COMMITTEE ON RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES HOLDS DAY OF GENERAL DISCUSSION ON ACCESSABILITY
The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities today held a Day of General Discussion on Article 9 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on accessibility. Over the course of two meetings, the Committee held three sessions on the right to access on an equal basis with others to physical environment and transportation, on the right to access on an equal basis with others to virtual and material information and communications, and on best practices on the implementation and promotion of accessibility.
Ronald McCallum, Chairperson of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in opening remarks, said without access to buildings, public transport and information persons with disabilities could not receive education and become full citizens. There could not be anything more crucial to persons with disabilities than full access.
Speakers noted that accessibility was essential for the enjoyment of all rights envisaged under the Convention and underscored the need to move from identifying obstacles to planning for accessible societies. They recommended that the Committee produce a general comment on accessibility and several representatives from States, international organizations, and non-governmental organizations presented their activities undertaken for disabled persons.
Speaking were representatives of the World Bank, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, the United Nations Children's Fund, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and Committee Experts.
Also speaking were representatives of the Atlas Council, the national human rights institutions of the United Kingdom and Germany, International Disability Alliance, Human Rights Watch, Blue Law International, Global Alliance on Accessible Technologies and Environments, Scandic, European Disability Forum, Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile, Federation Algérienne des Personnes Handicapées, Global Initiative for Inclusive ICTs, World Federation of the Deaf, World Blind Union, G3 Research Committee, Inclusion International, Disability Awareness Right and Education, Aalborg University, World Blind Union, SCOPE, World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry, and the Mental Disability and Advocacy Center.
The Committee will reconvene on Friday, 8 October, at 10 a.m. to discuss organizational matters and the methods of work of the Committee in a closed meeting. At 3 p.m. on Friday, also in a closed meeting, the Committee will discuss other matters and future meetings before concluding its fourth session.
Opening Statements
RONALD McCALLUM, Chair of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in opening remarks, said access to buildings, public transport and information was crucial for persons with disabilities. Without this access, persons with disabilities could not receive education and become full citizens. There could not be anything more crucial to persons with disabilities than full access.
MOHAMMED AL-TARAWNEH, Committee Expert speaking on behalf of His Highness Prince Ra’ad bin Zeid of Jordan, said accessibility was perhaps the most important question in the Convention. It was indeed that concept that clarified the difference between the medical and the social model of disability: The medical model focused on providing charity to persons with disabilities while the social model urged to provide more accessibility. Societies sometimes resisted making environments accessible to persons with disabilities due to the investments required, but the Convention only required undertaking what was “reasonable”. The concept of “reasonableness” may vary from one society to another but it was important that something be done for persons with disabilities.
Mr. Al-Tarawneh said investments in public services were necessary to return persons with disabilities back to their social environment and it was necessary to invest in the education sector if they sought to change the attitude of society towards persons with disabilities. But most importantly, persons with disabilities must no longer be viewed as passive receivers of goods – they could contribute to a nation’s economic growth.
CRAIG MOKHIBER, a.i. Director, Research and Right to Development Division, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said serving some 650 million persons with disabilities, this state of the art human rights convention demanded active and early interpretation of the Committee. It was right that this early discussion focused on the concept of accessibility because perhaps no other concept was more important in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. In fact, accessibility was implied in the full range of rights protected under the Convention.
Mr. Mokhiber said the framing of this Day of General Discussion around the three themes of physical environment and transportation, information and communication and best practices was very important. However, as the Committee had not yet been able to build a body of jurisprudence around the nascent Convention, it was important it remained as faithful as possible to the actual language of the Convention. The practices of other human rights treaty bodies offered good lessons in this regard, said Mr. Mokhiber. He suggested that the principle of accessibility be expanded by the Committee which should consult with experts and other stakeholders as much as possible. The Office of the High Commissioner stood ready to assist the Committee.
Session on the Right to Access on an Equal Basis with Others to the Physical Environment and Transportation
CHARLOTTE McCLAIN-NHLAPO, Senior Operations Officer, East Asia and Pacific/Africa, World Bank, said the slippery notion of accessibility was essential for the enjoyment of all rights envisaged under the Convention. Accessibility among other things included access to information, technologies, communication, economic and social life. Achievements in terms of accessibility had to be monitored, Ms. McClain-Nhlapo said, adding that this required knowing the normative content of accessibility. Other accessibility challenges ahead included developing the Government’s capacity to implement Article 9, the establishment of control mechanisms and sanctions for non-compliance, as well as adopting and enforcing legislation and moving from identifying obstacles to planning for accessible societies.
VALERIE KARR, Executive Director, the Atlas Council, said letting disability prevent persons from enjoying their rights would be a violation of States’ fundamental obligations. The obligation to remove these barriers was a fundamental one. Negative stereotypes could be tackled through awareness-raising and physical barriers could be removed through using new technologies, Ms. Karr observed. However, one must find a balance between “reasonable” and “necessary” adjustments for persons with disabilities.
Discussion
In the ensuing discussion, a representative of Australia said Australia’s national disability reform placed persons with disabilities at the center of services and the country’s new national disability strategy promoted the implementation of the Convention. A representative of New Zealand drew attention to the 2004 New Zealand Building Act. That Act required that all new and refurbished buildings that were accessible to the public also be made accessible to persons with disabilities.
A representative of Mexico said in implementing Article 9 of the Convention Mexico focused on training relevant staff, conducting awareness-raising initiatives and strengthening capacities. While Mexico has made progress in this area, it would nonetheless appreciate receiving examples of good practices to help it rolling out similar approaches in Mexico.
A representative of the United Nations Children's Fund said UNICEF was developing draft guiding principles for its work for and with persons with disabilities and it anticipated that a Senior Advisor on Children with Disabilities would shortly be appointed. A civil society representative speaker presented the current situation in the United Kingdom regarding access for persons with disabilities, saying the United Kingdom had good standards, laws and guidelines on accessibility, but major gaps in implementation and a lack of good practice examples persisted.
Other speakers said one should not forget how support persons and interpreters could enhance the access of persons with disabilities. The importance of taking into account gender perspectives in terms of accessibility was also underscored. Speakers recommended that the Committee produce a general comment on accessibility and that it provide States with concrete guidance to implement the Convention. The Committee was also encouraged to call upon industry trade associations and United Nations agencies to produce more standards on accessibility and to support efforts undertaken by the World Intellectual Property Organization in ensuring the rights of persons with disabilities.
Civil society representatives suggested that an international campaign be conducted to raise awareness of the Convention and that measures be undertaken to monitor the implementation of standards on persons with disabilities. Also, a uniform benchmarking system of accessibility should be established and more efforts must be made to train practitioners working with persons with disabilities, speakers said.
GERMAN XAVIER TORRES CORREA, Resource Person and Committee Expert, underscored the need to look at funding and ensure that loans to developing countries were big enough to improve the situation of persons with disabilities. The most beautiful standards were useless if people had no access to information and education. The Committee must do all it could to develop opportunities for people with disabilities.
Session on the Right to Access on an Equal Basis with Others to Virtual and Material Information and Communications
JIA YANG, Committee Chairperson for this session, said losing her sight had not prevented her from graduating from Harvard Kennedy School and working as a Professor, but this had only been possible thanks to information and communication technologies.
AXEL LEBLOIS, Executive Director, G3ict - Global Initiative for Inclusive ICTs, said information and communication technologies had tremendously progressed over the last 10 to 20 years. These technologies offered major opportunities, but substantial risks for exclusion persisted, among other reasons due to a lack of awareness and policies, fast-moving technologies, and a lack of inter-operationability and standardization that resulted in high costs.
PAAL RICHARD PETERSON, Member, World Federation of the Deaf, said accessibility came very close to freedom of speech which included both the right to give and the right to receive information. Yet deaf people suffered from a lack of accessible information as most Governments did not provide special services for deaf people, including sign language translations. New technologies often led to the world moving forward, but they could also create new obstacles. Legislation should thus ensure that new technologies did not create new barriers but opened paths to a more accessible and inclusive society.
In the ensuing discussion speakers said Australia funded two organizations to provide media content that was accessible to disabled persons and any organization that developed a website in Australia must ensure that it was accessible for persons with disabilities. New Zealand, for its part, had recognized the New Zealand sign language as an official language in 2006. Speakers underscored that teachers, nurses, policy-makers and other professionals must receive training on the needs of all disabled persons, including those with intellectual disabilities. It was further important that stakeholders aligned their standards for the universal access of persons with disabilities and that access to technologies was recognized as a basic need for persons with disabilities rather than a luxury.
Session on Best Practices on the Implementation and Promotion of Accessibility
JANET E. LORD, Legal Advisor, Disability Awareness, Rights and Education, said the Convention was not entirely clear in its characterization of accessibility. Its appearance in Article 9 required some disentangling and the interrelationship between accessibility and other core concepts, principles and rules was not explained, although the placement of the concept in the text suggested an overarching role. Accessibility as articulated in the Convention was also most certainly an affront and challenge to formal conceptions of equality. Putting conceptual and academic issues aside, however, accessibility could help identify discriminatory barriers. As an implementation tool, accessibility could generate meaning when applied to each and every specific obligation.
In the ensuing discussion speakers said Governments, national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations must all work together to ensure the obligations under the Convention were met. Speakers further underscored that technologies were costly, particularly for blind people who were often unemployed, and that accessibility should therefore also be seen in the context of education and employment. Speakers expressed concern about political parties that voiced their uneasiness with human diversity, including from countries that had ratified the Convention, and about people with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities, who were often left out by States.
Closing remarks
MOHAMMED AL-TARAWNEH, Chairperson of the Working Group on Accessibility, said today’s discussion had made it clear that the rights and principles of accessibility were the cornerstone of the Convention. In fact, disability was about the environment surrounding disabled persons.
IBRAHIM SALAMA, Director, Human Rights Treaties Division, said there seemed to be agreement that the Convention referred to physical, social and cultural environments, that accessibility was a cross-cutting issue in the Convention, and that a gender perspective on accessibility was needed. There also seemed to be agreement that Article 9 recognized accessibility as more than physical access, thus including information, technology, social and economic life, and that Article 9 covered both public and private actors and must be understood in terms of both domains.
For use of information media; not an official record
CRPD10/008E