COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES CONSIDERS REPORT OF TUNISIA

The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has considered the initial report of Tunisia on its implementation of the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The report of Tunisia is the first report to be considered by the Committee under the Convention.

Presenting the report of Tunisia, Mohamed Ennaceur, Minister of Social Affairs, said that since independence Tunisia had worked to enshrine human rights principles and their efforts had focused on all social classes, especially the most vulnerable. Laws and legislation had been enacted and today there was a body of law that formed the basis for a comprehensive domestic system that worked hand in hand with international legislation that was also in place to firmly root these values in the minds of the Tunisian people; this system of law represented the basis for their society.

Mr. Ennaceur went on to say that in 1981 Tunisia had adopted laws about the rights of persons with disabilities. Tunisia had declared a national day of celebration for persons with disabilities and on 3 December they also celebrated the International Day of Persons with Disabilities. Tunisia had doubled its efforts in this domain with laws on vocational training in 1988, professional integration and employment for persons with disabilities in 1989, and it had adapted its domestic legislation by passing amendments. They had also implemented programmes to shore up the civil and political rights and social rights of this sector of society. The political will had to be in place and the Government had to do its job while making the most of help from civil society, which had been at the forefront of all of this work since independence. Tunisia could be very proud of its network of non-governmental organizations, which represented a broad swath of society and worked in every field and were present in 87 per cent of their national territory. They were funded by government and national and international organizations.

Experts raised questions concerning, among other matters, the collection of data on persons with disabilities, the definition of disabilities and whether it included mental and social disabilities, the dissemination of the Convention, issues of access to physical spaces, information, technology and communication and awareness-raising, and the process of institutionalization of people with mental and intellectual disabilities. The Committee members also asked the delegation about the access to education for children with disabilities, domestic violence against women and children with disabilities, and legal guardianship for persons with disabilities. Several Committee members asked about access to justice as well as the legal independence and competence of persons with disabilities. Numerous questions were raised about the government agency tasked with protecting the rights of persons with disabilities and how it was funded, how its members were chosen and whether it was independent from the Government.

In concluding remarks, Amna Ali Al-Suwaidi, the Committee member serving as the Rapporteur for the report of Tunisia, thanked the delegation for the fruitful and positive dialogue they had had with the State party. There remained questions that were raised during the dialogue that needed clarification, however. Ms. Al-Suwaidi said that she hoped Tunisia would go further in its awareness-raising efforts concerning the disabled and their integration into society. She also wished that more money would be allocated to this awareness-raising as well as education because this could go a long way in changing children’s lives and helping them to achieve full equality of opportunity.

Also in concluding remarks, Mohamed Ennaceur, Minister of Social Affairs for Tunisia, thanked the Committee members for their comments and recommendations and said his delegation was happy to have been able to benefit from their discussion. The delegation felt that the members of the Committee were activists in the area and had a great professional and exhaustive understanding of the dimensions involved and the lofty aims of the Convention concerning the disabled. This had given them even greater determination to achieve their noble objectives.

The delegation of Tunisia included representatives from the Ministry of Social Affairs, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Public Health and the Permanent Mission of Tunisia to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The next public meeting of the Committee will be on the afternoon of Friday, 15 April when it will publicly close its fifth session and adopt concluding observations on the initial report of Tunisia.

Report of Tunisia

The initial report of Tunisia (CRPD/C/TUN/1) notes that with a view to putting into practice the principles and general commitments set forth in the Convention and, in particular, the principle of realizing the full enjoyment by persons with disabilities of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, Tunisia has accorded such persons even greater attention, with a view to ensuring that they enjoy the civil and political rights that are assured by law to all persons and groups without distinction by, in particular, adopting numerous amendments to the law that are intended to guarantee and protect such rights. Tunisia has also made every effort to actualize numerous such rights as the right to life, the right to health, the right to education, the right to social and economic inclusion, the right to equality and non-discrimination, the right to freedom of movement, the right to independence and the right of access. To that end, Tunisia has devised strategies, programmes, mechanisms and plans that are designed to ensure that persons with disabilities enjoy those fundamental rights. In addition to those plans for the advancement and protection of persons with disabilities, such persons are granted many privileges with a view to facilitating the enjoyment of their rights, including transportation at no or reduced cost and priority in dealings with Government departments and institutions, while the private sector is encouraged to employ them by being offered tax and other exemptions.

Tunisia has taken steps to ensure that persons with disabilities are represented on the bodies that are relevant to them, including the provincial committees for persons with disabilities that exist in each of the Republic’s 24 governorates. Those committees comprise a chairman, a representative of the governorate department responsible for social and medical affairs and public health, the doctor responsible for coordinating health in governorate schools and universities, the doctor in charge of the governorate training unit, representatives of the governorate departments of education, training and employment and representatives of the social funds and welfare associations for persons with disabilities. The formation of associations for persons with disabilities is encouraged: there are currently 101 such associations, with a total of 242 branches in various parts of the country. They run 279 special education centres that provide coverage for 80 per cent of the Republic.

Tunisia recognizes the equal right of all persons with disabilities to live in the community, with choices equal to others, and has taken numerous measures to facilitate full enjoyment by persons with disabilities of this right and their full inclusion and participation in the community. Persons with disabilities are allowed to live in a family environment and choose their place of residence, and are not compelled to live in institutions or separate communities. Tunisian law requires persons with disabilities to be provided with properly equipped apartments in properly equipped blocks. Law No. 83 (2005), article 13, requires that public housing blocks must contain residential units equipped for persons with disabilities. Persons with severe or multiple disabilities are provided with health and rehabilitative services in the home.

Presentation of Report

MOHAMED ENNACEUR, Minister of Social Affairs of Tunisia, in presenting the initial report of Tunisia, said that it was an honour for him to present this report, which gave details of the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Tunisia had undergone remarkable events and they had seen the outcome of these events, the people’s struggle against exclusion. Upholding dignity and equality of rights were values they believed in and strived to preserve and strengthen. They were proud that Tunisia was the very first country to have its national report on the implementation of the Convention reviewed. They acceded to the Convention with no reservations and they were one of the first 20 countries to do so.

Since independence Tunisia had worked to enshrine human rights principles and their efforts had focused on all social classes, especially the most vulnerable. Laws and legislation had been enacted and today there was a body of law that formed the basis for a comprehensive domestic system that worked hand in hand with international legislation that was also in place to firmly root these values in the minds of the Tunisian people; this system of law represented the basis for their society.

Mr. Ennaceur went on to say that in 1981 Tunisia had adopted laws about the rights of persons with disabilities. Tunisia had declared a national day of celebration for persons with disabilities and on 3 December they also celebrated the International Day of Persons with Disabilities. Tunisia had doubled its efforts in this domain with laws on vocational training in 1988, professional integration and employment for persons with disabilities in 1989, and it had adapted its domestic legislation by passing amendments. They had also implemented programmes to shore up the civil and political rights and social rights of this sector of society. The political will had to be in place and the Government had to do its job while making the most of help from civil society, which had been at the forefront of all of this work since independence. Tunisia could be very proud of its network of non-governmental organizations, which represented a broad swath of society and worked in every field and were present in 87 per cent of their national territory. They were funded by government and national and international organizations.

Mr. Ennaceur said Tunisia had made great strides in ensuring equality of access and opportunity, including the adoption and strengthening of legislation based on the rights enshrined in the Convention. The exercise had been mutually reinforcing. Tunisia was fully committed to implementing the Convention and they stood before the Committee proud of their achievements, but also aware of the challenges before them. They had made progress, albeit modest, given the scope of the work before them. Tunisia was well aware of the road still to be travelled before they could truly say they had full, effective participation of persons with disabilities in society on an equal footing with other people with no discrimination. Their society was committed to respecting the diversity of each individual and their right to equal opportunity.

The head of the delegation said that Tunisia had worked to disseminate a culture of human rights that respected the rights of persons with disabilities. They had translated the Convention into Braille and had translated the text on the website of the Ministry of Social Affairs in addition to other methods of distribution. Tunisia had moved from a purely medical approach to an approach which was medical, psychological and social and took into account individual and environmental specificities. Mr. Ennaceur also recalled the efforts of Tunisia to increase accessibility by working with the public sector to remove some of the obstacles that persons with disabilities faced, an important process for integration. The country gave special attention to addressing the needs of children with disabilities and they had also achieved significant results in access to sports and sporting events. The State party had also made a special effort to use technology to integrate persons with disabilities into public life by allowing distance learning and working and creating an online library available to the deaf and blind.

In conclusion, Mr. Ennaceur said that Tunisia was fully convinced that the work in human rights in general, and the rights of persons with disabilities in particular, was a daily task they must all engage in. They had a common goal to ensure that persons with disabilities could benefit from all of these rights on an equal footing with others.

Questions by Experts

AMNA ALI AL-SUWAIDI, the Committee Member serving as the Rapporteur for the Report of Tunisia, expressed her thanks to the delegation of Tunisia for coming despite difficult circumstances in the country, adhering to the guidelines in the preparation of the report, and the preparation of the report in consultation with civil society. Several laws had been passed to prevent discrimination against children with disabilities in school as well as other laws to ensure the equality of persons with disabilities.

Despite these efforts, there were still negative patterns seen against persons with disabilities, such as an approach that focused more on medicine rather than integration. There were also degrading terms used in Tunisian laws and society and the country would be well served by raising awareness of the rights of persons with disabilities as well as developing better images of this sector. There was also insufficient protection against discrimination of persons with disabilities in the laws and criminal codes such as laws on elections, education and health. More also needed to be done regarding integrating rural women with disabilities and training public officials on implementing the Convention. Persons with disabilities still faced obstacles accessing services that were available to the general public and the proper financial and human resources needed to be allocated to ensure this access. Disabilities could also be psychological and mental so these definitions needed to be included as disabilities as well. The State party needed to do a better job of collecting data on persons with disabilities, and Ms. Al-Suwaidi said there was a lack of analysis and classification of the data that was available and this was important for developing policies and measuring their effectiveness.

A Committee Expert noted that the Tunisian definition of disability was narrower than that outlined in the Convention. What measures had been taken to ensure that when assessments of disabilities were made people received the proper care and support to enable their full participation in society? In terms of the definition of reasonable accommodation, this concept did not always translate very well and many lawmakers did not understand the concept. What measures had Tunisia taken to ensure that a clear understanding of this concept was present in society at large and with lawmakers specifically?

Another Committee member asked how Tunisia prevented discrimination against persons with disabilities in the private sector. The delegation was also asked to elaborate on the organizational environment in Tunisia and whether these organizations were service providers rather than being organizations made up of persons with disabilities.

Regarding statistics, the report implied that the numbers were very low and an Expert asked for clarification on data regarding persons with disabilities. Also, what procedures were in place to ensure that derogatory terms were totally abolished in laws and official usage?

The delegation was asked for more information on what the medical-psychosocial model entailed and how it was reflected in legislation. How did the delegation gather the opinions of women and girls for the preparation of this report?

Another Expert expressed surprise that the number of people with disabilities in Tunisia was less than 4 per cent of the population. How was this number calculated? Did the State only count people who had a disability card? How did the Government deal with the concept of long-term impairment? Was there any legislation that prohibited discrimination for persons who did not have a disability card or who were disabled by association, for example a parent with a child with a disability?

Response by Delegation

With regard to questions on statistics, the delegation said they depended a great deal on statistics so in 2003 they started a study covering the entire country and in 2004 they took into account statistics on persons with disabilities. The census was done every 10 years and they had established a database that was periodically updated that took into account disability cards that were made available to all persons with disabilities via neighbourhood services. The rate of disability had increased from 1.5 per cent in 2008 to 2 per cent in 2010. Statistics came from quality and feasibility studies as well as the census and included persons with permanent disabilities and assessment and evaluation studies, not just quantity. Definitions of disability included medical, social and psychological disabilities and rates were based on standards and the provision of social services.

Turning to associations and organizations of persons with disabilities, the delegation said they used a participatory approach. There was a parliament with representation of persons with disabilities and young people were represented via associations in the local governments as well as the higher council for human rights. There were 290 special care centres that carried out training and they needed to include this curriculum in high school and university studies.

In terms of identifying persons with disabilities, previously they had used a medical approach based on World Health Organization guidelines which used to define disabilities based on physical illness. But in order to comply with the Convention, they had stopped using this approach entirely and they now used an approach that took into account psychological and social factors as well. They now had a questionnaire that in no way resembled the old questionnaire and took into account a number of factors. They took into consideration environmental factors, the degree of autonomy, social and other factors to determine the degree of disability. In terms of whether a disability card attested to a person’s actual needs, the delegation said when the card was issued the holder was granted a series of free services and benefits depending on the nature of the disability, such as free care and assistive devices depending on the degree of mobility. So the disability card established the degree of disability and the services they required to fully participate in society.

On discrimination, the human rights system was based on fundamental principles. The 14 January revolution would bring a new vision and new approach under the second constitution that would be established by the constitutional council. This would be the basis for their fight against discrimination on any grounds. The law prohibited any discrimination in health legislation on the basis of disability. There was also the question of affirmative action, or positive discrimination, which was an approach that the State followed. In public office there was a quota for persons with disabilities. In terms of sexual harassment, there was a law now making this an offence and disability was an aggravating circumstance. In Tunisia they had had the honour of presenting their fourth and fifth periodic reports to the Committee on the Rights of the Child and the Committee had been kept abreast of developments in Tunisia in the protection and promotion of children’s rights.

The delegation said that together with UNICEF Tunisia had been implementing a national strategy to protect children from violence and children with disabilities were particularly vulnerable to this phenomenon. They had started to collect data with an eye toward gathering more information in this area. They had made the most of international expertise available to them as well and they had been carrying out awareness-raising for judges to make these issues part of their basic training. They had organized a seminar in conjunction with the European Union to modernize the judiciary and many recommendations were made as a result of this exercise and they were transmitted to the proper agency for the adoption of best practices.

Turning to negative terminology that was still used in legislative texts, the delegation said that there were no pejorative terms used in Tunisian law. They used terms that were used internationally and could be found in legislation worldwide. Regarding environment and accessibility, the delegation said Tunisian legislation included communication and information as well as the physical environment. In terms of disseminating the Convention, an Expert had remarked that it did not seem that the State party had done very much in this regard and the delegation said that the Convention had been translated into Braille and Arabic, which might not seem like much for a Scandinavian country, but it was quite a lot for Tunisia.

Organizations for persons with disabilities were made up of these persons and not only provided services to them.

Questions by Experts

In another round of questions, an Expert asked to what extent the Higher Council on Persons with Disabilities was an independent institution, who ran it, did persons with disabilities have a role in managing it, from where did it receive its funding and how involved was the Government in its activities?

Another Committee member asked whether domestic legislation had been harmonized since the ratification of the Convention, particularly in the areas of non-discrimination and reasonable accommodation.

Another Expert reiterated the need for the Government to take the lead in changing the language used when referring to persons with disabilities, which would go a long way in changing how society viewed and treated these people.

The delegation was asked to elaborate on the issue of reasonable accommodation in education and whether there was a legal remedy if people disagreed with local councils on the level of assistance they received based on their disability. What legal remedies did persons with disabilities have if services were denied to them? There was also little information in the report on how the State party dealt with multiple discriminations and what concrete measures had been taken to address access to sexual and reproductive health, the workplace and other areas of public life. Could the delegation also share some figures in terms of the budgetary allocations for removing physical barriers and what courses, if any, were offered to architectural students in the area of universal and accessible design?

Response by Delegation

Regarding the Council for the Disabled, its composition and funding, the delegation said that the Council was a coordination mechanism of programmes and actions and it was composed of representatives of government agencies, men, women, and the ten most representative organizations for the disabled. The composition of the Council reflected the concept of collective responsibility for the care of and integration of persons with disabilities. The Council met annually, once per year, under the presidency of the Prime Minister and submitted its reports to the highest authority in the country.

Regarding statistics and disability cards, any person wishing to obtain such a permit could voluntarily submit a request for such a permit. Women were not prevented from receiving permits and women represented more than 33 per cent of the persons with disabilities in Tunisia. The percentage of women in the age group 0 to 16 years of age represented 48.2 per cent of persons with disabilities and this showed that programmes aimed at enabling children to attend normal schools and their integration were working. In a country in which women made up a large percentage of pharmacists, doctors and university students, they could not discount women with disabilities.

In terms of mothers of children with disabilities, the State took a holistic approach to family assistance in helping families care for their disabled children. There were mobile home care units that travelled through the countryside to provide services and assistance to rural communities, covering 66 per cent of the country. They were attempting to further develop this assistance to cover even more of the country.

The delegation said their national legislation already included a number of provisions contained in the Convention so it was not always necessary to pass additional domestic legislation in order to harmonize national laws with the Convention. They had passed legislation to increase access to justice, electoral processes, and other government services for the disabled.

The delegation said that many disabilities developed before the child was born, during birth or immediately after birth so Tunisia was working hard to provide better pre-natal, natal and post-natal care for mothers and children to reduce child and maternal mortality, complications during pregnancy and childbirth and preventable disabilities that could be avoided with better healthcare. They used the mobile health units to improve access to health in rural areas.

Regarding sexual and reproductive health for women with disabilities, the State party worked hard to raise awareness on issues such as HIV/AIDS, family planning, and other subjects that used to be considered taboo. This was particularly true for women with disabilities who were often not educated about contraception and were ignorant about how to protect themselves in this area.

Regarding the role of architects in the development of accessible environments, the delegation said architects and urban planners were on the front lines of changing not only physical spaces, but also changing people’s attitudes toward persons with disabilities. There were also fines for new buildings that were built without proper access for persons with disabilities. Concerning adaption measures, particularly in school curriculums, teaching was tailored to the individual taking into account the particular needs of each child.

Questions by Experts

A Committee member asked about the concept of legal capacity in the country and how people with disabilities were treated under the law in terms of competence and their ability to make legal decisions. How many adults with disabilities were under guardianship for example, who could be a guardian, what standards guided the work of guardians, and how could persons with disabilities petition a court if their rights were violated? Could they directly petition the court or did their guardian have to do it on their behalf?

In terms of determining a person’s mental capacity, an Expert asked whether this ever resulted in a person being denied access to justice on an equal footing. Was there a clear distinction between persons with intellectual disabilities and those with mental or psychosocial disabilities? There was also the need to move from institutionalization to more community and family based living. Were there any measures that had been put into place to make this transition in the earliest possible time? Were there mechanisms for monitoring psychiatric institutions? Were legal and judicial processes completely separate from mental health services, as judicial proceedings were often used to institutionalize people with disabilities? How involved were families in the decision to institutionalize a family member?

What steps were being taken in Tunisia to move from a model based on non-recognition of the legal ability and autonomy of persons with disabilities to make their own decisions, to the new model enshrined under the Convention?

In terms of violence against women, was it still true that a rapist could marry their victim in order to avoid prosecution or if the victim dropped the charges the rapist could also avoid criminal charges? What was being done to ensure that persons with disabilities could marry, have their own children and adopt children if they wanted? The delegation was asked to please speak about women with disabilities specifically rather than women in general in their answer.

Did the delegation consider the guardianship system compatible with article 12 of the Convention? How many people were admitted to institutions each year, both voluntarily and involuntarily? Had Tunisia considered revising its mental health of 1992? What were the criteria for a placement in a specialized institution, which the Expert understood to be for people with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities under exceptional circumstances? What did exceptional circumstances mean and what procedures were available to someone who wanted to challenge their placement in such an institution?

Another Committee member asked what specific measures had been taken to ensure access to justice. For example, was sign language available for witnesses or jurors? What training programmes were available for police and prison guards in terms of the rights of persons with disabilities? Was disability an aggravating circumstance when crimes were committed?

The delegation was being asked what measures had been undertaken to mainstream children with disabilities into mainstream schools? What were the necessary diplomas or qualifications for teachers in terms of special needs schools and were their salaries the same or higher or lower? What types of degrees were awarded to children with special needs? Did these degrees allow them to go on to higher education? Were there children who did not receive any schooling at all? Were sign language interpreters provided to children in mainstream schools?

Were there any plans to find out how many people had been disabled by torture and might be in need of rehabilitation services? Another Expert said that the delegation had spoken at length about programmes in place to avoid preventable disabilities and the Expert asked if the delegation was aware that such programmes created stigmas and negatively impacted people with disabilities.

Had Tunisia considered amendments to the current electoral laws to ensure that persons with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities were no longer deprived of their basic participatory rights? Were there any barriers to persons with disabilities running for office? Could they join political parties and other groups freely? In other words, what was being done to ensure the political participation of persons with disabilities in all aspects of political life on a broad basis? Persons with disabilities were allowed to have an assistant with them in the voting booth to help them vote, but what kind of training did these people receive? Also, how did they avoid conflicts of interest such as having the assistant be a parent or someone responsible for their direct good such as giving them food? What was being done to ensure that the assistant did not divulge who the person had voted for, thus ensuring their right to vote by secret ballot and their right to freedom of expression via the electoral process?

The delegation was asked whether experts from civil society would be added to the monitoring and coordinating bodies and would the State party implement the suggestion that a special division be added to address the issues of children with disabilities specifically? What was being done to promote international cooperation on the rights and provisions of the Convention? Could the delegation explain in greater detail how the Council on Persons with Disabilities functioned? Where did its budget come from for example? Did the delegation have any information on why there was such a high number of congenital disabilities? This had implications for families and preventive measures. Was there disaggregated data on people with disabilities? Had the State party considered collaborating with the African Union in relation to gathering best practices on how to improve access to equal participation in various areas for persons with disabilities?

Was the national human rights institution in compliance with the Paris Principles? To what extent were the opinions of persons with disabilities taken into consideration and what was done to ensure the gathering of their opinions and views?

Response by Delegation

The delegation said the national human rights institution was independent and adhered to the Paris Principles. The body had been criticized in the past on several fronts, including the appointment of members, many of whom had been appointed and not elected and whose independence had been questioned. After the revolution in January, however, a Supreme Court judge had been appointed to oversee the agency and its independence and neutrality. The agency would have an independent budget to carry out its mandate and it would be fully representative.

In terms of the inclusion of children with disabilities in school, the delegation said the State party did all it could to include them, but there were not always appropriate places for children with disabilities in schools in their areas so they had set up special departments to ensure their needs were met and they were included. Schools also offered special services such as speech and language therapies and programmes offering special support and additional learning. Various measures had also been taken to ensure that children with disabilities could follow normal lessons depending on their learning skills.

As for participation in public life, the delegation said it was important to note that persons with disabilities took part in the revolution. In terms of voting, 52 per cent of persons with disabilities were entitled to vote or stand as candidates.

Data showed that 56 per cent of disabilities were the result of hereditary illnesses or illnesses contracted during pregnancy and prevention aimed to act on this. The State encouraged voluntary pre-marriage physicals to determine the likelihood of them passing on diseases to their future children. There was also vaccination programmes for children to reduce the risks associated with childhood illnesses as well as educational programmes for teens about genetic and hereditary disorders.

In response to the numerous questions raised about mental capacity and guardianship, the delegation said that physically disabled persons enjoyed full rights and decision making capabilities so there were no guardianship issues. In terms of people considered mentally incapacitated, there were legal guardians who were legal, not medical experts, who appointed those persons who assessed the individual to determine whether they were in full possession of their faculties or not. The judge then decided whether someone should be subjected to a guardian or not and the judiciary supervised the guardianship and all actions related to the status of this person. There were certain actions that guardians could not undertake without permission from a judge. Should a guardian make a decision without the required judicial permission, they would be considered to have violated their duties. There was precedent in case law of people who had been removed from their guardianship positions for not fulfilling their obligations.

Regarding marriage of persons considered mentally disabled, international covenants and agreements stated that consent was the main principle, therefore a person considered not in full possession of their mental faculties could not legally speaking enter into agreements. Persons not considered mentally disabled could marry.

On the issue of torture, Tunisia had ratified the Convention against Torture following the revolution. There were also a series of decrees after the revolution pardoning people and acceding to all international conventions, and they were gathering data on people who had been tortured. The legislature had provided many guarantees to avoid abuse of people in institutions. In emergencies, the placement of a person in an institution took place without the consent of a sick person, but this could only be done by judicial authorities. In some countries, a medical certificate was usually issued that allowed people to be institutionalized, but in Tunisia this had to be done by a judge. People also could not be institutionalized in private hospitals, only in public hospitals to avoid abuse of the procedure.

Turning to the question of sexual violence against women, the delegation noted that Tunisian law once stated that should a rapist marry his victim by mutual consent, the matter was subject to review. New legislation considered this forced marriage and if the woman was disabled this compounded the crime.

The delegation also noted that once upon a time a visually impaired person used to have to find two people who could be witnesses when they signed any sort of paper or document. They had fought long and hard to change that law, in vain, until the Convention was ratified. Then they managed to use the Convention and invoked article 12 on legal capacity and the law was finally amended. This highlighted the importance of the Convention in ensuring the rights and promoting inclusion for persons with disabilities.

In terms of regional and international cooperation, the delegation said that given Tunisia’s geographical location it had always collaborated with European and other neighbouring countries. The State party had passed bilateral agreements with various States including Cameroon, Mauritania, Italy and Monaco. There were a number of non-governmental organizations that worked with African organizations and there was tripartite cooperation between Tunisia and countries in the north and south.

One of the positive aspects of Tunisian development was that they provided increasing support for institutional development and capacity building. There were small assessment units being put into place to assist people and make this assistance more widespread. There was no question of a person being institutionalized without their consent, and the person with disabilities had to request this placement or agree to it. The role of the family and the community was very important to the inclusion of persons with disabilities. There were rules governing the placement of persons with disabilities into host families or foster families.

Questions by Experts

In a round of follow-up questions, an Expert noted that the Convention talked about equality before the law in a general sense and given that people with disabilities were often poor they needed money to access the justice system because it was difficult to do so without money, legal assistance, education and so on. So without establishing an independent, impartial agency funded by government, persons with disabilities would still have trouble accessing justice.

A Committee member asked if it was correct that there was one specialized hospital for the care of the mentally disabled and how many people were treated in this hospital. Another Expert asked for clarification on new legislation that had been passed after the revolution and they asked if these new laws could be published throughout the Middle East and North Africa. Would this new legislation include a law on domestic violence and was there any sort of legislative initiative in this area?

Another speaker asked about the mistreatment of women and children with disabilities and were there provisions in the law for such victims of mistreatment and what was done in terms of awareness-raising about this issue?

Response by Delegation

Responding to these question and comments, the delegation said that the legal system was free and anyone who could not afford a lawyer was provided one, in both civil and criminal matters. On the question of sign language in the court, if a person with disabilities had requested this assistance it was required that someone be present in the court to assist the person in question whether it was a civil or criminal case. In terms of domestic violence and whether the mistreatment of a person with a disability was an aggravating factor, the delegation said that people must denounce family violence and violence against women and children wherever they found it. There were provisional centres where women and children who were victims of abuse could go for two weeks and there was also a hotline they could call for help. There was a project for producing a model law for the protection of persons with disabilities in the Arab world. They were also trying to plan a seminar on this issue, but given the prevailing conditions in the country, this seminar was now postponed.

In all hospitals, there were now services offered which covered mental impairments. A Committee Expert interrupted to say that the Convention did not allow isolation in institutions or other social situations, including in hospitals.

Concluding Remarks

AMNA ALI AL-SUWAIDI, the Committee Member Serving as the Rapporteur for the Report of Tunisia, thanked the delegation for the fruitful and positive dialogue they had had with the State party. There remained questions that were raised during the dialogue that needed clarification, however. Ms. Al-Suwaidi said that she hoped Tunisia would go further in its awareness-raising efforts concerning the disabled and their integration into society. She also wished that more money would be allocated to this awareness-raising as well as education because this could go a long way in changing children’s lives and helping them to achieve full equality of opportunity.

MOHAMED ENNACEUR, Minister of Social Affairs for Tunisia, thanked the Committee members for their comments and recommendations and they were happy to have been able to benefit from the discussion. The delegation felt that the members of the Committee were activists in the area and had great professional and exhaustive understanding of the dimensions involved and the lofty aims of the Convention concerning the disabled. This had given them even greater determination to achieve their noble objectives. The Committee had seen the steps taken by Tunisia to comply with the international system and how the principles covered by the Convention had become a tangible reality in that country. They wanted to do more and study matters more closely as further progress was needed in some areas and they would strive to achieve this so that there was greater equality of opportunity for this sector of society. They had presented their report despite the prevailing conditions in the country and this fact proved that they were determined to join this international effort to gain greater respect for the disabled. This report was an initial step in moving forward in applying the Convention and they hoped four years from now their next report would be even more comprehensive and concise concerning the finer points of the Convention.

For use of the information media; not an official record

CRPD11/004E