OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
Conference: Advancing the National Disability Strategy: Building on Comparative and
International Innovation
10 December 2010
Centre for Disability Law and Policy
Ladies and gentleman,
I am delighted and honoured to have the opportunity to participate at this conference organized
by the Centre for Disability Law and Policy, to discuss lessons from international consultation
and the experience of drafting the CRPD.
Allow me to start with a reflection of the past, of the time when the CRPD was being drafted.
During this process, large numbers of civil society actors played an active role in shaping the
Convention. The slogan “Nothing About us Without Us”, which as you know came into use by
the disability movement during the 1990s, illustrates the claim of persons with disabilities which
is reflected in the Convention: No policy should be decided by any representative without the full
and direct participation of persons with disabilities affected by the respective policy.
The participation of civil society organizations in drafting human rights treaties is not new: The
Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Convention
on the Rights of the Child (CRC), for example, benefitted from the input of the respective
constituencies. And the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was preceded by
over 20 years of negotiations, in which indigenous peoples themselves participated tirelessly.
The difference in the case of the CRPD, however, consisted on one hand of the larger role, which
civil society played in the negotiations of the CRPD in comparison with other treaties: An
unprecedented number of persons with disabilities were participating in the historical drafting
1
process and persons with different disabilities took part in it, reflecting the diversity of the
constituency. Also, the Ad Hoc Committee (AHC) working on the draft Convention established a
broader role for civil society in the negotiations, following the motto “nothing about us without
us”: As opposed to usual practice, official documents of the AHC were made available to NGO
representatives; NGOs could distribute awareness-raising and advocacy materials to government
representatives and during informal sessions of the AHC, civil society representatives could
directly approach government delegations at their seat.
Organizations of Persons with Disabilities (DPOs) were particularly influential in the
negotiations of the Convention and they achieved tangible results: One example came at the end
of the negotiations. At the last minute, a footnote was added to the text as adopted by the Ad Hoc
Committee which would have led to a different understanding of the term 'legal capacity' in
article 12 in the Russian, Arabic and Chinese versions of the Convention. Through strong civil
society lobbying in partnership with some member states, it was possible to remove the footnote
prior to adoption by the General Assembly.
The Convention recognizes that the active role played by civil society organizations during the
drafting process role must continue. Therefore, States parties are required to “closely consult
with” and “actively involve” persons with disabilities in decision-making processes related to
them, as stated in article 4(3). In particular, the Convention requires that “civil society, in
particular persons with disabilities and their representative organizations, shall be involved and
participate fully in the monitoring process” (art. 33(3)). This has implications for both process
and substance. In terms of process, persons with disabilities must be involved in monitoring
activities, for example by having persons with disabilities among the monitors. By way of
substance, the voices and experiences of persons with disabilities must be central in monitoring
reports in recognition of the fact that persons with disabilities are the experts on their own
situation.
It is also important to ensure that efforts to monitor the human rights situation of persons with
disabilities do not contribute to further marginalizing persons within a particular group.
Monitoring the rights of persons with disabilities must have a cross-disability and cross-society
2
focus. That is, monitoring must involve women, men, girls and boys with the full spectrum of
types of disabilities—including those with physical, mental, intellectual or sensory
impairments—and from all socio-economic and ethnic backgrounds, age groups and walks of
life. For example, it must reach and include those who are poor, homeless or institutionalized.
In addition to monitoring, National Human Rights Institutions, NGOs and civil society have an
important role to play at the national level in the follow-up process of the recommendations
contained in the concluding observations. Through advocacy, they can actively promote an
effective implementation of the recommendations at the national level.
In addition to participation at the national level in monitoring the Convention, there are several ways
to engage with the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: For example, the
Convention stipulates that States must consult with and actively engage persons with disabilities
through their representative organizations in relevant decision-making processes, including in the
nomination of experts for the Committee. Furthermore, civil society organizations are invited to
submit “shadow” or “parallel” reports, which are meant to supplement State reports. This is a way of
ensuring that the recommendations contained in the concluding observations reflect the needs and
concerns of civil society actors and that States implement the Convention by responding directly and
specifically to persons with disabilities’ needs.
Moreover, DPOs have a role to play in the review of specific countries. As you know, each State
that is party to the Convention presents a comprehensive report on measures taken to implement the
Convention within two years of becoming a party. There is now a common practice for civil society
organizations to prepare parallel country reports for the Committee – reports that provide a distinct
and often more comprehensive review of the current human rights situation on the ground.
The
preparation of country reports has become a rallying point for civil society groups to compare
lessons learned and to consider the way forward. Treaty bodies also engage directly with civil
society groups during the country review offering an additional avenue for DPOs participation in
treaty body deliberations.
Participating in days of general discussion is another way for civil society actors to engage with the
Committee, as issues of general interest arising from the CRPD are discussed at these platforms of
3
discussion. The theme of this year’s DGD was accessibility and organizations of persons with
disabilities delivered remarkable and extremely valuable inputs on this key topic.
Distinguished participants,
In spite of the active participation of civil society in the drafting process of the CRPD and in
monitoring the Convention, the way forward is challenging: We all must listen to as many voices as
possible and those voices should be representative. The diversity of persons with disabilities might
mean that there could be conflicting voices, which must be respected. We as defenders of the human
rights of persons with disabilities, can make a difference in promoting that all persons with
disabilities are being heard and that they can fully participate in all processes affecting them.
Concretely, this means that we need to ensure that women and men with physical, mental,
intellectual and sensory impairments of both developing and developed countries participate fully in
implementing and monitoring the Convention. This is important as different disability constituencies
have different needs and different ways of communicating. This diversity and heterogeneity of
persons with disabilities needs to be reflected in order for the Convention to be effectively
implemented and monitored. If full participation of persons with disabilities from all constituencies
is ensured, the world’s 650 million persons with disabilities will be more likely to enjoy the same
rights and opportunities as everyone else. Let us therefore join forces in this regard.
I would like to thank the Centre for Disability Law and Policy for giving us the opportunity to reflect
on the experience of drafting the CRPD with regard to civil society participation. Ireland can set an
example by actively inviting civil society organizations to participate in all processes related to the
implementation of the Convention and in empowering organizations of persons with disabilities in
order for all of them to make their voices heard. OHCHR stands ready to assist in any way that we
can be helpful.
Thank you
4