1 / 11

Ke y Challenges for State Parties to the CRPD

Ke y Challenges for State Parties to the CRPD. Theresia Degener Dublin, Friday 17th May 2013 Dfi/ CDLP conference. Agenda. The CRPD Committee Monitoring articles 5 equality and non-discrimination & art. 9 accessibility Monitoring art. 12 legal capacity

luke
Download Presentation

Ke y Challenges for State Parties to the CRPD

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. KeyChallengesfor State Partiestothe CRPD Theresia Degener Dublin, Friday 17th May 2013 Dfi/ CDLP conference

  2. Agenda • The CRPD Committee • Monitoring articles 5 equality and non-discrimination & art. 9 accessibility • Monitoring art. 12 legal capacity • Monitoring art. 19 independent living • Monitoring art. 14 liberty • Monitoring art. 24 education • Monitoring art. 6 disabled women

  3. 1. The CRPD Committee 18 treaty members CRPD: 130 parties (155 sign) OP: 76 (91) 45 reports received, 50 overdue 7 States fully reviewed: Tunesia, Spain, China, Peru, Argentina, Hungary, Paraguay Meeting time: 5 (+ 2) weeks in Geneva Backlog: 5 years!

  4. Procedures & working methods • Review of state report (art. 35 CRPD) • Individual communication (art. 1 OP) • Inquiry (art. 6 OP) • Early awareness & urgent action (para b. 26 working methods) • General Comments (rule 47 RoP) • Statements (para. 64 WM) • Days of general discussions (Rule 28 RoP)

  5. 2. Monitoring Art. 5 (non – discrimination) & Art. 9 (accessibility) Equality and non-discrimination (art. 5) Accessibility (art.9) Concluding Observations on Spain (6th sess. Sept 2011) The Committee (…) remains concerned at the low level of compliance with these requirements, (…) The Committee reminds the State party that article 9 of the Convention also requires States to ensure access to information and communication Key challenge: understanding scope of art. 9 Target: group of disabled persons (impairment related) Right or principle ? (1st case on art. 9) Concluding Observations on Hungary (8th sess. Sept 2012): The Committee notes with concern that the State party’s legislation, (….), fails to state that denial of reasonable accommodation constitutes discrimination. • Key challenge: understanding reasonable accommodation not as a rehabilitation but as a non-discrimination measure • Target: individual disabled person .

  6. 3. Monitoring Article 12 (legal capacity) Concluding Observation on China (7th sess Sept 2012) The Committee is concerned about the system for establishing legal guardianship, which is not in compliance with art. 12 CRPD. It takes note of the complete absence of a system of supported decision-making measures which recognize the rights of persons with disabilities to make their own decisions and to have their autonomy, will and preferences respected. The Committee urges the state party to adopt measures to repeal the laws, policies and practices which permit guardianship and trusteeship for adults and take legislative action to replace regimes of substituted decision-making by supported decision making, which respects the person’s autonomy, will and preferences, in the exercise of one’s legal capacity in accordance with Article 12 of the CRPD.

  7. 4. Monitoring independent living (article 19) Concluding Observations on Peru (7th sess April 2012) The Committee is concerned at the absence of resources and services to guarantee the right of persons with disabilities to live independently and to be included in the community, in particular in rural areas. The Committee urges the State party to initiate comprehensive programmes to enable persons with disabilities to access a whole range of in-home, residential and other community support services, including personal assistance necessary to support living and inclusion in the community, and to prevent isolation or segregation from the community, especially in rural areas.

  8. 5. Monitoring liberty and security of the person (article 14) Concluding Observations on Argentina (8 th sess. Sept. 2012) The Committee notes with concern that involuntary long-term institutionalization is still common practice in the state party despite the adoption of deinstitutionalization strategies and despite the fact that the National Law on Mental Health (…) is based on the human rights model of disability.

  9. 6. Monitoring education article 24 Concluding Observations on Tunesia (5th sess April 2011) The Committee takes note of the national programme of inclusive education for children with disabilities. However, it notes with deep concern that, in practice, the inclusion strategy is not equally implemented in schools; rules relating to the number of children in mainstream schools and to the management of inclusive classes are commonly breached; and schools are not equitably distributed between regions of the same governorate. The Committee is equally concerned that many integrated schools are not equipped to receive children with disabilities, and that the training of teachers and administrators with regard to disabilities remains a concern in the State Party.

  10. 7. Monitoring the rights of disabled women (art. 6) Key challenges: (1) multiple discrimination (2) reproductive rights (3) sexual violence 9th session (April 2013) Half day of general discussion on disabled women and girls

  11. 8. Conclusions • Implementation and monitoring is an ongoing process which takes place after ratification • No state party has yet fully implemented the CRPD • International monitoring is based on constructive dialogue with state parties AND civil society • National monitoring and participation of DPOs are the keys!

More Related