onvention and that of persons

with disabilities so that they can claim their rights is essential for the full implementation

of the +onvention.

There are several ways to present State obligations in relation to human rights treaties. Theinternational human rights system is based on the identification of two broad obligations:

• *egative obligations3the obligation to refrain from doing something or freedom from the

State

• Positive obligations3the obligation on the State to ta1e steps to promote rights or

freedom through the State

5t is increasingly popular to rely on the formula Drespect, protect and fulfilE to present

obligations on States. This is the formulation proposed to explain obligations here:

• The obligation to respect 3States must refrain from interfering with the enBoyment of

rights<

• The obligation to protect 3States must prevent violations of rights by third parties such

as private enterprises, medical professionals and so on<

• The obligation to fulfil 3States must ta1e appropriate legislative, administrative,

budgetary, Budicial and other action to reali9e rights.

5t is possible to go bac1 to the general obligations and fit each one into one of these three

categories. =or example:

• !espect3refrain from any act that is inconsistent with the +onvention<

• #rotect3ta1e steps to eliminate discrimination in the private sector<

• =ulfil3introduce legislation that is compatible with the +onvention< ta1e steps to achieve

the progressive reali9ation of economic, social and cultural rights.

National and international /onitoring /e*hanis/s

The +onvention explicitly provides for national and international monitoring mechanisms.

$. )t the national level, the +onvention proposes three mechanisms:

• The establishment of a focal point or focal points within the overnment to ensure

coordination among different branches of the overnment and different ministries andlevels, i.e., local, provincial and federal, to progress on the implementation of the+onvention<

• The establishment or designation of a coordination mechanism within the overnment to

facilitate action in different sectors and at different levels<

• The establishment of a framewor1, such as a national human rights institution orombudsperson0s office, to promote, protect and monitor the +onvention. This framewor1

(%



should conform to the #aris #rinciples, which set out the standards for independence aswell as the functions for such monitoring institutions as agreed by the eneral )ssembly.

=ocal points and coordination mechanisms potentially have strong and transformative rolesin the promotion of the +onvention. Traditionally, disability issues have been within the remitof one ministry, such as the health or social affairs ministry. )t times, this has meant that

some issues have been placed outside the ministry dealing with the general issue. This hascreated parallel approaches and segregation. =or example, the social affairs ministry mightdeal with the education of children with disabilities and not the ministry of education, thusplacing children with disabilities outside the general education system. The cross7cuttingnature of disability rights means that they involve many other issues, including Bustice,education, labour, foreign affairs, housing, finance, sports and culture. The focal points andcoordination mechanisms provide a means to ensure that:

• There is one governmental body, or several, with responsibilities for disability rights

4focal points6<

• arious ministries and departments 4and others6 are coordinating their wor1

4coordination mechanism6.

The +onvention provides significant flexibility as to the form of these mechanisms andStates can adapt them to national circumstances. =or instance, a coordination mechanismmight also have civil society participation, as is already the case of many disability councils.

The national framewor1 for implementation and monitoring that is compliant with the #aris#rinciples is very important as it provides an independent means of assisting and alsoverifying the implementation of the +onvention. 5ndependent national human rightsinstitutions can play many roles:

• Monitoring the overnment0s implementation of its commitments under the +onvention<

• Ma1ing recommendations to the overnment on steps to improve implementation<

• !eviewing and promoting the harmoni9ation of national laws related to disability<

• Submitting opinions on legislative bills and proposals related to disability to ensure they

are consistent with the +onvention<

• 8ncouraging the ratification of disability7related instruments, for example, encouraging

the overnment to ratify the -ptional #rotocol to the +onvention if it has not yet done so<

• !aising awareness about disability rights and about combating disability discrimination<

• !eceiving complaints from individuals and groups alleging breaches of the +onvention<

• =ormulating human rights education programmes<

• +ontributing to reports to the +ommittee of the !ights of #ersons with isabilities<

• +ooperating regionally and internationally with other N!5s.

There are other ways of monitoring and enforcing the +onvention, beyond those outlined init, such as courts, consumer tribunals and so on. +ourts provide legal protection of the rightsof persons with disabilities. 5n other words, they provide legally enforceable remedies when

abuse has been proven. They can be particularly relevant when an individual, a group ofindividuals or a civil society organi9ation decides to bring a test case. The court0s decision

()



can then have wide7ranging repercussions such as changes in the law or in attitudes.owever, courts can be slow and costly, and potential litigants might have to decide whethertheir case is worth the time and cost.

'. )t the international level, the +onvention envisages two mechanisms:

• The establishment of an independent treaty7monitoring body 4the +ommittee on the!ights of #ersons with isabilities6 composed of $? members, whose primary function isto review implementation reports from State parties together with shadow reports fromcivil society, and to enter into a constructive dialogue with State parties to strengthenimplementation of the +onvention. The +ommittee can also receive complaints under the-ptional #rotocol and launch investigations into possible grave and systematic violationsof the +onvention.

• The +onference of States #arties meets at least biennially to consider any matter related

to the implementation of the +onvention.

-ther training modules will focus on these mechanisms. owever, it could be useful to

discuss the reporting process and how the process as well as the +ommittee0s review ofreports can help implementation. Such a discussion might have to be tailored to theaudience at hand. =or example, if participants are principally overnment representatives,the discussion could focus on ways that reporting can help them with implementation.#reparing the report can help State representatives to:

• !eview national legislation and policies to ascertain their compatibility with the

+onvention as well as their impact on persons with disabilities<

• 5dentify gaps in the legal and policy framewor1<

• 8nsure that focal points and coordination mechanisms have been appointed within

overnment and are functioning ade2uately<

• 5dentify funding gaps in ministries and programmes that might be delaying

implementation<

• Fuild partnerships with other actors such as #-s through the drafting process.

• -ther O

5f the participants are principally from civil society, the discussion could focus on how civilsociety can influence the State report as well as how it can prepare an alternative report forthe +ommittee which can provide a broader view of the situation of persons with disabilities

and the enBoyment of their rights than is available in the State report.

5f participants are from the United Nations, the participants can discuss how the UnitedNations country teams might prepare information for the +ommittee. United Nationsparticipants might not be aware that information can be sent on a confidential basis to the+ommittee. iscussion could focus on how the +ommittee0s recommendations canstrengthen United Nations programming and also feed into future United Nationsprogramming, including future country analyses and country programmes.

Parti*i2ation and in*lusion of 2ersons with disabilities and re2resentativeorgani<ations

8ffective participation and inclusion of persons with disabilities is only one of the generalprinciples. owever, it is particularly significant given the traditional invisibility of many

(+



persons with disabilities in decision7ma1ing that affects them. Therefore, it can be valuable

to elaborate on this principle, time permitting.

The concepts of full and effective participation and inclusion promote a reality where all

people are able to ta1e part fully in the public and private dimensions of their society and in

decisions that affect their lives.

#articipation. To be effective, participation must go beyond Bust consultation before moving

along a predetermined path or with a predetermined decision. To be effective, participation

should be as active as possible so that persons with disabilities are involved in decision7

ma1ing processes and activities. 8ffective participation also involves an element of

accountability. ecision ma1ers should ta1e account of the proposals and ideas put forward

by persons with disabilities, either by modifying their action, activity or decision or, if that is

not possible, explaining why they cannot do so.

5nclusion is not simply about physically placing persons with disabilities in the same space

as persons without disabilities 4for example, in the classroom6. 5t is about mainstream society

changing and adapting so that persons with disabilities can participate on an e2ual basis

with others. =or example, in the classroom, it could involve changing the syllabus to

accommodate persons who are deaf or changing activities so that they strengthen the

abilities and capacities of each pupil, with or without a disability.

Through participation and inclusion:

• The needs and concerns of persons with disabilities become clearer and solutions can

be more effective<

• #ersons with disabilities have the opportunity to raise issues and hold decision ma1ers

accountable<

• #ersons with disabilities become more visible and have the opportunity to learn and

change from the experience of others and vice versa.

#articipation and inclusion are not one7off experiences< they are lifetime experiences.

=urthermore, 2ersons with disabilities should also have the o22ortunit to /ake

de*isions not ne*essaril related to disabilit or related to 2ersons without

disabilities. Sometimes, accessibility arrangements are made in relation to activities relating

specifically to persons with disabilities 4for example, a meeting on disability rights6. owever,

persons with disabilities have many interests Bust as anyone else in society. =or example, a

person with a disability might wish to participate in meetings unrelated to disability and

accessibility should extend to these activities as well. 5n this sense, the principle of

participation and inclusion should be applied broadly.

Since the beginning, the participation of a vibrant civil society, including persons withdisabilities, and representatives of speciali9ed organi9ations of persons with disabilities4#-s6, general N-s and N!5s, inspired the drafting process of the +onvention.

5n 1eeping with practice in human rights7related discussions, N-s, including #-s, were

accredited to the )d oc +ommittee that drafted the +onvention and participated in the

(*



related sessions and meetings. The eneral )ssembly constantly supported the activeinvolvement of disability organi9ations in the )d oc +ommittee0s wor1.

) broad coalition of #-s and allied N-s formed the 5nternational isability +aucus 45+6,the unified voice of organi9ations of people with disabilities from all regions of the world. -neof its members stated that its goal was Dto open doors for positive change that will enddiscrimination and ensure our freedom and rightsE.

The level of participation of #-s and N-s in the drafting process was probablyunprecedented in United Nations human rights treaty negotiations. Fy the )d oc+ommittee0s final session, some ?(( #- members were registered. Feyond thenegotiations, #-s have been actively involved in the DlifeE of the +onvention. They wereclosely involved in the signing ceremony on C( March '((J and have been involved in thewor1 of the +onference of States #arties and the uman !ights +ouncil0s annual debates onthe +onvention.

@hat role then did #-s playA The 5nternational isability +aucus was a 1ey presence

throughout and brought the concerns of international, regional and national civil society tothe negotiating table. #-s had a crucial role in the drafting of the wor1ing group text, thebasis for negotiations on the final +onvention, which was the result of the wor1 of 'Jovernments, $' N-s"#-s and $ N!5.

The final text of the +onvention was the product of truly inclusive negotiations. Manypositions ta1en and suggestions provided by civil society, especially #-s and mainlythrough 5+, were integrated in the text. Substantive proposals made by 5+, e.g., on theneed to ensure that persons with disabilities are consulted in policyma1ing and decision7ma1ing, are integral parts of the +onvention.

The role of 5+ and N!5s in the negotiations was also 1ey to ensuring the inclusion of a

provision on national implementation and monitoring re2uiring States to establish some formof independent national mechanism to protect, promote and monitor the +onvention.

*othing about us $ithout us6

The motto DNothing )bout Us @ithout UsE relies on the principle of participation and is usedby #-s as part of the global movement to achieve full participation and e2uali9ation ofopportunities for b and with persons with disabilities. The main message is that personswith disabilities must always be directly involved when strategies and policies are beingplanned that will directly affect their lives. #ersons with disabilities are men, women orchildren with disabilities.

)s an N!5 representative stated before the adoption of the +onvention, Des2e*iall theactive involvement of civil society has helped to give this +onvention a sustained focus andrelevance as well as bring its drafting to a speedy conclusion 4O6 This openness andinclusiveness has ensured that the fairly lengthy text of the +onvention neverthelesspossesses a powerful electric current.E

The 1ey role of civil society did not stop with the adoption of the +onvention< it continues with

its implementation. #ersons with disabilities are 1ey in ensuring promotional activities and

information about the +onvention. The new approach of the +onvention is very much about

understanding and sharing the perspectives of persons with disabilities. These persons are

also crucial in the process of reviewing and proposing national measures.

-hat *an different a*tors do to 2ro/ote the Convention

(



State actors

!atify the +onvention

@hen the +onvention has been ratified, publici9e this fact

Translate the +onvention into local languages

8nsure that a national focal point within the overnment is appointed

+onsider establishing a coordination mechanism

esignate an independent monitoring and implementation mechanism

!eview and reform laws and policies and start implementing the +onvention

-therA

2rgani1ations of persons $ith disabilities 7,P2s8

#ersons with disabilities and their representative organi9ations can play many roles inpromoting the +onvention, for instance:

Using the +onvention as a benchmar1 to assess national laws, policies and activities

of the overnment and other actors to ensure compliance with the +onvention and

its progressive implementation

Using the +onvention as a benchmar1 to record and report on the current enBoyment

of rights by persons with disabilities

Using the +onvention as a tool for advocacy. =or example, using the signing,

ratification and reporting to the +ommittee as media moments to attract attention tothe situation of persons with disabilities nationally

Using the +onvention as an obBective and internationally recogni9ed standard to alert

States to their responsibilities towards persons with disabilities, underlining the fact

that disability rights are not the responsibility of others 4private sector, international

community, N-s and so on6 but first and foremost the responsibility of States

Using the +onvention as a tool to ensure the establishment of ade2uate national

promotion and monitoring mechanisms as re2uired under article CC, so that there is a

better chance that implementation will be successful and sustainable

@or1ing with the overnment to encourage it to report to the +ommittee on time and

also participating in drafting the report

#roviding alternative reports to the +ommittee so that the it has the fullest possible

view of the situation of persons with disabilities in the country, as well as the areas

where clear recommendations are most needed and are li1ely to be most effective

-ther O

+ivil society organi1ations 7other than ,P2s8

+ivil society organi9ations such as human rights or development N-s have important roles

to play in promoting and monitoring the +onvention. They can:

(9



+onsider mainstreaming disability rights within their own programmes

8xamine whether they should establish a stand7alone programme on disability rights

Fuild the capacity of #-s

5nclude information on the rights of persons with disabilities in their alternative

reports to United Nations treaty bodies

-ther O

*ational human rights institutions

National human rights institutions can:

+larify which institution4s6 will be designated as the national implementation andmonitoring framewor1

#ublici9e the +onvention

Underta1e research related to disability rights

5nclude the +onvention in its annual activities and reports

5nclude information on the rights of persons with disabilities in their alternative reportsto United Nations treaty bodies

-ther O

)nited *ations country teams

United Nations country teams can also play a role in promoting the +onvention and can:

Mainstream the +onvention in country programmes

8stablish a stand7alone programme to support the State in the ratification andimplementation of the +onvention

Fuild the capacity of #-s

#rovide information to the +ommittee at the time of reporting

+onsider establishing a programme and applying for funding through the Multi7donorTrust =und for the +onvention.

The Multi7donor Trust =und was established in '($$ to support United Nations7ledprogrammes, principally at the country level, but also at the regional and global levels,relating to the +onvention0s ratification and implementation. The founding agencies were the5nternational Habour -rgani9ation 45H-6, -+!, the United Nations epartment for8conomic and Social )ffairs 4UN8S)6, the United Nations evelopment #rogramme4UN#6, the United Nations +hildren0s =und 4UN5+8=6 and the @orld ealth -rgani9ation4@-6.

+ =or more information, see http:""mdtf.undp.org"factsheet"fund"!#(( 4accessed ? -ctober '($'6.

%0

http://mdtf.undp.org/factsheet/fund/RPD00

http://mdtf.undp.org/factsheet/fund/RPD00



5%D&6( 0

R#T)?)C#T)%N

)ntrodu*tion

The +onvention has been widely ratified in only a few years. Fy $ -ctober '($', the+onvention had $'K parties and its -ptional #rotocol JK. This means that over half the worldhas indicated its consent to be bound by the +onvention. Get, there is still wor1 to be doneto achieve universal acceptance. Module C introduces the main concepts and processesunderlying ratification, which should help train and motivate representatives of States, civilsociety and national human rights institutions in countries that have not yet ratified the+onvention.

5n delivering a training session on ratification, it is important to highlight that ratification of aninternational treaty is a complicated process which changes from country to country. =irst of

all, the term ratification is used in different ways and can cause some confusion. =orexample, ratification can refer to the adoption of a treaty at the national level 4such asadoption by the national parliament6, but it can also refer to the international act of adheringto a treaty. =urthermore, some countries accede to a treaty rather than ratify it, so the termratification might be less relevant than accession. )t the same time, the treaty is subBect toformal confirmation by regional integration organi9ations such as the 8uropean Union. @hilethe term ratification tends to be used as a catch7all phrase, strictly spea1ing it might be morerelevant to some Burisdictions than others.

Second, the process underlying ratification tends to differ from county to country. Somecountries have comprehensive national discussions prior to international ratification, whileothers ratify the treaty first and underta1e national discussions later. Some countries simply

ratify the +onvention internationally and do not ta1e any further step at the national level.

+onse2uently, in presenting module C, the facilitator should be aware of the relevantnational processes and adapt the module accordingly.

National /easures for ratifi*ation

+onstitutional law and practice regulate the various aspects of the ratification process thatgenerally, although not always, ta1es place at national level prior to ratification or accessionat the international level. 5t is relevant to note that the +onvention does not indicate anyspecific national process that States should underta1e with regard to ratification.

-verall, there are two approaches to national ratification, which are defined by the role of thelegislative branch. =irst, in civil law countries, ratification ta1es place through the approval ofthe treaty by the legislative branch. )fter the vote of approval, the act of ratification is sent tothe executive for its promulgation, publication and deposit with its depositary. =or example, )rgentina, +hile, +roatia, 8cuador, ungary, Mali, Niger, #anama and Spain ratified the+onvention through an act of parliament. Mexico ratified it through approval by one of itslegislative chambers.

Second, in most countries with a common law tradition, as well as in other legal systems,ratification of the +onvention can ta1e place through an act of the executive. 5f parliament isinvolved, it is in a consultative capacity. 5n other words, a formal vote by parliament is not

necessary. =or example ratification through executive decisions too1 place in Fangladesh,New Pealand and Thailand.

%1



!egardless of the differences between the two approaches, and of the specificities ofnational systems, these domestic processes offer important opportunities for raisingawareness and promoting understanding of the treaty under consideration. 5ndeed, theprocesses leading to and following ratification can influence the next step, i.e.,implementation, for instance by identifying legal and other gaps and galvani9ing support.

Some States assess the benefits and challenges of ratification with national analyses. Suchreports follow a review of the national legislation and policies for compliance with the+onvention, and highlight issues such as the reasons and implications, in terms ofobligations and costs, of becoming a party to a treaty and implementing it. National analysesaccompany the proposal for ratification internally. )ny pre7ratification review should be partof the process that continues in the implementation phase to review existing and proposedlegislation. 5deally, the findings of the national interest analysis carried out by theovernment should eventually be made public.

Similarly, States should engage in ade2uate consultation prior to ratification. 5ndeed, some

support for this can be found in the +onvention itself. 5ts article K 4C6 states:

'n the development and implementation of legislation and policies to implement the present +onvention. and in other decision4making processes concerning issuesrelating to persons $ith disabilities. States Parties shall closely consult $ith andactively involve persons $ith disabilities. including children $ith disabilities. throughtheir representative organi1ations9

@hile the State is not yet bound by article K 4C6, as it has not ratified the +onvention,underta1ing public consultations on ratification is a good practice that could influenceimplementation at a later stage. Through consultation, the act of ratification may becomemore than a political act directed towards the international community and actually improve

standards on the ground.

5f consultations ta1e place, they should ta1e into account the full range of actors that have arole to play in ratification. overnment representatives should be consulted. owever, manyparts of the overnment have a role to play in ensuring disability rights and consultationscan include different levels, such as central, provincial and municipal government. Similarly,consultations can occur across overnment, not only ministries of social affairs and health,which often have the disabilities portfolio, but also other ministries, such as education, Bustice, the interior or finance, that will be involved in implementing the +onvention.

#ersons with disabilities should have a voice in the discussions about ratification, bothdirectly and through their representative organi9ations 4#-s6. Such consultations should

reflect the diversity of disabilities. #ersons with disabilities are not a monolithic group, butcomprise persons with different impairments 4psychosocial, intellectual, physical, sensory6and also different people 4men and women, children with disabilities, indigenous peoples,older persons and so on6. +onsultations should attempt to reflect this diversity as much aspossible.

The need to support the participation of organi9ations of persons with disabilities inconsultations, including financially, should be carefully considered. States engaged inratification processes sometimes find it difficult to ensure wider consultation owing to a lac1of funds, for example, for developing countries or those facing crises. 5n such cases,consultation processes have to ma1e the most of scarce resources. owever, consultationshould nonetheless ta1e place, not only to ensure the participation and inclusion of personswith disabilities, but also because these persons might have proposals relating to the mosteffective use of scarce resources to ensure the progressive reali9ation of the +onvention.

%2



-ther civil society actors, such as human rights or development N-s, should also beconsulted. 5f there is a national human rights institution, it should be consulted and couldalso have a role in underta1ing research on the rights of persons with disabilities and inanalysing laws and policies.

The ratification process should be inclusive and representative of society as a whole,including minority groups and political opposition, and not be guided by a political agenda.Such a genuine and inclusive process is in line with the principle of international lawaccording to which a country0s subse2uent overnments are e2ually bound by aninternational treaty previously ratified. The ris1 is that a overnment in power might excludecertain actors, such as the political opposition, so as to ensure freer action in decision7ma1ing. Get, in the longer term, this might thwart implementation and ma1e it unsustainablewhen there is a change in overnment.

The )ustralian ratification process offers a good example of the steps involved. )ustraliasigned the +onvention in March '((J and ratified it in ;uly '((?. The national exercise

involved a comprehensive review of all +ommonwealth, State and Territory legislation toensure that )ustralia could comply with all the articles of the +onvention. The epartmentsof =amilies, ousing, +ommunity Services and 5ndigenous )ffairs, and of the )ttorney7eneral, in consultation with national #-s, disability advisory councils and the disabilitylegal services networ1, presented a report on the impact of ratification to the overnment.The report identified both the benefits and the disadvantages of ratifying the +onvention andits -ptional #rotocol< verified whether )ustralian laws complied with +onvention obligations<described the economic, environmental, social and cultural impact of ratification< establishedan appropriate means of directly incorporating the +onvention< and audited national laws,policies and programmes.

#reparing for ratification is not only a overnment7led process. +ivil society can also

advocate ratification. 5ndeed, this can be one of the most effective triggers for theovernment to ta1e action. To this end civil society and others can:

• Qnow the facts

Hearn how the +onvention becomes part of national law

Hearn about the effects and costs of ratification

5dentify ways in which ratification can help persons with disabilities

• 8ducate others

5ncluding decision ma1ers through meetings, e7mails, letters, telephone callsand visits, stressing disability as a human rights issue

5ncluding the community through encouraging national debates and tal1s inschools and the community

• Mobili9e partners and allies, such as other disability groups and human rights

organi9ations and social movements

ighlight the importance of the issue

+reate a Boint ratification campaign

Suggest concrete actions for them to become involved

Fuild a networ1, including ways to exchange information and communicate4such as creating a website6

• Hobby @rite to the overnment, urging it to sign and ratify

%(



iscuss the +onvention with Members of #arliament

Meet your contacts in ministries, local and national agencies, etc.

• =ollow7up

Send than1 you letters to officials and other partners

)ssess the success of strategies and messages

The United Nations Mine )ction Service and -+! prepared an Advocacy it to helpmine action centres advocate ratification of the +onvention. The box below reproduces asample letter that could be sent to relevant sta1eholders to promote ratification.

R;2)R A,,RESSRRE+'P'E*T<S A,,RESSR,ATE

ear R*A(E 20 G2=ER*(E*T 200'+'A,

The +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities entered into force on C May '((?.@hen it was opened for signature on C( March '((J, there were ?' signatories to the+onvention, the highest number of signatories in history to a United Nations convention onits opening. =or the full text, please see www.un.org"disabilities. This +onvention:

8stablishes international standards regarding the rights and freedoms of persons withdisabilities<

+larifies human rights principles of inclusion, non7discrimination, accessibility andparticipation in the context of persons with disabilities<

#rovides an authoritative model for overnments to use in shaping national law andpolicies<

+reates more effective mechanisms for monitoring the rights of persons withdisabilities< and

#rescribes national implementation and monitoring mechanisms.

The +onvention mar1s a paradigm shift in attitudes and approaches to persons withdisabilities. 5t represents the movement from viewing persons with disabilities as DobBectsE ofcharity, medical treatment and social protection towards viewing persons with disabilities asDsubBectsE with rights, who are capable of ma1ing decisions and being active members ofsociety.

This is the first maBor human rights treaty of this century and it is a historic achievement forthe /( million persons with disabilities around the world. 5t certainly offers R*A(E 20

+2)*TR; an important opportunity to fulfil its obligations towards citi9ens. @e loo1 forwardto wor1ing with you on these matters and are available to provide support should you sore2uire.

Gours sincerely,R*A(E 20 PERS2* ! 2RGA*'>AT'2*

)nternational /easures for ratifi*ation

)t the international level, States or regional integration organi9ations 4such as the 8uropeanUnion6 that intend to become parties to the +onvention must express their consent to be

%%



bound by it. )rticle KC establishes that such consent can be expressed through ratification,accession or formal confirmation. ) regional integration organi9ation is an organi9ationconstituted by sovereign States of a given region, to which its member States havetransferred competence in respect of matters governed by the +onvention 4art. KK6.

)t this stage, it is important to define certain terms. =or many States, expressing thisconsent comprises signature and ratification:

4a6 Signature of the +onvention is an act by which a State or regional integrationorgani9ation expresses its interest in the treaty and its intention to become a #arty.States and organi9ations are not bound by their signature. owever, they mustrefrain from acts that would defeat the obBect and purpose of the +onvention,according to the ienna +onvention on the Haw of Treaties 4art. $?6<

4b6 Ratifi*ation consists of the deposit, through a formal letter, of the instrument ofratification with the Secretary7eneral of the United Nations as the depositary of the+onvention, in accordance with article K$.

@ith the deposit of the act of ratification, the DState establishes on the international plane itsconsent to be bound by a treatyE. !atification, li1e other acts of consent, ma1es theinternational human rights norms guaranteed in the treaty legally effective vis77vis the Stateand obliges it to report to the international community on measures adopted to align itslegislation, policy and practice with international standards. The significance of this differsfrom country to country and will be discussed below.

Some States have a one7step process to express their consent to be bound, namelya**ession. 5t consists of the deposit of an instrument of accession with the depositary andhas the same legal effect as ratification< however, unli1e ratification, it is not preceded bysignature.

=or regional integration organi9ations, the process is similar to the two7step process referredto above, with signature by the organi9ation followed by for/al *onfir/ation.

States and regional integration organi9ations can decide to ratify and"or accede to both the+onvention and its -ptional #rotocol or to the +onvention only. Such intention needs to bereflected in the instrument executed and deposited. ) precondition for signing and ratifyingthe -ptional #rotocol is having signed and ratified the +onvention, although the two mayoccur simultaneously at the same signing ceremony.

Reservations and de*larations

)t the moment of signature, ratification or accession of the +onvention, States and regional

integration organi9ations may wish to adBust the application of the treaty by means of lodginga reservation. The ienna +onvention on the Haw of Treaties 4art. ', para. $ 4d66 defines areservation as follows:

a unilateral statement. ho$ever phrased or named. made by a State $hen signing.ratifying. accepting. approving or acceding to a treaty. $hereby it purports to e3cludeor to modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application tothat State9

States can also lodge declarations at the moment of signature, ratification or accession.eclarations are statements of understanding of a matter contained in the +onvention or aninterpretation of a particular provision. Unli1e reservations, declarations do not purport toexclude or modify the legal effects of a treaty but rather to clarify the meaning of certainprovisions. owever, some declarations might amount to reservations.

%)



5n some cases reservations and declarations could be the symptom of a State0s lac1 of willto implement the +onvention fully, e.g., a State may mas1 its lac1 of will by invo1ingconflicting cultural principles. 5n other cases reservations and declarations could be theexpression of a State0s legitimate and serious concern related to the inade2uacy of itsnational resources to cope with the obligations derived from the +onvention. States may betempted to lodge reservations to gain more time for implementation. States may decide tomodify or limit some of the tougher provisions to avoid being blamed by the internationalcommunity for not implementing the +onvention properly. 5f reservations are inevitable, it isimportant to limit their impact to the absolute minimum. Foth vague and specific reservationsdeserve attention when monitoring a treaty. =or example, through its authoritativeinterpretations, the +ommittee on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities can circumscribereservations of apparent general and indeterminate scope.

5n any case, reservations are not to be encouraged and the facilitator should find ways toma1e this clear when presenting this module, ta1ing into account the audience.

)rticle K of the +onvention allows parties to lodge reservations provided that these are notincompatible with its obBect and purpose. ) State that obBects may notify the United NationsSecretary7eneral. The Secretary7eneral circulates any obBection received. -bBections todeclarations generally focus on whether the statement is merely an interpretative declarationor is, in fact, a reservation that would modify the legal effects of the treaty. )n obBectingState sometimes re2uests that the declaring State should clarify its intention. 5f the declaringState agrees that it has formulated a reservation instead of a declaration, it may withdraw itsreservation or confirm that its statement is only a declaration.

)fter a reservation is circulated, other State parties have $' months in which they can obBectto the reservation, beginning on the date the notification of reservation was deposited or thedate on which the State or regional integration organi9ation expressed its consent to be

bound by the treaty, whichever is later. @hen a State lodges an obBection to a reservationwith the Secretary7eneral after the end of the $'7month period, the Secretary7eneralcirculates it as a Dcommunication.E Hodging a complaint does not force a State to withdraw it.owever, it does put political pressure on the State ma1ing the reservation and could lead tothe voluntary withdrawal of the reservation either immediately or over a period of time.=urthermore, as a result of obBecting to a reservation, a State might regard a treaty as notbeing in effect between itself and the State ma1ing the reservation3or at least not in relationto the provision to which the reservation has been made.

Treaty7monitoring bodies have consistently sought to restrict the scope of reservations andencourage their withdrawal. The uman !ights +ommittee, for example, has set out itsposition in its general comment No. 'K 4$%%K6 on issues relating to reservations made upon

ratification or accession to the +ovenant or the -ptional #rotocols thereto, or in relations todeclarations under article K$ of the +ovenant. !elying on the test that reservationsincompatible with the obBect and purpose of the treaty are not permitted, the +ommitteeindicates areas where it believes reservations are inadmissible. These include articlesconsidered peremptory norms. The +ommittee 2ueries whether reservations to non7derogable rights are permissible. Similarly, the +ommittee holds that reservations tomeasures that create the supportive machinery for the enBoyment of rights, such as the rightto a remedy, are not acceptable. The +ommittee considers that it falls on itself to determinewhether a reservation is incompatible with the obBect and purpose of the treaty, partlybecause the +ommittee indicates that the nature of a human rights treaty ma1es itinappropriate for State parties to ma1e the decision and partly because the +ommitteecannot avoid ma1ing such an assessment in the performance of its functions.

%+



Stakeholders involved in supporting treaty bodies. enhancing the universal periodic revie$7)PR8 and!or interacting $ith national authorities that are embarking on or completing theratification process should advocate ratification $ithout reservations9

=inally, it is important to note that existing reservations may be modified. Such amodification may result in a partial withdrawal or could create new exemptions from, ormodifications to, the legal effects of certain provisions 4resulting in a new reservation6. )State or regional integration organi9ation may withdraw any reservation it has made to the+onvention or -ptional #rotocol at any time. The withdrawal must be in writing and signedby the ead of State, ead of overnment or minister for foreign affairs, or a person havingfull powers for that purpose issued by one of those authorities. )s with reservations, it ispossible to modify or withdraw declarations.

State parties to the +onvention have lodged a range of reservations and declarations, someof which have attracted obBections from other State parties.

@ith regard to the concept of DconsentE and its implications, )ustralia declared Ditsunderstanding that the +onvention allows for compulsory assistance or treatment ofpersons, including measures ta1en for the treatment of mental disability, where suchtreatment is necessary, as a last resort and subBect to safeguardsE. Foth =rance andthe Netherlands declared their understanding of the term VconsentV and itsapplication: 4$6 consent given by a person who is able to consent< and 4'6 in the caseof persons who are not able to give their consent, permission given by theirrepresentative or an authority or body provided for by law.

Malta, Monaco and #oland made reservations and declarations stressing that the+onvention shall not be interpreted in a way conferring an individual right to abortion.

The Syrian )rab !epublic DunderstandsE that being a signatory of the +onventionDdoes not in any way imply recognition of 5srael or entry into relations with 5srael, inany shape or form, in connection with the +onvention.E

)9erbaiBan declares that Dit is unable to guarantee the application of the provisions ofthe +onvention in the territories occupied by the !epublic of )rmenia until theseterritories are liberated from occupation.E

=rance and several other States obBected to the declaration made by the 5slamic!epublic of 5ran to exclude the application of those provisions of the +onvention that

are deemed incompatible with 5ranian laws. )ccording to =rance, the 5slamic!epublic of 5ran made a Dreservation of general and indeterminate scope. Thisreservation is vague, failing to specify the relevant provisions of the +onvention orthe domestic laws to which the 5slamic !epublic of 5ran wishes to give preference.+onse2uently, it does not allow other States parties to 1now the extent of thecommitment of the 5slamic !epublic of 5ran and could render the +onventionineffective.E

)ustria, the +9ech !epublic, the Netherlands, #ortugal, Slova1ia and SwedenobBected a reservation made by 8l Salvador to sign the +onvention Dto the extent thatits provisions do not preBudice or violate the provisions of any of the precepts,principles and norms enshrined in the +onstitution of the !epublic of 8l Salvador,

particularly in its enumeration of principles.E Fy not specifying the extent of the

%*



derogation, the reservation was incompatible with the obBect and purpose of the+onvention, according to these States.

The +9ech !epublic, #ortugal, Spain and Sweden obBected to Thailand0sinterpretative declaration subBecting article $? of the +onvention to conformity with

Thai laws, regulations and practices. The reservation ma1es it unclear to what extentThailand considers itself bound by the obligations of article $?, putting in 2uestionThailand0s commitment to the obBect and purpose of the +onvention as regards therights associated with liberty of movement and nationality.

)n*or2oration into the legal sste/ of the ratifing State

-nce international ratification has ta1en place, the State has expressed its consent to bebound by the treaty and the +onvention has entered into force for it. owever, it should notbe assumed that the +onvention has automatically become part of its national law.

There are two main approaches to incorporating treaties within the domestic legal system,

usually as a result of legal traditions and often reflected in national constitutions.

(onist countries assume that domestic law and international law form one system of law.5nternational law does not need to be translated into national law. The act of ratifying aninternational agreement immediately incorporates it into national law. 5nternational law canbe directly applied by a national Budge and directly invo1ed by citi9ens, Bust as if it werenational law. ) Budge can declare a national rule invalid if it contradicts international rules. 5nsome States, international law always has priority while others adopt the le3 posteriori rule.5n some State parties to the +onvention, such as )rgentina, +hile, +osta !ica, +roatia,ungary, Mali, Niger, atar, Slovenia and Spain, the provisions of the +onvention havedirect legal effect on the national legal framewor1 and are in principle directly applicable,including in courts of law. 5n relation to other human rights treaties, such as the 5nternational

+ovenant on 8conomic, Social and +ultural !ights, individuals have gone to court withallegations of breaches of treaty rights and won compensation or reparation.

5n dualist countries, the international and national legal systems are seen as separate. Theinternational human rights treaties to which these States are a party have no force, as such,within their domestic legal systems and domestic legislation must be adopted to incorporatethe treaty into the domestic legal order. @hile some State parties have made amendmentsto their legislation to ensure compliance with the +onvention, it appears that the steps ta1enso far fall short of giving direct effect to the +onvention in the domestic system.

5f a dualist country does not translate an international treaty into domestic law, for example,

out of negligence or because the purpose of the ratification"accession was merely political,its implementation will remain uncertain. 5f the State does not translate the +onvention intonational law once it has ratified it, those in most need of having its provisions applied mightnot be protected by it. 8xamples of dualist countries are )ustralia, +anada, 5ndia, Qenya,Malawi, South )frica, United Qingdom and Pambia.

uman rights treaty bodies have often recommended incorporation of their treaties into thedomestic legal order so as to reali9e their full potential. =or example, in its general commentNo. C$ 4'((K6 on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the+ovenant, the uman !ights +ommittee, while noting that the 5nternational +ovenant on+ivil and #olitical !ights does not explicitly re2uire State parties to incorporate the+ovenant, expressed the view Dthat +ovenant guarantees may receive enhanced protection

in those States where the +ovenant is automatically or through specific incorporation part ofthe domestic legal orderE and invited State parties to proceed accordingly.

%



The +ommittee on 8conomic, Social and +ultural !ights expressed similar views in itsgeneral comment No. % 4$%%?6 on the domestic application of the +ovenant: Dlegally bindinginternational human rights standards should operate directly and immediately within thedomestic legal systemE and Dwhile the +ovenant does not formally oblige States toincorporate its provisions in domestic law, such an approach is desirableE.

8ven in countries where it is necessary for legislation to refer to or reproduce the content ofa treaty, Budges have in some cases developed innovative ways of ma1ing use ofinternational standards. =or example, although South )frica is not a party to the 5nternational+ovenant on 8conomic Social and +ultural !ights, its +onstitutional +ourt has used generalcomments of the +ommittee on 8conomic, Social and +ultural !ights to interpret the contextof economic, social and cultural rights in the South )frican +onstitution.

'ierar*h of the Convention in the legal sste/ of States

5n States where the +onvention is directly applicable, it has been assigned different levels

within the domestic hierarchy of laws. +osta !ica, for example, recogni9es conventions asbeing on the same level as the +onstitution. 5n )rgentina, a bill was presented to parliamentso that the +onvention would be recogni9ed as being at constitutional level, similar to otherhuman rights treaties. 5n several States, such as +roatia, Mali, Mexico and Niger,international human rights treaties to which they are a party are regarded as standing abovenational laws.

uman rights treaty bodies have often re2uested clarity regarding the place of their treatiesin the domestic legal hierarchy. They have also consistently expressed appreciation toStates that have recogni9ed human rights treaties as holding constitutional status, which isnot always the case.

5n its general comment No. C$ 4'((K6, the uman !ights +ommittee explicitly noted theimportant status of international human rights treaties, which Dflows directly from theprinciple contained in article 'J of the ienna +onvention on the Haw of Treaties, accordingto which a State #arty Imay not invo1e the provisions of its internal law as Bustification for itsfailure to perform a treaty0E. 5t noted that this principle Doperates so as to prevent Statesparties from invo1ing provisions of the constitutional law or other aspects of domestic law to Bustify a failure to perform or give effect to obligations under the treatyE.

!eservations lodged by States that do not recogni9e the predominance of the +onventionon the !ights of #ersons with isabilities if there is a conflict between it and theirconstitutional or national laws might present challenges in view of article 'J of the ienna+onvention. +onse2uently, even a State with a dualist system should at the very least not

invo1e national law as a reason not to respect the +onvention, even if the +onventioncannot be directly invo1ed in national courts without an additional act of parliament.

Pro/oting ratifi*ation@ roles of different a*tors

E3ecutive

+onsult with line ministries

5dentify a focal point for ratification

old a national consultation

!eview laws and policies

5dentify any gaps in protection Underta1e a national interest analysis

%9



Ma1e ratification a national obBective

5dentify good practices in the region

!e2uest assistance from the United Nations

2ther steps#

Parliament +hec1 if the overnment intends to ratify

Use parliamentary procedure to encourage ratification, such as 2uestions to theminister

Submit a private member0s bill

8ncourage parliamentary debate

Mobili9e public opinion

iscourage reservations and declarations

!aise awareness of the +onvention and the ratification process

8ncourage ratification of the +onvention and its -ptional #rotocol

(ore#

+ivil society

=orm a coalition to support ratification

+ontact international civil society organi9ations

Set out a timeline and lobbying strategy

Haunch a media awareness campaign

old a national conference

evelop and see1 funding for a programme on ratification

Meet representatives of parliament, line ministries, national human rights institution,etc.

!aise ratification with the donor community

)s1 what the United Nations is doing

*ational human rights institution

Underta1e research on the rights of persons with disabilities

!aise ratification in annual reports to parliament

5ssue press releases supporting ratification

!aise awareness in the community

+ooperate with #-s on ratification

8nsure own capacity related to the +onvention

)nited *ations country team

iscuss ratification with overnment partners

+ompile good practice from the region

!aise awareness about the +onvention

#rovide expert advice to the overnment and civil society partners

#rovide technical assistance to national focal points and N!5s

!aise ratification with the international community

Support ratification through media communications

evelop a programme to support ratification

)0



5%D&6( A

5(#S&R(S ?%R )5P6(5(NT#T)%N

)NTR%D&CT)%N

-hat i/2le/entation /easures does the Convention re7uire

)rticle K 4$6 4a6 indicates in broad terms the implementation measures needed for the fullreali9ation of the rights of persons with disabilities, without discrimination. 5t re2uires States:

To adopt all appropriate legislative. administrative and other measures for theimplementation of the rights recogni1ed in the present +onvention9

)t least three aspects of this subparagraph need to be highlighted. =irst of all, the article

refers to adopting DallE appropriate measures. This suggests that implementation should becomprehensive, in that it should cover all possible measures relevant to the +onvention. )rticle K sets out some of these measures, which will be explored in greater detail below.=urthermore, much of the +onvention sets out specific implementation measures in relationto specific rights. 5t is worth loo1ing at any article to understand the types of measuresnecessary to put the +onvention into practice. The reference to DallE appropriate measurescan also be understood as a flexibility device: in other words, no options are left out anddifferent States might identify different options for implementation, in 1eeping with their legaland cultural contexts.Secondly, the article refers to all DappropriateE measures. 5n other words, the measures mustbe appropriate in the light of the principles and obligations in the +onvention. They mustrespect the +onvention and promote its principles. They must be consistent with it.

Thirdly, the article refers explicitly to legislative and administrative measures, but it alsorefers to DotherE measures. This is in 1eeping with the other human rights treaties. @hilelegal and administrative measures are important to implement an international treaty,measures to implement human rights treaties fully go far beyond legal and administrativemeasures and cover education, funding, development, social programmes, institution7building, Budicial measures and more. +onse2uently, such measures must be broad ifimplementation of the +onvention is to be effective. ) narrow understanding of the treaty asre2uiring only legal measures 4e.g., without funding measures6 ris1s leading to good lawsthat are not applied.

) whole range of implementation measures might be relevant, such as:

• 5dentifying focal points, coordination mechanisms and other institutions within the

overnment to support implementation

• 8nsuring that laws and budgets are in line with the +onvention

• Ma1ing sure that laws, policies and institutions are fully funded

• elivering services that are inclusive of persons with disabilities

• !aising awareness about the +onvention

• Training professionals

• Underta1ing research, data collection, analysis, surveys on disability rights

• !esearching and developing accessible technology

• 8nsuring that effective remedies exist when rights are not respected.

)1



This module examines a range of implementation measures, such as law reform to ensurethat laws and policies respect the +onvention through to the provision of ade2uate servicesand institution7building.

Many of the implementation measures examined in this module ta1e time and resources.Many participants will want to 1now what practical steps they could ta1e immediately afterratification or even after the training. +onse2uently, before examining each implementationmeasure in greater detail, it is worth considering some more immediate steps that can beta1en to start the implementation process. These include:

5dentify a +onvention focal point in the overnment

5dentify focal points in line ministries

Ma1e or Boin civil society coalitions for the +onvention

5ssue a press release on the +onvention0s ratification

Ma1e the +onvention available in local languages and in accessible formats

)dvocate for implementation at the national, regional and local levels

!eview laws, policies and budgets

!aise awareness with professionals 4service providers, lawyers, Budges, publicservants, parliamentarians, O6

!eview the accessibility of public facilities"services

Underta1e a baseline study of the situation of persons with disabilities in the country

5dentify gaps in understanding of or capacity related to the +onvention

)NST)T&T)%N4$&)6D)NG ?%R )5P6(5(NT#T)%N

)nstitutions re7uired under the Convention +art. 00,

Fefore examining various implementation measures more closely, it is worth referring brieflyto article CC, which sets out three particularly relevant ones 4see also module 6: focalpoints, coordination mechanisms and independent monitoring mechanisms.

?o*al 2oints@ )rticle CC, paragraph $, re2uires a focal point or focal points within theovernment with responsibility for matters relating to the implementation of the +onvention.The +onvention does not specify who could act as focal point 4a ministry, a department in aministry, a single person and so on6.

Coordination /e*hanis/s@ The same paragraph re2uires States to give due considerationto the establishment or designation of a coordination mechanism within the overnment tofacilitate action related to the implementation of the +onvention. )lthough optional, such a

coordination mechanism could be beneficial by ensuring that all ministries and all levels ofgovernment 4central, provincial and local6 are wor1ing together to implement the +onventionand disability issues do not remain stuc1 in one ministry 4such as health or social affairs6.

=ocal points and coordination mechanisms ensure that there is an authority in the countrywith ongoing responsibility for implementation. Fy itself, this might not necessarily lead toeffective implementation: the focal point and"or coordination mechanism also has to havefinancial bac1ing to follow up on implementation, as well as have the relevant expertise.8ffective participation of persons with disabilities and their representative organi9ationsshould also help ma1e focal points and coordination mechanisms effective. @ithout effectivefocal points and"or coordination mechanisms, the ris1 is that no one will be responsible formoving the +onvention0s standards from the international level to the national level so that

they have real meaning.

)2



Some issues to bear in mind:

8nsure that the focal point and"or coordination mechanism is clearly established,e.g., in law

8nsure that the focal point and"or coordination mechanism is sufficiently staffed

8nsure that the focal point and"or coordination mechanism has funding to carry outits tas1s

8nsure that the focal point and"or coordination mechanism is sufficiently close todecision ma1ers with authority so that advice on implementation and coordination isacted upon

8nsure that the focal point and"or coordination mechanism is not relegated to aministry or department with relatively little authority, and if it is, ensure that the focalpoint is sufficiently high up so that it has authority to act and is connected through aneffective coordination mechanism with other relevant ministries so that +onvention>related action cuts across the overnment

+larify in the focal point0s terms of reference that it is there to facilitateimplementation but not to be the sole overnment institution responsible for the

+onvention 4the effect of which could be to sideline the +onvention andimplementation rather than mainstream disability rights6

#rovide the focal point and coordination mechanism with terms of reference so thattheir roles are clear

Some li1ely initial tas1s of the focal point might be:

Map laws and strategies as a first step in the legal reform

8nsure that other parts of government are aware of the ratification 4other ministries,parliament, etc.6

)lert civil society as a first step towards holding effective consultations on

implementation 8stablish an interministerial tas1 force on the +onvention

Ma1e contact with other levels of government, such as local or State

raw up a list of actions and identify which ministries are responsible for whichactions

8nsure that a budget is allocated to its wor1 in next year0s wor1plan

old a national conference or consultation

+ontact media organi9ations to highlight what the overnment is doing to put the+onvention into practice

Translate the +onvention into local languages

Fe aware of the +ommittee0s reporting guidelines

)nde2endent /onitoring /e*hanis/s@ )rticle CC, paragraph ', on the other hand, focuseson establishing a structure to oversee the implementation of the +onvention. 5t re2uiresStates to maintain, strengthen, designate or establish one or more independent mechanismsto promote, protect and monitor implementation of the +onvention. 5mportantly, in setting upsuch mechanisms, States have to ta1e into account Dthe principles relating to the status andfunctioning of national institutions for protection and promotion of human rightsE, otherwise1nown as the #aris #rinciples. 5n other words, the mechanisms must meet internationallyagreed standards of independence, plurality and operating.

%ther institutions relevant to i/2le/entation

Courts@ State parties are also re2uired to promote appropriate training on the +onventionfor the Budiciary in accordance with article $C. D5n order to help to ensure effective access to

)(



Bustice for persons with disabilities, States #arties shall promote appropriate training forthose wor1ing in the field of administration of Bustice, including police and prison staff.ETraining should include training for Budges and lawyers on the rights of persons withdisabilities and on the international commitments of States under the +onvention so thatcases are dealt with in accordance with international law. 5n addition, courts should bephysically accessible to persons with disabilities and their information must also beaccessible 4documents in Fraille, websites using screen7readable formats, sign7languageinterpretation in court and so on6.

Parlia/ents@ #arliaments have a crucial role to play in implementing the +onvention, byadopting legislation but also by holding the executive accountable for policies and strategiesas well as service delivery. #arliaments also have an important role in the budget process.@hile the +onvention does not refer to parliaments, strengthening them, by ma1ing themaccessible and raising awareness among parliamentarians about disability rights andpersons with disabilities as 1ey constituents, can have a potentially strong impact on the+onvention0s implementation.

Parti*i2ation of *ivil so*iet

The +onvention also stipulates that *ivil so*iet, particularly persons with disabilities andtheir representative organi9ations, should participate fully in all aspects of this monitoringprocess, Bust as they are to be involved in the development and implementation of policies,programmes and legislation to implement the +onvention, in line with article K.

This reference to civil society raises at least two issues:

4a6 +ivil society, in particular persons with disabilities and their representativeorgani9ations, should be involved in the monitoring process underta1en by theindependent monitoring mechanism established under article CC 4and ideally also in

the wor1 of focal points and coordination mechanisms6<4b6 +ivil society itself has a role to play in monitoring the +onvention, independently of

the other mechanisms established under article CC.

6#-S P%6)C)(S #ND $&DG(TS

6aw refor/

A duty to reform la$s

)rticle K 4$6 4b6 of the +onvention obliges State parties to Dta1e all appropriate measures,including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices

that constitute discrimination against persons with disabilitiesE.

5n addition, States underta1e to adopt appropriate legislative and administrative measuresand, in article K 4$6 4c6, to ta1e into account the protection and promotion of the human rightsof persons with disabilities in all policies.

+onse2uently, an important step in implementing the +onvention is to review the nationallegislation and policy framewor1 comprehensive so as to:

• Modify or abolish discriminatory laws

• )dopt new legislative measures to ensure future implementation

)%



) review of existing laws 4and policies6 is a duty that applies to all State parties. 8ven inStates where the +onvention is automatically applicable, there will still be a need to ensurethat all relevant domestic law, including regional or customary law, is brought intocompliance with the +onvention.

'ngredients for compliance

)spects of article K and other provisions in the +onvention identify some of the factors tobear in mind when reviewing and reforming laws:

- Ma1e explicit references to the +onvention in domestic legislation so that there is aclear lin1 between the international and national standards, and the variousstandards in the +onvention become part of national law

- Ma1e sure the understanding of DdisabilityE is in line with the social"human rightsunderstanding of the term set out in the +onvention. 5n other words, ensure thatDdisabilityE is seen as the result of the interaction between an individual0sDimpairmentE and an unwelcoming environment

- efine Idiscrimination0 in 1eeping with the +onvention. )rticle ' definesDdiscrimination on the basis of disabilityE in broad terms. 5t includes distinctions,exclusions or restrictions which have the purpose or the effect of impairing ornullifying the rights of persons with disabilities. This is a very broad understanding ofdiscrimination which re2uires at the very least the prohibition of discrimination on theground of disability in all areas but also legal measures that prevent discrimination inthe first place as well as measures to promote e2uality between persons with andwithout disabilities

- !eview all relevant legislation, not Bust legislation specifically or only related todisability rights. This is important, as many areas of law and policy can have animpact on the enBoyment of the rights of persons with disabilities, even whendisabilities or persons with disabilities are not referred to. +onsider the following

areas of law:

o The constitution

o Non7discrimination laws and regulations

o +omprehensive disability law and regulations

o uardianship rules

o +riminal law

o 8ducation laws and policies

o ealth laws and policies

o Social protection laws and policies

o +onstruction laws and regulations

o Habour laws and policieso #rivacy laws and policies

o 8lection laws and regulations

o 5mmigration laws and policies

o +hild protection laws and policies

o 5ntellectual property laws

- 5dentify rights7holders< in particular, ma1e sure that the diversity of disability isrespected so that disability legislation does not exclude any Drights7holdersE.+onse2uently, it should be clear that domestic legislation and policy protect personswho have physical disabilities, mental or psychosocial disabilities, intellectual

disabilities or sensory disabilities 4such as persons who are deaf, blind or deaf7blind6- 5dentify duty7bearers, including different levels of government, and private actors andtheir clear responsibilities. Two aspects deserve to be underlined here:

))



o 8nsure the reform covers all levels of government: local, provincial as well as

central. )rticle K 4$6 4d6 re2uires States to ensure that public authorities andinstitutions act in conformity with the +onvention. #ublic authorities includenot only central authorities but also provincial and local authorities, whichoften have important roles in areas such as service delivery for persons with

disabilitieso 8nsure that the private sector is regulated. )rticle K 4$6 4e6 re2uires States to

ta1e all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination on the basis ofdisability by any person. organi1ation or private enterprise. #rivate individualsas well as organi9ations"enterprises have duties in relation to persons withdisabilities, at the very least, not to discriminate against them

- 5dentify the institutional framewor1 for promoting and protecting the rights of personswith disabilities. )rticle CC sets out three mechanisms for implementation andmonitoring: focal points in the overnment, coordination mechanisms in theovernment and independent mechanisms for the promotion, protection andmonitoring of the +onvention. -ther institutions, such as parliamentary committeesand the Budiciary, also have roles which legislation can identify

- Ma1e provision for secondary legislation, administrative measures and budgetarymeasures. This is fundamental to the success of law reform. #rimary legislationwithout directives on how to implement it or without financial or human resources will,in many cases, be difficult if not impossible to implement

5t is relevant to note that higher standards of protection should prevail: if the +onvention0sprovisions are wea1er on certain issues than the law currently applicable in the State, thenthe national standard should of course be applied. uring consultations with #-s in )ustralia, it was stated that the +onvention potentially establishes a different standard ofcompliance between State and non7State actors 4i.e., a lower standard for non7State actors6.iven the extensive role of the private sector in the provision of public goods and services in )ustralia, such as in the development and provision of disability7specific services, aids and

appliances, and in the shaping of social attitudes, #-s called on the )ustralianovernment to declare that )ustralia would not limit itself to DfosteringE or DencouragingE orDpromotingE or DencouragingE non7State actors to observe the rights set out in the+onvention, but might in some situations re2uire the private sector to ta1e on responsibilitieson a basis e2uivalent to that of State actors.

Ensuring effective remedies

=or rights to have meaning, effective remedies must be available to redress violations, andlegislation should ensure that courts and other tribunals have the authority to receivecomplaints of non7compliance with rights. This re2uirement is implicit in the +onvention andconsistently referred to in the context of the other maBor human rights treaties. 5mportantly,persons with disabilities who suffer discrimination in any field should have access to Bustice.+onse2uently, remedies should cover all human rights3civil and political rights as well aseconomic, social and cultural rights. The right to a remedy in the event of abuse of rightsshould be established in law and legislation should identify the means through whichremedies are provided.

@hen discussing remedies, Budicial remedies are often the first that come to mind. Monistapproaches may have advantages in this respect. Fy ratifying the +onvention, a monistState will automatically be bound by its principles and obBectives. 5ndividuals in that State,including persons with disabilities, who have been denied specific rights for examplebecause domestic legislation is wea1 on the matter can invo1e the +onvention in a national

courtroom and as1 the Budge to apply the +onvention and decide that the national law isinvalid. The Budge does not have to wait for the +onvention to be translated into national law:

)+



the treaty has been ratified and its provisions are, in principle, directly applicable. -f course,the monist approach will have an advantage so long as the national Budges are competentand familiar with international standards and human rights.

8ven in States where the +onvention is not directly applicable, ratification of or accession to

it encourages the Budiciary to apply domestic law in a manner that is consistent with it. Fytranslating the +onvention into national law, dualist States enable their courts to apply the+onvention in their Budgements.

owever, it is important to consider other remedies, too. =irst, other remedies might be moreappropriate. =or example, problems arising in service delivery might be better dealt with byconsumer tribunals or through administrative remedies national human rights commissions,ombudsmen, e2uality commissions, disability commissioners and so on. These can be mucheasier to access, even without a lawyer, and can be cheaper and less intimidating. Similarly,mediation and arbitration might be preferable in some cases as they can be lessconfrontational and rely on solutions 4remedies6 that are agreeable to all parties. Habourinspectors and school inspectors might provide a means of holding employers and

education professionals accountable and, as a result, provide solutions 4remedies6 that are2uic1er, cheaper and ultimately more effective than Budicial remedies.

Second, other remedies might be shorter and more certain. 5n some countries, the Budiciaryis dysfunctional or insufficiently resourced to ensure access to Bustice. 5n such situations,individuals might have little faith in the court system and be put off from filing a complaint forthe denial of their rights. !emedies which are easier to access might provide alternatives toprocesses uncertain to bring relief.

Third, traditional forms of Bustice might be preferable, particularly in poor, rural areas. 5nmany countries there is a lac1 of tribunals and courts in the areas outside the capital districtand main urban centres. This situation is particularly critical for persons with disabilities

living in remote areas. #overty or extreme poverty can affect these areas, ma1ing itimpossible to move around freely and reach urban areas for legal or other support.Nevertheless, for persons with disabilities, traditional systems are not always a panaceabecause of stigma and preBudice. ecisions could then reflect traditional approaches thatisolate persons with disabilities or give them une2ual treatment. #rogrammes to raiseawareness should therefore involve traditional authorities, including elders and communityleaders, integrating elements of non7discrimination and participation in local remedies.

Relevant actors

@ho should be involved in law review and reformA This is a non7exhaustive list:

- #arliamentary committees, such as human rights committees- Ministry of Bustice or attorney7general0s office- Sectoral ministries, such as social affairs, health, education, labour, interior, etc.- =ocal points and coordination mechanisms- National human rights institution, e2uality commission, ombudsman, etc.- -rgani9ations of persons with disabilities- -ther civil society organi9ations, such as human rights N-s, development N-s,

etc.- United Nations agencies, regional human rights organi9ations, such as the +ouncil of

8urope, the )frican +ommission, 5nter7)merican +ommission, etc.- 5nternational experts on the +onvention

- )cademics- 5nternational development agencies

)*



Process

8ach State will have its own process for underta1ing law and policy reform. owever,following certain principles will ensure that the process is inclusive of persons withdisabilities and other relevant actors and is also effective.

5mportantly, article K 4C6 stresses that States should consult and actively involve personswith disabilities, through their representative organi9ations, in the development of legislationand policies to implement the +onvention and in other decision7ma1ing processesconcerning them. Their participation should therefore underpin the entire law and policyreform.

Some ste2s in law review and reform are:

- 5dentify all laws directly or indirectly relevant to the +onvention 4see next section6- !eview laws for consistency with the +onvention- Underta1e a national interest analysis, including an open consultation

- old a public hearing in parliament- )ssess the types of legislation needed, e.g., comprehensive disability law and"ornon7discrimination law and"or sectoral laws including disability rights provisions

- raft amendments to legislation- ebate amendments in parliament- +onsider drafting a national human rights action plan for implementation- )dopt secondary legislation"regulations- 8nsure funding of new provisions- 5nclude process and amendments in the initial report to the +ommittee on the !ights

of #ersons with isabilities.

Poli*ies

Haws translate international commitments into the domestic legal framewor1 and often leadto real improvements in the human rights situation on the ground.

owever, in many cases, policies can be important to accelerate implementation. @hile lawsset out rights and obligations, policies can set out steps to achieve time7bound goals so thatobligations are met. #olicies are particularly relevant to the progressive reali9ation ofeconomic, social and cultural rights. owever, policies are also relevant to civil and politicalrights 4for example, improving the administration of Bustice6. Many policies are relevant to the+onvention, such as:

The national development strategy 4or poverty reduction strategy6

Sectoral development strategies 4health, education, social protection, vulnerablecommunities, etc.6

National human rights strategy and action plan

isability rights strategy and action plan

isaster preparedness and response plan

#olicies are not a one7off< they have a lifespan:

• Diagnosis@ ) diagnosis is re2uired to identify strengths, wea1nesses, opportunities

and threats. =or example, a national development strategy should be analysed toidentify whether development programmes ta1e into account the rights of persons

with disabilities, whether development is accessible to them, whether development

)



programmes unintentionally create additional barriers 4e.g., by building inaccessibleschools6 and so on.

• ?or/ulation@ -n the basis of the diagnosis, the policy should be formulated.

)chievable benchmar1s and indicators should be identified. The formulation shouldbe such that there as many connections as possible with specific provisions of the

+onvention. )n education policy should refer to article 'K so that it explicitlyrecogni9es the right to inclusive education and provides for training for teachers oninclusion as well as specific education services to persons with disabilities such assupport in the classroom or materials in Fraille and the teaching of sign language.#ersons with disabilities and their representative organi9ations should be involved atall stages of the policy formulation.

• #do2tion@ #olicyma1ers should adopt the policy and publish it. Transparency is very

important. 5t enables civil society, including persons with disabilities, to identify theextent to which consultative processes have actually influenced the policy, and itencourages implementation because everyone is aware of it and can support it.

• )/2le/entation@ The policy should be implemented according to the strategies and

action plan. 5mplementation should respect the +onvention0s principles: it should

avoid discrimination 4include persons with disabilities, not create new barriers,respect the diversity of disability, e.g., physical, sensory, mental and intellectual6, itshould be as participatory as possible< it should be transparent and accountable< itshould promote e2uality between men and women and so on.

• (valuation. 5mplementation should be reviewed to examine whether benchmar1s

have been met. 8valuation is important in and of itself to see what wor1ed and whatdid not wor1 so that the policy can be fine7tuned. Moreover, evaluation can feed intothe State0s reporting process to the +ommittee.

5n many ways, this corresponds to what is 1nown as a human rights7based approach. Thisapproach has three main elements:

5t stresses participation, non7discrimination, transparency and accountability. The+onvention reinforces these principles and adds others 4see art. C6, such asinclusion, respect for autonomy, accessibility, respect for difference and respect forthe evolving capacities of children.

5t explicitly lin1s policies to meeting human rights standards 4e.g., promoting inclusiveeducation, free and compulsory primary education6.

5ts aim is that policies should strengthen the capacity of rights7holders to claim theirrights and duty7bearers to meet their obligations.

The World Report on Disability s re*o//endations on national strategies and 2lans

of a*tion

The "orld Report on ,isability J ma1es nine recommendations. They are reproduced here toillustrate how the +onvention could be implemented around the world. owever, they are notthe only steps that States should ta1e to implement the +onvention.

Some recommendations are relevant to law and policy reform.

!ecommendation C: )dopt a national disability strategy and plan of action

?@ A national disability strategy sets out a consolidated and comprehensive long4term vision for improving the $ell4being of persons $ith disabilities and should cover

* @orld ealth -rgani9ation and @orld Fan1, "orld Report on ,isability 4eneva, '($$6.

)9



both mainstream policy and programme areas and specific services for persons $ithdisabilities9

The development. implementation. and monitoring of a national strategy should bringtogether the full range of sectors and stakeholders ?@9

The strategy and action plan should be informed by a situation analysis. taking intoaccount such factors as the prevalence of disability. needs for services. social andeconomic status. effectiveness and gaps in current services. and environmental andsocial barriers9 ?@ The plan of action operationali1es the strategy in the short andmedium terms by laying out concrete actions and timelines for implementation.defining targets. assigning responsible agencies. and planning and allocatingneeded resources9

(echanisms are needed to make it clear $here the responsibility lies forcoordination. decision4making. regular monitoring and reporting. and control ofresources9

!ecommendation K: 5nvolve people with disabilities

People $ith disabilities often have uni-ue insights about their disability and theirsituation9 'n formulating and implementing policies. la$s. and services. people $ithdisabilities should be consulted and actively involved9

,isabled people<s organi1ations may need capacity4building and support to empo$er people $ith disabilities and advocate for their needs9 ?@

People $ith disabilities are entitled to control over their lives and therefore need tobe consulted on issues that concern them directly B $hether in health. education.

rehabilitation. or community living9 Supported decision4making may be necessary toenable some individuals to community their needs and choices9

$udgetar /easures in the *onte3t of law and 2oli* refor/

Fudgetary measures are essential aspects of most laws and policies. @hile some laws andpolicies3such as those prohibiting certain conduct, e.g., discrimination or torture3do notre2uire funding, most laws and policies related to human rights do, particularly in relation toeconomic, social and cultural rights. Qey factors to bear in mind are:

Some provisions do not cost anything to implement

5mplementing some provisions can save money 4e.g., universal design saves moneyon retrofitting later6

Some provisions can be implemented by using existing funding differently 4fundinginclusive education rather than segregated education could simply involvereallocating budgets6

Some provisions can be implemented by using existing funds better 4here, budgetplanning that is transparent and ensures accountability is important6

Some provisions can be implemented through the dedication of relatively fewadditional funds 4awareness7raising through public campaigns is relativelyinexpensive but can be very effective6

5mplementing some provisions re2uires additional funds 4for example, rehabilitation

services, home care services and so on6.

+0



State duty to provide budgets

ecision ma1ers must consider whether laws and policies have financial implications andthen they must foresee ade2uate budgets. )s noted above, before adopting laws andpolicies, parliament and the executive should explicitly indicate the sums that will beprovided for implementation. @hen budgets 4and human resources6 are made available,other measures have a much higher li1elihood of success.

The +onvention0s 1ey provision on funding is article K 4'6 4general obligations6: "ith regardto economic. social and cultural rights. each State Party undertakes to take measures to thema3imum of its available resources and. $here needed. $ithin the frame$ork ofinternational cooperation. $ith a vie$ to achieving progressively the full reali1ation of theserights. $ithout pre/udice to those obligations contained in the present +onvention that areimmediately applicable according to international la$9

This obligation is often misunderstood. 5t does not mean that aspects of economic, socialand cultural rights that re2uire resources"funding can be put off indefinitely. 5ndeed, the

+ommittee on 8conomic, Social and +ultural !ights has stated that economic, social andcultural rights comprise core obligations which must be implemented immediately,irrespective of the costs involved. -ne example is the duty to provide affordable essentialmedicines as part of the right to health.

owever, where resources are re2uired and progressive reali9ation applies:

• The State must ta1e steps immediately to draw up the budget and a time7bound

action plan

• Time7bound benchmar1s should be set so as to guide progressive implementation

• 5ndicators should be identified to measure whether those benchmar1s have been

met or not

• =unding should be committed so that the measures necessary to meet those

benchmar1s can be ta1en

• The action plan should be monitored, using the indicators, to assess whether

implementation is on trac1 or not.

5n the light of the difficulties that poorer States have in implementing the +onvention 4as aresult of resource re2uirements6, article K 4'6 as well as article C' highlight internationalcooperation as a means of helping States. )rticle C' 4$6 4d6 re2uires States to underta1eappropriate and effective international cooperation measures including by providing. asappropriate. technical and economic assistance.

,isability rights budgeting

5ncreasing attention is being placed on Dhuman rights budgetingE and related issues such asgender budgeting. The experience from these areas will be important to guide budgeting forthe +onvention. The following 2uestions can help to decide whether budgets are alignedwith laws and policies to implement it:

ow are national development policies aligned with the +onventionA @hat is the alignment between policy and budget processesA To what extent are budgets aligned with the +onvention0s priorities, standards and

goals, including their desired and real impact 4tied to the progressive reali9ation ofrights and maximum available resources6A

To what extent are budgets aligned with both the +onvention and nationally setprioritiesA

+1



To what extent are budgets aligned with inclusive, transparent and accountableprocessesA

To what extent does the budget process reflect the differing roles of rights7holders,civil society and the State as well as the dynamic relationship among themA

-ne problem facing the alignment of budgeting with law and policy processes is theasymmetry of ownership. =or example, the asymmetries between ministries of finance,ministries of planning, sectoral ministries, parliament and civil society can have an impact onthe ways in which budgets are aligned with policies as well as the extent to which policiesand budgets incorporate human rights principles 4e.g., of the extent to which civil society isinvolved6.

The World Report on Disability s re*o//endation on funding

The "orld Report on ,isability provides some illustrations of some funding measures thatcould be relevant as well as the areas where funding is needed.

!ecommendation : #rovide ade2uate funding and improve affordability

?@ Ade-uate and sustainable funding of publicly provided services is needed toensure that they reach all targeted beneficiaries and that good -uality services are provided9 +ontracting out service provision. fostering public4private partnerships. ?@and devolving budget to persons $ith disabilities for consumer4directed care cancontribute to better service provision9

,uring the development of the national disability strategy and related action plans.the affordability and sustainability of the proposed measures should be consider andade-uately funded9 ?@

To improve the affordability of goods and services for people $ith disabilities and tooffset the e3tra costs associated $ith disability. ?@ consideration should be given toe3panding health and social insurance coverage. ?@ ensuring that poor andvulnerable people $ith disabilities benefit from poverty4targeted safety net programmes. and introducing fee4$avers. reduced transport fares and reducedimport ta3es and duties on assistive technologies9

)NC6&S)>( S(R>)C(S

Servi*e deliver as a *o/2le/ent to law 2oli* and budget refor/

Haw and policy are very important elements in ensuring that the +onvention is translatedinto the national legal and political order. owever, they should be accompanied by practicalmeasures to turn standards into reality for persons with disabilities. Through servicedelivery, State and non7State service providers can ensure that persons with disabilitieshave access to the facilities, goods and services that they are entitled to, according to the+onvention.

Relevant se*tors

Service delivery relates to many of the +onvention0s articles, including:

- Situations of ris1 and humanitarian emergencies 4art. $$6- Supported decision7ma1ing 4art. $'6

+2



- )dministration of Bustice 4art. $C6- Support for victims of violence and abuse 4art. $6- Support for independent living 4art. $%6- =acilitation of access to mobility aids, devices, technologies and live assistance 4art.

'(6- #rovision of information in accessible formats 4art. '$6- #rovision of reproductive health services 4art. 'C6- Support, including individuali9ed support, within the general education system 4art.

'K6- #rovision of health services and health care 4art. '/6- #rovision of habilitation and rehabilitation services and programmes 4art. '6- Support for inclusive employment and vocational training 4art. 'J6- #rovision of access to services, devices and other assistance to ensure an ade2uate

standard of living and social protection 4art. '?6- Support for political participation, including voting 4art. '%6- )ccess to recreational, tourism, leisure and sporting activities 4art. C(6

Servi*e deliver in the light of the Convention

Service delivery existed well before the adoption of the +onvention. owever, it needs tocomply with the principles and standards laid down in the +onvention if it is to contribute tothe +onvention0s effective implementation. This means that service delivery must meet thegeneral principles in article C of the +onvention: for example, services should notdiscriminate on the basis of disability, they should respect the e2uality between men andwomen, promote individual autonomy as well as ensure the participation and inclusion ofpersons with disabilities. Service delivery which reinforces the segregation of persons withdisabilities would, on the face of it, not be in compliance with the +onvention.

5n addition, service delivery should comply with the specific standards in the +onvention0s

substantive articles. =or example, under article '/ on the right to health, health professionalsshould provide health care to persons with disabilities on an e2ual basis with others,including on the basis of free and informed consent. =orced treatment for example, wherethis occurs on the basis of disability, would not be in compliance with the +onvention.

#*hieving in*lusive servi*es for 2ersons with disabilities

)chieving inclusive and non7discriminatory services for persons with disabilities incompliance with the +onvention does not necessarily mean that the same services arenecessary for everyone at all times. )s with other aspects of the +onvention, servicedelivery re2uires a two7trac1 approach. )t times, the +onvention re2uires access tomainstream services on an e2ual basis with others. )t other times, specific support might be

needed for persons with disabilities so that they can enBoy the same rights as personswithout disabilities.

Three forms of services are needed to implement the +onvention:

5ainstrea/ servi*es: these refer to services that are used by and designed for thewhole population. 5n such cases, it is important that the services are inclusive of andaccessible to persons with disabilities. 5ndeed, accessibility is crucial: by ensuringthat facilities, goods, services, transport, information and technology are accessible,many persons with disabilities can enBoy their rights and live independently in thecommunity in the same way as persons without disabilities. Some examples ofmainstream services are:

> 5nclusive education

+(



> #rimary health care made fully accessible 4information, communication andphysical environment6

Su22ort servi*es: these refer to services that contribute directly to overcomingbarriers facing persons with disabilities and are meant to strengthen theirparticipation in mainstream society. 5n other words, while access to mainstreamservices ensures that the same services are accessible to all persons with or withouta disability, access to support services re2uires services tailored to persons withdisabilities 4but not persons without disabilities6. 8xamples include:

> #rovision of wheelchairs and mobility aids to enable a person with a mobilityimpairment to access the community

> #ersonal assistance to support someone in his or her daily tas1s > Support for legal decision7ma1ing to help persons with disabilities enter into

contracts, write wills, etc. on an e2ual basis with others S2e*ifi* servi*es: these services either prepare persons with disabilities for

inclusion into mainstream society or at times replace mainstream or support servicesif the person cannot be fully accommodated in the community. 5n such cases, theservices should always target inclusion and not isolation. =or example:

> ay care for people with severe intellectual disabilities

#*tors involved in servi*e deliver

Many actors are involved in delivering services3mainstream, support or speciali9ed3topersons with disabilities:

- overnment service providers, including at the local or municipal level- Those wor1ing in the administration of Bustice, including lawyers, Budges, prison staff,

the police, public interest litigators, etc.- #rivate enterprise service providers- Non7governmental service providers, e.g., not7for7profit organi9ations"N-s

- The media- ealth professionals- 8ducation professionals- Habour inspectors- Trade unions- 8mployers0 associations

The role of the State

=or law and policy reform, the State clearly has the lead role, but in service delivery theprivate sector, national and international civil society as well as the State are involved. )t thelevel of the State, the central overnment has a regulatory role and also a service provision

role, but other levels of government, particularly municipal"local, have a role to play, too.

@hat then is the role of the StateA

The duty of the State is paramount: uman rights law identifies the State as the primaryduty7bearer to promote, protect and ensure the implementation of the +onvention.

The State must:

$. ?ulfil its duties as 2ri/ar dut4bearer@ The duties under the +onvention fall firstand foremost on the State. The entire +onvention establishes duties on the State topromote, protect and ensure the rights of persons with disabilities. This does notmean that the State must provide services itself. =or this reason, the +onventionuses terms such as the State underta1es Dto promoteE or Dto encourageE or Dto

+%



facilitateE the provision of services. owever, at times, the State must provideservices3for example, in outlying regions or unprofitable areas where privatebusiness might not be active or which the not7for7profit sector might be unable toreach.

'. Regulate the 2rivate se*tor : @here private actors supply services, the State neednot duplicate these services, however, it still has a duty to regulate the privateorgani9ations that supply services. The +onvention recogni9es this, especially inarticle K 4$6:

States Parties undertake @ 7e8 to take all appropriate measures to eliminatediscrimination on the basis of disability by any person. organi1ation or privateenterprise9

The broad understanding of DdiscriminationE in the +onvention means that the Stateduty to regulate the private sector 4including private individuals6 goes beyondregulating only direct discrimination. 5t should also regulate indirect discrimination 4for

example, where persons with disabilities are effectively excluded because facilitiesare inaccessible or relevant services are not offered6.

The +onvention also refers to specific areas where the State should regulate theprivate sector:

#**essibilit 4art. %6: States Parties shall also take appropriate measures to:Ensure that private entities that offer facilities and services $hich are open or provided to the public take into account all aspects of accessibility for persons $ith disabilitiesC

?reedo/ of e32ression and a**ess to infor/ation 4art. '$6: States Partiesshall take all appropriate measures to ensure that persons $ith disabilities

can e3ercise the right to freedom of e3pression and opinion by urging privateentities that provide services to the general public. including through the'nternet. to provide information and services in accessible and usable formatsfor persons $ith disabilitiesC

'ealth 4art. '/6: States Parties shall re-uire health professionals to providecare of the same -uality to persons $ith disabilities as to others. including onthe basis of free and informed consent by. inter alia. raising a$areness of thehuman rights. dignity. autonomy and needs of persons $ith disabilitiesthrough training and the promulgation of ethical standards for public and private health careC

(/2lo/ent 4art. 'J6: States Parties shall promote the employment of

persons $ith disabilities in the private sector through appropriate policies andmeasures. $hich may include affirmative action programmes. incentives andother measures.

C. Regulate different levels of govern/ent@ The central overnment must alsoregulate its own service provision and that of other levels of government. )rticleK 4$6 4d6 re2uires the State to ensure that public authorities and institutions act inconformity $ith the present +onvention. #ublic authorities should be understood inbroad terms to include authorities across different ministries in the centralovernment but also, as noted previously, to all parts of the State, including theprovincial and local levels.

+)



The World Report on Disability s re*o//endations on servi*es

The Report includes two recommendations relevant to service delivery:

!ecommendation $: 8nable access to all mainstream systems and services

People $ith disabilities have ordinary needs B for health and $ell4being. foreconomic and social security. to learn and develop skills ?@9 These needs can andshould be met in mainstream programmes and services9 (ainstreaming not onlyfulfils the human rights of persons $ith disabilities. it is also more effective9

(ainstreaming is the process by $hich Governments and other stakeholders ensurethat persons $ith disabilities participate e-ually $ith others in any activity and serviceintended for the general public. such as education. health. employment. and socialservices9 5arriers to participation need to be identified and removed. possiblyre-uiring changes to la$s. policies. institutions. and environments9

(ainstreaming re-uires a commitment at all levels. and needs to be consideredacross all sectors and built into ne$ and e3isting legislation. standards. policies.strategies. and plans9 Adopting universal design and implementing reasonableaccommodations are t$o important strategies9 (ainstreaming also re-uires effective planning. ade-uate human resources. and sufficient financial investment Baccompanied by specific measures such as targeted programmes and services toensure that the diverse needs of people $ith disabilities are ade-uately met9

!ecommendation ': 5nvest in specific programmes and services for people withdisabilities

'n addition to mainstream services. some people $ith disabilities may re-uire accessto specific measures. such as rehabilitation. support services. or training9Rehabilitation B including assistive technologies such as $heelchairs. hearing aids?@ B improves functioning and independence9 A range of $ell4regulated assistanceand support services in the community can meet needs for care. enabling people tolive independently and to participate in the economic. social. and cultural lives oftheir communities9 =ocational rehabilitation and training can open labour marketopportunities9

"hile there is a need for more services. there is also a need for better. moreaccessible. fle3ible. integrated. and $ell4coordinated multidisciplinary services. particularly at times of transition such as bet$een child and adult services9 E3isting

programmes and services need to be revie$ed to assess their performance andmake changes to improve their coverage. effectiveness. and efficiency9 The changesshould be based on sound evidence. appropriate in terms of culture and other localconte3ts. and tested locally9

#-#R(N(SS4R#)S)NG #ND TR#)N)NG

)wareness7raising, including training, is another important implementation measure. )sdisability is the result of the interaction between impairment and an unwelcomingenvironment3environment refers not only to the physical environment but also to

unwelcoming attitudes and negative or inaccessible information in society3awareness7raising and training about the +onvention are essential if the environment is to be changed.

++



#wareness4raising

)rticle ? is specifically devoted to awareness7raising, setting out a whole range of measuresthat State parties should ta1e, in particular to:

!aise awareness throughout society, including the family, to foster respect for rights

+ombat stereotypes, preBudices and harmful practices

#romote awareness of the capabilities and contributions of persons with disabilities.

This can be done through public awareness campaigns, the education system, the mediaand awareness7training programmes.

-ther articles re2uire State parties to provide information to persons with disabilities, whichis also a form of awareness7raising. =or example, States underta1e to:

#rovide accessible information to persons with disabilities about mobility aids,

devices and assistive technologies as well as other forms of assistance, supportservices and facilities 4art. K6<

#rovide to persons with disabilities information and education on how to avoid,recogni9e and report instances of exploitation, violence and abuse 4art. $6<

8nsure access to age7appropriate information, reproductive and family planningeducation 4art. 'C6<

#rovide early and comprehensive information to children with disabilities and theirfamilies to ensure that children with disabilities have e2ual rights with respect tofamily life 4art. 'C6.

Training

)rticle K underlines the importance of training. The State is re2uired to 2ro/ote thetraining of professionals and staff wor1ing with persons with disabilities in relation to therights in the +onvention so as to provide better assistance and services.

The +onvention promotes training in the broader community, for instance professionals aswell as of persons with disabilities. =or the former, it promotes:

Training for sta1eholders on accessibility issues 4art. %6

Training for those wor1ing in the field of administration of Bustice, including police andprison staff 4art. $C6

Training in mobility s1ills to specialist staff wor1ing with persons with disabilities 4art.'(6

Training to professionals and staff who wor1 at all levels of education 4includingdisability awareness and the use of appropriate augmentative and alternative modesof communication, educational techni2ues and materials to support persons withdisabilities6 4art. 'K6

Training of health professionals and the promulgation of ethical standards for publicand private health care 4art. '/6

Training for professionals and staff wor1ing in habilitation and rehabilitation services4art. '6

Training through international cooperation 4art. C'6.

Training for the latter3beyond the right to education itself3is referred to as follows:

+*



Training in mobility s1ills 4art. '(6

ocational and continuing training 4arts. 'K and 'J6

Training to ensure access to assistance by persons with disabilities and their familiesliving in situations of poverty 4art. '?6

Training so that persons with disabilities have an opportunity to organi9e, develop

and participate in disability7specific sporting and recreational activities 4art. C(6.

The World Report on Disability s re*o//endations on awareness4raising

The Report identifies two recommendations which are relevant to implementing the+onvention0s provisions on awareness7raising and on training.

!ecommendation /: 5mprove human resource capacity

?@ Human resource capacity can be improved through effective education. training.and recruitment9 A revie$ of the kno$ledge and competencies of staff in relevantareas can provide a starting point for developing appropriate measures to improve

them9 Relevant training on disability. $hich incorporates human rights principles.should be integrated into current curricula and accreditation programmes9 'n4servicetraining should be provided to current practitioners providing and managing services90or e3ample. strengthening the capacity of primary health4care $orkers. andensuring availability of specialist staff $here re-uired. contribute to effective andaffordable health care for people $ith disabilities9

(any countries have too fe$ staff $orking in fields such as rehabilitation ?@9,eveloping standards in training for different types and levels of ?@ personnel canassist in addressing resource gaps9 ?@ (easures to improve staff retention may berelevant in some settings and sectors9

!ecommendation J: 5ncrease public awareness and understanding of disability

(utual respect and understanding contribute to an inclusive society9 Therefore it isvital to improve public understanding of disability. confront negative perceptions. andrepresent disability fairly9 ?@

+ollecting information on kno$ledge. beliefs and attitudes about disability can helpidentify gaps in public understanding that can be bridged through education and public information9 Governments. voluntary organi1ations. and professionalassociations should consider running social marketing campaigns that changeattitudes on stigmati1ed issues such as H'=. mental illness. and leprosy9 'nvolving

the media is vital to the success of these campaigns and to ensuring thedissemination of positive stories about persons $ith disabilities and their families9

R(S(#RC' #ND D(>(6%P5(NT

!esearch has had an important impact on the lives of persons with disabilities.Technological innovations based on the principle of universal design are helping them leadindependent lives in the community. Statistics and data collection are helping the State andothers to understand the barriers facing them so that implementation measures can bebetter targeted.

The +onvention refers to research7related measures in several areas:

+



&niversall designed goods servi*es e7ui2/ent and fa*ilities@ article Kre2uires States to underta1e or promote research and development of universallydesigned goods, services, e2uipment and facilities, which should re2uire theminimum possible adaptation and the least cost to meet the specific needs of aperson with disabilities. The obligation extends to promoting the availability and use

of universally designed goods and services and the promotion of universal designthrough the development of standards and guidelines<

New te*hnologies in*luding infor/ation and *o//uni*ation te*hnologies/obilit aids devi*es and assistive te*hnologies@ article K also re2uires Statesto underta1e or promote research and development of new technologies and topromote their availability and use<

?or 2oli* for/ulation@ article C$ 4statistics and data collection6 re2uires States tocollect appropriate information, including statistical and research data, to enablethem to formulate and implement policies to give effect to the +onvention.

=inally, at the international level, State parties collectively have a duty to facilitatecooperation in research and access to scientific and technical 1nowledge 4art. C'6.

The World Report on Disability s re*o//endations on resear*h

The "orld Report on ,isability includes two relevant recommendations in this regard:

!ecommendation ?: 5mprove disability data collection

'nternationally. methodologies for collecting data on people $ith disabilities need tobe developed. tested cross4culturally. and applied consistently9 ,ata need to bestandardi1ed and internationally comparable for benchmarking and monitoring progress on disability policies. and for the implementation of the ?+onventionnationally and internationally9

*ationally. disability should be included in data collection9 )niform definitions ofdisability. based on the ?'nternational +lassification of 0unctioning. can allo$ forinternationally comparable data9 ?@ As a first step. national population census datacan be collected in line $ith recommendations from the )nited *ations "ashingtonGroup on ,isability and the )nited *ations Statistical +ommission9 A cost4effectiveand efficient approach is to include disability -uestions B or a disability module B ine3isting sample surveys ?@ 9 ,ata need to be disaggregated by population features?@ to uncover patterns. trends. and information about subgroups of persons $ithdisabilities9

,edicated disability surveys can also gain more comprehensive information ondisability characteristics. such as prevalence. health conditions associated $ithdisability. and use of and need for services including rehabilitation9

!ecommendation %: Strengthen and support research on disability

Research is essential for increasing public understanding about disability issues.informing disability policy and programmes. and efficiently allocating resources9

?The "orld Report on ,isability recommends several areas for research on disabilityincluding: the impact of environmental factors 7policies. physical environment.attitudes8 on disability and ho$ to measure itC the -uality of life and $ell4being of

people $ith disabilitiesC ?@ $hat $orks in overcoming ?barriers in different conte3tsC?@9

+9



?@ A critical mass of trained researchers on disability needs to be built9 Researchskills should be strengthened in a range of disciplines. including epidemiology.disability studies. health and rehabilitation. ?@ education. economics. sociology. and public policy9 'nternational learning and research opportunities. linking universities indeveloping countries $ith those in high4income and middle4income countries. canalso be useful9

5%N)T%R)NG

@hile not always thought of as an implementation measure, monitoring too has a 1ey role.Through monitoring, it is possible to see which implementation measures have wor1ed andwhich have not. 5t helps to refine laws and policies and other implementation measures, andensure that budgets are used optimally. 5t also helps to uncover human rights breaches sothat remedies can be granted to victims and, it is hoped, further breaches prevented.

#aramount is the process of State parties reporting to the +ommittee on the !ights of#ersons with isabilities. +ivil society and national human rights institutions can alsoprovide information to the +ommittee through what are called alternative reports. Module Jexamines State reports and alternative reports in detail.

5n addition to monitoring at the international level, monitoring can also be national. )ccording to the

-+! (anual on Human Rights (onitoring ,? Dhuman rights monitoringE is a broad term describing

the active collection, verification, analysis and use of information to assess and address human rights

concerns. Monitoring ta1es place over a protracted period of time. The term DmonitoringE also includes

the collection, verification and use of information to address human rights problems raised in relation

to laws, policies, programmes and budgets and other interventions.

Several aspects of this definition are worth highlighting:

Monitoring is a process: from collection to verification to the use of information. 5nformation collection can relate to many situations: one7off situations, such as

incidents or events< or ongoing situations, such as service delivery in psychiatrichospitals, schools, an inaccessible wor1place and so on.

Monitoring is not Bust about situations, but also about laws, policies and budgets.iven that the ratification of a human rights treaty re2uires changes to laws andpolicies, it is important that monitoring also includes the review of laws, policies andstrategies as well as budgets to identify the extent to which they reflect the normsand standards in the treaty.

Monitoring involves several actors. uman rights monitoring concerns both thesituation of rights and rights7holders, as well as the respect for duties and thesituation of duty7bearers. +onse2uently, monitoring should involve not only personswith disabilities whose rights might be affected, but also overnment actors 4staff atministries, local authorities and others6 so that: 4a6 the level of respect for duties isunderstood< and 4b6 all sides of the story are examined and information is verified.

Monitoring has a purpose. The information gathered through monitoring should beused to improve the respect for rights and duties. 5f there has been a breach of aright, the information should see1 to provide solutions and remedies for the victimand help overnment actors fulfil these rights in the future.

Monitoring can occur at different stages. Monitoring generally starts with the

collection of primary information or information direct from the source. owever,

#rofessional Training Series No. J"!ev.$ 4United Nations publication, forthcoming6.

*0



monitoring can also occur through the use of secondary sources. =or example, the+ommittee on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities underta1es monitoring on thebasis of State parties0 periodic reports and the alternative reports submitted by civilsociety and national human rights institutions.

Monitoring focuses mainly on:

6aws 2oli*ies budgets 2rogra//es. The +onvention re2uires the review and,generally, the reform of a range of laws, policies and strategies: for example,ensuring that anti7discrimination laws protect against discrimination on the basis ofdisability and that other laws, such as those on health, education or construction, donot discriminate on the basis of disability. 5n addition, given that the +onventionre2uires the appropriate allocation of resources, budgets can also be monitored. 5naddition, programmes and strategies, such as national development strategies orstrategies related to humanitarian emergencies, have great potential to affect therights of persons with disabilities, depending on the extent to which they mainstreamdisabilities. )ll of these may be monitored.

)n*idents and events can lead to individual violations of human rights and it isimportant that these should be monitored. Such data might come directly fromvictims. ata might also come from media accounts and other sources, includinglegal proceedings. This is a traditional focus of human rights monitoring.

Situations and 2la*es. )t times, there are particular situations, such as serviceprovision, or places, such as institutions, which could give rise to human rightsproblems. The level of accessibility of schools might be monitored to identify theprincipal barriers to inclusive education. Surveys of employers might identify theissues that need to be addressed to ensure inclusive employment and the provisionof reasonable accommodation in the wor1place. 8ven where allegations of individualviolations have not emerged 4events6, monitoring might uncover violations or helpprevent them.

)nyone can monitor the situation of the rights of persons with disabilities. owever, certainactors have particular responsibilities:

• States. )s noted above, the State has an obligation to report to the +ommittee on

the measures it has adopted to implement the +onvention.

• N'R)s. Under article CC, N!5s have a role to promote, protect and monitor the

provisions of the +onvention. This function is discussed in greater detail in module .ere, it is important to underline that these institutions have to conform to the #aris#rinciples, which means that they have to have competency to submit reports to theovernment, parliament and others on issues such as: conformity of laws to humanrights standards< any situation where a human rights violation has occurred< thenational human rights situation< its opinion on overnment reactions to reports onthe human rights situation. National preventive mechanisms under the -ptional#rotocol to the +onvention against Torture should consider including the rights ofpersons with disabilities within the scope of their monitoring activities.

• Civil so*ietBDP%s. )ccording to article CC 4C6, civil society, and particularly persons

with disabilities and their representative organi9ations, shall be involved andparticipate fully in monitoring the +onvention. This means that they should beinvolved in the monitoring organi9ed, for instance, by the independent mechanism orby the overnment. 5n addition, civil society, particularly persons with disabilities andtheir representative organi9ation, should, in its own capacity, monitor and defend therights of persons with disabilities.

• %ther *ivil so*iet a*tors. )rticle CC 4C6 refers to civil society generally. +ivil societyorgani9ations that are not #-s also have a role in monitoring. =or example, when

*1



monitoring the broader human rights situation, human rights N-s should ensurethat they also monitor the rights of persons with disabilities. ) failure to do so couldresult in the exclusion of persons with disabilities from the post7monitoring phase assolutions and remedies are identified and implemented.

• )ntergovern/ental organi<ations. Some intergovernmental organi9ations have a

monitoring role. This is particularly the case for stand7alone -+! field offices andhuman rights components of peace missions. Several field presences, such as thosein Timor7Heste and Sierra Heone, are actively involved in monitoring aspects of the+onvention. 5n addition, regional organi9ations, such as -ffice for emocratic5nstitutions and uman !ights of the -rgani9ation for Security and +o7operation in8urope, monitor elections and it is important to ensure that these activities also ta1einto account the rights of persons with disabilities.

)s set out in article C$ on data collection and statistics, by collecting appropriate information,including statistical and research data, States are enabled to formulate and implementpolicies to give effect to the +onvention. The +onvention0s implementation can be steppedup through evidence7based policy implementation, based on domestic monitoring and

reporting, as well as on reports to the +ommittee and the +ommittee0s concludingobservations.

*2

http://www.osce.org/






5%D&6(

D)SCR)5)N#T)%N %N T'( $#S)S %? D)S#$)6)TY

)ntrodu*tion

iscrimination refers to the act of treating someone or something differently and is notnecessarily negative. To say that someone is discriminating can mean that the person hasgood taste or Budgement. owever, discrimination can also mean that someone treatscertain people unfairly because of that person0s characteristics. 5t is this second meaning ofdiscrimination which concerns human rights law.

The Universal eclaration of uman !ights recogni9es that: Everyone is entitled to all therights and freedoms set forth in this ,eclaration. $ithout distinction of any kind. such asrace. colour. se3. language. religion. political or other opinion. national or social origin. property. birth or other status9 This simple statement has been repeated in national laws andconstitutions and regional and United Nations treaties. Fut what does it mean in practiceAiscrimination can occur in many forms: very open, laid down in law or hidden. 5t is often theresult of preBudices, economic and social disparities, and religious and culturalmisconceptions. 5f we are to combat discrimination, we have to combat these negativeattitudes.

Dis*ri/ination on the basis of disabilit today affects a large portion of the world0spopulation. 5t is one of the main problems persons with, or associated with, disabilities face.5t manifests itself in different forms and can have disastrous effects on their lives and, byextension, on the rest of society. )ccording to the +ommittee on 8conomic, Social and

+ultural !ights, in its general comment No. / 4$%%K6:

RO dis*ri/ination against 2ersons with disabilities Rhas a long history andRta1es various forms. They range from invidious discrimination, such as the denial ofeducational opportunities, to more DsubtleE forms of discrimination such assegregation and isolation achieved through the imposition of physical and socialbarriers. RO Through neglect, ignorance, preBudice and false assumptions, as well asthrough exclusion, distinction or separation, persons with disabilities have very oftenbeen prevented from exercising their economic, social or cultural rights on an e2ualbasis with persons without disabilities. The effe*ts of disabilit4baseddis*ri/ination have been 2arti*ularl severe in the fields of edu*atione/2lo/ent housing trans2ort *ultural life and a**ess to 2ubli* 2la*es and

servi*es. 4emphasis added6

@hile the general comment focused specifically on economic, social and cultural rights, thesame is true for civil and political rights. =or example, in many countries, some persons withdisabilities are still denied the right to vote as well as legal capacity to marry or enter intocontracts to buy or sell property.

5t is difficult to discuss discrimination without also considering the concept of e2uality. 5nhuman rights law, non7discrimination and e2uality are really two sides of the same coin. Fycombating discrimination, we hope to combat the underlying factors in society that lead toine2uality. )nd if deal with the factors leading to ine2uality, we hope to preventdiscrimination.

*(



owever, the relationship between non7discrimination and e2uality raises confusion overwhat is meant by De2ualityE. @hen we refer to the term De2ualityE, we often thin1 of thingsthat are the same, identical or e2uivalent. owever, when we tal1 about e2uality in thecontext of human rights, we are not necessarily saying that all people are identical or thesame. !ather, we are saying that everyone has the same rights. 5n order to ensure thateveryone has the same rights, two people might at times have to be treated differentlybecause of their inherent difference 4such as different sex, different linguistic heritage,different minority status or different impairments6.

Treating two people differently in this way can lead to confusion and also to claims ofdiscrimination. Fut this is not discrimination. 5t is a merely an ac1nowledgement that peopleare different but that they have the same rights< to ma1e e2uality a reality, differentstrategies might be needed for different people.

?or/s of 2rohibited dis*ri/ination

There are a range of concepts that underlie non7discrimination law which are important to

understand.

e Bure and de facto discrimination

,e /ure discrimination 7discrimination in la$8

uman rights law prohibits discrimination in law. 5n some countries, electoral legislation setsout that persons with mental disabilities placed under guardianship are not allowed to vote.Under international human rights law, this is an example of discrimination on the basis ofdisability. 5t is a distinction, in law, made on the basis of mental disability that has thepurpose as well as the effect of nullifying the recognition of the right to vote for somepersons with disabilities.

,e facto discrimination 7discrimination in practice8

#rotection against discrimination goes beyond only prohibiting discrimination in laws andincludes protection from discrimination in practice. =or example, it protects against theactions of employers who ma1e decisions based on stereotypes or assumptions about theabilities or performance of staff with disabilities. )n employer who refuses to promote aperson with a disability because of a belief that the disability will prevent the person fromfulfilling the duties of the post without any evidence that this is in fact the case is, on the faceof it, discriminating de facto. 5t is a distinction on the basis of disability which has the purposeand effect of impairing the right to wor1 4including career advancement6.

irect and indirect discrimination

,irect discrimination

irect discrimination occurs when an individual is treated less favourably than anotherperson in a similar situation for a reason related to disability. Thus, a refusal to accept astudent with a disability in the general education system amounts to direct discrimination.5magine the following scenario: a company has a policy of not hiring anyone with a history ofbac1 problems irrespective of the duties of a position. The policy unlawfully discriminatesagainst people with a disability who can meet the inherent re2uirements of the Bob. They arebeing treated less fairly than other Bob applicants on the basis of a disability.

*%



'ndirect discrimination

5ndirect discrimination refers to laws, policies or practices which appear neutral, but fail tota1e into account the particular circumstances of persons with disabilities3which thereforecauses direct harm or has a disproportionate impact on the exercise of their rights. =orexample, an inflexible re2uirement in the wor1place that all employees have lunch at thesame time might constitute discrimination against a person with a disability who has to ta1emedication at a certain time or ta1e periodic rests during the day. @hile the re2uirement, onthe face of it, applies to all staff and does not refer to persons with disabilities, its effect isdiscriminatory. +ombating indirect discrimination helps get to the underlying biases withinsociety that cause discrimination and exclusion in the first place. 5t is important to note thatindirect discrimination can sometimes be hard to prove.

Multiple forms of discrimination

The +onvention0s preamble recalls the Ddifficult conditions faced by persons with disabilitieswho are subBect to multiple or aggravated forms of discrimination on the basis of race,

colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic, indigenous orsocial origin, property, birth, age or other statusE. =or example, a woman with disabilitiesmight experience discrimination on the basis of sex as well as disability.

5magine an internally displaced woman fleeing a war. She is very poor, belongs to an ethnicminority and has a physical disability. 5n many countries affected by conflicts andhumanitarian crises this scenario is familiar. The woman could be subBect to multiple formsof discrimination owing to her sex and social conditions as well as her disability. @omen areoften vulnerable to sexual violence during conflict. #ersons with disabilities are also oftensubBect to sexual violence because they are hidden or ignored and might face greaterchallenges in communicating. )s a result, women with disabilities might face multiple ris1s ofsexual violence during conflict, particularly if preparedness strategies fail to ta1e them into

account.

Systemic discrimination

Unfortunately, much discrimination is systemic. The charity and medical approaches todisability are still very entrenched in all societies and at all levels. Systemic discriminationta1es time to change. #artly as a means to tac1le systemic discrimination, article ? of the+onvention re2uires States to raise awareness about persons with disabilities and to fosterrespect for their rights and dignity.

iscrimination by association

#ersons without disabilities DassociatedE with a person with disabilities can also be victims ofdiscrimination on the basis of disability. +onsider the case of a woman who was dismissedfrom her Bob when her employer discovered that she had a hearing7impaired son. Theemployer assumed that she would need time off wor1 to loo1 after him. 8ven though shedoes not have a disability herself, she suffers discrimination on the basis of her son0sdisability. 5n other words, there was a distinction on the basis of disability which had theeffect of nullifying the woman0s right to wor1.

arassment

arassment occurs when an individual is subBected to comments, ridicule or any otherdemeaning conduct on the basis of disability. Hegislation should protect against harassment. )rticle 'J 4b6 of the +onvention refers expressly to protection against harassment related to

*)



wor1 and employment. =or example, a supervisor who consistently ma1es someone with adisability do menial tas1s at wor1 while others with the same 2ualifications without adisability have more complicated and interesting tas1s could be subBecting the staff memberwith a disability to harassment.

;ustified differential treatment

@hile all discrimination is prohibited, in some cases, it is permissible to treat two peopledifferently on the basis of disability. +onsider the following case: a man who has severe bac1pain and is unable to bend is reBected for a Bob as a carpet fitter as he cannot carry out theessential re2uirement of the Bob, which is to fit carpets.

Not every differentiation of treatment constitutes discrimination. The criteria for assessing /ustified differential treatment are found in other areas of human rights law:

4a6 The criteria for such differentiation must be reasonable and ob/ective< and

4b6 The aim of the differential treatment must be to achieve a legitimate purpose, in otherwords, a purpose that is consistent with human rights principles.

5f a person cannot perform a Bob and no reasonable accommodation is possible, thendifferential treatment is Bustifiable.

The definition of dis*ri/ination in the Convention

The +onvention defines discrimination in article ' as follows:

%,iscrimination on the basis of disability& means any distinction. e3clusion or

restriction on the basis of disability $hich has the purpose or effect of impairing ornullifying the recognition. en/oyment or e3ercise. on an e-ual basis $ith others. of allhuman rights and fundamental freedoms in the political. economic. social. cultural.civil or any other field9 't includes all forms of discrimination. including denial ofreasonable accommodation9

To help understand this definition, it is important to brea1 it down.

istinction, exclusion or restriction

iscrimination means any distinction, as well as e3clusion or restriction made on the basis ofdisability. +onse2uently, the acts that constitute discrimination can be 2uite varied.

• ) DdistinctionE might be an explicit differentiation between two people on the basis of

disability. =or example, if children with certain intellectual impairments are subBect toforced sterili9ation while other children are not, this is a discriminatory distinction.

• )n DexclusionE refers to a situation where a person, on the basis of disability, cannot

enter a particular space or participate in a particular activity. ) policy that does notallow a child with a disability to enter mainstream education is an exclusion whichcould amount to discrimination.

• ) DrestrictionE refers to a limitation on the right of people to participate in certain

aspects of civil, cultural, economic, political or social life. =or example, a law statingthat persons with intellectual disabilities cannot, prima facie, vote in national elections

could amount to a discriminatory restriction.

*+



-n the basis of disability

The +onvention refers to Ddiscrimination on the basis of disabilityE. This goes further thanDdiscrimination against persons with disabilitiesE as the focus is not only on protectingpersons with disabilities but on combating 4and ultimately eliminating6 discrimination itself,whether against persons with disabilities or anyone else. +onse2uently, discrimination onthe basis of disability is not targeting only persons with disabilities but also people who, fordifferent reasons, are associated with persons with disabilities 4discrimination byassociation6.

This mirrors the +onvention0s social"human rights approach to disability. !ather thanDprotecting persons with disabilitiesE, which could be a charity approach in certain situations,the +onvention see1s to combat discrimination, i.e., the negative attitudes and environmentthat can put persons with disabilities in a vulnerable or marginali9ed situation. This is in orderto get to the heart of the problem. 5f someone suffers discrimination on the basis of aperceived disability, this is evidence that preBudice exists and human rights law see1s totac1le these negative attitudes. 5n doing so, we can imagine a world without discrimination.

#urpose or effect

)rticle ' clarifies that such distinctions, exclusions or restrictions are violations if they have:

4a6 The purpose 4discriminatory intention6< or4b6 The effect 4the obBective outcome, $hether this $as the intention or not 6,

of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enBoyment or exercise of all rights for"by personswith disabilities.

There does not need to be an intention to discriminate for discrimination to occur. The focus

is on the experience of the person suffering the discrimination. Thoughtlessness and neglectcan have the same or an even worse discriminatory effect than an intended discriminatoryact.

The reference to purpose and effect highlights the fact that the +onvention prohibits bothdirect and indirect discrimination. @hile some acts lead directly to discrimination3forexample, restricting the right to vote for persons with intellectual disabilities3muchdiscrimination occurs by treating two persons in different situations in the same way. Sobuilding a staircase at the entrance of a hospital is treating persons with and withoutdisabilities in the same way, but the result is discriminatory, as a person in a wheelchaircannot enter the hospital while a person who can wal1 is able to enter. @hile on the surfacethere does not appear to have been any discrimination 4the hospital is open to all6 the effect

can be discriminatory. The +onvention prevents this indirect discrimination as well.

!ecognition, enBoyment or exercise

#rotection from discrimination extends not only to the recognition of the rights of personswith disabilities, for example, in laws, but also the enBoyment of their rights 4such as thebenefit of freedoms without hindrance, e.g., freedom from abuse or torture6 and theirexercise 4such as the capacity to ta1e steps to attain a right, e.g., entering a school andgetting an education or deciding to refuse certain medications6. This recalls the prohibition inother areas of human rights law of both de Bure 4discrimination in laws and policies6 as wellas de facto discrimination 4discrimination in practice6.

**



8nBoyment of human rights Don an e2ual basis with othersE

The +onvention does not see1 to create new rights for persons with disabilities. 5nstead, itsee1s to combat discrimination, i.e., those barriers and attitudes that prevent persons withdisabilities from enBoying their rights. The ultimate aim is that everyone, whether with orwithout disabilities, can enBoy the same human rights.

)ll human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil orany other field

The +onvention combats discrimination in relation to all human rights, whether civil, cultural,economic, political or social, and in any field. 5n the past and still today, some people andeven States have tended to prioriti9e some rights over others. =or example, during the coldwar, States with a mar1et economy often put greater emphasis on civil and political rights,while States with a centrally planned economy tended to focus on economic, social andcultural rights. 5n the context of disability, there has traditionally been a greater focus onprotecting economic, social and cultural rights, and civil and political rights have been given

less attention. The +onvention clearly states that the protection against discrimination coversall rights in all fields.

enial of reasonable accommodation

The definition recogni9es denial of reasonable accommodation as a form of discrimination.To promote e2uality and eliminate discrimination, State parties must ta1e all appropriatesteps to ensure that reasonable accommodation is provided.

D!easonable accommodationE means, for example, ma1ing adaptations to the organi9ationof a wor1 environment, an educational establishment, a health7care facility or transportservice so as to remove the barriers that prevent an individual with a disability from

participating in an activity or receiving services on an e2ual basis with others. )t wor1, thismight involve physical changes to premises, ac2uiring or modifying e2uipment, providing areader or interpreter, giving appropriate training or supervision, adapting testing orassessment procedures, altering standard wor1ing hours or allocating some of the duties ofa position to another person.

@hile the +onvention re2uires the particular needs of an individual with a disability to beaccommodated, it refers to reasonable accommodation. 5f the accommodation imposes adisproportionate or undue burden on the person or entity expected to provide it, then failureto do so would not constitute discrimination.

5n a number of countries, legislation sets out the factors that should be ta1en into account

when assessing whether the accommodation re2uested amounts to a disproportionateburden. These include:

• The practicability of the changes re2uired<

• The cost<

• The nature, si9e and resources of the entity expected to provide it<

• The availability of other financial support<

• -ccupational health and safety implications< and

• The impact on the entity0s operations.

Reasonable a**o//odation is a /odifi*ation /ade in favour of and at the re7uest of

an individual. Thus, an employee who has a car accident and re2uires certain modificationsto continue wor1ing can re2uest reasonable accommodation of the employer. This is

*



different from general accessibility measures under article D of the +onvention which are notnecessarily targeted at individuals 4although individuals obviously benefit6 but at thecommunity at large. @hile States must achieve general accessibility over time, an individualcan re2uest reasonable accommodation immediately and lodge a complaint with a tribunal ifit is not made.

The +onvention imposes the burden to ensure reasonable accommodation on States.owever, given that much of it is needed in the private sector, States should oblige theprivate sector, through legislation, to provide reasonable accommodation.

5anifestations of dis*ri/ination

#ersons with disabilities have long faced different forms of discrimination, but the hope isthat the adoption of the +onvention will reduce this discrimination worldwide.

#ersons with disabilities have been considered abnormal beings, manifestations of evil orunnatural curiosities. They have been executed, segregated or forced to undergo medicalexperiments. They have been subBected to ridicule and cruel amusement and seen as badomens. 5n many cases, they have been considered inferior beings e2ual only in the eyes ofod and as such deserving sympathy and pity.

iscrimination evolves but does not necessarily decrease. 5n '((, on the adoption of the+onvention, the United Nations Secretary7eneral Qofi )nnan stated:

VToo often, those living with disabilities have been seen as obBects of embarrassment,and at best, of condescending pity and charity. O -n paper, they have enBoyed thesame rights as others< in real life, they have often been relegated to the margins anddenied the opportunities that others ta1e for granted.V

+onsider some examples:

• The annihilation of the %unfit&: discrimination and the right to life. -ne of the most serious

forms of discrimination on the basis of disability was perpetrated in the twentieth centuryduring the Na9i regime. 5t targeted persons with mental and physical disabilities, li1eother groups considered inferior, and subBected them to annihilation, experimentation,sterili9ation and other brutalities. Sterili9ation and euthanasia programmes were carriedout against the mentally or physically DunfitE. 5ndividual cases were presented in front ofpublic health officers, who decided whether or not to carry out forced sterili9ation. The5nterior Ministry also re2uired doctors and midwives to report all cases of newborns withsevere disabilities. +hildren under the age of three with illnesses or disabilities such as

own0s syndrome, hydrocephalus, cerebral palsy or Dsuspected idiocyE among otherswere targeted. )round '/(,((( disabled people were 1illed and some K/(,((( sterili9edduring this period.

-ther States, too, adopted legislation and policies authori9ing sterili9ation. Thousands ofpersons with disabilities were sterili9ed by force. Sterili9ation practices were based oneugenic theories, very popular at the beginning of the twentieth century, which promotedrace 2uality control, reproduction of selected people and traits, and repression ofundesired groups.

*9



• ,enial of legal capacity: discrimination and e-ual recognition before the la$9 Hegal

systems around the world have considered disability as a lawful ground for notrecogni9ing persons with intellectual, mental or sensory disabilities as persons before thelaw3and many still do. 5n practice this denies these persons a wide range of humanrights such as the capacity to ma1e decisions, sign contracts, vote, get married, inherit

property, administer personal goods, defend rights in court or choose medicaltreatments.

uardians sometimes fail to act in the interest of the persons with disabilities they arerepresenting. They may even abuse their positions of authority and violate the rights ofothers. @hen legal capacity is lac1ing, forced medical interventions 4drugs, surgery, andsterili9ation6 and medical experiments can be carried out without free and informedconsent. @omen and girls with intellectual disabilities, for example, are often subBectedto forced sterili9ation.

• ,eprivation of liberty on the basis of disability . isability has been considered as a lawful

ground to deprive persons with disabilities of their liberty. Fy declaring that they may bedangerous to themselves or others or be in need of care, the State can commit them,sometimes for their entire lives. Haws and policies have been enacted on the assumptionthat persons with disabilities are better off in institutions. 5n other cases persons withdisabilities are segregated from society and 1ept at home.

• ,isability and gender: multiple forms of discrimination9 Men and women have different

experiences of disability< women with disabilities can be discriminated against on twogrounds: sex and disability. =or instance, in rural areas women and girls with disabilities

sometimes have very limited access to education at any level and few opportunities toearn a living. Schools, roads and transport are often inaccessible. #arents mighttherefore not be able to send children with disabilities to school. 5n addition, thesebarriers might be exacerbated by gender7based discrimination in communities whereattitudes already discourage girls from going to school. The result can be high illiteracyamong girls with disabilities and a missed childhood, since they have no interaction withother children in an educational environment.

• ,iscrimination and the right to education9 +hildren with disabilities have been excluded

from education and may even be considered uneducable. Some have argued that

people with certain disabilities 4mental, learning and even physical6 cannot be educatedin mainstream schools. -ften these decisions are ta1en without investing in experts orteachers able to support or ensure peer learning between children with and withoutdisabilities. The result is that children with disabilities are put in special schools, whereexpectations for excellence are unsatisfactory. iven the preBudice that children withdisabilities supposedly obstruct the education of other children, parents of children withdisabilities may decide to put their children in special schools or 1eep them at home. 5fdiscrimination is pervasive, ta1ing decisions that go against the overall discriminatorymentality can be seen as ris1y and ultimately detrimental to the child with disabilities.Get, giving in only reinforces stigma and discrimination.

0



• Specific cultural settings and stigma: discrimination and the right to cultural life. 5n some

cultural settings, disability can be perceived as a punishment from od, the result ofwitchcraft or as a shameful failure on the part of the family. This can entail socialdisapproval, marginali9ation and even frustration leading to domestic violence. #ersonswith disabilities, including children, may decide to leave their communities and go to

urban areas to gain some independence. owever, they may end up begging or beingexploited in other ways because they are illiterate or have few Bob opportunities. Thosewho cannot move freely may be hidden by their family members or live in the communityin very precarious conditions.

5n some rural villages in aiti, parents giving birth to a child with mental or physicaldisabilities feel that they have been punished for a sin they committed. The implicationsare grave: the father may impregnate other women to show he was not responsible forthe disability. The child may be 1ept at home, hidden from the rest of the community.

5n +ambodia many children and adults have lost limbs in landmine explosions, mainly inrural areas. aving a disability is considered socially unfortunate and often forces

persons to live on the margins of society. 8ven today persons with disabilities may beignored by vendors in the mar1etplace and have to as1 the assistance of someone elseto get served.

• 'naccessibility: discrimination and freedom of movement!independent living . #hysical,

informational and technological barriers prevent persons with disabilities from fullyparticipating in society on an e2ual basis with others. 5naccessibility also relates tonegative attitudes in society that perpetuate images of persons with disabilities as beingslow, less intelligent or unable to ma1e decisions, for example. ) 1ey element to ensuree2ual rights for persons with disabilities is improving the accessibility of the builtenvironment, information and communications technology, transport and other facilities,goods and services open to the public.

6inking non4dis*ri/ination with e7ualit@ s2e*ifi* /easures

+ombating discrimination re2uires more than merely prohibiting it. 5t also re2uires getting tothe heart of indirect discrimination > changing the underlying biases in society that lead todiscrimination in the first place > by promoting e2uality. =or this reason, specific measuresare often needed to help achieve e2uality for persons facing discrimination, includingpersons with disabilities. Specific measures in favour of a person with a disability are notconsidered discriminatory< they amount to Bustified differential treatment. This is recogni9edin the +onvention. )rticle / 4K6 states:

Specific measures $hich are necessary to accelerate or achieve de facto e-uality of persons $ith disabilities shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of the present +onvention9

The +onvention therefore recogni9es that to ensure de facto e2uality with others, it maysometimes be necessary to adopt measures that are specific to persons with disabilities.

Such measures can be permanent3for example, building accessible car par1s in urbanareas for vehicles carrying persons with disabilities3or temporary3such as employment2uotas for wor1ers with disabilities. Foth are permissible under the +onvention and do notconstitute discrimination as defined in its article '.

)t times, specific measures in favour of a particular individual or group might be resented byothers, who see them as being unfair or even discriminatory. Get such measures are

1



permissible only to the extent that they redress the imbalance in the enBoyment of humanrights between persons with and without disabilities. -nce e2uality between them isachieved, specific measures are no longer necessary.

The formula provided in article / must be read in conBunction with the specific non7discrimination and e2uality measures that are attached to the broad range of rightscontained in the +onvention, such as in matters of marriage, family, parenthood andrelationships 4art. 'C6, education 4art. 'K6, health 4art. '/6, employment 4art. 'J6, standard ofliving and social protection 4art. '?6, and participation in public and political life 4art. '%6.

Ta1e the right to wor1 in article 'J. State parties to the +onvention have committed toemploying persons with disabilities in the public sector and to promoting their employment inthe private sector, including through affirmative action programmes. These are specificmeasures that see1 to redress the under7employment of persons with disabilities in an areawhere the State has direct influence, namely its employment policies. Fy actively see1ing toemploy persons with disabilities, the State can promote e2ual enBoyment of the right to wor1.Fy re2uiring or encouraging the private sector to introduce affirmative action programmes,

the State can influence employment indirectly.

-ne type of affirmative action programme is the introduction of 2uotas3e.g., a re2uirementthat / per cent of employees have a disability and the imposition of a fine on the employerwho does not respect the 2uota. The +onvention does not re2uire 2uotas. uotas haveadvantages and disadvantages. They might lead to to1enism, with employers recruiting anyperson with a disability at any level simply to meet the 2uota or paying the fine to avoid themeasure all together. -n the other hand, 2uotas might be a way to get persons withdisabilities into the wor1place, which in turn can lead to economic empowerment and theenBoyment of other rights. iven that the +onvention refers to affirmative action programmeswithout specifying what they are, it is advisable to examine what programmes are most li1elyto lead to sustainable improvements for persons with disabilities and their right to wor1. 5n

some cases 2uotas might wor1, in others not.

The +ommittee on the 8limination of iscrimination against @omen, in its general commentNo. '/ 4'((K6 on temporary special measures 4art. K 4$66, identified some measures whichcould be relevant to identifying specific measures in favour of persons with disabilities.These include:

-utreach and support programmes

)llocation and"or reallocation of resources

#referential treatment

Targeted recruitment, iring and promotion measures

Numerical goals connected with time frames

uota systems.

-ho is res2onsible

@hen discrimination on the basis of disability occursA @ho is actually perpetrating itA )ndwho is responsibleA

ere are some examples:

2



) passenger changes compartment because she feels uncomfortable sitting close toa passenger with own0s syndrome<

) family 1eeps a small child with autism at home because there are no inclusiveeducation opportunities at the local school<

) private ban1 denies a loan to a person who has a mental impairment<

)n employee with cerebral palsy re2uests a change of position in a large corporationand the employer refuses to accommodate her without giving reasons<

) person with a physical disability is abused at home and reports it to the police, butthe police refuse to ta1e action<

) United Nations humanitarian preparedness plan fails to mention persons withdisabilities in a disaster7prone country<

) person with a visual impairment cannot apply for a position of human rights officerbecause the vacancy re2uires a driving licence.

+onsidering the examples above, who, if anyone, is responsibleA The passenger, the family,the ban1, management, the human resources sectionA @hen it comes to discrimination,different layers of responsibility emerge, but the State is the primary duty bearer.

States

Foth States and regional integration organi9ations, which are made up of sovereign States,can sign up to the +onvention. The +onvention lays down specific obligations on Stateparties to protect, promote and ensure the rights of persons with disabilities.

Moreover, under article C', States commit to underta1ing appropriate and effectivemeasures of international cooperation in support of national efforts for the reali9ation of the+onvention. @hile States have primary responsibility for implementing the rights of personswith disabilities in their Burisdiction, they also have to cooperate with other States. Thishighlights their extraterritorial responsibilities to promote, protect and ensure the rights ofpersons with disabilities.

5nternational and regional organi9ations

This, in turn, raises the 2uestion of the responsibility of international and regionalorgani9ations, such as the United Nations, the @orld Fan1, the +ouncil of 8urope and so on. )rticle C' refers to them as partners in international cooperation. Similarly, the speciali9edagencies and other United Nations organs are entitled to be represented before the+ommittee on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities. This clearly shows that they have arole in international cooperation to promote the +onvention. owever, internationalorgani9ations might themselves discriminate. @hile their member States are ultimatelyresponsible for avoiding such discrimination, these organi9ations also have a role to play tosupport the +onvention, even if this role is not clearly defined.

#rivate enterprises

!ights can be violated through the direct action or omission by State parties, including theirnational and local institutions or agencies. owever, while States are the main duty bearers

under the +onvention, those implementing many of its provisions are not State actors but

(



private enterprises. The private sector plays a very important role in the delivery of relevantservices 4e.g., education, sign translation, mobile telephones with voice7over systems6.

)ccording to article K, State parties must ensure that the private sector respects the rights ofpersons with disabilities. +onse2uently, States must ensure that appropriate mechanismsare in place to monitor the private sector and that State policies related to, for instance,education, employment and health integrate the principle of non7discrimination and areadopted by private providers.

Service providers

The +onvention also refers to specific services such as support for decision7ma1ing 4art. $'6,personal assistance for independent living 4art. $%6, teachers 4art. 'K6, health professionals4art. '/6. Service providers have an important role in providing the conditions needed bypersons with disabilities to fully enBoy their human rights. )t the same time, service providersthemselves might discriminate against persons with disabilities3intentionally or otherwise.

Thus, the State must also ta1e steps to ensure that service providers are aware of andsupport the +onvention, for example, by ta1ing appropriate measures to employ teachers,including teachers with disabilities, who are 2ualified in sign language and"or Fraille and totrain professionals and staff who wor1 at all levels of education.

5ndividuals and families

)rticle K also re2uires States to ta1e steps to eliminate discrimination by any person. Thisincludes ensuring ade2uate penalties and other Budicial measures to protect againstdiscrimination. 5t also re2uires DraisRing awareness throughout society, including at thefamily level, regarding persons with disabilities, and to foster respect for the rights anddignity of persons with disabilitiesE, as set out in article ?.

-hat *an these a*tors do to *o/bat dis*ri/ination

Module K sets out the range of measures that assist in the implementation of the+onvention: developing laws and policies< ensuring allocation of ade2uate resources<providing inclusive services< raising awareness and training professionals and others<underta1ing research and development< providing remedies< and building institutions. @henwe consider the various examples outlined in the previous section, it is possible to identifysome of the actions these actors can ta1e to combat discrimination.

A passenger changes compartment because she feels uncomfortable sitting close to

a passenger $ith ,o$n<s syndrome9 @hile the negative attitude of this woman ispotentially creating barriers to the participation of the person with own0s syndrome,this is not strictly spea1ing discrimination. There has been a distinction on the basisof disability, but this has not impaired the enBoyment of any right of the passengerwith own0s syndrome. owever, the State might consider raising awareness topromote more inclusive societies and to combat fear of persons who are different<

A family keeps a small child $ith autism at home because there are no inclusiveeducation opportunities at the local school9 The failure to provide inclusive educationopportunities has the effect of nullifying the right to education of the child. The Statehas a duty to ensure inclusive education services are available in the area and alsoto raise awareness about inclusion. The State should also ensure that laws andpolicies reflect principles of inclusive education. )t the same time, the school boardand teachers might have responsibilities to ensure that inclusive education is

%



effective and that parents are aware that such services are in place 4if indeed theyare6<

A private bank denies a loan to a person $ho has a mental impairment9 @hetherthere has been discrimination here is open to 2uestion. 5n reality, the ban1 may notspecify that the refusal is based on disability, but put forward another excuse to Bustify the refusal. Moreover, there is no human right to a ban1 loan. owever, theState has a duty to legislate to ensure that private ban1s do not discriminate on thebasis of disability. 5t should also provide support services so that the person canexercise his or her legal capacity. 5n such cases, the provision of support might besufficient to prevent such a situation in the first place, as it would underscore theability of the person to exercise legal capacity and repay the loan<

An employee $ith cerebral palsy re-uests a change of position in a large corporationand the employer refuses to accommodate her $ithout giving reasons9 #otentially,there has been a denial of reasonable accommodation that would amount todiscrimination. The State has a duty to legislate to ensure that the private sector does

not deny reasonable accommodation to the person with a disability. The employermust ensure that accommodation is provided unless it is unreasonable 4a undueburden6<

A person $ith a physical disability is abused at home and reports it to the police. butthe police refuse to take action9 There has been an exclusion on the basis ofdisability by the police which impairs the right to be free from violence and abuse.The State has a duty to pass laws re2uiring the police to protect persons withdisabilities from violence and abuse and to raise awareness and train the police sothat persons with disabilities can access Bustice<

A )nited *ations humanitarian preparedness plan fails to mention persons $ith

disabilities in a disaster4prone country9 This exclusion could impair or nullify theexercise of a range of human rights in the event of a disaster and has alreadyimpaired the right to ta1e part in the conduct of public affairs. States, actinginternationally, underta1e to ensure that international cooperation is accessible toand inclusive of persons with disabilities. This should include the development ofpolicies that re2uire the United Nations to respect the rights of persons withdisabilities through international cooperation programmes<

A person $ith a visual impairment cannot apply for a position of human rights officerbecause the vacancy re-uires a driving licence9 This could amount to Bustifiabledifferential treatment if driving is a 1ey element of the Bob and a driver0s licence istherefore necessary. 5t is reasonable treatment based on obBective criteria 4Bob

re2uirements applied to all applicants6 which see1s to respect the right to wor1 of allapplicants.

'n all these cases. it is also important to think not only $hat the State should do but $hat theindividual concerned should do9 =or example, the individual might see1 a remedy throughcourts, national human rights institutions or informal conflict resolution systems, or mightsee1 help from a non7governmental organi9ation or lobby the overnment or others directlyto ta1e action 4writing letters to local parliamentarians for example6.

Disabilit as 2rohibited grounds of dis*ri/ination in other hu/an rights treaties

)



The Universal eclaration on uman !ights, the 5nternational +ovenant on 8conomic,Social and +ultural !ights and the 5nternational +ovenant on #olitical and +ivil !ights, allprotect individuals from discrimination. iscrimination on the basis of disability is covered intheir articles ' under Dother statusE:

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this ,eclaration.$ithout distinction of any kind. such as race. colour. se3. language. religion. politicalor other opinion. national or social origin. property. birth or other status 4Universaleclaration6

The States Parties to the present +ovenant undertake to guarantee that the rightsenunciated in the present +ovenant $ill be e3ercised $ithout discrimination of anykind as to race. colour. se3. language. religion. political or other opinion. national orsocial origin. property. birth or other status 45nternational +ovenant on 8conomic,Social and +ultural !ights6

The 5nternational +onvention on the 8limination of )ll =orms of !acial iscrimination, the

+onvention on the 8limination of )ll =orms of iscrimination against @omen, the+onvention on the !ights of the +hild, the 5nternational +onvention on the #rotection of the!ights of )ll Migrant @or1ers and Members of Their =amilies also set out States0 obligationsto combat and eliminate discrimination. -f these, only the +onvention on the !ights of the+hild explicitly mentions DdisabilityE among the prohibited grounds of discrimination:

States Parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present +onventionto each child $ithin their /urisdiction $ithout discrimination of any kind. irrespective ofthe childs or his or her parents or legal guardians race. colour. se3. language.religion. political or other opinion. national. ethnic or social origin. property.disability . birth or other status9 4art. '6

The +ommittee on 8conomic, Social and +ultural !ights, in its general comment No. '(4'((%6, explained that Dother statusE covered among other things:

• Disabilit

• )ge

• Nationality

• Marital and family status

• Sexual orientation and gender identity

• ealth status

• #lace of residency

• 8conomic and social status

5ts general comment No. / 4$%%K6 provides a definition of discrimination against persons withdisabilities. The +ommittee against Torture includes Dmental or other disabilityE among theground for discrimination in its general comment No. ' 4'((J6. The +ommittee on the8limination of iscrimination against @omen, in its general recommendation No. $? 4$%%$6,points out the problem of Idouble discrimination0 affecting women with disabilities. 5n thepreamble to the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities it is recogni9ed thatDchildren with disabilities should have full enBoyment of all human rights and fundamentalfreedoms on an e2ual basis with other childrenE and recalled that Dobligations to that endunderta1en by States #arties to the +onvention on the !ights of the +hildE.

The 5nternational Habour -rgani9ation0s +onvention No. $/% 4$%?C6 concerning ocational

!ehabilitation and 8mployment 4isabled #ersons6 addresses e2ual opportunity, e2ualtreatment and non7discrimination. The United Nations 8ducational, Scientific and +ultural-rgani9ation0s +onvention against iscrimination in 8ducation also deserves attention,

+



particularly if complemented with the principles of inclusive education adopted at the $%%K@orld +onference on Special Needs 8ducation: )ccess and uality.

Some relevant regional instruments are the 5nter7)merican +onvention on the 8limination of )ll =orms of iscrimination against #ersons with isabilities of the -rgani9ation of )mericanStates, the +ouncil of 8urope0s +onvention on the !ecognition of ualifications concerningigher 8ducation in the 8uropean !egion and its )ction #lan to promote the rights and fullparticipation of people with disabilities in society: improving the 2uality of life of people withdisabilities in 8urope 4'((>'($/6.

The +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities is a new tool to ma1e the fightagainst discrimination on the basis of disability more informed and determined. 5f a specificState has not yet ratified the treaty, it still has obligations to prohibit discrimination againstpersons with disabilities under other human rights treaties that it has ratified.

*



5%D&6(

N#T)%N#6 )5P6(5(NT#T)%N #ND 5%N)T%R)NG ?R#5(-%R8S

National i/2le/entation and /onitoring /e*hanis/s

The +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities provides for the establishment ofnational mechanisms and institutions for the implementation and monitoring of the+onvention both at the international and at the national level.

National i/2le/entation and /onitoring /e*hanis/s, the focus of this module are setout in article CC of the +onvention. These are:

?o*al 2oints@ )rticle CC, paragraph $, introduces domestic implementation throughthe designation of a focal point or focal points within the overnment. The+onvention does not specify who could act as focal point 4a ministry, a department in

a ministry, a single person and so on6. )t the very least, having a focal point meansthat the +onvention should not remain only in the ministry of foreign affairs, as aninternational issue, but should have a dedicated entity focused on nationalimplementation.

Coordination /e*hanis/@ The same paragraph re2uires States to give dueconsideration to the establishment or designation of a coordination mechanism withinthe overnment to facilitate action related to the implementation of the +onvention. )lthough optional, such a coordination mechanism could be beneficial. Traditionally,disability issues have been dealt with by one ministry, such as the ministry of healthor of social affairs. The ris1 has been that the education of children with disabilitieswas sometimes dealt with by the ministry of social affairs rather than that of

education. Such an arrangement tends to exacerbate exclusion and promotesegregation. The +onvention spans all rights and, therefore, a range of ministriesshould have responsibilities such as the ministry of the interior, of Bustice, ofeducation, of labour and so on. ) coordination mechanism can help ensure that the+onvention does not remain stuc1 in one ministry but that responsibilities are shared.

)nde2endent i/2le/entation and /onitoring /e*hanis/@ )rticle CC, paragraph', on the other hand, focuses on establishing a structure to oversee theimplementation of the +onvention. 5t re2uires States to maintain, strengthen,designate or establish one or more independent mechanisms to promote, protect andmonitor implementation of the +onvention. 5mportantly, in setting up suchmechanisms, States have to ta1e into account Dthe principles relating to the status

and functioning of national institutions for protection and promotion of human rightsE,otherwise 1nown as the #aris #rinciples. These are dealt with in greater detail below. )t this stage, it is important to highlight the relevance of these #rinciples to ensuringa truly independent and well7functioning national independent monitoring mechanismas re2uired by the +onvention.

The +onvention also stipulates that *ivil so*iet, particularly persons with disabilities andtheir representative organi9ations, should participate fully in all aspects of this monitoringprocess, Bust as they are to be involved in the development and implementation of policies,programmes and legislation to implement the +onvention, in line with article K.

This reference to civil society raises at least two issues:



4a6 +ivil society, in particular persons with disabilities and their representativeorgani9ations, should be involved in the monitoring process underta1en by theindependent monitoring mechanism established under article CC 4and ideally also inthe wor1 of focal points and coordination mechanisms6<

4b6 +ivil society itself has a role to play in monitoring the +onvention, independently ofthe other mechanisms established under article CC.

5n addition to the specific monitoring, promotion and protection framewor1 set up under the+onvention, 2arlia/ents as well as national *ourts and tribunals can also play a 1ey rolein promoting and protecting the rights in the +onvention. -ther relevant mechanisms includelabour ins2e*torates s*hool ins2e*tors and any other mechanisms that have a role inmonitoring rights. They should monitor the rights of persons with disabilities as part of theirgeneral monitoring functions.

The inclusion of an article detailing national implementation and monitoring structures andtheir functions continues a trend in human rights treaties towards strengthening the nationalmonitoring of human rights. #rior to the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with

isabilities, the -ptional #rotocol to the +onvention against Torture and -ther +ruel,5nhuman or egrading Treatment or #unishment also re2uired State parties to set upnational preventive mechanisms.

?o*al 2oints and *oordination /e*hanis/s in the Govern/ent

iven that State parties to the +onvention have different forms of government and areorgani9ed differently, the article relating to focal points and coordination mechanisms isflexible and therefore adaptable.

owever, since other international instruments, such as the @orld #rogramme of )ctionconcerning isabled #ersons and the Standard !ules on the 82uali9ation of -pportunities

for #ersons with isabilities, have also called for the establishment of similar entities, it isworth reflecting on their experience to orient the implementation of article CC.

The focal point7s8

• @here focal points on disability exist, it is nonetheless important to give such

mechanisms an explicit mandate in relation to the +onvention. 5n addition, thismandate should be revised to ensure that it is sufficiently broad to cover theimplementation of the +onvention in full.

• =or the effective implementation of the +onvention, it might be advisable to adopt a

two7pronged approach and appoint focal points in each or most governmentaldepartments"ministries as well as designate one overall focal point within theovernment responsible for implementation.

• Fesides functional focal points in the ministries concerned, the State might establish

focal points at different levels of government, e.g., local, regional andnational"federal.

• The mandate of the focal point4s6 should ideally include promoting awareness of the

+onvention within the ministry designated as focal point, participation in thedevelopment of an action plan on the +onvention, and monitoring and reporting onimplementation within their functional lines 4but remember. this monitoring does notreplace the one foreseen in paragraph F 6.

• 5f a decision is ta1en to appoint one overall focal point, the following considerations

are relevant:

9



o =irst, the +onvention0s shift in approach to disability, away from a medical and

charity approach to one based on human rights, needs to be reflected in thechoice of focal point. The ministry of health should not be designated as theovernment focal point, because that would reinforce the understanding ofdisability as a medical condition. Similarly, placing the focal point within the

ministries of welfare or labour as is the practice in the maBority of State partiesmay also need to be reviewed to ensure that a human rights approach isadopted. )n alternative could be placing the focal point in ministries withresponsibility for Bustice and human rights 4which in some countries is, in anycase, the ministry of social affairs6.

o Second, implementation of the +onvention re2uires traction at the most

senior level. #lacing the focal point close to the heart of the overnment,such as in the office of the president or the prime minister, or the cabinetoffice, would be ideal. Some State parties have already done this. owever, ifa ministry is appointed focal point and that minister is not part of the cabinet,this might hamper effectiveness.

o Third, the mandate of the focal point should clearly focus on developing and

coordinating a coherent national policy on the +onvention. )s such, the focalpoint should promote, guide, inform and advise the overnment on mattersrelated to the implementation of the +onvention but not necessarilyimplement it by delivering disability support services. The mandate could alsoinclude coordinating overnment action on the +onvention in respect ofreporting, monitoring, awareness7raising and liaising with the independentmonitoring framewor1 designated under article CC, paragraph ', of the+onvention.

o =ourth, the focal point should represent the channel for civil society and

organi9ations of persons with disabilities to communicate with theovernment on the +onvention0s implementation.

o =ifth, the focal point should have ade2uate technical staff and resources.

#lacing the focal point within a large ministry could ensure this.

The Handbook for Parliamentarians on the +onvention on the Rights of Persons $ith,isabilities and its 2ptional Protocol D identifies possible tas1s of the national focal point4s6 asfollows:

• )dvise the ead of State"overnment, policyma1ers and programme planners on

the development of policies, legislation, programmes and proBects with respect totheir impact on people with disabilities<

• +oordinate the activities of various ministries and departments on human rights and

disability<

• +oordinate activities on human rights and disability at federal, national, regional,State, provincial and local levels of government<

• !evise strategies and policies to ensure that the rights of persons with disabilities are

respected<

• +oordinate the drafting, revision or amendment of relevant legislation<

• !aise awareness about the +onvention and its -ptional #rotocol within the

overnment<

• 8nsure that the +onvention and its -ptional #rotocol are translated into local

languages and issued in accessible formats<

• 8stablish an action plan for the +onvention0s implementation<

• Monitor the implementation of the action plan on human rights and disabilities<

• +oordinate the preparation of the State0s initial and periodic reports<

9 0rom E3clusion to E-uality: Reali1ing the rights of persons $ith disabilities 4'((J6.

90



• !aise public awareness on disability7related issues and the rights of persons with

disabilities<

• Fuild capacity within the overnment on disability7related issues<

• 8nsure and coordinate the collection of data and statistics for effective policy

programming and evaluation of implementation<

• 8nsure that persons with disabilities participate in the development of policies andlaws that affect them<

• 8ncourage persons with disabilities to participate in organi9ations and civil society,

and encourage the creation of organi9ations of persons with disabilities

The coordination mechanism

)lthough optional, the establishment of a coordination mechanism at governmental level inaddition to focal points is encouraged under the +onvention.

) coordination mechanism could, for example, ta1e the shape of an interministerial group,i.e., representatives from the ministries concerned tas1ed with coordinating the +onvention0simplementation across departments"sectors or levels of government. iven the breadth ofthe +onvention, all ministries will have some responsibilities for implementing parts of it.

Some coordinating mechanisms include representatives of various ministries as well as oforgani9ations of persons with disabilities, other civil society organi9ations, the private sectorand trade unions. Their mandate often focuses on policy development, the promotion ofdialogue on disability, awareness7raising and similar functions.

Note that coordination mechanism could prove particularly beneficial in countries withsystems of devolved administration, such as federal States.

Trainers should endeavour to identify national and regional mechanisms that are relevant tothe context of the training so that participants are provided with sufficient examples ofexisting mechanisms.

National inde2endent /e*hanis/s for i/2le/entation and /onitoring

5n addition to designating the above institutions, the +onvention re2uires States to maintain,strengthen, designate or establish a framewor1 to Dpromote, protect and monitorE theimplementation of the +onvention.

State parties may choose to set up specific disability mechanisms or assign the monitoringfunction to existing entities. =urthermore, article CC does not prescribe a particularorgani9ational form for the national monitoring framewor1 and State parties are free todetermine the appropriate structure for their political and organi9ational context.

@hatever the organi9ational structure, article CC sets out three 1ey re2uirements for themonitoring framewor1:

$. The State must /aintain strengthen designate or establish a framewor1 withone or /ore /e*hanis/sE

'. The mechanism4s6 shall ta1e into account the Paris Prin*i2les. This does not mean

that only entities that comply with the #aris #rinciples should be included in theframewor1, but the framewor1 should have at least one such entity<

91



C. Civil so*iet and in particular persons with disabilities and their representativeorgani9ations need to be involved and fully participate in the monitoring process 4art.CC 4C66.

The organi<ational stru*ture of the /onitoring fra/ework@ alternatives and2referen*es F one or /ore /e*hanis/s

)n initial consideration for the State party is whether it should designate 4and maintain oreven strengthen6 an existing mechanism or establish an entirely new framewor1. 5n thisregard, the following factors are particularly relevant:

Human and financial resources9 The decision by a State to either modify and"or addfunctions to an existing framewor1 or, instead, establish a new one will naturally beaffected by financial and human resource considerations. 5n some cases creating anew structure shaped on the +onvention0s expectations could be more cost7effectivethan reconceptuali9ing the mandate, the expertise and the mentality of an existing

institution< in others, the N!5, ombudsperson or speciali9ed agency could besufficiently flexible to adapt to additional tas1s.

+ommitment to the +onvention9 To have a fully functioning framewor1, commitmentto the +onvention0s innovative approach is as important as resources. The nationalframewor1 should represent a ground7brea1ing human rights body, with itspromotion, protection and monitoring duties reflecting the +onvention0s principles.The nomination of commissioners and"or staff needs to involve persons withdisabilities. The body has to be open to the participation of persons with disabilitiesand their representative organi9ations 4see below6, and have sufficient credentials ofintegrity, independence and expertise in human rights monitoring.

A t$in7track approach9 5n the context of development cooperation, it is recogni9edthat, at times, disability7specific development measures are necessary while, at other

times, disability rights should be mainstreamed into general developmentprogrammes, proBects and other interventions. The same logic can be applied to themonitoring of the +onvention. )t times, specific 1nowledge of the +onvention, itssocial"human rights approach and its general principles is essential to ensure thatmonitoring respects the +onvention. =or example, in mainstream human rights wor1,the #rinciples for the protection of persons with mental illness and the improvementof mental health care are still commonly applied, while disability rights experts2uestion these #rinciples, which are sometimes in conflict with the +onvention.+onse2uently, either ensuring full participation of disability rights experts or,alternatively, having a stand7alone disability rights commissioner or other mechanismmight be preferable to having an existing human rights mechanism ta1e over themonitoring role foreseen under article CC.

5n addition, the State must consider whether its national framewor1 will have one or moremechanisms. ere are some options:

$. )ttribute the monitoring function to a single entit, i.e., one independent mechanism

The explicit lin1 in article CC 4'6 between the framewor1 and the #aris #rinciplessuggests a preference for attributing the monitoring function to a national humanrights institution. Such attribution would certainly comply with the +onvention.

Nowadays, over $(( national human rights institutions have been established

worldwide. They may be called human rights commissions, ombudsmen or institutes.

92



'. )ttribute the function to a framewor1 consisting of more than one independentmechanism

The +onvention also foresees the possibility of more than one independentmechanism being appointed.

The Paris Prin*i2les in the *onte3t of the Convention

)n international wor1shop of national human rights institutions, held in #aris in $%%$, firstdrafted the #rinciples relating to the status and functioning of national institutions for theprotection and promotion of human rights, 1nown today as the #aris #rinciples.

)rticle CC 4'6 of the +onvention re2uires State parties to ta1e these #rinciples into accountwhen designating or establishing mechanisms to promote, protect and monitor its

implementation. @ith reference to the +onvention, the #aris #rinciples would raise thefollowing 2uestions:

+ompetence and responsibilities

5n general terms:

√ as the mechanism been vested with competence to promote and protect the

+onvention0s provisionsA

√ 5s the mandate as broad as possibleA

√ 5s the mandate set forth in a legislative act or in the constitutionA

√ oes the law establishing the mechanism set out the mechanism0s composition and

competence"mandateA

5n relation to specific responsibilities:

√ oes the mandate include the possibility to hear any matter, without referral, relating

to the promotion and protection of the rights of persons with disabilitiesA

√ +an the mechanism promote and ensure the harmoni9ation of national laws and

policies with the +onventionA

√ +an the mechanism encourage ratification of other human rights instruments, such

as the -ptional #rotocol to the +onventionA

√ +an the mechanism contribute to State reports to United Nations and regional

bodies, such as the +ommittee on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities or the+onference of States #arties, and express its opinion on the subBectA

√ +an the mechanism assist in the formulation of programmes for disability rights

educationA

√ +an the mechanism publici9e the rights of persons with disabilities and raise

awareness about the +onvention, including through combating all forms ofdiscrimination based on disabilityA

+omposition and guarantees of independence and pluralism

√ 5s the composition of the mechanism pluralistic< in particular, does it have experts

that reflect the diversity of disabilityA

9(



√ oes the composition of the mechanism include and"or reflect: civil society, trends in

philosophical or religious thought, universities and 2ualified experts, parliamentA

√ @hile optional, does the composition of the mechanism include government

departments participating in the mechanism0s deliberations in an advisory capacityA

√ oes the mechanism have sufficient powers to enable effective cooperation with

non7governmental organi9ations, including organi9ations of persons with disabilitiesA√ 5s the mechanism funded so that it has its own staff and premises, so that the

overnment cannot subBect it to financial control in a way that might affect itsindependenceA

√ 5s the membership of the mechanism established by an official act which sets out the

specific duration of the mandateA

(ethods of operation

√ +an the mechanism freely consider any 2uestion falling within its competenceA

√ +an the mechanism hear any person and obtain any information necessary for

assessing situations falling within its competenceA√ +an the mechanism address public opinion, including through publication of its

opinions and recommendationsA

√ +an the mechanism meet on a regular basisA

√ +an the mechanism establish wor1ing groups and set up local or regional sectionsA

√ +an the mechanism maintain consultation with other bodies responsible for the

promotion and protection of human rightsA

√ +an the mechanism establish and maintain relations with persons with disabilities

and their representative organi9ationsA

Additional principles concerning the status of commissions $ith -uasi4/urisdictional

competence

)n optional principle relates to the authori9ation of a mechanism to hear and considercomplaints and petitions concerning individual situations, such as claims that the rights of aperson with a disability have been breached. @here this option is granted, the power of themechanism should be based on four principles:

√ See1ing an amicable resolution through conciliation

√ 5nforming petitioners of their rights and remedies

√ earing complaints or petitions and transmitting them to the competent authorities

√ Ma1ing recommendations to the competent authorities.

=or the #aris #rinciples to apply fully to the national framewor1 under article CC, it isessential to ensure access to Bustice. 5n this connection, article $C re2uires States to:

• 8nsure effective access to Bustice for persons with disabilities on an e2ual basis with

others, including through the provision of procedural and age7appropriateaccommodations< and

• #romote appropriate training for those wor1ing in the field of administration of Bustice,

including police and prison staff.

)ccessibility considerations and accommodation can relate for instance to:

√ )ccess to the building that houses the mechanism

9%



√ #ublication of reports, awareness7raising materials, recommendations, training

materials and so on in accessible formats

√ )ccess to the mechanism0s website

√ )ffirmative action policies to promote the employment of persons with disabilities

√ #rovision of reasonable accommodation to individual employees of the mechanism

√ #rovision of accessibility measures such as sign language interpretation duringpublic hearings.

?un*tions of the national /onitoring fra/ework

The independent monitoring framewor1 is expected to 2ro/ote 2rote*t and /onitor theimplementation of the +onvention. Slide $( in the computer slide presentation sets out someexamples of tas1s to promote, protect and monitor the rights of persons with disabilities.

Parti*i2ation and involve/ent of *ivil so*iet and 2ersons with disabilities

)rticle K 4C6 re2uires State #arties to ensure consultation with and active involvement ofpersons with disabilities and their representative organi9ations in the development andimplementation of legislation and policies to implement the +onvention and in otherdecision7ma1ing on the rights of persons with disabilities.

)rticle CC 4C6 re2uires civil society, in particular persons with disabilities and theirrepresentative organi9ations, to be involved and participate fully in the monitoring process.

)t the very least, this means that national structures established under article CC shouldendeavour to involve and ensure the participation of persons with disabilities and theirrepresentative organi9ations. No guidance is provided on how this participation could andshould ta1e place. The trainer could open the floor for discussion among course participants

on areas for involvement, such as:

√ Membership of the national framewor1, focal points and coordination mechanisms

√ +onsultation with representative organi9ations in the drafting of laws and regulations

establishing the various mechanisms

√ +onsultation with representative organi9ations on the appointment of 1ey figures

√ +onsultation with representative organi9ations in the development of annual

wor1plans

√ !egular hearings on the wor1 of national mechanisms for persons with disabilities

and their representative organi9ations

√ esignation of an advisory group including representative organi9ations

√ #roduction of reports, recommendations and other documents relating to monitoringin accessible formats

√ -pen facilities, goods and services through maintaining high accessibility standards

√ !eflection of the diversity of disabilities in activities to promote consultation and

participation.

There could be many other areas to promote consultation with and participation of personswith disabilities and their representative organi9ations in the implementation and monitoringof the +onvention. The group activity will provide a means to identify more.

Parlia/ents

5n addition to the specific monitoring arrangement set up by the +onvention, #arliament,through its oversight function, plays a 1ey role in ensuring respect for the human rights of

9)



persons with disabilities. arious #arliamentary mechanisms that could be relied uponinclude:

9+



Parliamentary committees

#arliamentary committees oversee the executive. To be effective, they must be able to settheir own agendas and have the power to oblige ministers and civil servants to appear andanswer 2uestions. #arliamentary committees can as1 ministers and civil servants 2uestionsrelating to the establishment of national framewor1s or any other matter relating to theimplementation and monitoring of the +onvention.

+ommissions of in-uiry

+ommissions of in2uiry are established when a maBor public concern arises involvingaspects not limited to the remit of specific parliamentary committees. This might be the casewhere certain violations of the rights of persons with disabilities come to light, such as forcedinstitutionali9ation and forced treatment of persons with mental disabilities or systematicexclusion of persons with disabilities from the general education system.

,irect -uestioning of ministers

irect 2uestioning of ministers is relevant in countries where ministers are members of thelegislature. uestioning might be oral or in writing and helps to maintain overnmentaccountability. #ersons with disabilities, their representative organi9ations or independentmechanisms under article CC might contact local members or members of parliamentarycommittees related to human rights in order to raise 2uestions for ministers withresponsibility for implementing the +onvention.

Scrutiny of e3ecutive appointments

Scrutiny of executive appointments is particularly relevant in countries where ministers arenot members of the legislature. =or example, for the appointments of ombudsmen, human

rights commissioners and cabinet members, it would be entirely appropriate for parliamentto verify the appointee0s 1nowledge of and attitude towards disability issues.

2versight over non4governmental public agencies

#arliament also monitors independent agencies to which the overnment may havedevolved public functions, such as agencies involved in regulatory activities or the deliveryof front7line services. These include regulatory bodies for health and safety, service7deliveryagencies, public utilities and other agencies whose activities might have a direct impact onthe rights of persons with disabilities.

5udgetary scrutiny and financial control

#arliament holds considerable influence over policies through its control of theovernment0s budget, during the stages of formulation as well as expenditure. )s part ofthis process, parliament can ensure that the impact of the proposed budget on differentsocial groups, such as persons with disabilities, is discussed and monitored.

National *ourts and tribunals

National courts can also play an important role in the implementation and monitoring of the+onvention.

√National courts have a role to protect the rights set out in the +onvention. @hilepersons with disabilities claiming a violation of their rights should be able to accessnational human rights institutions and other mechanisms under article CC, they

9*



should also have the opportunity to see1 a legally enforceable remedy throughcourts.

√ National courts have a role in interpreting and applying the +onvention nationally.

+ases that come before national Budges provide a means of testing the application ofthe +onvention in national circumstances. ;udgements can help to clarify what global

standards mean in the national context.√ National courts can complement the article CC mechanisms. 5n particular, if a case is

particularly important or complicated, the national mechanism might refer it to thenational courts to ensure the fullest consideration as well as a legally enforceablesolution.

)s a result of national court cases:

√ 5t is possible to reflect upon areas where progress in the reali9ation of disability rights

has been possible as well as problem areas 4particularly where the same complaintarises in several cases6<

√ !espect for the rights of persons with disabilities is strengthened. Not only does a

court case provide a remedy for the complainant, a court case can often provide thetrigger for law reform as well as clarity on the law. 5n addition, a case supportingdisability rights can help to raise awareness on the rights of persons with disabilitiesand the +onvention. 5n doing so, similar violations can be prevented.

The trainer might consider researching national case law to identify disability7related cases.

The trainer could provide a summary of the case and then encourage participants to discuss

the various ways in which the Budiciary has been able to strengthen and protect the rights of

persons with disabilities.

9



5%D&6(

R(P%RT)NG T% T'( C%55)TT(( %N T'( R)G'TS %? P(RS%NS -)T'

D)S#$)6)T)(S@ ST#T( #ND #6T(RN#T)>( R(P%RTS

)NTR%D&CT)%N

The purpose of this module is to provide detail for States, civil society and national human

rights institutions on the process of reporting to the +ommittee on the !ights of #ersons with

isabilities. States have an obligation to submit an initial report within two years of

ratification and to submit periodic reports thereafter. +ivil society and N!5s have a crucial

role to play in the reporting process by complementing information provided by the State

party. This module covers the content of State and alternative reports as well as the process

of drafting them, submitting them to the +ommittee and following up on the +ommittee0s

concluding observations and recommendations.

ST#T( R(P%RTS

The Co//ittee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Fefore discussing reports, it is important to understand the nature and role of the +ommittee

on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities, the +ommittee that receives reports from States

and other sta1eholders. )rticle CK establishes the +ommittee. 5t is a treaty body of $?

independent experts acting in their personal capacity. They are elected by State parties to

the +onvention at the +onference of States #arties and possess certain characteristics,

such as:

• igh moral standing

• !ecogni9ed competence and standing in the field covered by the +onvention.

@hen electing these experts, State parties should give consideration to a range of issues

explicitly referred to in article CK, including:

• 82uitable geographic distribution

• !epresentation of different forms of civili9ation

• !epresentation of the principal legal systems

• ender balance

• #articipation of experts with disabilities.

This last criterion3the participation of experts with disabilities3is a novelty in the

+onvention and attests to the fact that persons with disabilities have often been excluded

from decision7ma1ing processes that affect them. 5n a similar vein, State parties are invited

to give due consideration to article K 4C6 when nominating experts. )rticle K 4C6 re2uires

States to consult closely with and actively involve persons with disabilities, including children

99



with disabilities, and their representative organi9ations in decision7ma1ing processes that

affect them 4and specifically in relation to decisions on laws and policies6. @hile the call to

participation is relatively wea13States are only invited to consider this in nominating experts

3it nonetheless provides an indication that the nomination process should not be a purely

overnment concern but that other parts of society also have a role to play and an interest in

the +ommittee0s membership.

The +ommittee0s experts are elected for a four7year term, renewable once.

The +ommittee0s main responsibility is to receive comprehensive reports from each State

party to the +onvention 4see below6.

5n addition, under the -ptional #rotocol, the +ommittee can:

• !eceive communications 4complaints6 and issue recommendations on these

communications 4see module ?6<

• Underta1e in2uiries into countries when there is reliable information indicating grave

or systematic violations of the +onvention 4see module ?6.

The +ommittee also underta1es thematic wor1. 5t:

• olds days of general discussion on various themes, such as legal capacity and

accessibility<

• )dopts general comments. ) general comment is an authoritative statement of the

+ommittee on particular themes or articles in the +onvention and can help State

parties in their tas1 of reporting to the +ommittee by identifying in greater detail whatspecific provisions mean. The +ommittee is currently considering drafting general

comments on accessibility and on legal capacity.

=inally, the +ommittee has authority in relation to its own administration. =or example:

• 5t elects its +hair, adopts its wor1ing methods and rules of procedure and so on<

• 5t meets with representatives of civil society, national human rights institutions and

United Nations agencies to discuss issues related to the implementation and

monitoring of the +onvention<

• 5t coordinates with other treaty bodies to strengthen the treaty body system and

harmoni9e wor1ing methods.

The re7uire/ent on States to re2ort

)ccording to article C/ 4$6, DReach State #arty shall submit to the +ommittee, through the

Secretary7eneral of the United Nations, a comprehensive report on measures ta1en to give

effect to its obligations under the present +onvention and on the progress made in that

regard, within two years after the entry into force of the present +onvention for the State

#arty concerned.”

)fter the initial report, the State party must submit subse2uent reports at least every four

years and whenever the +ommittee re2uests it. The subse2uent report is often referred to as

100



a periodic report. The possibility of the +ommittee re2uesting reports at any time was added

so that it can respond to particular situations that re2uire its attention outside the four7year

cycle.

The re2orting **le

The reporting cycle is similar to that under any human rights treaty. The important factor to

remember is that it is a cycle. 5t is not, or at least it should not be, a one7off event, but rather

a process that comprises the following steps:

• rafting the report through a consultative process both within the overnment and

with counterparts such as civil society and N!5s, and submitting it<

• #reparing and responding to the list of issues<

• Meeting the +ommittee and having a constructive dialogue on implementation<

• =ollowing up to the views and recommendations of the +ommittee<

• #reparing for the next cycle on challenges since the previous dialogue with the

+ommittee and on implementation of the +ommittee0s recommendations.

) potentially significant difference compared to other treaties is the fact that State parties are

invited to consider adopting an open and transparent process in drafting the report, ta1ing

into account article K 4C6. )s noted above, this article re2uires States to consult closely with

and actively involve persons with disabilities, including children with disabilities, and their

representative organi9ations in decision7ma1ing processes that affect them 4and specifically

in relation to decisions on laws and policies6. )gain, the re2uirement on States is only to givedue consideration to the participation of persons with disabilities in the preparation of the

report. Nonetheless, it provides a further indication that this drafting process 4and indeed the

whole reporting cycle6 should not be a purely overnment concern but also a legitimate

interest of other parts of society.

Do*u/ents to 2re2are

There are two main documents for the State to prepare:

• The *o//on *ore do*u/ent should contain general information about the

reporting State, the general framewor1 for the protection and promotion of humanrights, disaggregated according to sex, age, main population groups and disability, aswell as information on non7discrimination and e2uality, and effective remedies, inaccordance with the harmoni9ed guidelines.

• The treat4s2e*ifi* do*u/ent submitted to the +ommittee on the !ights of #ersons

with isabilities should not repeat the information included in the common coredocument or merely list or describe the legislation adopted by the State party.!ather, it should contain specific information relating to the implementation, in lawand in fact, of articles $ to CC of the +onvention, ta1ing into account analyticalinformation on recent developments in law and practice affecting the full reali9ation ofthe rights recogni9ed in the +onvention by all persons, with all forms of disabilities

within the territory or Burisdiction of the State party. 5t should also contain detailedinformation on substantive measures ta1en towards the aforementioned goals and

101



the resulting progress achieved. @here applicable, this information should bepresented in relation to policy and legislation of persons without disabilities. 5n allcases, it should indicate data sources.

5ethodolog

There is no strict methodology that States have to follow for the preparation of their reports,

but the following steps are relevant:

• 5dentifying a reporting group< normally, the focal point or the coordination mechanism

will have a role to play in drafting the report to the +ommittee. 8arly in the drafting

stage, the focal point and"or coordination mechanism should identify the ministries

and departments that have a role in implementing the +onvention, as they should be

on board. 5t is also useful to include civil society representatives in the group, bearing

in mind the importance of participation. The reporting group might identify a smaller

drafting group to prepare the first draft.

• 5nitial review of 1ey issues< at this stage, the reporting group should review the

+onvention as well as documents such as laws and policies as well as any studies

that have been done so as to identify the issues that are relevant to the report.

• Hegal analysis and data collection< at this stage, the drafters should first of all review

laws, policies and strategies to examine the extent to which they comply with the

+onvention. 5n addition, studies, surveys, statistics and other materials should be

collected to bac1 up the legal analysis with facts and figures that reflect the current

situation of persons with disabilities.

• )nalysis and preparation of the draft report< on the basis of the legal analysis anddata collection, a first draft can be prepared. The data collected should not simply be

reproduced, but be analysed by reference to the provisions of the +onvention to

identify the extent to which they are being implemented and also reveal the

challenges.

• +onsultation within the overnment and finali9ation of the report< the draft report

should be circulated to the broader reporting group to ensure that it reflects the

position of all relevant overnment representatives. The overnment should also

consider ways to circulate the draft to civil society so as to respect article CC, which

re2uires participation of persons with disabilities in monitoring the +onvention. Thedraft might also be shared with the N!5 or independent framewor1 established

under article CC.

Content@ the re2orting guidelines1"

The +ommittee has prepared reporting guidelines to advise States parties on the form andcontent of their reports, so as to facilitate the preparation of reports and ensure that theseare comprehensive and presented in a uniform manner by States parties. +ompliance withthe reporting guidelines will also reduce the need for the +ommittee to re2uest furtherinformation under article C and under rule C, paragraph C, of its rules of procedure.

10 +!#"+"'C.

102



5n relation to the rights recogni9ed in the +onvention, the treaty7specific document shouldindicate:

• @hether the State party has adopted policies, strategies and a national legal

framewor1 for the implementation of each +onvention right, identifying the resources

available for that purpose and the most cost7effective ways of using such resources<• @hether the State party has adopted comprehensive disability anti7discrimination

legislation to put into effect provisions of the +onvention in this regard<

• )ny mechanisms in place to monitor progress towards the full reali9ation of the

+onvention rights, including recognition of indicators and related nationalbenchmar1s in relation to each +onvention right, in addition to the informationprovided under appendix C of the harmoni9ed guidelines and ta1ing into account theframewor1 and tables of illustrative indicators outlined by -+! 4!5"M+"'((?"C6<

• Mechanisms in place to ensure that a State #arty0s obligations under the +onvention

are fully integrated in its actions as a member of international organi9ations<

• The incorporation and direct applicability of each +onvention right in the domestic

legal order, with reference to specific examples of relevant legal cases<

• The Budicial and other appropriate remedies in place enabling victims to obtain

redress in the case their +onvention rights have been violated<

• Structural or other significant obstacles arising from factors beyond the State party0s

control which impede the full reali9ation of the +onvention rights, including details ofthe steps being ta1en to overcome them<

• Statistical data on the reali9ation of each +onvention right, disaggregated by sex,

age, type of disability 4physical, sensory, intellectual and mental6, ethnic origin,urban"rural population and other relevant categories, on an annual comparative basisover the past four years.

The treaty7specific document should be delivered in accessible electronic format and in print.

The report should follow paragraphs 'K to ' and '% of the harmoni9ed reporting guidelines.

The format of the +onvention7specific document should be in accordance with paragraphs$% to 'C of the harmoni9ed reporting guidelines 4!5"8N"'"!ev./, chap. 56. The initial reportshould not exceed ( pages, and subse2uent +onvention7specific documents should belimited to K( pages. #aragraphs should be numbered se2uentially.

The reporting guidelines suggest the following broad structure:

$. )rticles $7K'. Specific provisions:

4a6 82uality and non7discrimination4b6 )wareness7raising4c6 )ccessibility4d6 !ight to life4e6 Situation of ris1 and humanitarian emergencies4f6 82ual recognition before the law4g6 )ccess to Bustice4h6 Hiberty and security of the person4i6 =reedom from torture4B6 =reedom from exploitation, violence and abuse416 #rotecting the integrity of the person4l6 Hiberty of movement and nationality

4m6Hiving independently and being included in the community4n6 #ersonal mobility4o6 =reedom of expression

10(



4p6 !espect for privacy426 !espect for home and family4r6 8ducation4s6 ealth4t6 abilitation and rehabilitation4u6 @or1 and employment4v6 )de2uate standard of living and social protection4w6 #articipation in political and public life4x6 #articipation in cultural life

C. Specific situation of boys, girls and women with disabilitiesK. Specific obligations

4a6 Statistics and data collection4b6 5nternational cooperation4c6 National framewor1 for implementation and monitoring

The +ommittee0s reporting guidelines set out specific issues that State parties should report

on, provision by provision.

The initial report submitted by #eru 4+!#"+"#8!"$6, part of which is reproduced below,

provides a good example as the State party reported on each of the guidelines identified by

the +ommittee. =or article '%, for instance, table below sets out the +ommittee0s guidelines

in the left7hand column and the measures underta1en in the right7hand column. The

example is interesting for at least two reasons:

• =irst, the State party ma1es the effort to report on each of the 2uestions identified

in the reporting guidelines<

• Second, the information provided does not appear to answer the 2uestions posed

by the +ommittee. =or example, the first response to the re2uest for legislationand measures to guarantee political rights mentions only the legal framewor1 but

does not refer explicitly to persons with mental or intellectual disabilities, nor does

it clarify whether the act does in fact guarantee political rights to persons with

disabilities. 5nstead, it only mentions facilitating voting by persons with disabilities

4which is not exactly the same thing6. This demonstrates the importance of the

constructive dialogue with the +ommittee to clarify such ambiguities.

!0.#rti*le !9@ Parti*i2ation in 2oliti*al and 2ubli* life

?$. This article guarantees political rights to persons with

disabilities.

Report on Progress

Hegislation and measures to guarantee to

persons with disabilities, in particular persons

with mental or intellectual disability, political

rights, including, if it is the case, existing

limitations and actions ta1en to overcome them

Since the adoption of )ct No. '%KJ? by

+ongress in ecember '((%, the National

8lection #rocedures -ffice has had the

necessary legal framewor1 to facilitate voting by

persons with disabilities.

Measures ta1en to ensure the right to vote of all

persons with disabilities, on their own or to be

assisted by a person of their choice

The national identity card also serves as the

one and only type of voter registration card. 5ts

use is compulsory for all citi9ens, and theNational 5dentity and +ivil Status !egistry has

10%



Report on Progress

issued an administrative decision under which

national identity cards are to be issued free of

charge to persons with disabilities, following

verification of eligibility.

Measures ta1en to ensure the full accessibility

of the voting procedures, facilities and materials

Under )ct No. '%KJ?, the National 8lection

#rocedures -ffice maintains a register of

citi9ens with disabilities in order to facilitate their

access to the ballot box by: 4a6 preparing ballot

papers in Fraille 4Fraille templates6 for citi9ens

with visual disabilities< 4b6 setting up voting

booths at ground7floor level in polling stations<

4c6 temporarily moving voting booths from upper

floors in polling stations to ensure that persons

with disabilities do not have to climb stairs< 4d6putting up signs in polling stations to guide

citi9ens with disabilities and publici9ing the

measures ta1en to facilitate their access to

voting booths. The register can be consulted on

the -ffice0s website.

5ndicators measuring the full enBoyment of the

right to participate in political and public life of

persons with disabilities

5n '((K>'((J, $(,J/? persons with disabilities

exercised their right to vote.

Nationally, the total number of identity cards

issued free of charge to persons with disabilitiesbetween '((C and / March '($( was J,J'%, ofwhich C?,?(/ were issued to adults and '?,%'Kto minors.

Support provided, if any, to persons with

disabilities for the establishment and

maintenance of organi9ations to represent their

rights and interests at local, regional and

national level

Since '(($, the National +ouncil for the5ntegration of #ersons with isabilities4+-N)5S6 has maintained a register ofassociations, N-s and other organi9ations thatwor1 to benefit persons with disabilities and toaddress the problems they face< in a number ofthose organi9ations, parents and relatives ofpersons with disabilities sit on the board of

directors. +urrently, C$( institutions have beenentered on the roster maintained by the National!egistry< this authori9es them to enter intocooperative arrangements, gives them access tointernational cooperation funding and enablesthem to promote the social integration of theirmembers.

6ist of issues

-nce the +ommittee has received the State party0s report, its country rapporteur 4a memberof the +ommittee6 will examine it, and the +ommittee with the assistance of the rapporteur

10)



will decide if there is any information missing from the report. -n this basis, the +ommittee

forwards a list of issues to the State party with a view to completing the information in the

report. enerally, State parties will respond to the list of issues in writing prior to the

constructive dialogue with the +ommittee.

The list of issues is normally decided by the +ommittee at the session before theconstructive dialogue with the State party. This allows the State party sufficient time to

respond. 5t also gives the +ommittee time to reflect on the additional information provided by

the State and decide whether it now has enough information or whether further follow7up is

necessary during the constructive dialogue.

The report of Tunisia provides an example of how the list of issues wor1s. The State party, in

its initial report, provided information on the rights of children with disabilities, although this

focused primarily on health and education. Tunisia did not provide information on the

protection of children from violence and exploitation. The +ommittee therefore re2uested this

information. 5n its response 4+!#"+"TUN""$")dd.$6, Tunisia noted:

$. )ssociations have called for increased efforts inlegislative, administrative, social, educational, cultural and otherspheres to prevent such practices.

$J. 5n this regard we should li1e to mention that the +hild#rotection +ode promulgated by )ct No. %' of % November $%%/guarantees children in general and children with disabilities inparticular freedom from various forms of exploitation, violence andabuse. Under the said +ode, sexual or economic exploitation andhabitual mistreatment of children are considered as difficult situationsthat re2uire swift intervention by both child protection officers and

family Budges in order to protect children.

+hild protection officers

$?. +hild protection officers are experts on social issues andintervene in all situations in which the physical or mental health andsafety of children could be at ris1 as a result of the environment inwhich they live or because they are vulnerable to various forms ofabuse and exploitation.

$%. +hild protection officers are one of the most importantsocial protection mechanisms for children at ris1< there is one childprotection officer in every province, although there can be more than

one, if needed, in order to ensure swift and effective intervention andto protect children from all possible harm.

'(. iven the importance of reporting mechanisms instrengthening society0s role in protecting children from various formsof violence, abuse and exploitation, the +hild #rotection +odeprovides that all situations in which children are living in difficultcircumstances must be reported to a child protection officer, focusingon threats to children0s physical, mental and economic health andsafety.

'$. To underscore the importance of this mechanism in theprotection of children at ris1, although persons bound by professional

secrecy do not have a duty to report, those who do so enBoy legal

10+



protection through impunity as they are acting in good faith byreporting, even if the report proves to be incorrect.

0amily /udges

''. =amily Budges in cases involving children with disabilities

at ris1 of exploitation, violence or abuse are re2uired to ta1e theappropriate decision in order to remove them from the difficultsituation in which they are living, ta1ing into account their bestinterests, which all courts, administrative authorities and public orprivate social welfare establishments must ta1e into considerationwhen ta1ing any action relating to children.

'C. @hen the source of the violence, exploitation or abuse isthe child0s family, a family Budge can decide to remove the child fromhis family and place him in a foster family, a speciali9ed social oreducational institution or a training or educational centre. e mayalso send a child who has suffered physical or mental harm as a

result of exploitation, abuse or violence for medical treatment, inorder to ensure the child0s reintegration in society.

'K. ) child who is the victim of a crime of violence is in adifficult situation that re2uires the intervention of a family Budge toaddress the underlying causes and the conditions in which the childwas subBected to such a crime.

5t is interesting to note that the State party provides little information on the protection of

children with disabilities specifically, but more on its child protection system more generally.

@hile this of course should apply to children with disabilities, too, there are a range of

reasons why laws and policies should specifically mention the protection of children withdisabilities. =or example, adults might have difficulty communicating with children who are

deaf, which in turn might ma1e them more susceptible to violence and abuse as they might

not be able to see1 protection.

)lthough the State party did not fully address the +ommittee0s 2uestion, it nonetheless

helped the +ommittee to identify that there is a child protection system in place, allowing for

more specific 2uestioning during the +ommittee0s session and hence ensuring the optimal

use of the +ommittee0s limited time.

The Co//ittees session

The next step is for the State party to come before the +ommittee to enter into a constructive

dialogue. -n that basis, the +ommittee will issue concluding observations and

recommendations for the State party.

The +ommittee currently has two sessions a year with many items on its agenda. The first

day will typically begin with opening speeches by its +hair and a representative of -+!.

This will be followed by discussions in plenary session with representatives of United

Nations organi9ations such as the @orld ealth -rgani9ation 4@-6 and the 5nternational

Habour -rgani9ation 45H-6 as well as -+! and then by representatives of civil society. 5n

the afternoon, the +ommittee continues to meet representatives to hear about specific

initiatives related to accessibility or the national implementation of the +onvention. The

+ommittee might also meet in private session to prepare the dialogue with a State party.

10*



The +ommittee will then meet with the State party. The +ommittee0s dialogue with Spain

lasted a full day, i.e., two sessions of three hours each. The session begins with the

presentation by the State representative and then an introduction by the +ommittee0s

country rapporteur. The +ommittee0s members then ta1e the floor to reflect on the State

party0s report and as1 additional 2uestions. The dialogue proceeds in stages, in accordance

with the reporting guidelines: general discussion< articles $>K< then discussions on rights<then rights of women and children with disabilities< and specific obligations 4national

framewor1s, data collection and international cooperation6. The State representatives are

given time to respond at intermittent stages throughout the day. The +ommittee will then

meet in private session to discuss its concluding observations and recommendations, which

also ta1es some time.

5n addition to the constructive dialogue, the +ommittee discusses communications under the

-ptional #rotocol, as well as other topical issues such as its report to the eneral )ssembly

4if relevant at that particular session6, treaty body strengthening, its methods of wor1, the

drafting of any general comments or the preparation of future days of general discussion.

5ts concluding observations follow the format of those of other treaty bodies. They begin with

the positive aspects of implementation by the State party. They then move onto Dfactors and

difficulties impeding implementationE and Dprincipal areas of concern and recommendationsE.

The latter are expressed in terms of observations followed by recommendations and follow

the format of the report, namely articles $>K, specific rights, and specific obligations.

To continue with the example of Tunisia, it is interesting to see that the preoccupations of the+ommittee at the list7of7issues stage appeared to have continued and the responses of theState party were insufficient to allay these concerns. 5n the concluding observations4+!#"+"TUN"+-"$6, the +ommittee noted:

Children with disabilities +art. ,

$. The +ommittee is particularly concerned at the low rate ofreporting 4signalement 6 of cases of habitual mistreatment of children,including children with disabilities, which may amount to situations ofdanger, in view of the results of the Multiple 5ndicator +luster Survey4M5+S '((6 which indicated that %K per cent of children agedbetween ' and $K years are disciplined in the home through violentmeans, whether verbal, physical, or through deprivation.

$J. The Co//ittee re*o//ends that the State 2art@

+a, (valuate the 2heno/enon of violen*e against bosand girls with disabilities and *o/2ile sste/ati*disaggregated data +see 2ara. 09 below, with a view to better*o/bating it<

+b, (nsure that institutions 2roviding *are for *hildrenwith disabilities are staffed with s2e*iall trained 2ersonnelsub=e*t to a22ro2riate standards regularl /onitored andevaluated and establish *o/2laint 2ro*edures a**essible to*hildren with disabilitiesE

+*, (stablish inde2endent follow4u2 /e*hanis/sE and

+d, Take ste2s to re2la*e institutional *are for bos andgirls with disabilities with *o//unit4based *are.

10



?ollow4u2

-nce the concluding observations have been adopted, they are posted almost immediately

on the -+! website 4www.ohchr.org6.

owever, the State party has a 1ey role in the follow7up. )ccording to article C 4K6 of the

+onvention:

States Parties shall make their reports $idely available to the public in their o$n

countries and facilitate access to the suggestions and general recommendations

relating to these reports9

So States should at the very least publici9e concluding observations. 5n addition, they should

see1 ways to follow up on recommendations as they will have to report on implementation

four years later.

Fearing these responsibilities in mind, the State might:

5ssue a press release about the dialogue and concluding observations<

old a press conference about the concluding observations<

8nsure that the focal point, coordination mechanism and national independent

framewor1 receive copies of the concluding observations<

old a round table with civil society and N!5s to discuss the concluding

observations<

raw up an implementation plan that includes deadlines for the implementation of therecommendations and specifies the entities responsible for implementation<

See1 the assistance of the United Nations country team for implementation, where

necessary.

The fun*tions of re2orting

5t is important to remember that reporting is not a one7off event or something that has to be

done merely to fulfil an obligation under the +onvention. 5t is a fundamental part of the whole

implementation process. So reporting to the +ommittee is both an end in itself, but also a

way to strengthen implementation. Some of the functions of reporting can be summari9ed asfollows:

!eviewing implementation to date

5dentifying strengths and challenges in implementation

See1ing assistance from international experts with implementation

5mproving data collection and analysis in relation to persons with disabilities

5mproving understanding of the +onvention through drafting the report

109



Strengthening coordination in the overnment 4the coordination re2uired for

reporting can also strengthen internal coordination mechanisms for ongoing

implementation6

Strengthening dialogue and partnerships with civil society and N!5s on

implementation

Sharing experience on implementation with other countries through publication of the

national report

-therA

#6T(RN#T)>( R(P%RTS

Civil so*ietBN'R) in2ut into the re2orting **le

!eporting to the +onvention is not a single or isolated event. 5nstead, it is a process and civil

society organi9ations and National uman !ights 5nstitutions 4N!5s6 can contribute to the

various stages of the process. The overall process is as follows 4indicating where civil

society organi9ations and N!5s can influence6:

• Drafting the State 2art re2ort > the State is responsible for preparing its initial and

periodic reports. 5n some countries, the State reaches out to civil society and National

uman !ights 5nstitutions when preparing the report. They might hold a consultation

with 1ey organi9ations or circulate the report for review. Some countries annex the

views of civil society to the report. 8ven where these practices are not present, civil

society organi9ations and N!5s can attempt to have their say in the preparation and

content of the report by contacting +onvention focal points in overnment or, whereit exists, the coordination mechanism.

• Pre2aring the list of issues > the +onvention will develop a list of issues on the

basis of the State party report to send to the State party in order for the State party to

prepare for the constructive dialogue. The State party should also provide answers to

the list of issues prior to the session > which helps to focus the discussion. +ivil

society organi9ations can provide information at the time of submission of the State

party report and, in this way, influence the list of issues that are provided to the State

for clarification in preparation of the interactive dialogue. 5n addition, civil society

organi9ations can provide answers to the list of issues which will ensure the

+ommittee has the widest possible information before it.

• The Co//ittee session > during the +ommittee0s session, civil society

organi9ations and N!5s can play an active role. The +ommittee will generally meet

with civil society organi9ations and N!5s related to the reporting country to hear

issues of interest and concern. 5ndividuals can also use the opportunity of being in

eneva to meet with +ommittee members to discuss various implementation issues

they face nationally. +ivil society organi9ations and N!5s can also be present

during the dialogue with the State party. =ollowing the dialogue in this way can clarify

how the +ommittee identified its various concluding observations which in turn can

help with follow7up later at the country7level.

110



• ?ollow4u2 to *on*luding observations > civil society organi9ations and N!5s

have crucial roles in ensuring follow7up. @hile the ultimate responsibility for

implementing concluding observations rests with the overnment, civil society

organi9ations and N!5s can also play their part. This is considered in greater detail

below.

-'#T #R( #6T(RN#T)>( R(P%RTS

)lternative reports are one way3and a significant one3in which civil society and N!5s can

have their say in the reporting process. There is no strict definition of an alternative report

and there is no strict format to follow as such. 5n general, an alternative report provides the

+ommittee with complementary information to that provided by the State party with a view to

ensuring the +ommittee has the fullest information before it.

)n alternative report will not necessarily contradict the State report, but simply add to it or

provide an alternative perspective on issues raised in the State report. owever, if a State

report does not provide the most accurate or up7to7date information, the alternative reportcan alert the +ommittee to such information.

Fy providing complementary information, the ultimate aim of alternative reports is to ensure

the most relevant concluding observations and recommendations to assist with future

implementation.

STR&CT&R( %? T'( R(P%RT

There is no re2uirement to structure alternative reports in a particular way< however, drafters

should consider a methodological approach that assists the +ommittee to understand how

the report was compiled and that identifies in as clear a manner as possible the issues civilsociety and N!5s wish to raise with the +ommittee as well as possible solutions.

The following is one possible structure, drawn in large part from the +ommittee0s reporting

guidelines:

$. 8xecutive summary setting out the principal concerns, advances and

recommendations

'. Table of contents

C. Methodology for preparing the report, including the process of data collection and

which organi9ations have been involved in preparing and finali9ing the report

K. iscussion of the general bac1ground3political, economic, social, cultural3that

might help the +ommittee better understand the context of the report

/. Qey issues:

4a6 )rticles $7K: purpose, definitions, general principles and general obligations

4b6 )rticles />C(: in relation to specific rights

4c6 )rticles and J: boys, girls and women with disabilities

111



4d6 )rticles C$>CC: specific obligations in relation to data and statistics,

international cooperation and national implementation and monitoring

framewor1s

. !ecommendations, to be as precise and directed as possible. There is no need to

include many.

5(T'%D%6%GY@ ?%R5)NG # C%#6)T)%N ?%R #N #6T(RN#T)>( R(P%RT

)lthough not a re2uirement, it can be useful to form a coalition of national sta1eholders to

prepare the alternative report. This helps the +ommittee by providing it with one document

covering the various concerns of civil society across the country. 5n addition:

=orming a coalition to draft the report also helps to form national civil society

coalitions to wor1 on issues beyond the alternative report. =or example, the coalition

might not only prepare the alternative report but wor1 together on implementing the

+ommittee0s recommendations.

Similarly, it allows sta1eholders to understand issues of concern in areas beyond

their own focus. =or example, one organi9ation focusing on service delivery for

persons with physical disabilities might learn about the concerns of another that is

wor1ing to protect the rights of persons with psychosocial disabilities in prisons. This

provides an opportunity to learn about the wor1 of other disability groups and identify

common areas of activities such as advocacy.

=urthermore, forming coalitions allows groups to capitali9e on 1nowledge and

expertise. =or example, a #- might have extensive experience on protecting

disability rights nationally and could pair up with the more general human rightsorgani9ation with extensive experience in treaty body reporting. Foth organi9ations

bring something to the table and can ma1e for an effective process and useful

alternative report.

Some issues to consider in forming coalitions are:

)re all disability constituencies representedA

5s the diversity of society reflected as much as possible, e.g., men and women, a

child perspective, older persons, racial and ethnic minorities, indigenous persons and

so on.

5s there sufficient 1nowledge about the treaty body reporting systemA

5s there sufficient capacity to consult with as wide a group as possibleA

C%NT(NT@ SP(C)?)C R)G'TS

5t is advisable for alternative reports to follow the +ommittee0s reporting guidelines. This

means that the report aligns with the +ommittee0s practice and also with the State report,

assuming that the State has followed the reporting guidelines when preparing its report. )s

noted above, the +ommittee groups the rights and obligations in the +onvention as follows:

112



• efinitions, general principles and general obligations<

• Specific rights<

• The rights of women, boys and girls with disabilities<

• Specific obligations, namely data and statistics, international cooperation and

national implementation and monitoring framewor1s.

The reporting guidelines also provide a list of 2uestions that should be addressed in relation

to the various provisions under these headings.

=or example, the +ommittee0s guidelines for article / on non7discrimination and e2uality are:

This article recogni1es that all persons are e-ual before the la$ $ith entitlement to

e-ual protection and benefit of the la$ on e-ual grounds $ithout any discrimination9

States parties should report on:

• "hether persons $ith disabilities are able to use the la$ to protect or pursue

their interests on an e-ual basis $ith others

• Effective measures taken to guarantee persons $ith disabilities e-ual and

effective legal protection against all types of discrimination. including the

provision of reasonable accommodation

• Policies and programmes. including affirmative action measures. to achieve

the de facto e-uality of persons $ith disabilities. taking into account their

diversity9

Spain provided the following information in response to these 2uestions in its initial report

4+!#"+"8S#"$, paras. $/>$, emphasis added6:

9 'n the sphere of disability. full compliance with thisarticle is ensured by the DIJ +onstitution and '2*,A) ?Act *o9!FKKL on e-uality of opportunity. non4discrimination and universalaccessibility for persons $ith disabilities mentioned earlier9 +hapter'' of the latter is devoted to e-uality of opportunityC specifically. itdefines infringements of the right to e-uality of opportunity 7as

defined in art9 8 and specifies t$o types of measure $hich the publicauthorities must take to guarantee that right. namely anti4discrimination and affirmative action measures9 'n addition. article Kof '2*,A) re-uires the Government to regulate the basicconditions to govern accessibility and non4discrimination in a numberof spheres and areas9 However, in view of the entry into force ofthe Convention, steps are being taken to revise existinglegislationC there is already a proposal to amend articles K and Jof the General Health Act *o9 M!DJN to include a mention ofdisability as one of the grounds on $hich no person may bediscriminated against9

N9 The entry into force of !"#D$% and its enablingregulations, together with the mechanisms for supervision and

11(



the imposition of penalties, is a basis for the achievement andguaranteeing of e&uality and non'discrimination9 'n addition. itoffers the system effective safeguards against discrimination of anykind9 The establishment of specific regulations and action plans and programmes in the different areas is the responsibility of theministerial departments concerned. $hich $ill in any case have toadapt to the ne$ standards9

5n summary:

• Spanish legislation ensures full compliance with article /<

• Some legislation nevertheless re2uires revision in the light of the +onvention, such

as the eneral ealth )ct<

• Hegislation together with the supervisory mechanisms and sanctions imposed for

breaches of the law provide an effective regime to guarantee e2uality and non7

discrimination.

The alternative report provides the +ommittee with a longer response to its 2uestions as well

as complementary information. 5t notes that:

• #rotection against discrimination in Spanish legislation is not in line with the

+onvention as it is restricted to persons with a certificate indicating a degree of

disability above CC per cent 4although the overnment has expressed its intention to

repeal this re2uirement6<

• )dministrative and legal protection against discrimination is not effective. There are

supervisory and sanctions mechanisms but these face two obstacles:

/ There is no data to demonstrate that the infraction system is being applied

and so its efficacy is un1nown. -n the $( complaints filed there has been no

action.

/ The procedures are slow 4ta1ing $$ to ' months6, which can lead to

irreparable damage.

R(C%55(ND#T)%NS

5t is important for alternative reports to propose action that the +ommittee can ta1e, such as2uestions that the +ommittee could put to the State representatives. )lternatively, it could

propose recommendations to be included in the concluding observations. The important

thing to remember is that recommendations should be as clear and targeted as possible so

that they can be implemented and reflected in the next periodic report. ague or general

recommendations might be confusing for the State party to implement or lead to non7

implementation or ineffective implementation.

Some guidelines for recommendations are:

They should be clear

8ach one should contain only one action

11%



They should specify who should implement them

5f possible, they should be measureable

@here relevant, they should specify a time frame for implementation

They should be lin1ed to a particular implementation challenge

They should not be vague or general

Still in connection with article /, the alternative report on Spain0s implementation ma1es two

sets of recommendations.

5n relation to the claim that protection against discrimination fails to protect certain persons

with disabilities, it proposes a focus not on percentages of disability but on vulnerability:

't is important. not only to e3tend protection against discrimination in line $ith the

+onvention. but also to consider the situation of those persons $ho. despite having a permanent disability and obvious difficulty in accessing and e3ercising their rights

7this can be clearly. although not e3clusively. seen $ith regard to the right to $ork. or

education8 do not meet the re-uirements of the administrative concept of disability9 'n

this regard. +ER(' ?Spanish +ommittee of Representatives of Persons $ith

,isabilities have already proposed that certain particularly vulnerable groups $ho

are in a situation of legal neglect 7persons $ith limited intelligence. for e3ample8

should receive administrative recognition. and it is necessary that the Spanish State

identify situations of great vulnerability and adopt the measures needed to $iden the

protection of the rights of persons in a situation of disability in accordance $ith the

?+onvention9

5n relation to the claim that the supervisory and sanctions mechanisms were not completely

effective, the alternative report recommends:

• 'nclude indicators monitoring the efficacy of the protection systems follo$ing

up matters both in the administrative disciplinary area and follo$4up

indicators in the legal area

• "ith regard to the legal protection on fundamental rights. principally in the

contentious4administrative and civil areas. it is necessary to hasten

processes or establish immediate protection measures 7similar to in/unction proceedings8

• Ensure that the system of infractions and sanctions of '2*,A) is developed

on a regional level and started effectively

• Promote the arbitration system covered by '2*,A)

• E3tend the benefit of free (ustice to all situations $here protection has been

re-uested of a fundamental right $hich has been violated on the grounds of

disability. $ith no financial restrictions to its application9

11)



The recommendations are helpful, although not all of them meet the suggestions listed

above. +onsider the following recommendation:

'nclude indicators monitoring the efficacy of the protection systems follo$ing up

matters both in the administrative disciplinary area and follo$4up indicators in the

legal area

5n general terms, the recommendation is helpful:

5t is clear

5t is measureable

5t lin1s with and responds to an implementation challenge

5t is not vague or general.

5t could be improved by:

• Specifying which governmental authority should develop the indicators

• Setting a time frame for this to occur.

D#T# C%66(CT)%N #ND #N#6YS)S

There are several data sources that could be helpful for the alternative report:

Haws and policies. The alternative report, as with the State report, should provide the

+ommittee with information on the legal and policy context as it relates to the+onvention0s implementation. This re2uires a mapping of laws and a gap analysis.

See the forthcoming -+! handboo1 on legislation, which should assist in

identifying legal compliance with the +onvention.

!eview of secondary materials. +ivil society organi9ations might not have the time or

the resources to collect new data. -ne way to overcome this situation is to rely on

trustworthy secondary sources of information. =or instance:

• !eports, such as census data or ad hoc reports, from the national statistical

institute

• ata from ministries of education, health, social affairs, transport

• !eports from the United Nations and the @orld Fan1 might either include

information on persons with disabilities or even focus specifically on

disabilities

• National human rights institutions might have information such as research

reports

• )cademic institutions might have underta1en research or surveys on the

rights of persons with disabilities.

11+



5nformation on complaints 4such as court cases, complaints to the ombudsman and

so on6 can show whether individuals are using complaints mechanisms and whether

such mechanisms are effective. )n analysis of complaints can also identify

challenging and recurring issues in implementation.

5t might be possible for civil society organi9ations to underta1e their own research forthe alternative report. Techni2ues such as household surveys can provide

2uantitative information, while interviews with 1ey experts and interviews with groups

reflecting the diversity of disability can provide important 2ualitative information that

could add depth to the report, for example, by reflecting an individual0s actual

experience of human rights in the national context.

S&$5)TT)NG T'( R(P%RT T% T'( C%55)TT((

The drafters should submit their alternative report to the +ommittee in time for it to be

considered in full. This could be done:

)t the time of submission of the State report. owever, given the delays in the

+ommittee0s review of State reports, this might re2uire updating the report prior to

the constructive dialogue.

#rior to the +ommittee0s session preceding its review of the State party report. =or

example, if the State party will be reviewed at the tenth session, the +ommittee0s

secretariat should receive the alternative report before the ninth session, so the

report can influence the list of issues.

#rior to the session itself. 5n this way, the alternative report can still influence the

constructive dialogue with the State and will be fully up to date.

The report should be sent to the -ffice of the United Nations igh +ommissioner for uman

!ights, secretariat of the +ommittee on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities, at

crpdWohchr.org.

+ivil society organi9ations might also consider attending the +ommittee0s sessions either:

)t the session prior to the constructive dialogue with the State. The 5nternational

isability )lliance holds a lunchtime session for the +ommittee0s members, which is

open to the public, to discuss issues relating to the State party whose report will be

reviewed at the next session.

or

)t the session of the constructive dialogue. The +ommittee will set aside time to

meet civil society organi9ations and N!5s prior to the constructive dialogue to have

their views. These sessions are normally closed.

?%66%-4&P T% T'( C%55)TT((S S(SS)%N

There are many ways in which civil society organi9ations, either separately or in partnership

with the authorities, can follow up on the +ommittee0s concluding observations andrecommendations. =or example, they may:

11*

mailto:[email protected]




5ssue a press release to raise awareness of the concluding observations and

recommendations

+ontinue the coalition that drafted the alternative report, meet and strategi9e on ways

to move forward on the concluding observations

Meet staff in the relevant ministries to ensure that a wor1plan for the implementation

of the concluding observations is developed

Meet parliamentarians to raise awareness of specific recommendations that re2uire

law and policy reform

Meet the United Nations country team to encourage United Nations agencies to

advocate implementation of the concluding observations and to align programming

with the +ommittee0s recommendations

old a national conference to raise awareness of the concluding observations

old wor1shops on specific issues

5dentify recommendations that civil society could assist in implementing

=ollow implementation of recommendations over time to maintain focus

!eport on implementation to the +ommittee as well as to other international

processes such as the universal periodic review.

11



5%D&6( H

T'( %PT)%N#6 PR%T%C%6

)ntrodu*tion

This module sets out the basic parameters of the two procedures under the -ptional#rotocol to the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities: communications andin2uiries. 5t explains the steps involved in each procedure and identifies some of the benefitsof the -ptional #rotocol as a means of strengthening the rights of persons with disabilities.

The Co//ittee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

)rticle CK of the +onvention establishes a +ommittee on the !ights of #ersons withisabilities, an international committee of independent experts with several functions 4the

+ommittee6. 5ts members are elected during the +onference of States #arties, which ta1esplace in New Gor1. Unli1e the +onferences of States #arties of other human rights treaties,that of the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities also holds substantivediscussions on issues related to the +onvention0s implementation.

State parties elect the experts by secret ballot on the basis of candidatures put forward bythe State parties themselves. The State parties elect the expert members on the basis oftheir competence and experience in the field of human rights and disability, and also inconsideration of e2uitable geographic representation, representation of different forms ofcivili9ation and legal systems, gender balance, and participation of experts with disabilities.The experts serve in their personal capacity: they do not represent the State that put forwardtheir candidature or that elected them. They are independent.

The Co//ittees duties under the Convention

Fy becoming parties to the +onvention, States commit to providing the +ommittee with2eriodi* re2orts on the steps they have ta1en to implement it 4art. C/6. State parties shallsubmit their initial reports within two years of the +onvention0s entry into force for them andsubse2uent reports at least every four years thereafter and further whenever the +ommitteere2uests them to do so.

The +ommittee engages in a *onstru*tive dialogue with State parties and issuesconcluding observations and recommendations for follow7up action to improve andstrengthen the +onvention0s implementation. -ther interested parties, such as nationalhuman rights institutions and civil society organi9ations, can also be part of this dialogue.#-s for example can submit alternative reports to the +ommittee. )lternative reports canbe very valuable, as they provide a civil society perspective on implementation and thus givethe +ommittee a fuller view of the status of the +onvention0s implementation.

The +ommittee may also hold das of general dis*ussion, open to the public, duringwhich it discusses issues of general interest arising from the +onvention. The +ommitteehas already held days of discussion on legal capacity and accessibility.

The +ommittee issues general *o//ents on specific provisions in the +onvention or onspecific issues. These are authoritative statements that clarify issues arising from the

implementation of the +onvention. eneral comments have been particularly important inthe context of other treaty bodies, as they provide a summary guide for the implementation

119



of specific treaty provisions. =or example, the general comments of the +ommittee on8conomic, Social and +ultural !ights have had a significant impact at the national level,fleshing out the +ovenant0s provisions, which are 2uite general. National courts in several Burisdictions on different continents have referred to these general comments as a means ofapplying the +ovenant to individual cases.

The Co//ittees duties under the %2tional Proto*ol

The -ptional #rotocol is a separate international legal instrument attached to the +onventionon the !ights of #ersons with isabilities 4+onvention6. 5t was adopted together with the+onvention on $C ecember '((. The -ptional #rotocol is subBect to separate ratificationor accession. 5n order to become a party to the -ptional #rotocol, a State already needs tobe a State party to the +onvention. !eservations to the -ptional #rotocol are permitted solong as they are not incompatible with the obBect and purpose of the +onvention and the#rotocol.

The #rotocol is optional in the sense that States are not obliged to ratify it. owever, the

right to remedy or redress is fundamental for the full enBoyment of all rights, as recogni9ed,for instance, in the 5nternational +ovenant on +ivil and #olitical !ights and in the +onventionon the !ights of #ersons with isabilities. 5t applies to persons with disabilities as it does toanyone else. Treaty bodies always recommend the ratification of optional protocols toensure the comprehensive protection of rights.

Fy becoming parties to the -ptional #rotocol, States recogni9e the competence of the+ommittee to receive complaints from individuals 41nown as communications6 allegingviolations of any of the provisions of the +onvention. The -ptional #rotocol 4art. 6 alsoprovides the +ommittee with the opportunity to underta1e in2uiries if it receives reliableinformation indicating grave or systematic violations of the +onvention in a particular Stateparty. States can opt out of the in2uiry procedure by ma1ing a declaration to this effect at the

time of signing or ratifying the -ptional #rotocol 4art. ?6.

$asi* infor/ation on the *o//uni*ations 2ro*edure

The procedure for individual communications set out in the -ptional #rotocol is similar tothat under other international human rights treaties. 5t allows individuals and groups ofindividuals claiming be have suffered violations of any of the provisions of the +onvention topresent complaints before the +ommittee. 5t is worth pointing out from the outset some basicinformation on what the -ptional #rotocol is and what it is not so as to avoid confusion.

The communications procedure is what is 1nown as a 2uasi7Budicial procedure. 5n manyways the procedure parallels Budicial consideration of complaints but there are also some

important differences:

• The procedure is in writing and there is no oral hearing as in court cases. The parties

are not represented before the +ommittee by lawyers, nor is it necessary for theparties to come to the +ommittee. 8verything is done in writing, throughcorrespondence.

• The +ommittee0s experts are independent experts but they are not Budges.

• The +ommittee offers views and recommendations on communications but unli1e a

court decision these are not legally enforceable. Their implementation will depend onthe political will of the State party and the pressure brought to bear through variousactors at the national level. The +ommittee cannot compel implementation.

120



5t is also interesting to note that there have already been many communications sent to the+ommittee. owever, most of these have not been registered as they do not meet even thebasic re2uirements for admissibility 4for example, many communications have been broughtagainst the United States, which is not a party to either the +onvention or its -ptional#rotocol6.

The *o//uni*ation 2ro*edure@ fro/ *o/2laint to resolution

The overall procedure is as follows:

• 5ndividuals can complain to the +ommittee if they believe that they have been treated

contrary to any of the articles of the +onvention. The complaint is sent to the petitionsteam of -+!, +7$'$$ eneva $(, tb7petitionsWohchr.org or by fax 4for urgentmatters6 XK$ '' %$J %( ''.

• The communication is registered. 5n order to be registered, the communication must

meet the basic re2uirements for admissibility, such as identification of the State as aState party to the -ptional #rotocol. -therwise, the communication is not registered

or the petitions team may re2uest additional information.• )ny communication received is then brought to the attention of the State party

concerned.

• The State party may submit written explanations within six months, clarifying the

matter and outlining possible remedies that may have been ta1en.

• The +ommittee should transmit the information provided by the parties to the other

parties and shall afford each party the opportunity to comment on submissions withinfixed time limits.

• 5f necessary, the +ommittee may order interim measures to prevent any irreparable

damage occurring to the individual or group. owever, this does not imply that the+ommittee believes the communication is either admissible or founded. The

+ommittee could order interim measures but then decide that the communicationinadmissible and ta1e no further action.

• The +ommittee will consider whether the communication is admissible.

• 5f the communication is admissible, the +ommittee will consider the merits of the

communication. 5n other words, it will assess whether there has been a violation ofthe +onvention or not. 5f the communication is inadmissible, the parties are informedand that is the end of the matter.

• -ther committees decide on admissibility and on the merits together as this can save

time. The +ommittee on the !ights on #ersons with isabilities has not yetdeveloped a practice in this regard.

• )fter examining the communication, the +ommittee will forward its views and

recommendations, if any, to the State party and the petitioner.• The views on admissibility and the merits are made public.

• 5f the +ommittee ma1es a finding of a violation, it will follow up on action ta1en by the

State, for example, through future periodic reports.

The +ommittee has not yet decided any case on the merits. owever, communicationsrelated to the rights of persons with disabilities have been considered by regional humanrights mechanisms as well as by other United Nations human rights treaty bodies, such asthe uman !ights +ommittee. ere are two examples: one from the +ouncil of 8urope0s+ommittee of Social !ights and another from the uman !ights +ommittee:

(uro2ean Co//ittee of So*ial Rights

$utism )urope v. *rance Co/2laint No. 10B!""!

121





$. 0acts: )ccording to State legislation, people with autism were able to attendmainstream schools, either individually 4individual mainstreaming6 in ordinary classeswith the assistance of special auxiliary staff, or as part of a group 4collectivemainstreaming6 through school integration classes 4primary level6 or educationalintegration units 4secondary level6. #eople who, due to the severity of their autism, wereunable to integrate into the ordinary school system, were able to receive specialeducation in a speciali9ed institution. 5ndividual mainstreaming was financed through thegeneral education budget, while collective mainstreaming was financed through thesic1ness7insurance benefit. )utism78urope argued that the State did not, in practice,ma1e sufficient provision for the education of children and adults with autism due toidentifiable shortfalls3both 2uantitative and 2ualitative3in the provision of bothmainstream education as well as so7called special education.

'. +laim: )utism78urope claimed that the failure to ta1e the necessary steps to ensurethe right to education of children and adults with autism resulted in violations of the rightof persons with disabilities to independence, social integration and participation in thelife of the community, the right of children and young persons to social, legal andeconomic protection and the prohibition on discrimination.

C. ,ecision: The +ommittee recalled that the implementation of the 8uropean Social+harter re2uired State parties to ta1e not merely legal action but also practical action togive full effect to the rights recogni9ed in the +harter. @hen the achievement of one ofthe rights in 2uestion was exceptionally complex and particularly expensive to resolve, aState party had to ta1e measures that allowed it to achieve the obBectives of the +harterwithin a reasonable time, with measurable progress and to an extent consistent with themaximum use of available resources. 5n doing so, States should be mindful of theimpact that choices of measures might have on groups with heightened vulnerabilitiesas well as for others affected, especially the families of vulnerable people. 5n the light ofthe facts of the case, the +ommittee noted that the State continued to use a morerestrictive definition of autism than that adopted by the @orld ealth -rgani9ation andthat there were still insufficient official statistics that would rationally measure progress

through time. =urther, the proportion of children with autism being educated in eithergeneral or specialist schools was much lower than that of other children3whetherdisabled or not3and there was a chronic shortage of care and support facilities forautistic adults. =or these reasons, the State had failed to achieve sufficient progress inadvancing the provision of education for people with autism. The +ommittee also notedthat establishments speciali9ing in the education and care of disabled children,particularly those with autism, were not in general financed from the same budget asnormal schools< however, this did not amount to discrimination as it was for the Statesthemselves to decide the modalities of funding.

K. 0inding : The +ommittee stated that the State did not conform with the +harter.

'u/an Rights Co//ittee

+- v. -ermany *o//uni*ation No. 1AH!B!""

$. 0acts: Three members of the author0s family filed lawsuits against the author in familylaw and civil matters. The author made fre2uent and voluminous submissions in courtproceeding and appealed every single decision that she considered disadvantageous.The members of her family sought an order compelling her to desist from ma1ing certainstatements and see1ing pecuniary damages. The court, without hearing or seeing theauthor in person, ordered a medical examination of the author to assess whether shewas capable of ta1ing part in the legal proceedings. The court reasoned that thebehaviour of the author in the proceedings, including her many very voluminoussubmissions to the court, raised doubts as to her capacity to ta1e part in proceedings.The author challenged the court0s decision re2uiring a medical examination, claiming thatthere were no obBective reasons for ordering the examination and challenging theabsence of an oral hearing prior to issuing the order. aving lost that challenge, she too1

122



her challenge to two higher courts, including the =ederal +onstitutional +ourt, both ofwhich reBected it.

'. +laim: The author claimed to be victim of violations of articles J 4freedom from torture orcruel, inhuman or degrading treatment6, $J 4right to privacy6 and $K 4$6 4right to a fairtrial6 of the 5nternational +ovenant on +ivil and #olitical !ights. 5n relation to article J,she argued that re2uiring the medical treatment was DdegradingE as it would causefeelings of fear or anguish and inferiority capable of debasing the victim. 5n relation toarticle $J, she argued that involuntary medical examination would interfere with herprivacy and integrity, arguing that only in exceptional circumstances and for compellingreasons may a person be subBected to medical or psychiatric examinations withoutexplicit consent. =inally, in relation to article $K 4$6, she argued that the refusal of thecourt to hear or see here in person prior to ordering her medical examination violated herright to a fair trial as an oral hearing is an essential element of the due processguarantees.

C. The State party<s submissions on admissibility and on the merits: The State challengedthe admissibility of the communication, arguing that it constituted an abuse of the right ofsubmission on various grounds, including the fact that she did not disclose that the order

of the court to determine her capacity concerned only proceedings against members ofher family and not her legal capacity in other respects. 5n relation to the merits of thecase, the State considered the claim to be Dmanifestly ill7foundedE. The State argued thatthe author was not compelled to undergo the examination as she could refuse to see theexpert, in which case the opinion would be prepared on the basis of the files. Moreover,the State said that the author would have had the occasion to be heard by the courtwhen the court came around to evaluating the expert opinion< however, that stage hadnot been reached in the proceedings.

K. ,ecision: The +ommittee considered admissibility and the merits together. -nadmissibility, the +ommittee found that the author had failed to substantiate that theinvitation to undergo an expert examination by itself failed to raise issues related toarticle J so this part of the submission was inadmissible. Similarly, the +ommittee found

that the author had not sufficiently substantiated the claim in relation to article $K 4$6. 5nrelation to article $J, the +ommittee found that the author had substantiated these claimsfor purposes of admissibility and the State had not challenged this.

/. 0inding : The +ommittee found that to order a person to undergo medical treatment orexamination without the consent or against the will of that person constitutes interferencewith privacy, and may amount to an unlawful attac1 on his or her honour and reputation.=or such an interference to be permissible, it must meet certain conditions, i.e., it mustbe provided for by law, be in accordance with the provisions, aims and obBectives of the+ovenant and be reasonable under the circumstances. The +ommittee found the court0sactions not to be reasonable, as the author would either have to undergo theexamination or, alternatively, the expert would prepare the opinion on the basis of the filewithout the author being heard e. 5t found a violation of article $J in conBunction with

article $K 4$6. The +ommittee noted the State was under an obligation to provide theauthor with an effective remedy and to prevent similar violations in the future. The+ommittee re2uested information about measures ta1en to follow up on its views within$?( days. The +ommittee also re2uested the State to publish the +ommittee0s views.

5t is interesting to review these two cases, which precede the +onvention, in the light of the+onvention0s norms and standards. 5n particular, the second case raises particularlycomplicated issues. 5mportantly, the court0s actions, calling into 2uestion the legal capacity ofthe author, would be 2uestionable under the +onvention for failing to respect legal capacityon an e2ual basis with others 4using mental disability as a possible distinction for denyingher legal capacity in relation to the case6. ow would this case have been decided by the+ommittee on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities under the -ptional #rotocol to the+onventionA

12(



Che*klist for sub/itting a *o//uni*ation

The +ommittee has provided helpful guidance on the issues that must be reflected in acommunication for it to be registered 4+!#"+"/"C"!ev.$6. These are produced in the boxbelow:

12%



Guidelines for sub/ission of *o//uni*ations to the Co//ittee on the

Rights of Persons with Disabilities under the %2tional Proto*ol to the

Convention

1. )nfor/ation *on*erning the author+s, of the *o//uni*ation

• =amily name

• =irst name4s6

• ate and place of birth

• Nationality"citi9enship

• Sex

• -ther relevant personal identification data 4if any of the above details are not

available6

• #resent address

• #ostal address for confidential correspondence 4if other than present address6

• Telephone or mobile number 4if any6

• 87mail address 4if any6

• =ax number 4if any6

• 5f you are submitting the communication on behalf of the alleged victim4s6, please

provide evidence showing the consent of the victim4s6, or reasons that Bustifysubmitting the communication without such consent

!. )nfor/ation *on*erning the alleged vi*ti/+s,

• =amily name

• =irst name4s6

• ate and place of birth

• Nationality"citi9enship

• Sex

• 5f you consider it appropriate, please indicate whether the alleged victim4s6 has a

disability and, if so, the nature of that disability• -ther relevant personal identification data 4if any of the above details are not

available6

• #resent address

• #ostal address for confidential correspondence 4if other than present address6

• Telephone or mobile number 4if any6

• 87mail address 4if any6

• =ax number 4if any6

• 5f the communication concerns a group of individuals claiming to be victims, pleaseprovide basic information about each individual, in line with the above list

0. )nfor/ation on the State 2art *on*erned

12)



)ll ten points are important. 5t is relevant to draw attention to some specific issues:

"ho can apply#

)ny individual under the Burisdiction of a State party that has accepted the competence ofthe +ommittee can submit a communication to the +ommittee0s secretariat. 5n addition,groups of individuals can also submit communications. 5n other words, two or moreindividuals can Boin together and send a communication to the +ommittee claiming a breachof their rights.

=urthermore, a communication can be brought on behalf of an individual or group. Thatmeans, for example, a family member, an N- or a public interest law centre or other entitycould bring a communication on behalf of someone. The +ommittee0s rules of proceduresimply specify that communications may be submitted on behalf of an individual or a groupof individuals 4rule %6. )s is clear from the information, an author submitting acommunication on behalf of alleged victim4s6 must provide evidence of the consent of the

victim4s6 4such as a power of attorney6, or reasons that Bustify submitting the communicationwithout such consent.

Against $hom#

The defendant State must have accepted the competence of the +ommittee by ratifying the-ptional #rotocol.

"hat is the communication about#

The communication must include an allegation of a violation of any provision in the+onvention. 5t is important to note that the communication can concern any DprovisionE. The

authors should ma1e sure that they clarify which provisions have allegedly been breachedand how that alleged breach has affected them.

12+



Ho$ A

The communications procedure is a confidential written procedure< there are no oralhearings. owever, the -ptional #rotocol does not rule out oral hearings and the +ommitteecould receive oral submissions, although this is unli1ely.

Re*eivabilit and ad/issibilit

The -ptional #rotocol sets out strict admissibility criteria 4arts. $>'6, which must be metbefore the +ommittee can decide on the merits. )rticle $ sets out the basic re2uirementsthat a communication must meet for the +ommittee to receive and consider it. 5f thesere2uirements are clearly not met, the +ommittee0s secretariat cannot register thecommunication and it does not even get to the admissibility stage. The +ommittee mighthave to consider some of these criteria itself at the stage of admissibility, if they were notclear at the registration stage. These criteria are set out here in 2uestion form:

• 5s the communication from an individual or a group of individualsA 5n other words,

does the author have standing to bring the communication under the -ptional

#rotocolA 5f not, the +ommittee will reBect it on formal grounds. =or instance, if anauthor brings a complaint without demonstrating that it is on behalf of an individual ora group of individuals3for example, without furnishing a power of attorney3then theauthor will not have standing.

• oes the individual or group claim to be a victim of a violation of the +onventionA

This is the vi*ti/ re2uirement. The communication must identify an individual or agroup of individuals whose rights have suffered. 5t is not possible to bring a generalclaim against a State, e.g., on behalf of the broader community for failure to fulfil itsobligations but without demonstrating that someone has been victim of this failure.

• 5s the claimant subBect to the State0s BurisdictionA There must be a connection

between the victim and the State party against which the allegation is made.

• as the State ratified the -ptional #rotocolA 5f the State has not accepted the

+ommittee0s Burisdiction to receive and consider communications, the +ommitteecannot consider any communication against that State.

)rticle ' sets out the re2uirements for admissibility. These apply to those communicationsthat are registered and that the +ommittee considers. )s noted above, the +ommittee coulddecide that the communication does not meet the admissibility re2uirements after all and sothere is no need to consider its merits.

• 5s the alleged victim anonymousA 5f so, the +ommittee cannot admit the

communication. 5t should be noted that for all communications the identity of theauthor can nevertheless remain confidential, if the author so re2uests.

• as the communication come before another international procedure of investigation

or settlementA This criterion aims at ensuring that a given international or regionalbody does not examine a communication if the same matter is being 4simultaneousprocedures6 or has already been 4successive procedures6 examined by anotherinternational procedure.

• )re domestic remedies exhaustedA The exhaustion of domestic remedies is an

important rule of law, which applies to other dispute mechanisms, too. 5ts purpose isto give national authorities, generally courts, an opportunity to deal with allegations ofhuman rights violations first. 5ndeed, an important aim of communications procedures

12*



is to strengthen national human rights protection mechanisms, which are more easilyaccessed and li1ely to provide 2uic1er and legally enforceable remedies to victims.

aving exhausted domestic remedies is a 1ey admissibility criterion under the-ptional #rotocol. =or this reason, it is important for authors to include as muchinformation as possible in their submissions on how they have exhausted domestic

remedies. )s noted above, the submission can indicate the type of action ta1en, theauthority to which it was addressed, when the action was ta1en, the final decisionand so on. The +ommittee has also as1ed why domestic remedies were notexhausted. 5ndeed, according to article ' 4d6, this re2uirement can be waived in somecases: where the application of the remedy is unreasonably prolonged or unli1ely tobring effective relief. This mirrors developments in other areas of international law.=or example, the 8uropean +ourt of uman !ights re2uires domestic remedies tohave been exhausted where remedies are DavailableE and DeffectiveE. The inter7 )merican system has identified three exceptions to the rule: 4$6 the domesticlegislation of the State does not afford due process of law for this rule< 4'6 the partyalleging violation of rights has been denied access to remedies under domestic lawor has been prevented from exhausting them< 4C6 there has been unwarranted delayin rendering a final Budgement under the aforementioned remedies.

• 5s the communication manifestly unfounded or unsubstantiatedA This allows the

+ommittee to exclude communications which are contrary to the obBects andpurposes of the +onvention.

• id the alleged conduct occur after the entry into force of the -ptional #rotocol for

the StateA The State cannot be held to account by the +ommittee for an action thatoccurred prior to its acceptance of the communications procedure.

=ew communications are ever registered. )s of $% November '($', the +ommittee has

registered a total of nine individual communications in relation to seven State parties to the -ptional

#rotocol. -ut of these nine, one has already been examined by the +ommittee on the merits4communication No. C"'($$, H9(9 v. S$eden6 and one has been found inadmissible 4communicationNo. "'($$, (cAlpine v. )nited ingdom6.$$

)nteri/ /easures

5n urgent situations, the +ommittee may, after receipt of the communication and beforeadopting its views, re2uest a State party to ta1e certain interim measures to avoidirreparable damage to the victim of the alleged violation. 5nterim measures are designed torespond to exceptional or life7threatening situations. =or example, in the vast maBority ofcases before the uman !ights +ommittee, interim measures have been used in casesconcerning the death penalty or deportation that ris1ed violating provisions relating to the

right to live and freedom from torture. 5f the +ommittee grants interim measures, the finaldecision may confirm or revo1e them.

Consideration of the /erits and 2ubli*ation of the Co//ittees views andre*o//endations

The +ommittee considers the merits either after or simultaneously with a communication0sadmissibility. Some treaty bodies consider accessibility and the merits at the same time,while others consider one after the other. The advantage of considering accessibility andmerits together is that it saves time. The general process can be summari9ed as follows.

11 The +ommitteeYs views and decisions are available in full in all six official United Nations languages

from www.ohchr.org"8N"!Fodies"+!#"#ages";urisprudence.aspx 4accessed $% November '($'6.

12

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CRPD/Pages/Jurisprudence.aspx

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CRPD/Pages/Jurisprudence.aspx



The next stage is the +ommittee0s adoption of its decision or views on a communication.This is done on the basis of the written information provided by the two parties and theapplication of the +onvention to the facts as determined by the +ommittee. The +ommitteethen forwards its views and recommendations, if any, to the State party concerned and tothe petitioner. 5n there has been a violation, the +ommittee would normally re2uest the Stateparty to ta1e appropriate steps to remedy it. The practice of the +ommittee in this regard isof course not yet developed. 5n the experience of other treaty bodies, these steps might belimited to recommendations that a State party should provide an Dappropriate remedyE, orthey might be more specific, such as recommending the review of policies or the repeal of alaw, the payment of compensation or the prevention of future violations.

!ule J/ of the +ommittee0s rules of procedure sets out that, within six months oftransmission of its views, the State party must submit a written response with information onany follow7up action. The +ommittee may then re2uest further information from the Stateparty and it may also re2uest the State party to include information in its periodic report tothe +ommittee.

5nterestingly, there is a focal point to follow up on the implementation of the +ommittee0sviews. The rule establishes that the +ommittee may appoint a special rapporteur or wor1inggroup to ascertain the measures ta1en by State parties to implement views andrecommendations. The special rapporteur or wor1ing group may ma1e contacts and ta1eaction as appropriate to follow up on views and can also recommend action to the+ommittee. 5f the +ommittee and the State party agree, the special rapporteur or wor1inggroup can visit the country and report bac1 to the +ommittee.

The in7uir

The second procedure established by the -ptional #rotocol is the in7uir. 5t allows the+ommittee to examine reliable information indicating grave or systematic violations of the

+onvention by a State party. State parties may opt out this procedure, through a declarationand reservation, and still ratify the -ptional #rotocol 4art. ?6. States can decide to liftreservations at a later date.

The main features of an in2uiry compared to a complaint are:

• =irst, that to launch an in2uiry, the +ommittee does not have to receive a formal

complaint. 5t is up to the +ommittee to decide to initiate the procedure 4which mayinclude a visit to the State party, subBect to the latter0s consent6<

• Second, an in2uiry is permitted only in cases indicating grave or systematic violations

of the rights set forth in the +onvention< and

• Third, there is no re2uirement for a victim to come forward.

) grave violation refers to a severe abuse of one or more provisions of the +onvention, suchas discrimination that threatens someone0s life, integrity or personal security. ) systematicviolation refers to a pattern of abuse, the scale and fre2uency of which are significantregardless of intention. The abuse may result from laws, policies or practices. The termDsystematicE may include violations which might not be considered DgraveE.

129



The process is as follows:

Receipt of reliable information on grave or systematic violations: the +ommittee

receives information, which in the experience of other treaty bodies is generally

provided by N-s although treaty bodies may on their own initiative compile

information available to it, including from United Nations bodies 4see rule J% of the+ommittee0s rules of procedure6. )t this stage, the +ommittee should see1 further

information to establish that the information received is reliable.

'nvitation to State party to cooperate: if the +ommittee finds that the information is

reliable, it invites the State party to cooperate in the examination of the information,

including through the submission of information to the +ommittee.

,esignation of one or more +ommittee members to conduct the in-uiry: the

+ommittee considers the submission of the State party as well as any additional

information provided by governmental organi9ations, the United Nations system,

N-s and individuals, and designates one or more members to conduct the in2uiry.

The +ommittee must see1 the cooperation of the State party at all stages if it decides

to proceed.

+ountry visit: where warranted, the +ommittee may conduct a visit to the territory

concerned, provided the State party agrees. isits may, again, with the consent of

the State party, including hearings. owever, a country visit is not mandatory and the

+ommittee may underta1e the in2uiry without it.

0indings. comments and recommendations submitted to State party: the +ommittee

must draft a report and transmit it to the State party confidentially.

2bservations from the State party to be transmitted $ithin si3 months: the State party

has six months to submit its observations to the +ommittee. 5t is worth noting that the

+ommittee on the 8limination of iscrimination against @omen can ma1e its final

report public. Neither the +onvention on the !ights of #ersons with isabilities nor

the +ommittee0s rules of procedure refers to such an option, which suggests it is

open.

'nvitation transmitted to State party to report on action taken: the +ommittee may

invite the State party to include in its periodic report details of any measures it has

ta1en to implement the findings. The +ommittee includes a summary of theprocedure in its annual report.

)s with the individual communications procedure, it could be helpful for participants to hearabout an in2uiry. Unfortunately, there are relatively few public in2uiry reports owing to theconfidential nature of the procedure. =acilitators might wish to discuss the +ommittee on the8limination of iscrimination against @omen0s in2uiry into the abduction, rape and murder ofwomen in +uidad ;uZre9, Mexico 4+8)@"+"'((/"-#.?"M8[5+-6.

$enefits of the %2tional Proto*ol

Foth procedurally and substantially, the -ptional #rotocol represents a potentially importantmechanism for protecting persons with disabilities and for strengthening national capacities.

1(0



There are benefits not only for victims of human rights violations but also for States. 5t is truethat, on first glance, States might have little enthusiasm for a complaints or in2uiriesprocedure. Get, over half the States that have ratified the +onvention have also ratified its-ptional #rotocol, because the -ptional #rotocol can also be helpful for them.

•The -ptional #rotocol can be a means to strengthen national protectionmechanisms. 5f domestic remedies are prompt and effective, individuals are lessli1ely to need to petition the +ommittee once they have exhausted domesticremedies.

• The -ptional #rotocol can also provide a means to confirm State policy. Not all

communications are decided in favour of the alleged victim. The application ofinternational standards to specific individuals is not necessarily always clear, as theirsituations do not always fit into neat compartments. ) State party may be convincedit is meeting its obligations under the +onvention and a decision of the +ommittee inrelation to an individual communication or an in2uiry can confirm the State0s position.

• 5n the same vein, the -ptional #rotocol mandates the +ommittee to validate or 2uery

national court decisions. 5t will offer guidance to domestic courts and other human

rights protection mechanisms by developing further the substantive content of therights under the +onvention and related obligations of States. 5nternational case lawcan also promote national Burisprudence.

• The -ptional #rotocol can also help State parties bring about change. The uman

!ights +ommittee0s decision on Toonen v. Australia is a case in point. The uman!ights +ommittee considered that legislation in the )ustralian State of Tasmaniaconcerning homosexuality was incompatible with the provisions of the 5nternational+ovenant on +ivil and #olitical !ights. The =ederal overnment in )ustralia thenused this decision to bring about law reform in the State.

• The in2uiry procedure under the -ptional #rotocol can provide an opportunity to

benefit from international expertise to solve difficult or protracted problems. 5n

particular, country visits by the +ommittee0s members can help analyse problemsfrom a more obBective and independent perspective and provide solutions toproblems. -n the one hand, these experts can draw on the experience of othercountries. -n the other, the international and independent bac1ground of the expertscan ma1e the in2uiry less politically charged, e.g., because it is not lin1ed to theovernment or another political force in the country.

• The -ptional #rotocol0s procedures also clarify how to apply the +onvention in

specific cases. Fy examining its application through the prism of an individualcomplaint or in2uiry, the +ommittee may broaden and deepen its understanding ofthe +onvention and its meaning and so refine its recommendations to States 4allStates, not only the defendant State6 and clarify the steps they need to ta1e.

• The procedures help to incorporate the +onvention into domestic law. The

+ommittee0s views and recommendations could trigger for law reform as a step inbringing State practice into line with the +onvention.

• The -ptional #rotocol provides a mechanism for strategic litigation by civil society to

support 1ey changes. Hitigation can be costly and the outcomes are invariablyuncertain. Hitigation is therefore not always the preferred option. owever, it can behelpful in certain cases, one of these being strategic litigation. +ivil societyorgani9ations and public interest advocates can use litigation as a strategic tool invarious ways. =or example, litigants can bring a test case as a means of clarifyingthe law. The law is then clarified not only for the litigants in the particular case, butalso for others facing similar situations. Fringing one such case and clarifying the lawcan prevent many problems 4and more litigation6 in the future. 5n this way,

organi9ations can use the -ptional #rotocol as a means of engaging the views of the+ommittee on 1ey issues in domestic implementation or interpretation of the+onvention.

1(1



• The -ptional #rotocol can protect victims and potential victims. )s an international

accountability mechanism for addressing violations of the rights under the+onvention, 5t can provide alleged victims with interim measures if the situation iscritical and their rights are seriously under threat.

• The complaints procedure is relatively easy to use for victims. There is no time limit

for bringing complaints 4apart from the re2uirement that the alleged violation shouldnot have occurred prior to the entry into force of the -ptional #rotocol for the Stateparty6 and the procedure can be relatively fast and simple, although much dependson the capacity of the +ommittee. There is no re2uirement to have legalrepresentation and decisions are made in writing.

The role of States *ivil so*iet and &nited Nations *ountr tea/s

)ll three can play a role in promoting the -ptional #rotocol and can benefit from it. 5nparticular, States can:

• Ratify the 2ptional Protocol9 +learly, States should consider ratifying the -ptional#rotocol.

• Strengthen implementation9 !atifying the -ptional #rotocol exposes States to

individual complaints and in2uiries. This can deter them from not complying with the+onvention. iews on communications and in2uiries can also indicate the steps thata State should ta1e to comply.

• Strengthen domestic remedies9 The fact that alleged victims can appeal to the

+ommittee can act as a trigger for strengthening domestic remedies 4e.g., ensuringthat all rights are Busticiable at the national level6 so that cases do not need to go tothe +ommittee in the first place.

• Provide timely information to the +ommittee9 States should participate actively in the

communication and in2uiry processes by providing up7to7date and accurateinformation so that the +ommittee can act with full 1nowledge of the facts.

• 0ollo$ up on recommendations9 States should ensure that they follow up on

recommendations to provide a remedy to victims, but also to ensure that the treatybody system is respected and is effective. 5t was, after all, created by States, soStates have an interest in ensuring that it wor1s.

• ,isseminate the +ommittee<s vie$s9 States should, at the very least, publish its

views on individual communications relating to individuals under their Burisdiction.States should also consider publishing the results of in2uiries under the -ptional#rotocol as this will trigger national debate, which in turn should help theimplementation of recommendations and ultimately improve the enBoyment of rights.

• Report on follo$4up9 States should ensure that they conscientiously report on follow7

up to recommendations in subse2uent periodic reports to the +ommittee.

+ivil society and #-s have a crucial role in strengthening the national implementation ofthe +onvention through promoting the ratification of the -ptional #rotocol and advocatingthe implementation of the +ommittee0s recommendations. 5n particular, civil society can:

• Promote ratification of the 2ptional Protocol9 -rgani9ations of persons with

disabilities and civil society organi9ations have an important role in encouragingStates to ratify treaties, including optional protocols. 5t is often through such lobbyingthat States ta1e the decision to ratify. 5n promoting ratification, #-s and civil societyorgani9ations can also advocate acceptance of the in2uiry procedure 4i.e., no

declaration to the contrary upon either signature or ratification6.

1(2



• Assist individuals in bringing complaints9 -rgani9ations of persons with disabilities

and civil society can play an important role in creating awareness about thecommunication and in2uiry procedures, and provide victims with the 1nowledge andoften the resources to file a complaint.

• Submit communications9 -rgani9ations of persons with disabilities can act on behalf

of victims. )t times, persons with disabilities who are victims of violations are deniedlegal capacity, lac1 education, live in poverty and so on. 5n such circumstances, therole of #-s is even more important. )s noted above, normally a #- will have todemonstrate that it has the consent of the victim on whose behalf it is acting.

• 'nform in-uiries9 @hen violations are grave or systematic, it is often #-s that have

the broad7ranging information available to spot the patterns and provide the+ommittee with the information it needs.

• +an monitor compliance by State parties $ith recommendations9 -rgani9ations of

persons with disabilities can be the eyes and ears of monitoring. They can witnesschanges 4or lac1 of action6 following the +ommittee0s recommendations. 5f nothing isdone, they can communicate this to the +ommittee 4through communications oralternative reports6.

• ,isseminate /urisprudence9 -rgani9ations of persons with disabilities can

disseminate decisions ta1en by domestic courts to satisfy the rights of victims as wellas the +ommittee0s recommendations and observations related to communicationsand in2uiries.

• Report on follo$4up9 +ivil society organi9ations preparing alternative reports to the

+ommittee should consider including information on follow7up to views andrecommendations under the -ptional #rotocol.

United Nations country teams 4UNT+s6 can support ratification of the -ptional #rotocol andalso implementation of the +ommittee0s suggestions and recommendations relating toindividual communications and in2uiries. 5n particular, UNT+s can:

• Promote ratification9 The United Nations country teams can use advocacy with

partner ministries to encourage ratification of the -ptional #rotocol. -ne way wouldbe for UN+Ts to collect recommendations of other human rights bodies encouragingratification of the -ptional #rotocol and use this in discussions with their overnmentcounterparts. 5t is li1ely that the +ommittee 4similar to other treaty bodies6 willrecommend ratification of the -ptional #rotocol in its regular reviews of State partyreports. Similarly, the universal periodic review of the uman !ights +ouncil, thespecial procedures during country missions or the igh +ommissioner and evenregional human rights bodies will recommend that specific States should ratify the-ptional #rotocol. United Nations country teams can draw on theserecommendations to promote ratification.

• +ollect information on domestic case la$ and e3perience $ith optional protocols ofother treaties9 5n countries where domestic courts or N!5s have already dealt withcomplaints in relation to disabilities, States might be more willing to accept the Busticiability of the +onvention0s rights. United Nations country teams can collect andanalyse information on such experience to demonstrate how Budicial and 2uasi7 Budicial procedures can improve the reali9ation of human rights, including the rights ofpersons with disabilities.

• Raise a$areness and train relevant actors. such as Budges, law students, civil

servants and #-s"civil society organi9ations so that they are aware of the -ptional#rotocol and its relevance to their wor1 so that they can support and advocateratification. 5f the +ommittee has issued recommendations related to a

communication or in2uiry, training can help these actors identify ways to promoteimplementation. )lternatively, the UN+T could issue a press release on the

1((



anniversary of the entering into force of the two instruments 4C May6 or theanniversary of ratification of the +onvention by the State to encourage the State partyto ratify the -ptional #rotocol. @hen the +ommittee issues suggestions andrecommendations related to an in2uiry or communication, the UN+T can encouragethe overnment to issue a press release or consider issuing a press release itself.

•Provide reliable information to the +ommittee9 The United Nations country team canuse the in2uiry mechanism as a means of highlighting a country situation which mightbe too sensitive for the UN+T to do itself. 5n this way, the UN+T can rely on the+ommittee to underta1e an independent investigation so that the issue is dealt withade2uately, without the UN+T being placed in a difficult position vis77vis theovernment.

• Assist $ith follo$4up9 epending on the nature of the views and recommendations

and the 1nowledge and experience in the UN+T, it could help the State partyimplement the +ommittee0s views and recommendations. This could be particularlyrelevant for in2uiries where the views and recommendations are li1ely to becomprehensive, covering a range of different interrelated issues concerningimplementation 4as opposed to views on a communication, which might simply be

about providing compensation to an individual victim6.• ,isseminate the +ommittee<s vie$s and recommendations9 The United Nations

country team could publish the +ommittee0s views and recommendations on itswebsite and also issue a press release when decisions are published.

• Report on follo$4up9 The United Nations country team can also provide information to

the +ommittee, either publicly or confidentially, when a State party presents itsperiodic report. 5t can provide the +ommittee with invaluable information on follow7upto its views and recommendations under the -ptional #rotocol. 5n this way, the+ommittee has information from a trusted source.

ohchr training guide crpd and op (1)

Documents