One Step Closer to a Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities
For two weeks in May, LSN staff and country directors participated in shaping the new U.N. Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities. The LSN team, including co-founders Ken Rutherford and Jerry White, sat in on caucus meetings with other nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and participated with government representatives to review and revise draft language and content for this new and important human rights convention. SURVIVOR REPORT spoke with Janet Lord and Kathy Guernsey, two of LSN’s Advocacy Attorneys, who were instrumental in LSN’s participation. (For the text of the Convention on the Human Rights of People with Disabilities click here)
SR: What is the purpose of this treaty? How will it benefit survivors around the world?
Janet Lord (JL): The purpose of the treaty is to provide a broad international framework for the rights of people with disabilities that will usher in a new phase of legislation on the national level (within the signatories own countries.) It means that, given that fewer than 45 countries around the world have any type of disability legislation to protect the rights of people with disabilities, this treaty will prompt states to undertake comprehensive disability legislation and policy. The really dramatic barriers that people face, from employment to education, to access to court or political and public life, will, over time, be addressed. The treaty will help wipe away laws that actually discriminate against people with disabilities and policies that create barriers to employment or education. If countries sign and ratify, they would be obliged to set in motion legislative reform to bring their own domestic law within the range of obligations set forth in this treaty.
SR: How will it change life for individuals on the ground, so to speak?
Kathy Guernsey (KG): Nobody would argue that the treaty is a panacea. The benefits of it will not be immediate. However, when states become parties to the treaty, under international law, they are then obliged to be in compliance with the treaty. The treaty will set forth minimum standards. So, in those instances where governments have policies, regulations, or legislation that contravene the treaty, they will have to change it. They will no longer be permitted to have laws that discriminate against people with disabilities. They will have to get rid of them. The treaty will provide governments a framework for those legislative processes, and it will provide them with a different approach. Many governments have addressed people with disabilities as charity cases, or as patients needing to be fixed. However, the philosophy of this treaty really looks at society and social barriers. The problem is not the person; it’s society. The treaty encourages governments to really respect the potential and capabilities of people with disabilities as contributing members of society, who not only should be involved with society, but need to be involved.
JL: If we develop an effective treaty, it will create international minimum standards that domestically, states must adhere to. It will also create a type of international watchdog mechanism that will pressure governments to comply over time with the obligations set forth in the treaty, via national legislation and policy making. The treaty will require governments to report on the progress they’re making, the obstacles they’re confronting, and at the same time, create a healthier link between national and international practices and policies--perhaps through a coordinating body at the national level. What we see typically in countries around the world, even in the United States, is a very fragmented approach to disability laws. You’ve got legislation over here dealing with employment; you have special legislation somewhere else dealing with education; pieces of legislation relating to rehabilitation and health issues, transportation, etc., elsewhere. These issues are typically overseen by several different ministries or departments. Rarely do you have a body that coordinates communication among the different ministries in a coherent way, and therefore you rarely have a coherent disability policy. Even in the United States, you have the National Council on Disability, but it doesn’t really possess the resources or authority to coordinate effectively. What successful international treaties do is create and mobilize networks of grassroots groups across the world, who are able to link not only into what is going on at the international level, as far as what’s going on with the monitoring body, but also nationally, providing pressure within their country. So, we’re hoping this treaty, like others, will have both a top-down and a bottom-up effect.
SR: Has that been a challenge in the treaty process? Is it the way most countries look at people with disabilities?
KG: There are occasions when you hear governments making statements, and you think, “Oh, my.” We heard some Asian countries referring to the concept of independent living as an issue of institutionalization. U.N. mission staff have not necessarily been involved in domestic implementation of their own national laws, and they make statements based on their personal understandings and prejudices. They would make comments that locking people up in institutions was not only the appropriate thing to do to people with disabilities, but it would benefit them. There was a complete lack of understanding that people with disabilities would like to have some choice in the matter.
SR: How does this treaty compare with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)?
KG: The convention will not necessarily tell states that they have to implement a specific piece of legislation, like the ADA. How countries implement the treaty is up to them. If a country wants to develop an anti-discrimination piece of legislation, that would be a common approach and we would encourage that. There may be regulations or other policies and programs they want to implement. How countries implement the treaty and make its minimum standards a reality in that country will very much depend on that countries’ own situation, culture and context.
JL: I think the way to draw a parallel between the ADA and this treaty is to say that there are certain concepts embodied in the ADA that, broadly speaking, may make their way into this treaty. The concept of “reasonable accommodation,” for instance, or modification of an environment is included in this treaty. However, the treaty is going to be much broader than the ADA. This convention is not just a civil rights issues; it is much broader than that.
SR: What do you see as LSN’s role if the treaty becomes international law?
JL: Once this treaty is adopted and we move into ratification and implementation at the national level, particularly in developing countries, in some cases there will be a need for quite dramatic changes in law and policy. The formulation of national disability strategies and legislation to bring these laws into effect will require a tremendous amount of technical assistance for many developing countries. Organizations like LSN may be in a position to help. It will also require capacity building for these countries to comply with their reporting obligations. In order for all of that to happen, the disability communities within these countries will need to be mobilized and have the sort of resources and tools and training in order to feed into that process on the national level, and in some cases, regionally or international level. LSN’s role in mine-affected countries will be to continue to convene and help support the mobilization of survivors and disability organizations and human rights groups, and so on. We also ensure that disability issues are part of development planning. We will ensure that landmine survivors and other people with disabilities are at the table when development projects are being planned. When new schools are being built, for example, to make sure they are wheelchair accessible and include all children.
KG: The participation of people with disabilities in this process has been rather unusual. NGOs have had a role to play in this treaty development process that has been very different than past processes. NGOs can not only observe, but speak as well. In January, when the Working Group put together a draft text, governments and people with disabilities sat at the same table. It was very powerful. Governments said they had not been at the same table before. With the participation of people with disabilities, it was clearer to the government representatives why it was so important to do this. The governments acknowledged that NGO’s have an important role to play. It inspired them to get involved even more.
JL: To see a group that is so traditionally marginalized and left out of international and even regional decision-making, having a role – it was very inspiring and empowering. It was even nicer seeing members of disability groups from developing countries participating at such a high level, and that participation has continued to grow. It’s remarkable and amazing. It’s really a South-driven process (“South” being the developing world). They are the countries initiating this, generating tremendous participation in the process.
|
