DRAFT EDF ALTERNATIVE
REPORT TO THE UN
COMMITTEE ON THE
RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH
DISABILITIES
European Disability Forum |
First Version July 2014
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
OUTLINING AND STRUCTURING THE EDF ALTERNATIVE REPORT TO THE UN
COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
...................................................................................................................
A. INTRODUCTION
1. Context
1.1. Who are EDF and the other organisations (non EDF members) involved in the report?
1.2. How and to what extent are DPOs and Civil Society involved in decision making processes
at EU level?
1.3. How and to what extent are DPOs and Civil Society involved in the preparation of EU
Report?
2. Methodology used to prepare alternative report and the organisations involved
B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Key issues of concern and recommendations (1 page)
Priority to European Accessibility Act, anti-discrimination act, include in EU2020, review all
laws, mainstreaming impact assessment and of course guidelines for involvement of persons
with disabilities through organizations acc art 4.3. We also want to highlight the proposal to
encourage member states to invite DPO:s to national meetings in preparation for the high level
meetings going through agenda items and input before going to Brussels.
C. GENERAL PROVISIONS OF THE CONVENTION
Article 1: Purpose
The overall purpose of the Convention to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal
enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all people with disabilities and to
promote respect for their inherent dignity has not been realized today in the European Union.
The European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 builds on a variety of EU disability policy
instruments that have been developed since 1996 and aims at empowering people with
disabilities. The Strategy refers to the Convention and is based on the social model concept of
disability. The Disability Strategy is also linked to the Europe 2020 strategy in that it promotes
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
2
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
a full economic and social participation of people with disabilities in order to create a smart,
sustainable and inclusive growth in the EU.
However, despite the existing range of EU activities over the past 15 years, improvement in the
human rights situation of people with disabilities has been slow.1 Persons with disabilities are
still discriminated against in many areas of life and since the financial and economic crisis, are
thrown into poverty and social exclusion. The European Disability Strategy should have been
part of the Europe 2020 Strategy in order to be effective and reach its goals.
Resistance towards human rights based approach to disability policy is also still present at EU
and Member States’ level and in particular the fear for the impact this might have on the social
protection policies and economies.2
As mentioned in the EU report, EU law does not provide a harmonized concept of disability and
persons with disabilities. The Strategy refers to Article 1 of the Convention but this social model
approach to disability is not reflected across different EU law and policy sectors. Too often,
persons with disabilities are still seen as ‘vulnerable’ people, for example in EU consumer
policy3, EU civil and criminal justice policy4 or as ‘patients’ in EU research policy5.
EDF calls for
 The review of the Europe 2020 strategy must include a specific strategy for the
employment, social inclusion and poverty reduction of persons with disabilities, on the
model of the EU Youth Guarantee, with dedicated headline targets
1
Staying the Course: the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020, David L. Hosking, European Yearbook of Disability Law
(Volume 4), p. 86-87
2 See for example the fact that the Proposal for a Council Directive of 2 July 2008 on implementing the principle of equal
treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation has not been adopted yet after
5 years of negotiations. Also, the European Commission has not yet published the so-called European Accessibility Act, a
legislative initiative to improve accessibility of goods and services in the Internal Market.
3 See Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee of
the Regions, A European Consumer Agenda - Boosting confidence and growth, SWD (2012) 132 final): “The current context
may also exacerbate the disadvantaged situation of vulnerable consumers, such as people with disabilities or with reduced
mobility, who face difficulties in accessing and understanding information and in finding appropriate products and services on
the market”.
4 The European Council calls upon the EU to set common minimum standards on victim’s rights or rights of suspects and
accused in the Stockholm Programme – an open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens (2010/C 115/01). In this
Programme, reference is made to “vulnerable groups”.
5 Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing Horizon
2020 - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) and repealing Decision No 1982/2006/EC
(available at http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/funding/reference_docs.html#h2020-legal-basis-fp)
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
3
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF

The mainstreaming of the social human rights model approach to disability in all EU
law and policy relevant to people with disabilities
Article 2: Definitions
Denial of reasonable accommodation constitutes discrimination
The obligation to take reasonable accommodations can be found in article 5 of the Employment
Directive. However, the Convention goes one step further and states that ‘discrimination on the
basis of disability’ includes all forms of discrimination, including denial of reasonable
accommodations.
EDF calls for
 the definition in EU law of denial of reasonable accommodation as forms of disability
based discrimination.
Articles 3 and 4: General principles and general obligations
Currently, the Commission has no specific tool to assess existing and new legislation and
policies in the light of the UN CRPD. The impact on persons with disabilities and their rights,
despite improvements, is not always considered in the preparation of legislative and policy
proposals. The impact assessment guidelines, which the Commission uses to assess the
potential impact of different policy options makes no reference to persons with disabilities, but
calls for compatibility with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and for assessing the ‘social
impact’ of policy options6. However, the UN CRPD is more far reaching than the EU Charter of
Fundamental Rights. Only the annexes to the impact assessment guidelines refer to ‘the
integration of persons with disabilities’ and the Staff working paper on taking account of
fundamental rights in Commission’s impact assessments states the conclusion of the UN CRPD
by the EU.
As mentioned in the report, the European Commission has funded a wide ranging Study on
challenges and good practices in the implementation of the UN CRPD. 7 However, that study,
whilst identifying challenges to the implementation of the UN CRPD at both EU and Member
State level, and referring to individual EU instruments, did not amount to a review of EU
legislation and policy to establish compatibility with the Convention as it recommended the EU
to do.
6
Impact assessment guidelines, European Commission, 15 January 2009 (SEC(2009) 92), p. 39
European Foundation Centre, Study on challenges and good practices in the implementation of the UN Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities V/2008/1214, Final report, Brussels, October 2010, available at:
http://www.efc.be/programmes_services/resources/Documents/VC20081214_FINAL_REPORT_web_010211.pdf
7
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
4
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The list of competences which illustrates the EU legislative instruments that refer to matters
related to the implementation of UN CRPD8 is no longer up to date. Since its adoption in
2009, new legislation has been adopted that include disability provisions and also the Treaty
of Lisbon has entered into force including two articles (10 and 19 TFEU) with an explicit
reference to disability.
Optional Protocol
The EU has not signed the Optional Protocol to the Convention. People with disabilities face
gaps in the protection of their Convention rights with regards to those violations of Convention
rights for which the EU is to be held responsible, including in those areas of shared
competences where the EU is predominately responsible.9
Reservation
The EU upon ratifying the UN CRPD made a reservation with respect to article 27, 1 UN CRPD
in so far as it allowed Member States to make an exception for the armed forces. The
Employment Directive10 states that “Member states may provide that this Directive, in so far as
it relates to discrimination on the grounds of disability and age, shall not apply to the armed
forces”.
However, the applicable justification system11 and the occupational requirements exception12
in the Directive provide enough flexibility for the Member States to decide in each individual
case if a person with a disability is suited for a specific employment in the armed forces or not.
A generalized exception of application of the Employment Directive to the armed forces is
discriminatory and runs against the object and purpose of the Convention. This reservation has
an adverse impact on the right to employment of people with disabilities in the armed forces13.
8
The list of competences is an annex to the Council decision of 26 November 2009 concerning the conclusion, by the European
Community, of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2010/48/EC). This list is now outdated
as it was agreed at the end of 2009
9 The EU disability Framework under construction, Alexander Hoefmans, European Yearbook of Disability Law (Volume 3), p.
52
10 Article 3 (4) of the Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment
in employment and occupation, Official Journal L 303 , 02/12/2000 P. 0016 – 0022 (available at http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32000L0078:en:HTML)
11 Article 2, 2, b of the Employment Directive 2000/78/EC states that unequal treatment can be objectively justified by a
legitimate aim and the means of achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary
12 Article 4 of the Employment Directive 2000/78/EC
13 Also United Kingdom, Greece and Cyprus entered a similar reservation upon ratification of CRPD
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
5
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The European Court of Human Rights in the case Glor vs. Switzerland14, held that banning
persons from service in the army on the basis of disability represents discrimination contrary to
article 14 of the European Convention on human rights.
Standardisation
In 2012, the EU co-legislators adopted an updated regulation on the European
Standardisation15. Despite the reference to the UNCRPD and persons with disabilities in the
recitals 19, 22 and 24, it is not explicitly ensured that European Standards will promote universal
design, and that “exclusion clauses” on the ground of disability are prohibited16. In addition it is
not guaranteed that the Mandate 473 (paragraph 30 of the Report) issued by the European
Commission will produce as outcome a European Standard, according to what is indicated in
the Mandate itself.
Furthermore and contradicting the spirit of the article 4.3 of the UNCRPD, the Regulation does
not set up an effective representation and participation mechanism for persons with disabilities
and their representative organisations on equal basis with other stakeholders in the
development of standards and does not require to the European Standardisation Organisations
to make the standardisation process accessible (buildings, meetings, materials…). This
situation has caused that even in the development of European Standards funded by the EU
and targeting persons with disabilities, such as under Mandate 376 (accessibility requirements
of ICT products and services), users’ organisations had the status of “observers” without voting
rights inside the European Standardisation Organisations17. There has not been any initiative
coming from the EU institutions to build the capacity of DPO’s to participate in standardization,
the latter being a very long and complex process. Follow up of the involvement of
representatives of DPO:s in member states is needed.
14
Glor v Switzerland, European Court of Human Rights, Application no 13444/04, 30 April 2009
Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council of 25 October 2012 on European
standardisation, amending Council Directives 89/686/EEC and 93/15/EEC and Directives 94/9/EC, 94/25/EC, 95/16/EC,
97/23/EC, 98/34/EC, 2004/22/EC, 2007/23/EC, 2009/23/EC and 2009/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
and repealing Council Decision 87/95/EEC and Decision No 1673/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council:
available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:316:0012:0033:EN:PDF
16 Before the European Commission issued the Standardisation Mandate 392 (available at
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/standards_policy/mandates/database/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.detail&id=359#) for the
revision of safety standards for electrical household appliances with respect to the safety of children, older people and people
with disabilities, several European standards on household appliances had an “exclusion clause” explaining that the specific
needs of persons with disabilities, older people and children were not taken been into account while creating these
standards.
17 In the last stage of Mandate 376, some stakeholders were able to state that they could reach agreement without taking into
consideration the objection of the representatives of persons with disabilities and other societal stakeholders, including the
European Commission. After this situation, EDF prepared its technical comments on the final draft of the European Standard
on accessibility requirements for ICT products and services (Mandate 376): http://bit.ly/1e0l15b
15
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
6
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Research
Even though, the EU has indeed funded research projects in the field of disability (paragraph
30), there is still a predominant medical, therapeutic and rehabilitation-oriented approach that
has been pointed out by some studies18, although with an increasing number of projects
focusing on equality, non-discrimination and accessibility as well. The new R&D framework
Horizon 2020 (2014-2020)19 does not address disability under the social model of disability,
and the accessibility and design for all perspective is not mainstreamed in the programme. In
addition, there is not specific requirement to provide accessible information and communication
to persons with disabilities. Further, research on discrimination against women and girls with
disabilities has not been undertaken.
In Horizon 2020 chapter 6.3.1 research on social cohesion and discrimination to various group
– i.e. persons with disability – is mentioned.
There are societal and even scientific benefits in involving persons with disabilities as ideagivers and experts in the research process. See i.e. the British project Involve, the American
Cochrane collaboration and the Dutch "Tools". In Sweden there are some initiatives from the
Disability movement in going from "research object" to co-actor in research."
Training
The EU has organised successfully from 2011-2013 training seminars on the CRPD and EU
disability law for legal practitioners, judges and civil servants. However, no budget is foreseen
to fund the organisation of these seminars in the future20.
Add a sub headline “Involvement of persons with disabilities”
Consultation and involvement of persons with disabilities and their representative
organisations in the decision making processes on disability policies by the European
institutions happen on an ad hoc basis and there is no formal mechanism established to involve
them systematically.
See “New Priorities for Disability Research in Europe”, Report of the European Disability Forum Consultation Survey
“European Research Agendas for Disability Equality”, Prepared by Prof. Mark Priestley and Prof. Lisa Waddington for the
European Disability Forum, December 2008, available in PDF format online.
19 Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing Horizon
2020 - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) and repealing Decision No 1982/2006/EC
(available at http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/funding/reference_docs.html#h2020-legal-basis-fp)
20 The European Academy of Law has not received any funding yet to continue the seminar they organised in the past on the
UN CRPD for judges and legal professionals together with the European Foundation Center.
18
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
7
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Further, women and girls with disabilities are not involved through the relevant organisations of
persons with disabilities at EU level in relevant gender equality processes and, as a result, the
multiple discrimination they face is not taken into account in EU decision making processes.
As mentioned under Article 9 of this section, the communication and consultation tools, such
as the online public consultations of the European Commission are not accessible. In addition,
the EU offices in some Member States21 do not (systematically) invite people with disabilities
and their representative organisations to relevant meetings and events. If people are invited,
accessibility and the provision of reasonable accommodations are not always ensured22.
EDF calls for
 The revision of the impact assessment guidelines to include a systematic and
mandatory disability impact assessment and to be compliant with CRPD. This should
be accompanied by more rigorous implementation of the Commission’s commitment to
ensure compliance of proposals with the provisions of CRPD;
 the conduct a comprehensive screening exercise of EU legislation and, if necessary,
should modify or abolish existing instruments in order to ensure full compliance with
the UN CRPD. Such an exercise should be horizontal in order to ensure that all
legislation, policies and programmes are reviewed and evaluated, and should consider
the Convention not only article by article, but also holistically, recognising the
interdependence and indivisibility of human rights. This process should involve the
meaningful contribution of persons with disabilities and their representative
organisations. The outcomes of the screening process should be made publicly
available and disseminated in accessible formats;
 the update of the list of competences to include all EU legislation and policy that refers
to the rights of persons with disabilities;
 the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention;
 the withdrawal of the general reservation on non-discrimination in employment in the
armed forces to the Convention;
 The Reform the European Regulation on Standardisation setting up a binding prerequisite of universal design approach, ensuring the participation of persons with
disabilities and their representative organizations one equal basis with other
21
Organisations of people with disabilities have not been invited to relevant meetings and events of EU offices in for example
Italy, Portugal and Hungary. EU offices in Spain, Poland, UK and Sweden have invited people with disabilities.
22 This was the case of events organised the Italian representation to the Commission and the Parliament. Also,the EU office
in Stockholm does for not foresee assistive hearing loop system or other assistive listening device for a hard of hearing person
attending a meeting.
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
8
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF






stakeholders. This participation will need that the standards drafting process is
accessible, and there are appropriate resources to build the capacity of DPO’s to get
involve in standardization initiatives at national and EU level;
universal design should be mainstreamed in EU-funded research;
Disability-related research funded by the EU should include gender indicators and be
systematically grounded in a human rights perspective promoting participation and
access of persons with disabilities to society (i.e. the social model of disability);
Selection and award criteria should also include references to accessibility and design
for all to avoid the creation of new barriers for persons with disabilities;
EU funding rules should allow for additional funding to cover disability-related costs,
and should also require that all information and communication is accessible for
persons with disabilities;
The continuation of the training seminars on CRPD for all relevant professionals in the
EU;
The development of guidelines for consultation with persons with disabilities and
representative organisations of persons with disabilities, including of women and girls
with disabilities in the development and implementation of UN CRPD by the
Commission, the Parliament, the Council of the EU and the European Council. As far
as the Commission is concerned, EDF welcomes the establishment of working groups
and with regards to the Parliament, the establishment of UN CRPD cross committee
task force. It is crucial that the DPOs are involved as equal party in the process, and
receive adequate funding to do this. The guidelines pay particular attention on how to
consult and involve persons with autism, intellectual and psychosocial disabilities.
D. INFORMATION RELATING TO SPECIFIC RIGHTS
Article 5: Equality and non-discrimination
People with disabilities can have multiple identities and face multiple discrimination, based on
their disability but additionally also based on age, sexual orientation and gender identity, race,
ethnic and social origin, religion and other status. However, EU anti-discrimination legislation
does not protect against dual or multiple discrimination. The lack of protection means that there
is no incentive for public authorities to address the needs of people with intersectional identities.
Current EU legislation only covers discrimination in employment. This gap in protection
against discrimination for persons with disabilities needs to be addressed and the protection
framework needs to be completed to protect persons with disabilities also in social protection
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
9
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
and healthcare, social advantages, access to and supply of goods and other services
available to the public, including housing and education.
In some EU Member States, equality bodies and ombudspersons are not competent to work
on disability discrimination23. At the same time, the involvement of an equality body could be
an effective way to seek a friendly solution in cases of discrimination in employment, as proven
by the examples of countries where this practice already exists. Their intervention is competent,
informal, free of charge and impartial. 24
As the Employment Directive does not require it, most organisations of persons with disabilities
cannot represent a person with a disability who is a victim of employment discrimination in court.
This would be a very effective measure against victimization which is currently one of the main
obstacles for victims to file complaints. Additional conditions in national law to comply with or
limited recognition of persons with disabilities before the law can create further obstacles for
engaging in judicial procedures.25
The 2014 Commission report on the implementation of the Employment Directive found that
further efforts are needed to apply the Directive in practice, in particular through policy action,
awareness raising and training.26
EDF calls for
 the EU to adopt the proposed Directive, as amended by the European Parliament,
which aims to protect persons with disabilities (amongst other groups) against
discrimination in all areas of life outside of employment, while taking into account the
specific situations of multiple discrimination and ensuring its compliance with the UN
CRPD the extension of equality bodies’ and ombudspersons’ mandates to cover
complaints of disability based discrimination. In addition, training should be provided to
address cases of multiple discrimination based on age, sexual orientation and gender
identity, race, ethnic and social origin, religion and other status.
23
Austria, Hungary, Portugal and Spain. More countries are not competent to work on disability discrimination outside
employment and vocational training: Denmark, Estonia, Greece and Poland.
24 EDF Position Paper on the practical impact of the Employment Directive on persons with disabilities in employment, 2010
(available at http://www.edf-feph.org/Page.asp?docid=25005&langue=EN)
25 EDF Position Paper on Evaluation of Article 9 of the Employment Directive on defence of rights, 2013 (available at
http://www.edf-feph.org/Page.asp?docid=31816&langue=EN)
26 Joint Report on the application of Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment
between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin and of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing
a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, COM(2014) 2 final (available at
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/com_2014_2_en.pdf)
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
10
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Article 8: Awareness-raising
The conclusion of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) in
2010 constitutes a historic moment, since it’s the first time that the EU itself ratifies an
international human rights treaty. If the EU intended with that to bring a real change in the lives
of its 80 million Europeans with disabilities, a real and strong awareness-raising campaign,
which would make the UN CRPD known at European level, but also among the Member States,
would be necessary.
The fact that the EU has concluded the UN CRPD is not visible on the websites of the EU
institutions. Information about the UN CRPD is available on the website of DG Justice, but it is
‘hidden’ under several subsections of its menu bar: Tackling discrimination, People with
disabilities, United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
The EU report includes a summary of actions that were undertaken already before the
conclusion of the UN CRPD by the EU. For instance, the establishment of the European Day
of Persons with Disabilities was made in 1993, long before the EU concluded the UN CRPD
and, thus, this is not a result of the conclusion of the UN CRPD, neither indicative of the
progress that the EU has made on the implementation of the Convention. In the same way, the
‘For Diversity: Against Discrimination’ campaign was launched in 2009, before the UN CRPD
was concluded. This campaign was focusing on non-discrimination including on the grounds of
disability, but it should be in no way considered as a campaign to raise awareness specifically
on disability, neither as an action to promote the implementation of the UN CRPD, for which
the EU report should be all about.
The EU report states mostly the actions that the European Commission has undertaken to raise
awareness on disability issues. However, it does not state any specific actions that have been
developed as a result of the adoption of the UN CRPD or that have been undertaken by the
other EU institutions.
The report states that the EU supports the Member States campaigns, but does not describe
in which ways it does this.
EDF calls on the EU to:

launch a real, strong and well-organised campaign to raise awareness on the UN CRPD
and its obligations;
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
11
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF








make disability issues and the information on the EU’s accession to the UN CRPD visible
on the websites of its institutions;
include the UN CRPD, including its gender perspective, in EU mainstream campaigns,
key speeches or events of EU institutions leaders dealing with internal and external
policies;
establish a regular State of the Union meeting on disability after the one that took place
between the Presidents of the European Commission, European Parliament, and
European Council in December 2011;
engage all its European institutions on the promotion of the UN CRPD;
ensure that the websites of its institutions are accessible to persons with disabilities and
that the information is provided also in accessible formats;
involve also the offices of the European Commission in Member States as well as
external delegations by ensuring they are aware of the obligations that the EU and its
Member States have after the EU concluded the UN CRPD and raise awareness about
it at national level as well;
Ensure that the institutions’ spokesperson and communication departments are aware
of the UN CRPD and use language that is complaint with the UN CRPD;
Systematically celebrate the European Day or the Day of ratification of the UN CRPD
through press releases or messages by the Presidents of the European Parliament and
European Council as well as by the EU Presidency.
Article 9: Accessibility and Article 21: Freedom of expression and opinion, and access
to information
The EU report states that the European Commission has an extensive record promoting
accessibility. Several initiatives have indeed been launched such as the Access City Awards 27
to promote accessibility in the urban environment, the technical specifications for rail
interoperability (TSI-PRM)28 to improve accessibility of railways or the Lifts Directive 29 but those
initiatives are very diverse in scope (award, regulations) and their scope of application is not
sufficient. For example, the TSI-PRM aim at harmonizing technical standards for trains but they
exempt parts of the station building.
27
European Commission, DG Justice, Access City Awards website (available at
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/disabilities/award/index_en.htm) , last visited on 23 June 2014
28 European Railway Agency (ERA) website (available at http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Pages/PRMTSI.aspx) last visited on 23 June 2014
29 European Commission, DG Enterprise and Industry website (available at
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/mechanical/documents/legislation/lifts/index_en.htm) last visited on 23 June 2014
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
12
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
A general piece of legislation focusing on accessibility does not exist yet. European
Commission’s mandates to develop European Standards, such as M42030 in support of
European accessibility requirements for public procurement in the built environment and
M47331 to include “Design for All” in relevant standardization initiatives, have launched in order
to improve accessibility in the built environment, but neither of these two have led yet to the
adoption of a European standard and there is still a lack of binding legislation. The most
outstanding piece of regulation to explicitly tackle accessibility that the EC is still considering to
publish is the expected European Accessibility Act (EAA), which is supposed to cover
accessibility of goods and services on the Internal Market of the EU, but its exact scope of
application is not clear yet. This proposal is part of the European Disability strategy and has
been announced in several European Commission work programmes, yet it has not yet been
published for reasons that remain unclear32, despite pressure from the European Parliament
and a clear commitment from the European Commission.
The EU also needs to highlight that for people with disabilities it would be very helpful to be
supported by personal assistants to vote and to do things that you are unfamiliar or feel
uncomfortable with.
The EU report also mentions several pieces of legislation that allow Member States to put
accessibility requirements in legislation relating to consumer protection, transactions, public
procurement and the use of EU funds like the Structural and Investment Funds. However, the
EU is lacking initiative on other important areas, such as a general accessibility law for
transport. There is no EU legislation on accessibility of the built environment, although the EU
could tackle this issue indirectly for example via related legislation on provision of services,
professional qualifications or other areas in which it has competences. Furthermore, many of
the EU institutions remain inaccessible for persons with disabilities 33,34. Add follow up effects
30
M/420 Standardisation mandate to CEN, CENELEC and ETSI in support of European accessibility requirements for public
procurement in the built environment: available at
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/standards_policy/mandates/database/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.detail&id=392
31 M/473 Standardisation mandate to CEN, CENELEC and ETSI to include “Design for All” in relevant standardisation
initiatives: available at
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/standards_policy/mandates/database/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.detail&id=461
32 The Commission has repeatedly pledged to publish a proposal for such a law and has already completed the preparatory
phase including the impact assessment and the inter-service consultation and a stakeholder consultation. The Accessibility Act
would be the first piece of European legislation to tackle accessibility of the built environment and accessibility as a transversal
issue in itself.
33 European Union of the Deaf UNCRPD Survey Report 2013, p. 15: “In which institutions have you encountered barriers for
deaf people? 44.4% EP Brussels, 22.2% EC Brussels”. On p. 16: “Most frequently faced barriers – no international sign
interpretation (72.2%)”. More information on http://www.eud.eu/uploads/EUDUNCRPDWWW_1.pdf
34 Decision of the European Ombudsman closing his inquiry into complaint 2455/2011/JF against the European Personnel
Selection Office (available at http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/cases/decision.faces/en/49161/html.bookmark)
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
13
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
of procurement directive article 42 accessibility requirements – really important to realize
Universal Design as described in CRPD general comment 2
Although the reform of the “Telecom Package” on electronic communications (paragraphs 5557) takes into account the needs of persons with disabilities, there is still much room for
improvement in equivalence of access and choice among Member States, as different studies
show35. This means that persons with disabilities cannot still enjoy some services and benefit
from the competition among different service providers on the same conditions (including prices
and tariffs) than their peers. Besides, the obligation to provide accessible emergency services36
is not respected in all the EU Member States37.
The Audiovisual Media Services Directive in its article 7 requires Member States to “encourage”
media providers to make their services accessible, although it is limited to “visual or hearing
disabilities”38. Thus, the implementation of this article differs depending on the EU Member
State. According to a comparative study on the implementation of this Directive, just ten
countries report on having introduced requirements with regard to the level of subtitling, the
level of sign language interpretation and the level of audio description 39.
Concerning the e-identification Directive, there is not such “obligation” since the wording of the
dedicated article specifies “where feasible” (art. 15) and, furthermore, there is not a single
mention to this provision in the Commission mandate to develop the European Standard on esignature40.
35
Study on Assessing and Promoting E-Accessibility, available at http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/studyassessing-and-promoting-e-accessibility .
36 Art. 26,4 Directive 2009/136/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 amending Directive
2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services, Directive
2002/58/EC concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector
and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer
protection laws: “Member states shall ensure […] access to emergency services are equivalent to that enjoyed by other endusers”
37 See presentation on Emergency services accessibility in Europe and Reach 112, Gary Machado, EENA, available at
http://www.reach112.eu/ressource/static/files/reach112accessibilityfina.pdf. Also European Union of the Deaf UNCRPD
Survey Report 2013, p.10: “Accessibility of 112 – 0% of EU countries fully accessible, 31.3% no accessibility at all”, available
at http://www.eud.eu/uploads/EUDUNCRPDWWW_1.pdf
38Article 7 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of
certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of
audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive), available at http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:095:0001:0024:EN:PDF
39 Working Group 3, Round Table on Access to Audiovisual Media Services for persons with disabilities, Comparative
background document, Emmanuelle Machet, EPRA Secretariat, Revised public version – 8 July 2013, available at
http://epra3-production.s3.amazonaws.com/attachments/files/2202/original/accessibility_WG3_final_revised.pdf?1373379195
40 Standardisation mandate to the European Standardisation Organisations CEN, CENELEC and ETSI in the field of
Information and communication technologies applied to Electronic Signatures: available at http://www.e-signatures-
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
14
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Last but not least, according to the EC proposal for a Directive on the accessibility of public
sector bodies’ websites41, just 10 % of the websites are accessible, and less than one third42
concerning public websites. Despite the commitments in the European Disability Strategy
2010-202043 and the Digital Agenda for Europe44 to deliver accessibility to websites, the EC
proposal (yet on process) addresses just twelve “certain types of websites of public sector
bodies”45 and a weak enforcement mechanism46. In this regard, even the EU websites are not
fully accessible for persons with disabilities, including for people with cognitive disabilities.
For instance there is still a lack of accessible formats in documents and communications and
the online broadcasting of meetings and events is not accessible, and the pages need to be
clearer so that they are easier to find even for people with cognitive disabilities. For many people
with severe mental disabilities it is not enough with technical solutions to embrace different
types of information, but the increased use of computers is becoming rather an obstacle to the
opportunity of using their civil rights. This group needs rather people to talk to, someone to call,
or a personal assistant that can help them to guide them right.
The EU consumer rights legislation does not consistently take accessibility into account.
Directive 2011/83 on consumer rights47 (Consumer Rights Directive) does for example not
standards.eu/reference-documentation/standardisation-mandate-and-framework/ec-standardisation-mandate-m-460 It does
not include any mention to the special needs of persons with disabilities.
41 Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the accessibility of public sector bodies'
websites,
2012/0340 (COD), available at http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/proposal-directive-european-parliament-andcouncil-accessibility-public-sector-bodies-websites
42 Information available European Commission’s page ‘Digital Agenda for Europe’: available at http://ec.europa.eu/digitalagenda/en/pillar-vi-enhancing-digital-literacy-skills-and-inclusion/action-64-ensure-accessibility-public
43 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions, European Disability Strategy 2010-2020: A Renewed Commitment to a
Barrier-Free Europe, COM(2010) 636 final, p. 5. 2.1.1 ‘Accessibility’: available at http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0636:FIN:EN:PDF
44 Information available European Commission’s page ‘Digital Agenda for Europe’: available at http://ec.europa.eu/digitalagenda/en/pillar-vi-enhancing-digital-literacy-skills-and-inclusion/action-64-ensure-accessibility-public
45 The twelve types of websites such as “Car registration”, “Application for building construction”, “Notification of change of
residence” specified in the Annex of the Proposal Directive were taken from the 2001 E-government benchmarking exercise
(available at http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/egovernment-indicators-benchmarking-eeurope). This list is
obviously out of date and very restrictive. See also EDF position paper on the Proposal for a Directive on the Accessibility of
Public Sector Bodies’ Websites: available at http://www.edf-feph.org/Page.asp?docid=31816&langue=EN
46 In the Proposal Directive Member States are free to arrange a suitable mechanism to monitor the implementation of the
Directive. In our view it is rather unclear why an enforcement body is not foreseen, as it exists in other EU instruments, such
as the E-Privacy Directive amended by Directive 2009/136/EC (available at http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:337:0011:0036:en:PDF) in order to introduce implementation and
enforcement provisions (see Article 15 bis). See also EDF position paper on the Proposal for a Directive on the Accessibility
of Public Sector Bodies’ Websites: http://www.edf-feph.org/Page.asp?docid=31816&langue=EN
47 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending
Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
15
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
require explicitly traders to provide information in accessible formats for persons with
disabilities, even though information provision is one of the core rights under the Directive.
Another problem of the Consumer Rights Directive is that certain services are excluded from
the scope of the Directive such as financial services (e.g. insurance) and social and health care
services, even those services are of high relevance for persons with disabilities.
Important new consumer protection Directives, which have been adopted recently, such as the
Regulation on the Provision of Food Information to Consumers48 (Regulation 1169/2011 of 25
October 2011) and the Directive on Alternative Dispute Resolution for Consumer Disputes 49
(Directive 2013/11/EU of 21 May 2013) contain no reference to people with disabilities, even
though this would be appropriate and in line with the goals of the instruments. Specifically the
Regulation on the Provision of Food Information makes no reference to the needs of consumers
with disabilities who may have difficulties accessing or understanding information conveyed in
the standard ways envisaged, and the Directive on Alternative Dispute Resolution makes no
reference to the need to ensure that procedures are accessible to people with various
disabilities.
In a nutshell, EU is lacking of EU-level specific accessibility legislation, and facing problems
with the implementation of the existing regulation. There is also a need of raising awareness
on the needs of persons with disabilities and the CRPD among the policy-makers and citizens.
Furthermore, the EU should consider the living conditions of persons in rural areas who face
additional barriers because they rely on transport and local facilities and have less choice
concerning accessible goods and services. They also rely heavily on accessible communication
if they are isolated.
On the issue of intersectionality, LGBTI people with disabilities face a number of barriers that
prevent them from expressing their sexuality, sexual orientation and gender identity. Those
barriers are due to an overprotective family and care environment, a lack of privacy in many
residential settings, segregation in institutions and schools, and assumptions around the
sexuality of people with disabilities. People with disabilities often do not disclose any information
on their sexual orientation or gender identity for fears of stigmatization or discrimination. As a
Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 64–88
available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32011L0083&rid=1.
48 Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food
information to consumers, OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 18–63, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?qid=1404226461977&uri=CELEX:32011R1169
49 Directive 2013/11/EU of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes, OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p. 63–
79, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1404226627991&uri=CELEX:32013L0011
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
16
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
result, they often do not have access to specific information on affective and sexual relations,
and on sexual health including safe sex. A research in United Kingdom has shown that 46% of
lesbian and bisexual women with a disability has never been screened for a sexually
transmittable infection50.
EDF calls for
 An effective and strong EU Monitoring Framework that fully monitors the implementation
of EU accessibility legislation in Member States, and not merely delegating responsibility
to the national level (e.g. web accessibility or 112 emergency services).
 Enactment of European Accessibility Act covering a maximum of policy areas including
transport, the built environment, emergency services, ICT, etc. In order to guarantee its
effectiveness it should have the form of a Directive and it should provide for coherent
enforcement and complaints mechanisms.
 Enact legislation to ensure that at least public sector bodies’ websites and websites
providing basic services to the public are accessible for persons with disabilities
 To establish a mechanism to provide guidance to Member States to accomplish the
equivalence of access in telecommunications products and services, including the
emergency services (i.e. benchmarking), as well as in the implementation of the
accessibility provision of the Audiovisual Media Service Directive.
 Strengthen accessibility requirements in the revision of the Audiovisual Media service
directive.
 Strengthen development and dissemination of accessibility guidelines concerning
persons with cognitive disabilities.
 The end goal of EU consumer protection legislation and policy should be to enable
people with disabilities to become active participants in the internal market on an equal
basis with others.
 EU consumer protection legislation and philosophy should be brought into line with the
CRPD. Specifically, consumers with disabilities should no longer be labelled as
“vulnerable”. Instead, the focus should be on empowering consumers with disabilities
and placing them in the same position as other consumers. EU consumer protection
legislation and policy should aim to recognize the diversity of all consumers.
 EU consumer protection legislation and policy should pay explicit attention to the needs
of consumers with disabilities, including through imposing requirements that all relevant
consumer protection information and procedures are available in disability accessible
formats.
50
Disability, Stonewall Health Briefing, Stonewall, available at https://www.stonewall.org.uk/documents/disability_1.pdf
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
17
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
In the report "Mental disability and communication" of Funka.nu, people with mental
disabilities discussed web pages and how websites are designed.
Many of the participants are experiencing difficulties using the web. In some cases, there
seems to be directly linked to mental illness. In other cases it is because the psychological
problems also lead to cognitive difficulties.
The problems that the participants highlighted are not included in the standard for web
accessibility. This standard is called the WCAG 2.0 and is a global standard of how the web
should be made accessible to persons with disabilities.
It can for example include:
Security and trust
Misleading design
Disorganized interface
Illogical and inconsistent solutions
Too difficult and complex solutions
There is no or very little support for this type of problem in the current version of WCAG.
Article 10: Right to life
EDF calls for the EU to promote the right to life of all people with disabilities and in particular
their right to informed consent to medical treatment, especially the withdrawal of treatment,
nutrition or other life support.
How many people who commit suicide are different in different countries in Europe, but
regardless of the scale, the EU needs to put pressure on its member states that health care
should pay attention to suicidal people and applying resources to prevent them taking their
lives. In recent UN recommendations to Sweden the government was criticized for not having
done enough to combat suicides among young people, and since then suicides have increased
also among other groups in society.
Article 11: Risk and humanitarian emergency
We welcome the inclusion of persons with disabilities in the European Consensus on
Humanitarian Aid (2007)51, while reminding the European Union of their obligations under the
51
Joint Statement by the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the
Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission (2008/C 25/01) (available at http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:025:0001:0012:EN:PDF)
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
18
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
CRPD to design and implement policies and programmes inclusive of, and accessible to,
persons with disabilities.
We further welcome the European Commission’s Communication on the post-Hyogo
Framework for Action52. In addition we appreciate the efforts made such as the funding of
specific disability projects, while reminding the EU that a twin-track approach is one of the
fundamental principles enshrined in the CRPD and thus should also be applied in all responses
to situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies.
Because the EU ratified the CRPD in 2011, it is obliged to adapt its policy framework to make
it compliant. So far not enough steps have been undertaken to include disability in a structured
way in the EU humanitarian aid policy and programmes.
Awareness-raising, including policy and attitude changes, is an important step towards
inclusion. Despite the fact that training, capacity building and knowledge sharing can be
considered as opportune instruments, there is little evidence that the EU is engaging in such
activities.
To date we have very little evidence of the involvement of persons with disabilities in EU
humanitarian policies and funded projects, as enshrined in article 4.3 and 11.
The lack of a disability marker and indicators applied to the outcomes of humanitarian aid
projects makes any form of monitoring of the inclusion of persons with disabilities in EU-funded
humanitarian aid projects difficult.
EDF calls for


The revision of the European Commission Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection’s
policies and guidelines on how to make Disaster Risk Reduction management and
humanitarian aid inclusive, in consultation with civil society and especially representative
organisations of persons with disabilities, who are agents of change. By the next CRPD
progress report, this review should lead to the design of a sectorial policy on disability
as it was established on gender and children;
The identification, within the next 24 months, of mechanisms to share knowledge and
good practices between different EU institutions and between the EU and its Member
States on disability inclusion in humanitarian aid, including through training and capacity
building sessions;
52
Communication from the European Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, the post 2015 Hyogo Framework for Action: Managing risks to achieve
resilience (available at http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/news/post_hyogo_managing_risks_en.pdf)
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
19
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF


the appointment, before the next CRPD progress report, of disability advisers or focal
points across the different ECHO field offices to guarantee the inclusion of persons with
disabilities in in-country activities. The appointed advisers or focal points should consult
regularly with civil society organisations, persons with disabilities and their
representative organisations;
the establishment of a disability marker in the following 36 months, in order to enhance
the monitoring of disability inclusion in EU funded humanitarian aid projects.
Article 12: Equal recognition before the law
The General Comment on Article 12 has clarified some of the issues related to the exercise of
legal capacity and support in decision-making. The Committee observed “that there is a general
misunderstanding of the exact scope of the obligations of State parties under article 12 of the
Convention. Indeed, there has been a general failure to understand that the human rightsbased model of disability implies a shift from the substitute decision-making paradigm to one
that is based on supported decision-making.” 53 This describes also the situation in the
European Union.
In the absence of legal capacity the realization of many other rights guaranteed by the UNCRPD
cannot be achieved. Denying legal capacity in practice violates the personhood based on
discrimination and provoked by stigma and prejudices54. Formal restrictions of legal capacity,
as a result of legal measures, and informal restrictions, based on assumptions that people with
disabilities cannot make decisions, should be equally addressed.
While the European Union does not have the legal competence to regulate the question of legal
capacity55, this issue has a strong impact on areas where the EU has competence, such as
non-discrimination legislation, employment, consumers’ rights, independent living, or voting
rights. Indeed, decisions of people with disabilities under plenary or partial guardianship may
not be legally recognized and they may not be allowed to take decisions about where to live,
sign employment contracts or commercial contracts, make financial transactions, or vote in
European elections.
53
Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, General comment No 1 (2014), Article 12: Equal recognition before
the
law,
CRPD/C/GC/1,
§
11,
available
at
http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/Treaties/CRPD/Shared%20Documents/1_Global/CRPD_C_GC_1_7383_E.doc
54 Inclusion Europe submission to the CRPD Committee on the draft General Comment on Article 12 CRPD, available at
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CRPD/Pages/DGCArticles12And9.aspx
55 Commission Staff Working Document, Report on the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (CRPD) by the European Union, SWD(2014) 182 final, §68, p.16
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
20
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Deprivation of legal capacity affects a huge number of Europeans with intellectual disabilities
and with psycho-social disabilities, as well as the ageing population. No comprehensive data is
available, as most governments do not hold data on the number of people under guardianship.
According to MDAC’s last report56, the number of people under guardianship varies drastically
from country to country: Ireland has 48 people under the ward of court system per 100,000 of
the population. Bulgaria has 100 per 100,000 population under guardianship, Latvia 106,
Poland 158, and Lithuania 167. The figure jumps in the Czech Republic to 317, in Croatia to
410 and, finally, at 596 per 100,000 population in Hungary. 57
The aggregate data across Central and Eastern European countries, which have both plenary
and partial guardianship, shows that three quarters of people with restrictions on legal capacity
are under plenary guardianship58.
The FRA report on political participation also showed that in 201059, 17 countries in the
European Union automatically deprive people with disabilities under guardianship from the right
to vote and 8 countries may deprive them after some sort of assessment. Only a minority of
countries allow people with disabilities to fully participate in political life and elections. Even
during the European elections in May 2014, some European citizens with disabilities were
denied their basic right to elect their representatives60.
These examples demonstrate clearly that the way Member States discriminate against some
European citizen’s rights to exercise their legal capacity has a massive impact on the scope of
the work and the composition of the European institutions. Articles 10 and 19 of the TFEU give
the Commission a mandate to protect people and combat against discrimination. Through a
comprehensive implementation of the concept of non-discrimination in all areas of life, legal
capacity could be tackled in areas of EU competencies. The European Disability Strategy then
could be used to eradicate discrimination in the exercise of legal capacity in the EU.
Legal capacity is not just about guardianship but also about meeting your rights to a fair trial.
People with mental disabilities often lack the ability to get support in court, which could
undermine their ability to make their voice heard and to present their reality in a way that is
understandable and clear to the law. The Commission replies that they have made efforts on
56
MDAC, Legal Capacity in Europe, A Call to Action to Governments and to the EU, October 2013, available at
http://mdac.info/sites/mdac.info/files/legal_capacity_in_europe.pdf
57 Op. Cit., p. 21-22
58 Op. Cit., p. 24.
59 Fundamental Rights Agency, The right to political participation of persons with mental health problems and persons with
intellectual disabilities, Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union, 2010, available at
http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2010-report-vote-disability_en.pdf
60 See Inclusion Europe’s campaign for the European Elections: http://www.e-include.info/votingforall/en/
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
21
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
supporting civil society organizations in Serbia and Turkey, Bosnia, Herzegovina and Kosovo
so that they can increase the opportunity of legal capacity, but also Sweden lacks systematic
support to people with mental disabilities, which the UN criticized Sweden for in its latest
recommendations. It is also important to note that many people with mental disabilities need
support to go to polling stations and vote, for example with the help of a personal assistant.
This is usually missing, which means that people with mental disabilities find it difficult to
exercise their democratic rights.
EDF calls for
 Including in Article 223 TFEU a prohibition to exclude European citizens from European
elections on the basis of their legal capacity or ability to make informed decisions;
 The adoption of an Commission’s Recommendation to Member States as regards the
right of European citizens to vote and stand for EU and local elections
 Protecting the human rights of people under guardianship by installing a European
Monitoring Centre on discrimination based on legal capacity under the auspices of the
FRA;
 Reviewing all EU legislation on access to good and services, including banking and
employment, as well as consumer rights provisions to ensure that discrimination in
access to these services cannot be based on the legal capacity status and that informed
consent is ensured;
 Supporting European research and exchange about adequate measures of supported
decision-making through relevant funding programmes. This includes the research
framework programmes as well as programmes in the areas of social innovation, justice,
health, education and training;
 Supporting, facilitating and exchanging good practices and experiences in the field of
supported decision-making, as set up in the European Disability Strategy;
 Ensuring the collection of comparable data about the number of people under
guardianship and different forms of supported decision-making instruments to monitor
the implementation of Article 12 at EU level.
 Review legislation on hate crimes to make sure that persons with disabilities are
protected in all Member States.
Article 13: Access to justice
The EU has taken significant steps to protect EU citizens against crime and to ensure respect
when they get into contact with a criminal justice system. Relevant for people with disabilities
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
22
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
are the common minimum standards for procedural rights for victims of crime 61 or persons
suspected or accused of crime62 that the EU has developed.
These standards refer to the fact that persons with disabilities can find themselves vulnerable
in the justice system. The assessment of this ‘vulnerability’ or of the protection needs of an
individual is determined by his or her ‘personal characteristics’, including disability (Article 22
Victim’s rights directive). Persons with disabilities often find themselves in vulnerable situations
as a victim of crime or defendants, however not because they are defenceless or inherently
vulnerable. This ‘vulnerability’ is often caused due to the lack of accessibility and reasonable
accommodations in the justice system. Framing the needs of persons with disabilities in the
context of the justice system however as an issue of ‘vulnerability’ rather than an obstacle in
the environment is not in line with the concept of disability in the CRPD.
The standards do not guarantee full and accessible information and communication for all
people with disabilities at all phases in the legal proceedings. For example, the right to
understand and be understood (article 3 Victim’s rights Directive), the right to receive
information (article 4 Victim’s rights Directive) refer to communication in simple and accessible
language, orally or in writing. In addition, this communication has to take into account the
personal characteristics of the victim. The standards on the procedural rights of persons
suspected or accused of crime provide a similar protection since it refers to simple and
accessible language63 and provision of appropriate assistance for persons with hearing and
speech impediments64. However, persons with disabilities are more often than not excluded
from participation in the proceedings due to the inability of the authorities to provide information
or to communicate in a manner that is fully accessible to them. It is therefore necessary to
complete these standards by explicitly spelling out what meaningful and accessible
communication and information is for all people with disabilities.65
61
Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards
on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA, OJ L 315,
14.11.2012, p. 57–73, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32012L0029
62 Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal
proceedings,
OJ
L
142,
1.6.2012,
p.
1–10,
available
at
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32012L0013; Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October
2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings, OJ L 280, 26.10.2010, p. 1–7, available at http://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32010L0064.
63 Article 3 of Directive 2012/13/EU
64 Article 2, 3 of Directive 2010/64/EU
65 EDF amendments to the draft report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs jointly and the Committee
on Women's Rights and Gender Equality on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council
establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime (COM(2011)0275 – C7-0127/2011 –
2011/0129(COD)), 14 February 2012
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
23
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
In addition, inaccessible victim support services are a significant barrier for many victims with
disabilities, in particular women with disabilities and persons with intellectual disabilities who
cannot benefit from these services.66 Full accessibility of victim support services must be
included in the Victim’s Directive67.
Discriminatory violence against persons with disabilities is an important phenomenon that has
progressively been recognized in a number of EU jurisdictions68. OSCE research has shown
that this is. There is however a poor understanding of the phenomenon of disability hate crime
against persons with disabilities in the EU: the lack of data sends the wrong message that the
incidence of violent crime against persons with disabilities is low, and the underreporting of it
(or the inadequate response given to the victims by the authorities who fail to recognise the
bias-motivated hostility) lead to the decision of the states not to collect data on it. The explicit
recognition of the phenomenon in the EU standards on criminal justice will be a step towards
recognition of the phenomenon and a contribution to the implementation of the relevant
provisions of the UNCRPD.
Deprivation of legal capacity prevents people with disabilities from expressing their free and
informed consent in the context of access to justice system at large, including for example with
respect to access to legal aid and the reparative justice system (article 12 Victim’s rights
Directive). This right of victims with disabilities cannot be substituted with decisions by their
legal guardians who do not always represent the victim’s preferences and choices.
EDF calls for
 The EU standards on criminal justice to be revised in order to move the emphasis
from the vulnerable individual with a disability to the procedural and age
accommodations needed in the legal proceedings to ensure effective participation of
all types of persons with disabilities in the justice system;
 The EU to fund the appropriate training and capacity building on access to justice for
people with disabilities for those working in the field of justice administration,
including prison and police staff. Particular attention should be paid to ways to
prevent, recognise and report cases of discriminatory violence against women with
disabilities and persons with intellectual disabilities;
 The EU standards on criminal justice should be revised to include accessible and
meaningful communication and participation for people with disabilities in the judicial
66
Op cit.
Article 8 of Directive 2012/29/EU establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime
68 “Hate Crimes in the OSCE Region – Incidents and Responses”, Annual Report for 2010, Warsaw, November 2011, p 85;
“Hidden in sight, inquiry into disability-related harassment, Equality and human rights commission, p. 5-8
67
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
24
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF


proceedings through guaranteeing that all information and communication is
accessible and therefore includes, including sign language, easy-to-understand text,
as well as augmentative and alternative modes, means and formats of
communication. In addition, it needs to be specified that victim support services need
to be accessible for all people with disabilities, in particular to women with disabilities;
The EU standards on criminal justice should be revised to ensure that people with
disabilities who are deprived of their legal capacity receive support in accessing the
justice system and in making a free and informed consent for justice related
decisions;
The EU standards on criminal justice must include ‘bias crime’ and discriminatory
violence, where persons are attacked because of the hostility directed at them by
virtue of the inherent characteristics they possess.
Article 14: Liberty and security of person
Persons with psychosocial disabilities are too often subject to deprivation of liberty without
consent throughout the European Union due to involuntary treatment and/or placement.
In most European countries, compulsory psychiatric detention and/or treatment is legally
permitted on grounds linked to the existence of psychosocial disability. Furthermore, unequal
detention regimes for people with psychosocial disabilities exist as part of the penal system 69.
Comparative legal analysis of the European Agency for Fundamental Rights shows despite
these existing differences in legislation across the European Union, the trauma and fear
people associate with compulsory measures is a recurring theme. Special attention for those
cases where children and young people have been belted against their will, which the United
Nations criticized when Sweden was reviewed in the spring. Forced Treatment may also
involve more than that the person is suffering from trauma and fear. They may also involve
memory problems, whether the "treatment" consists of ECT, a form that the UN criticized
Sweden for using against the patients' will.
The largely negative personal experiences described in this report underscore the importance
of developing legal frameworks which can minimise such outcomes. 70
69
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, Report on involuntary placement and treatment of people with mental
health problems, 2012, p. 29-31
70 European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, Report on involuntary placement and treatment of people with mental
health problems, 2012, p. 41
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
25
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Moreover, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture71 specified that the Convention invalidates
earlier norms, which allow for involuntary placement and treatment. In this sense, EU policy
documents such as the Commission’s Green Paper on improving the mental health of the
population which still allows for involuntary treatment and placement as a last resort, should
be made compliant with the Convention.
EDF calls for
 the development of EU policy based on Article 19 TFUE calling for the ban on
disability discriminatory detention against the will of people with disabilities in any kind
of mental health facility;
 the promotion of procedures under the Post Stockholm programme to review all cases
of detention. These procedures should be compatible with due process and fair trial
guarantees and with Article 12 and 13 of the Convention. Persons with disabilities
should be provided with individual and public hearings, accessible information
regarding their rights and adequate legal representation paid for by the State. Judges
and lawyers should be trained on the Convention.
Article 15, 16 and 17 – Freedom from torture or cruel and inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment, including exploitation, violence and abuse and protecting the
integrity of the person
People with disabilities in Europe are at higher risk of incidences of torture, violence and abuse
in places of detention, including mental health facilities, social care institutions, segregated
schools, hospitals, disability justice centers and prisons. Women and girls with disabilities face
additional risks to numerous forms of violence, including forced sterilization, coerced abortion
and sexual abuse72.
This has been thoroughly documented73, including by the former Council of Europe
Commissioner for Human Rights.74 Additionally, the ‘need to protect’ people with disabilities is
71
Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment published
A/63/175, 28 July 2008, para. 46 (available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disability/Pages/UNStudiesAndReports.aspx)
72 EDF Manifesto on the rights of women and girls with disabilities in the European Union, 2011, p.17, available at
http://www.edf-feph.org/Page.asp?docid=26614&langue=EN
73 Common European Guidelines on the Transition from Institutional to Community based care, European Expert Group on the
Transition from Institutional to Community based care, November 2012, p. 43 (available at http://deinstitutionalisationguide.eu/)
74 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, The right of people with disabilities to live independently and be included
in the community, CommDH/IssuePaper (2012) 3, 12 March 2012, available at: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1917847
(last accessed: 03.06.2014), p. 37
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
26
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
insufficient justification to maintain institutions segregating people with disabilities75. The
Council of Europe Disability Action Plan 2006-1576 recommends a number of actions to Member
States to aid in the detection and prevention of abuse against people with disabilities, including
in institutional settings77.
However, despite the progress made in this regards by the EU in the new Structural Funds
regulations; this has not been followed up systematically in the review of partnership
agreements.78
As mentioned in the EU report, guidelines79 have been adopted to support and strengthen
efforts to prevent and eradicate torture and ill-treatment in all parts of the world. However, these
guidelines apply only in EU contacts with third countries. As a result, the EU fails to address
the incidences of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment that all people, including people
with disabilities face in Europe today.
In addition, it is deeply concerning that the European Commission continues to fund widespread
segregation and institutionalization of people with disabilities through financing provided to
Member States under its regional policy framework,80 leaving them at significantly greater risk
of torture, ill-treatment, forced medical treatment, violence and abuse.81
See for example: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (Europe Regional Office), Getting a Life – Living
Independently and Being Included in the Community: Legal Analysis of the Current Use and Future Potential of the EU
Structural Funds to Contribute to the Achievement of Article 19 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(April 2012), available at: http://www.europe.ohchr.org/documents/Publications/getting_a_life.pdf (last accessed 03.06.2014).
76 Council of Europe Committee of Ministers, Recommendation Rec (2006) 5 of the committee of minister on the Council of
Europe Action Plan to promote the rights and full participation of people with disabilities in society: improving the quality of life
of people with disabilities in Europe 2005-2015, available at: http://www.coe.int/t/e/social_cohesion/socsp/Rec(2006)5%20Disability%20Action%20Plan.doc (last accessed: 03.06.2014).
77 Ibid., at para 3.13.vii.
78 European Structural and Investment Funds are financial tools aiming to reduce regional disparities in terms of income, wealth
and opportunities. Europe's poorer regions receive most of the support, but all European regions are eligible for funding under
the policy's various funds and programmes. They fund inter alia, infrastructure, including accessibility, employment
opportunities and lifelong learning activities. See for more information, the section of this report under Article 19 CRPD.
79 Guidelines to EU Policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Council of European Union, COHOM Working group, 6129/12, 13 March 2012
(available at http://eeas.europa.eu/human_rights/guidelines/torture/docs/20120626_guidelines_en.pdf)
80 European Structural Funding and Cohesion Funds are administered by the Directorate-General for Regional Policy, in
accordance with Article 174 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and associated Regulations.
81 Numerous incidences of abuse, violence and exploitation have been uncovered in Romanian institutions funded by EU
Structural Funding. See, for example, allegations of sexual violence, threats and forced labour at Tantava Institution for
Integration through Occupational Therapy in Giurgiu, Romania, which received €500,000 in structural funding: Centrul de
Resurse Juridice, Raport de Monitorizare: Centrul de Integrare Prin Terapie Ocupationala Tantava, Giurgiu (Romanian, 2014),
available
at:
http://www.crj.ro/userfiles/editor/files/Tantava%20CENTRUL%20DE%20INTEGRARE%20PRIN%20TERAPIE%20OCUPA%
C5%A2IONAL%C4%82%20(1).pdf (last accessed 03.06.2014).
75
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
27
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Recent research has shown that over €24 million of EU Structural Funding has been used on
building, renovating and maintaining institutions which segregate over 18,000 people with
disabilities in Romania,82 including those where there have been serious allegations of torture,
abuse and ill-treatment.83 In addition, the European Agency for Fundamental Rights explains
that the requirement for consent to medical treatment and healthcare is a key aspect for the
protection of the integrity of the person with a disability84.
As a peremptory norm of international law, the prohibition on torture, cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment is absolute.85 Having the status of jus cogens, the right is
non-derogable, and Article 15 CRPD extends this to protection from “medical or scientific
experimentation” without consent.
It further places an obligation on the institutions of the EU to take “all effective legislative,
administrative, judicial or other measures” to prevent violations. This requires EU institutions to
go beyond merely assessing compliance of EU policy and secondary legislation with the CRPD
to assessing the effect of all actions of EU institutions, particularly in relation to people with
disabilities who have their liberty restricted and those in healthcare settings. 86 At a minimum it
requires the institutions of the EU to ensure systemic and systematic monitoring of the effects
of EU policy, particularly in relation to EU funding provided to Member States which increases
the risk of people with disabilities to be subjected to torture, inhuman and degrading treatment.
As mentioned in EU report, respect for the integrity and dignity of persons needs to be identified
and properly addressed in the Seventh Framework Research Programme 2007-2013. The
Guidance note on research ethics specifies that informed consent is required when the
The funding breakdown can be found in the following report: Institute of Public Policy, IPP National Report 2013 –
Appendices, 2014, available at: http://www.ipp.ro/library/IPP_National%20Report%202013_Appendixes.pdf (last accessed
03.06.2014).
83 Allegations of physical abuse and poor conditions were uncovered at the Neuropsychiatric Recuperation and Rehabilitation
Centre for Adults with Disabilities in Aricestii: Gazeta PH,
“Ne omoară cu bătaia, fără milă!” – strigăt din Centrul de Recuperare și Reabilitare Nedelea (Romanian), 23/01/2014 available
at: http://www.gazetaph.ro/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&catid=30:stirile-zilei&id=7079:ne-omoar-cu-btaia-frmil-strigt-din-centrul-de-recuperare-i-reabilitare-nedelea (last accessed: 03.06.2014). It received almost 1.5 million Euro of
Structural Funding (see supra note 82).
84 European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, Involuntary placement and involuntary treatment of persons with mental
health problems, 2012, available online at: http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2012/involuntary-placement-and-involuntarytreatment-persons-mental-health-problems (last accessed 03.06.2014).
85 Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment,
Juan
E.
Mendez,
A/HRC/22/53,
available
online
at:
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session22/A.HRC.22.53_English.pdf (last accessed:
03.06.2014).
86 Ibid., at para 26.
82
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
28
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
research involves the participation of human beings, when the research uses human genetic
material or biological samples and when the research involves personal data collection. 87
However, persons with disabilities who are deprived of their legal capacity risk being subjected
without their free and informed consent to medical and scientific experimentation, contrary to
Article 15, 2 CRPD. Supported decision making mechanisms should be foreseen in the
Guidance note on research ethics in line with Article 12 CRPD.
In addition, research that is funded under the current and future EU Research Programmes
should ensure compliance with Article 15, 2 CRPD and not fund research and technology
activities and projects that promote the use of net beds, restraints and other non-consensual
practices used against persons with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities in psychiatric
hospitals and institutions.
EDF calls for





The adoption of measures to prevent persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with
others from being subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment, including intrusive medical interventions in places of detention, including
mental health facilities, segregated schools, hospitals, disability justice centers and
prisons in the European Union;
The adoption of EU policy measures on gender-based violence to protect women and
girls with disabilities, both within and outside their home, from exploitation, violence and
abuse, and to facilitate their access to justice through community-based assistance and
support;
The expansion of the mandate of the EU Monitoring Framework to explicitly encapsulate
the EU’s obligations to prevent torture, abuse and restrictions of liberty of persons with
disabilities, including in areas of shared competence.
The end of the application of Structural Funds to the institutionalisation and segregation
of people with disabilities and future EU financing to Member States should be used to
advance the right for people with disabilities to live safely in community-based settings,
in compliance with Articles 15 and 19 CRPD.
The funding of research into situations of violence, exploitation and abuse experienced
by people and in particular women and girls with disabilities in institutional settings, and
to take appropriate measures on the findings
87
Guidance note of Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, Science in society /Capacities, FP7, 2013, p.18
(available at http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/fp7/89888/ethics-for-researchers_en.pdf)
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
29
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF


The amendment of the Guidance note on research ethics to include the obligation to
provide supported decision making mechanisms for persons with disabilities to ensure
their free and informed consent in line with Article 12 CRPD.
The funding of research applications aiming at developing CRPD compliant alternatives
to involuntary placement and treatment for people with intellectual and psychosocial
disabilities in the EU.
Article 18: Liberty of movement and nationality
Article 18 CRPD addresses both the right of liberty of movement and rights related to nationality.
The right of liberty of movement is addressed under Article 20, personal mobility. This section
of the alternative report focuses on barriers faced by people with disabilities in applying for
nationality.
The right to nationality, family reunification and long term residence permit
The conditions for acquisition and loss of nationality of an EU Member State are the
competence of the Member State itself. However, with the nationality of an EU Member State
automatically comes EU citizenship which gives the individual additional rights and protection 88,
such as the right to vote and stand in the EU elections and the right to free movement within
the EU. The European Court of Justice89 specified in different cases that the situation of an
individual applying for or losing the nationality of an EU Member State comes within the ambit
of European Union law since it places the citizen in a position of obtaining or losing EU
citizenship.
People with disabilities however face discrimination and obstacles in obtaining the nationality
for an EU Member State and as a result do not have access to the fundamental rights given to
each EU citizen. Certain requirements that EU Member States impose in the application
process, such as for example, presenting a medical certificate or being medically assessed can
be discriminatory for people with disabilities. Also the obligation to pass certain language or
integration tests might be a barrier for people with disabilities. Often no appropriate disabilityrelated accommodations and adaptions are provided for passing these tests.90
88
Article 20 of Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Rottmann v Freistaat Bayern, Case C-135/08, European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) 2 March 2010
90 Access to and Accessibility of Citizenship and Political Participation of People with Disabilities in Europe: Introduction to Two
Related 2013 ANED Reports, Synthesis Report for the Academic Network of European Disability Experts, prepared by Lisa
Waddington on the basis of country reports provided by ANED experts, December 2013, p. 17 (available at
http://www.disability-europe.net/theme/political-participation)
89
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
30
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
In addition, other conditions to applying for nationality are for people with disabilities who are
living in poverty more difficult such as having sufficient financial resources to support one self.
These conditions do however not only apply in the case of acquiring nationality, but also when
applying for long term residence permit91 or family reunification92. In the latter case, the income
requirement counts for minor children and might also count for adult persons with disabilities
“who are unable to provide for their own needs on account of their state of health”93. However,
as stated before, 24, 4% of people with disabilities live in the European Union are at risk of or
live in poverty94 and their family members will therefore find themselves excluded from family
reunification.
People with disabilities coming from outside the EU also face obstacles in obtaining a residence
permit for the EU, including for a short stay. The rules for accessing employment have to be
applied to people with disabilities from third countries on an equal basis with third country
nationals without disabilities. The conditions under which permits for short stay are delivered
have to be accessible to people with disabilities and reasonable accommodations need to be
taken in this process. For example, often consulate buildings that deliver the visa are far away
of places of residences of the person or are not accessible.
In addition, deprivation of legal capacity also creates an obstacle in certain EU Member States
to people with disabilities who wish to apply for nationality, family reunification or a residence
permit95. For this issue, please find more information under Article 12 CRPD.
The right to asylum
The UN Refugee Agency stresses that 2,5 to 3,5 million refugees worldwide have a disability.
Special measures should be taken by the European Union to allow persons with disabilities to
seek asylum and to be received in dignity. These people should be supported in their right to
asylum in case they do not have the means to get to the EU borders. If they are in the possibility
91
Article 5 of the Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who
are long-term residents, OJ L 16, 23.1.2004, p. 44–53 (available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32003L0109)
92 Chapter IV of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, OJ L 251, 3.10.2003,
p. 12–18 (available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32003L0086)
93 Article 4 Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family reunification
94 EU-SILC UDB 2011 that covers 27 EU Member States: see Report on the implementation of the UN Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) by the European Union, Brussels, 5.6.2014 SWD(2014) 182 final, p. 63
95 As mentioned in section of this report under Article 12 CRPD, people with disabilities who are deprived of their legal capacity
are de facto excluded from applying for naturalisation process. The same obstacles are faced in the process of application for
nationality, family reunification and residence permit. See for more information, Access to and Accessibility of Citizenship and
Political Participation of People with Disabilities in Europe: Introduction to Two Related 2013 ANED Reports, p. 35
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
31
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
to reach the EU borders, then they should not be retained in detention centres. Also, refugee
women and girls with disabilities face a high risk of violence and sexual abuse.
EDF calls for
- The provision of accessibility and reasonable accommodations in the application
process for nationality, family reunification and long term residence permit.
- Accessible immigration procedures and applications for short term visa for all people
with disabilities and in particular promotion of accessible consulates and training in
disability awareness of consular personnel.
- Reviewing all EU legislation on nationality, family reunification or a residence permit to
ensure that discrimination in access to these rights cannot be based on the legal capacity
status and that informed consent is ensured.
- Support for refugees with disabilities in obtaining residence in the EU, while taking
measures to prevent violence and abuse against women with disabilities, and to avoid
placement in detention centres.
Article 19: Living independently and being included in the community
All persons with disabilities have the right to live in the community, with choices equal to others.
The EU funding instruments (e.g. European Structural and Investment Funds 96) have the
potential to secure substantial advancements at this regard by funding social and health
infrastructures to promote transition from institutional to community based services, as well as
accessibility and equal opportunities for persons with disabilities. 97 However, the use of
European funds continues to flow to the perpetuation of institutions rather than towards CRPD
compliant endeavours such as increased supports to facilitate living in the community. 98
96
European Structural and Investment Funds are financial tools aiming to reduce regional disparities in terms of income, wealth
and opportunities. Europe's poorer regions receive most of the support, but all European regions are eligible for funding under
the policy's various funds and programmes. They fund inter alia, infrastructure, including accessibility, employment
opportunities and lifelong learning activities.
97 The EU regulation on structural funds that was into force in the period 2007-2013, Council Regulation (EC)
No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 included article 16 on Equality between men and
women and non-discrimination, explicitly mentioning accessibility for persons with disabilities. The new regulations on structural
funds covering the period 2014-2020 include several positive provisions, see Commission Staff Working Document Report on
the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) by the European Union Brussels,
5.6.2014 SWD(2014) 182 final, paragraphs 94-99.
98 For example, public tenders to the value of approximately €24million were issued in Hungary for the purported aim of
furthering the deinstitutionalization of people with disabilities in January 2012. Almost €19million was spent funding six new
social care institutions in the country, resulting in the trans-institutionalisation of over 700 people with disabilities. Half of this
funding came from European structural funding. Further information: Mental Disability Advocacy Center, The European
Commission Must Stop Funding Hungarian Segregation and Abuse, 18.12.2013, available online at
http://www.mdac.org/en/news/european-commission-must-stop-funding-hungarian-segregation-and-abuse (last accessed
03.06.2014). Moreover, ENIL-ECCL have collected evidence about the investment of EU Structural Funds (the European Social
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
32
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The European Commission has failed to take action to end the funding of segregation,99 and
has publicly admitted that it doesn’t have information on the amounts of Structural Funds used
on institutionalising people with disabilities, or how many people are affected.100
There is evidence about investing into institutions in the Czech Republic and Poland, and about
investing into smaller institutions in Estonia101. At least 150 million EUR have been invested to
build new institutions and renovate existing institutions in the six EU Member States in the
period 2007 – 2013102. Some “community-based” or “independent living” services are being
supported, that in fact remain institutional in character due to the number of residents living in
one place, who were not able to choose where/with whom they will live, and the staff is not
properly trained to work in the new services (e.g. Hungary and Bulgaria).
The involvement of persons with disabilities and their organisations has been inadequate, both
in terms of access to Structural Funds due to lack of technical assistance and participation in
the Monitoring Committees. To which they were neither invited nor in which they did not have
voting rights.103
The new Structural Funds Regulations set ex ante conditionality which identifies the need for a
“national strategic framework for poverty reduction [...] that [...] includes measures for the shift
from the institutional to community-based care”104. The Commission should verify the adequate
implementation of this provision before giving the funds to a country and is not clear how is
doing this. Moreover, the Regulations set out ‘transition from institutional care to communitybased services’ as an investment priority. However is not compulsory to choose this as
Fund-ESF and the European Regional Development Fund-ERDF) into institutions for people with disabilities in the period 2007
– 2013 in six EU Member States – Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Romania.
99 Statement of Spokesperson for European Commissioner for Regional Policy, email communication dated 11 April 2014,
available online at: http://mdac.info/sites/mdac.info/files/statement_of_spokesperson_for_commissioner_hahn_11.4.2014.pdf
(last accessed: 19.05.02014).
100 See the statement of ex-Commissioner for Regional Policy, Johannes Hahn, when interviewed in a documentary
investigating torture and ill-treatment against people with disabilities in Romanian institutions: Al Jazeera, Europe’s Hidden
Shame, available online at: http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/peopleandpower/2014/04/europe-hidden-shame2014414124139195247.html (last accessed 06.062014).
101 though there have been no published reports in relation to these countries
102 European Network on Independent Living – European Coalition for Community Living, Briefing on Structural Funds
Investments for People with Disabilities: Achieving the Transition from Institutional Care to Community Living, December 2013,
pages 11 – 12
103 European Coalition for Community Living, Wasted Time, Wasted Money, Wasted Lives ... A Wasted Opportunity? - A Focus
Report on how the current use of Structural Funds perpetuates the social exclusion of disabled people in Central and Eastern
Europe by failing to support the transition from institutional care to community-based services (2010); European Network on
Independent Living – European Coalition for Community Living, Briefing on Structural Funds Investments for People with
Disabilities: Achieving the Transition from Institutional Care to Community Living, December 2013, pages 15-16.
104 Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 Annex XI Part I thematic ex-ante conditionality 9
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
33
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
investment priority, and the Commission is failing in asking governments to invest on this, when
negotiating the partnership agreement and the programmes.105
Quality of social services provided to persons with disabilities, including habilitation and
rehabilitation services has been hindered in the EU due to the economic crisis and related
budget cuts.106 Moreover there is not a European quality system to guarantee a minimum level
of quality of services for all.
With the support of the Commission, the Social Protection Committee107 adopted a document
establishing quality principles and criteria for social services108. The framework is not legally
binding and there is no proof of its implementation.
In the list of action of the European Disability Strategy 109, there is the action to develop and
disseminate a quality framework for community-based services that is inclusive of persons with
disabilities. This action has not been implemented yet.
EDF calls for



In relation to 14 EU Member States the European Commission has identified deinstitutionalisation of one or more user groups as one of the priorities for reforms during
the period 2014-2020110. The EU should issue recommendations to each of these
countries accordingly and monitor the implementation of such recommendations;
Structural Funds shall fund services which facilitate the enjoyment of the right to live
independently in the community by people with disabilities;
Close co-ordination between all relevant services of the EC and co-ordination between
different Operational Programmes should be ensured;
105
The agreement signed between Greece and the Commission include support to community-based services which will end
in 2015; as EDF we wrote to the European Commission and to the Greeks authorities asking for Greece to invest on this even
after 2015 but without reply.
106 EDF Report on the impact of the crisis on the rights of persons with disabilities
107 The Social Protection Committee (SPC) is as an EU advisory policy committee, established by the Treaty on the
Functioning of the EU (article 160). For more information, please visit http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=758
108 The Social Protection Committee, A voluntary European Quality Framework for Social Services, SPC/2010/10/8 final,
available at http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=6140&langId=en
109 European Disability Strategy 2010-2020: A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe Initial plan to implement the
European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 List of Actions 2010-2015 {COM(2010) 636 final} {SEC(2010) 1323
final} SEC/2010/1324 final, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/ALL/;ELX_SESSIONID=KN0bTtrVDh4MpmJRnCk6p5Zn3ZpcnpS9RKKmsJYBVJwL7YX2QGm1!1169027494?ur
i=CELEX:52010SC1324
110 See European Commission Country Position Paper, available at
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/what/future/program/index_en.cfm
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
34
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF







Member States shall comply with the partnership agreements111 in the development,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation of EU funded projects;
Involvement of people with disabilities and their representative organisations in the
monitoring of the use of the Funds, by calling the Member States to respect article 5 of
the Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 must be ensured;
Structural Funds applied to the institutionalisation and segregation of people with
disabilities must be ended, by withdrawing the money if this happens;
Victims of misallocated funds post-EU confirmation of the CRPD should be recognized
and compensated;
Comprehensive data should be made publicly available outlining the ways in which EU
Structural Funds are spent to ensure compliance with the Convention;
The development of compulsory quality standards for social services including
habilitation and rehabilitation services for persons with disabilities;
The development of a quality framework for community-based services linking it to the
process of promoting active inclusion of European citizens with disabilities.
Article 20: Personal mobility
The EU report mentions several pieces of legislation that facilitate mobility of persons with
disabilities – however, the measures they cite are not binding and it is usually left up to the
Member States to decide if they want to make use of the measures. For example, the provisions
under Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the
taxation of energy products and electricity112 “allows the Member States to apply differentiated
rates of taxation for energy products when they are used for or by people with disabilities” 113.
There are 3 key barriers faced by persons with disabilities in access to personal mobility:
First, persons with disabilities cannot exercise the freedom of movement within the EU. They
have difficulties to get their disability status recognized in other EU Member State since there
is no portability of social security benefits114.
Numerous exceptions still exist on the portability of social security benefits. If somebody
receives disability benefits from one Member State, e.g. to pay for his personal assistant, he
will not be able to receive those benefits if he moves to another Member State and retain the
111
Agreements signed between Members States and the European Commission
Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and
electricity OJ L 283, 31/10/2003, p. 51–70
113 EU Report on the implementation of the UNCRPD, p. 25, paragraph 111
114 EDF Freedom Guide, December 2011, pages 48 – 50
112
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
35
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
right to receive benefits. He/she can apply for disability benefits in the host Member State if he
decides to settle permanently but this does for example not apply to exchange students,
trainees or short-term employed persons. Additionally, the disability status is not automatically
recognized in other EU-countries so his/her entitlements have to be re-assessed every time
he/she moves to another country which results in a major bureaucratic effort as well as
uncertainty for the person with disability concerned. However, the EU has already achieved a
mutual recognition of public health insurance schemes with the “European Health Insurance
Card” (EHIC) which illustrates that the EU can do more to encourage the Member States to
cooperate on social security related issues.115
Another important area of legislation covering personal mobility of persons with disabilities is
the EU’s package of Passenger Rights legislation. Even though it is already fairly
comprehensive, it still has gaps and it is not always implemented fully by the Member States. .
For example, Regulation 261/2004 on air passengers’ rights 116 has a limit on liability for mobility
equipment. Regulation 1371/2007 on rail passengers’ rights 117 has many exemptions to the
rights of rail passengers: the right to assistance does not specify at what times this assistance
has to be provided and is subject to pre-notification.118 In addition, procedures are costly and
often not accessible, rendering EU legislation ineffective even where it exists. As a result, no
seamless travel is possible so far since the accessibility of transport is still patchy. 78% of
Europeans with disabilities think that they would make more use of their rights of Freedom of
movement, if there were no barriers.119
In the area of goods and services: the EU market for services, mobility aids, devices and
assistive technologies still remains fragmented. There is also a lack of standardization and
interoperability of goods & services in the EU. People with disabilities are discriminated against
in the provision of services such as travel insurance and affordability of mobility aids and
assistive technologies is a problem.120
In short, these obstacles occur mainly because of a lack of harmonization of EU rules regarding
portability of social security benefits and assistance as well as a lack of awareness of the
115
European Commission website, DG Employment: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=559
Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common
rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights,
and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, OJ L 46, 17/02/2004, p. 1–8
117 Regulation (EC) No 1371/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on rail passengers’ rights
and obligations OJ L 315, 03/12/2007, p. 14–41
118 see for example Art. 24 of Regulation 1371/2007 on rail passengers rights
119 EDF Freedom Guide, December 2011, p. 43
120 EDF Freedom Guide, December 2011, p. 27; p. 29
116
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
36
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
particular challenges that persons with disabilities face in terms of mobility. Furthermore,
regulatory barriers prevent persons with disabilities from obtaining adequate mobility aids or
services in cross-border situations. The lack of support for innovation and research to improve
interoperability and innovative solutions at EU-level also contributes to this issue.
Furthermore, the EU report uses language which is not in line with the CRPD such as “mental
disturbance” or “mental retardation”.
EDF calls for

 Creating a mutually recognized “InclEUsive Card” (Commission working title) as a proof
of disability so that persons travelling from one Member State to another can benefit
from the same discounts (e.g. on public transport, culture, leisure and tourism activities)
as locals
 Facilitating stronger coordination of social security systems among EU Member States
to ensure portability of social security benefits, including personal assistance
 Removing technical, regulatory and other barriers to cross-border acquisition of
products and services that enhance personal mobility
 Funding development of innovative solutions for interoperable and affordable mobility
aids and introducing further tax reductions for mobility aids and services.
Article 22: Respect for privacy
The current EU legal framework on data protection does not fully take into account the rights of
persons with disabilities, and in particular the respect for their privacy. The proposed EU
legislative reform package on the protection of personal data to strengthen individual rights and
tackle challenges of globalization and new technologies121 is broadly speaking an improvement
with the current situation. However, the gaps in the current EU legal framework are not
comprehensively addressed in the reform package. The result is an increasing risk for the
privacy of people with disabilities and their families.
121
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the
processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation), COM(2012) 11
final, available at http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/document/review2012/com_2012_11_en.pdf ; Proposal for a
Directive on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the
purposes of prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and
the
free
movement
of
such
data,
COM(2012)
10
final,
available
at
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0010:FIN:EN:PDF
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
37
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
First, article 9 of the proposed General Data Protection Regulation sets out the general
prohibition for processing special categories of personal data, such as data on health. However,
this prohibition does not apply ‘where the data subject is physically or legally incapable of giving
consent’122. This exception to the general prohibition rule affects persons with intellectual
disabilities and persons with mental health problems, who may be deprived of their legal
capacity in some Member States123.
Secondly, the proposed Regulation also contains loopholes that will result in discriminatory
profiling of persons with disabilities. In its article 20, the Regulation relies on the “anonymisation”
and “pseudonymisation”124 of personal data, but without acknowledging the challenges that
these imply due to the current technology, it is and it will be possible to re-identify the
individuals125. Current proposals (art. 20 of the draft Regulation) establish that profiling the
individuals could happen in the absence of specific consent, and redress would only be
restricted ex post and in the event of demonstrable harm. This profiling implies a serious risk of
unreliable and discriminatory profiles –unknown by the individuals– that could be especially
harmful for persons with disabilities126.
EDF calls for
 The EU legal framework on data protection and in particular the proposed Data
Protection Package should be brought in line with CRPD. Specifically, persons with
disabilities who are deprived of their legal capacity should receive support in proving
consent for the use of their personal data.
 Apart from raising standards concerning data protection, there is a need of more
transparency regarding the technologies being used as well as clear information about
them and how personal data will be used.
Article 23: Respect for home and family
Persons with disabilities’ right to be parents is violated in many EU Member States as legal
systems allow forced sterilization or forced abortion without the consent of the person.
122
Article 9, 2, c General Data Protection Regulation
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, Opinion on the proposed data protection reform package, p.6 ,available
at http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-opinion-data-protection-oct-2012.pdf
124 Anonymisation means removing information from electronic traces that would allow direct or indirect identification of a
person, and “pseudonymisation” replaces the name and other direct identifiers with a new identifier such as numbers or codes.
125 An Introduction to Data Protection, European Digital Rights (EDRi), available at http://www.edri.org/files/paper06_datap.pdf
126 EDRi’s proposed amendment for article 20 of the proposed Regulation on Data Protection: available at
http://protectmydata.eu/articles/articles-11-20/article-20/
123
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
38
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Prejudices are also strong barriers. Persons with disabilities are often seen and judged by
judicial authorities, social services and by society in general as less fit to have, and take care
of, children. These prejudices lead to attempts to persuade them to be sterilized or have
abortions. Furthermore, legal decisions against a father or mother with a disability are not rare
in separation or divorce proceedings, where the legal custody of the child is in question, as they
are considered less able to care for the child. Despite being competent on judicial cooperation
in civil and criminal matters, the EU has failed to address this matter.
Women with disabilities are more vulnerable as occasionally they are pushed - either directly
or indirectly as they lack the necessary support- into giving up their rights to be mothers.
The CRPD also recognizes persons with disabilities’ right to decide freely on the spacing and
number of their children, and to have access to appropriate information and education on sexual
and reproductive health. However, persons with disabilities, in particular children and young
persons are often outside those education programmes. As a consequence they are more at
risk of abuse, undesired pregnancy or lack of access of contraception tools. Women are
particularly vulnerable.
Finally, the lack of available community-based care for persons with disabilities, in particular for
children, as well as the lack of support for families and carers, has led to their separation from
family and institutionalization, in violation their CRPD right. The EU measures in this matter lack
coherence. In its soft law127, the EU has addressed the issue of prevention of family separation,
by promoting support to families to take care of their children (including through anti-poverty
programmes), and by calling on Member States to stop the expansion of institutional care
settings. At the same time, EU-driven austerity measures have fostered cuts in social
services128, in support to families and in community- based services, contributing to a reinstitutionalization of persons with disabilities.
EDF calls for

The promotion of training of health staff so that their advice follows current legislation
rather than personal views and prejudices regarding parenthood of persons with
disabilities;
127
Commission Recommendation 2013/112/EU of 20 February 2013 Investing in children: breaking the cycle of
disadvantage, OJ L 59, 2.3.2013, p. 5–16, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32013H0112
128 ‘Assessing the impact of European Governments austerity plans on the rights of persons with disabilities’, European
Foundation Centre, 201, available at http://www.efc.be/programmes_services/resources/Documents/Austerity2012.PDF
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
39
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF




The recommendation to Member States to ensure the availability of the necessary
support to parents and families of persons with disabilities, as well as to parents with
disabilities (financial support, community-based services, training);
The promotion of training of parents and of carers of children with disabilities on all
aspects linked to being a child with a disability including aspects linked sexuality and
gender identity;
The EU to ensure under their competence for judicial cooperation in civil and criminal
matters that persons with disabilities are not discriminated against on the basis of their
disability by judicial staff, social services and legal professionals during legal and
administrative proceedings on their sexual and reproductive rights, right to a family and
legal custody of their children;
The promotion of the training of judicial staff, social services and legal professionals
involved in legal and administrative proceedings with regards to a person with disability’s
sexual and reproductive rights, right to a family and legal custody of their children.
Article 24: Education
Access to education is a fundamental right embedded in the European Charter of Fundamental
Right. This right should be enjoyed by all EU citizens; however persons with disabilities and in
particular students in need of high level support are often excluded or do not have adequate
access to education services. Furthermore the UN CRPD grants a right to inclusive education
at all levels. Yet as concluding observations by the UN CRPD Committee to the EU countries
examined up to now have shown, this right is far from granted. Data from 2011 shows that 19%
of youngsters with disabilities are early school leavers, that 39% of them are pupils with a
severe limitation. 129
The EU has already adopted in 2000 legislation addressing discrimination in education on the
ground of racial equality. For persons with disabilities this right is covered as regards vocational
training. However equal opportunities can only be achieved if the right to education is granted
from the first levels through the adoption of relevant legislation which will prohibit all
discrimination on the basis of disability (see comments on article 5).
129
European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) 2011, available at
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/microdata/eu_silc
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
40
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
In order to develop adequate policies to ensure access to inclusive education for all in the EU,
there is a need for comparable and consistent data. However, despite several surveys and data
collection carried out by the EU130 the data (in EU-SILC 2011) on persons with disabilities who
have completed tertiary education or who are early school leavers are very little. 131
Learning experiences abroad should be accessible to all students with disabilities by ensuring
more accessible information on EU programmes and the support needed to travel abroad. The
EU regulation and students exchange programmes (e.g. Erasmus+132) have been improved
over the last years by including specific provisions to financially support the mobility of students
with disabilities. However, in reality disabled students face numerous barriers when trying to
access the national educational institutions of the country of destination (attitudinal,
architectural, barriers and lack of flexibility of curricula).
These are the same barriers faced by students with disabilities in access to tertiary education
in their own country. In fact, in 2011, only 27% of people with disabilities aged 30-34 has
completed tertiary or equivalent education in the EU.133 The EU growth and employment
strategy134 has as an objective that the share of early school leavers should be under 10% and
at least 40% of 30-34 years old should have completed a tertiary or equivalent education.
However, there are no indicators in the strategy to specifically measure the share of persons
with disabilities.135
Persons with disabilities must have access to all levels of education including life-long learning.
Life-long learning programmes are a key element to ensure matching of skills and jobs and
strictly linked to the right to employment, including finding a job, job retention and career
development opportunities for persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others.
EDF calls for
130
EU-SILC, Labour force survey, etc.,
European comparative data on Europe 2020 & People with disabilities, prepared by Stefanos Grammenos/CESEP,
December 2013, available at Word version 6.997 kB
132 See http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/index_en.htm
133 EU-SILC 2011
134 Europe 2020 strategy for smart, inclusive and sustainable growth : A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe
Initial plan to implement the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 List of Actions 2010-2015 {COM(2010) 636 final}
{SEC(2010) 1323 final} SEC/2010/1324 final, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/ALL/;ELX_SESSIONID=KN0bTtrVDh4MpmJRnCk6p5Zn3ZpcnpS9RKKmsJYBVJwL7YX2QGm1!1169027494?ur
i=CELEX:52010SC1324
135 http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/europe_2020_indicators/headline_indicators
131
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
41
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF








The EC to promote support EU countries in developing inclusive education systems by
promoting the use of European funding instruments136 to fund both trainings and
accessible infrastructures;
The EC to collect data, best practices to monitor the access to education of pupils in
need of high level support so to support members states in developing adequate
responses;
The EC to promote and financially support national collection of data on access to
education for pupils with disabilities so to have comparable statistics at EU level;
The EC should develop a legislative proposal to establish a European mobility card to
provide for mutual recognition of disability status, thereby facilitating free movement of
students or trainees or teachers with disabilities in the EU; 137
Encourage the training of teachers to develop competences in disability awareness and
teaching strategies, which are crucial for pupils and students with disabilities to learn
and be included in society and in the labor market;
The EC to include disability specific indicators in the Europe 2020 strategy when
pursuing the target on education;
The EC to promote exchange of best practices about access to exchange programmes
for persons with disabilities;
Promote exchange of teachers and headmasters to share good practices on inclusive
education.
Article 25: Health
Persons with disabilities face a number of barriers preventing them from fully enjoying their right
to health on an equal basis with other as enshrined in the UN CRPD.
The inaccessibility of healthcare facilities and the lack of accessible information about
healthcare services and entitlements have been identified as major barriers in accessing
healthcare by European patients138.
The institutionalisation of children and adults with disabilities prevents them from having access
to quality healthcare services. Ill health is both a reason and a consequence of
institutionalisation of persons with disabilities
136
For example the European Structural and Investment Funds
EDF's Analysis Report on a European Mobility Card (October
2012) http://cms.horus.be/files/99909/MediaArchive/EDF_Analysis_Report_European_Mobility_Card.doc
138 European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, Inequalities and multiple discrimination in access to and quality of
healthcare, 2013, p. 51, available at http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2013/inequalities-discrimination-healthcare
137
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
42
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The lack of flexibility from healthcare professionals139 and misconceptions about healthcare
needs of persons with disabilities are also major barriers.
As a consequence, persons with disabilities140 tend to receive healthcare of lower quality that
is not adapted to their needs. Persons with disabilities enjoy a lower life expectancy than other
persons, for example, people with mental disabilities are living on average 15-20 years shorter
life than the rest of the population.
The quality of treatment for psychiatric care lags behind in many Member States, who rely on
the outdated biomedical approaches and not exploring the venues offered by social psychiatry.
A 2013 report by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) confirms and documents the
strong correlation between disability and ill health. This is particularly noticeable for women with
disabilities, 23.7% of whom reported ‘very bad health’. In comparison, less than 0,1% of women
and men without disabilities report the same.141 Research also shows higher prevalence of
psychosocial disabilities and mental health problems among women, particularly migrant
women142.
The EU has positively recognised in its ‘soft law’ the rights and specific needs of persons with
disabilities’ in term of health, in particular in the European Disability Strategy and in the
European Commission communication “Investing in Health”.
However, the EU fails to incorporate the disability perspective in an appropriate way in its
relevant health instruments.
None of the four thematic priorities of the new EU Health Programme 2014 – 2020, although
directly relevant, mention health of persons with disabilities or removing health inequalities143.
139
Ibid., p. 55.
Ibid, p. 39.
141 Ibid, p. 25.
142 Ibid., p. 37.
143 Regulation (EU) No 282/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 on the establishment of a
third Programme for the Union's action in the field of health (2014-2020) and repealing Decision No 1350/2007/EC Text with
EEA
relevance,
OJ
L
86,
21.3.2014,
p.
1–13
(available
at
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2014.086.01.0001.01.ENG). The Programme has the budget of 449.4 million euros to
support health-related actions at the EU level and in the Member States.
140
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
43
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The recent European legislation144 on cross-border healthcare does not guarantee patients with
disabilities access to affordable healthcare in EU Member States other than their own, since it
has left the implementation of the most important provisions to the discretion of the Member
States:
- Member States are not obliged to reimburse the extra costs related to the treatment,
such as accommodation and travel costs, or extra costs which persons with disabilities
might incur while receiving cross-border healthcare. This is likely to have a
disproportionately high deterrent effect on those patients with disabilities who use
personal assistance or children with disabilities who must travel with their parents, as
well as persons who must pay extra for accessible transport or accommodation.
- Member States are free to refuse the reimbursement of treatment that is not included in
the “health benefits package” in the Member State of affiliation. This nullifies the
usefulness of the Directive for patients who need treatments related to their disabilities
(such as the insertion of a shunt to relieve the pressure from the brain in persons with
hydrocephalus) that, while lifesaving, are not reimbursed by their national health
insurance, as the case in some EU Member States.
- Member States are free to refuse the reimbursement of the full cost of the medical
intervention if it exceeds its national ceiling for the same procedure. This leaves at a
significant disadvantage persons who run higher risk of unexpected complications due
to the nature of their disability and are forced to pay extra costs that may not have been
agreed with the authorities in their Member State of affiliation.
On the issue of intersectionality, LGBTI people with disabilities may also face higher risk of
harassment from service providers, especially health care services where disabled people
may be regarded as more vulnerable and reliant of health care services so less likely to
complain. In addition, trans people who suffer of mental health difficulties, totally unrelated to
their gender identity, may face barriers when trying to access support by mental health
providers. Some requirements for legal gender recognition, and in particular, for access to
gender reassignment treatment, may create new barriers for trans people with disabilities: i.e.,
condition of employment or use of hormones.
EDF calls for
Directive 2011/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011 on the application of patients’ rights
in cross-border healthcare, OJ L 88, 4.4.2011, p. 45–65 (available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32011L0024)
144
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
44
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
 The health of people with disabilities must be addressed at all levels through legislative,
policy and funding instruments, and be mainstreamed in the EU Health Programme.
 Disability must be included in all relevant health measurement indicators;
 The Commission proposal for a directive that would prohibit discrimination in relation to
healthcare needs to be adopted by the EU and include the grounds of disability, age, sexual
orientation, gender identity and religion;
 The training of health care professionals on disability awareness and provision of reasonable
accommodations with a particular attention to women, children, older and LGBTI people with
disabilities.
 In research and development of the health care systems participation and involvement of the
users as advisors and co-developers is essential.
 From the users point of view it is important having a confident and effective organization for
complaints and denouncements.

Article 26: Habilitation and rehabilitation
Quality of social services provided to persons with disabilities, including habilitation and
rehabilitation services has been hindered in the EU due to the economic crisis and related
budget cuts. Moreover there is not a European quality system to guarantee a minimum level of
quality of services for all.145
With the support of the EC, the Social Protection Committee146 adopted a document
establishing quality principles and criteria for social services147. The framework is not legally
binding and there is no proof of its implementation.148
Habilitation and rehabilitation services are fundamental for early intervention measures and for
the access of persons with disabilities and in particular in need of high level support to
145
In particular, in the field of health and education services no new financial resources were allocated by the States. This
caused an increase of the prize of medications and services, with a direct negative impact on high quality services which are
not affordable anymore. Apart from direct cuts to disability benefits, a number of other approaches to reducing the real value
of payments were evident in many countries. In some Member States delayed payments are a significant factor in putting
people with disabilities and their families under financial pressure. EDF Report on the impact of the crisis on the rights of
persons with disabilities
146 The Social Protection Committee (SPC) is as an EU advisory policy committee, established by the Treaty on the Functioning
of the EU (article 160) http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=758
147
A
Voluntary
European
Quality
Framework
for
Social
services,
available
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=6140&langId=en
148 See alternative report on article 19 of the present document
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
45
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
employment, education, health and society as a whole. However these services are not used
sufficiently in the EU149.
Habilitation and rehabilitation services should help persons with disabilities having access to
the open labor market and supported employment represent such category of services.
The EC published a study on supported employment which showed that the position and status
of Supported Employment across the EU is unclear and funding unstable and unpredictable.
150
Rehabilitation services such as Vocational education and training and employment services are
important in relation to activation of persons with disabilities and their access to employment in
all stages of entering and exiting the labor market. Unfortunately, in the EU rehabilitation
services are underdeveloped and underfunded151.
Persons with disabilities, and in particular persons in need of high level support, may benefit
from tailor made habilitation and rehabilitation services promoting inter alia early action.
These services should be developed in partnership between service users their families and
service providers.
Continuity of service delivery is a key characteristic for efficient results of rehabilitation services.
In 2014, the EU adopted legislation on public procurement 152 that gives the possibility to
reserve markets for non-profit organisations that deliver social, health and other services
provided directly to the person (including habilitation and rehabilitation services). However, the
duration of these reserved contracts is limited to 3 years, which is something that puts in
jeopardy the continuity of service provision.153
149
PES approaches for sustainable activation of people with disabilities, European Commission, Analytical paper, August 2003,
available at http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=10932&langId=en
150
Supported Employment for people with disabilities in the EU and EFTA-EEA, available at
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/cowi.final_study_report_may_2011_final_en.pdf
151 PES approaches for sustainable activation of people with disabilities, European Commission, Analytical paper, August 2003,
available at http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=10932&langId=en
152 Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and
repealing
Directive
2004/18/EC
Text
with
EEA
relevance,
available
at
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32014L0024&from=EN
153 Article 77 of Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement
and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC Text with EEA relevance, available at
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32014L0024&from=EN
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
46
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
According to the EU definition of long-term care, this includes rehabilitation services and
empowerment activities154. The EU is putting the sustainability of these services at risks by
recommending governments to contain public expenditure devoted to them.155
EDF calls for







The EC to raise awareness about the study on supported employment and its finding
and should implement the recommendations included in the report;156
The development of compulsory quality standards for social services including
habilitation and rehabilitation services for persons with disabilities;
The EC to support the development of rehabilitation services in the member states via
the use of European structural and investment funds;
The EC should collect and disseminate evidence on the effectiveness of rehabilitation
services;
The EC should facilitate partnerships between main actors involved in the development
and delivery of the rehabilitation services, giving priority to service users in the evaluation
phase;
The EC to provide guidance (e.g. best practices and benchmarking guides) to
contracting authorities so that at the end of the contract, the contracting authorities
should use open public procurement procedures or alternative forms of selecting the
provider, different from procurement, to ensure continuity of the service provision.
Support towards the labour market should be available early in the rehabilitation
process and can as OECD 2013 Mental health and work Sweden points out even be
integrated in primary health care services.

Article 27: Work and employment
People with disabilities are protected against discrimination in the fields of employment and
occupation by the EU Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000, establishing a
154
Long-term care in the European Union, available at http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=768&langId=en
Recommendation for a Council recommendation on Belgium’s 2014 national reform programme and delivering a Council
opinion
on
Belgium’s
2014
stability
programme
{SWD(2014)
402
final},
available
at
http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/csr2014/csr2014_belgium_en.pdf
156 Recommendations relevant for the EU, page 12 of the Supported Employment for people with
disabilities
in
the
EU
and
EFTA-EEA,
available
at
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/cowi.final_study_report_may_2011_final_en.pdf
155
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
47
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation 157. However, the
effectiveness of this Directive is limited due to the problematic implementation today in the EU:
- Extremely low level of awareness about disability rights and remedies by most parties
-
concerned by the Directive;
Inadequate understanding of the law, particularly of the concept of reasonable
accommodation, by persons with disabilities and employers;
Serious financial, procedural and informational barriers to seeking redress for
discrimination;
Inadequate procedures for victim support and representation;
- Fear of victimization as a paralysing factor undermining the effectiveness of protection.158
The EC created an online portal for mobility of workers across EU, which gives comprehensive
information for workers and employers, including information on living conditions in another
country. Unfortunately the portal is not fully accessible and provides little specific information for
workers with disability159.
In the EU employment strategy and policies disability has not been mainstreamed: The EU
identified reduction of unemployment as a priority at least until 2020 160. In several policy
instruments it addresses young people, elderly and disadvantaged groups. Although measures
taken for these groups are also relevant for persons with disabilities, there are no specific
actions or objectives addressed to them. This has a direct impact in influencing national
economic reforms to reduce unemployment, fight against poverty and exclusion and reducing
schools dropout rates.161
On the basis of European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions 2011, the
employment rate of persons with disabilities is lower than 50%,162 employment rate of women
157
The Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in
employment and occupation, Official Journal L 303 , 02/12/2000 P. 0016 – 0022 (available at http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32000L0078:en:HTML)
158 EDF Analysis of the practical impact of the Employment Directive on persons with disabilities in employment
http://cms.horus.be/files/99909/MediaArchive/Employment%20Directive%20report_November%202010_final.doc
159 The European job mobility portal, available at https://ec.europa.eu/eures/page/homepage?lang=en
160 Communication from the Commission, Europe 2020 A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, Brussels,
3.3.2010, COM(2010) 2020, available at
http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/COMPLET%20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20-%20Europe%202020%20%20EN%20version.pdf
161 In the Annual Growth Survey 2012, the European Commission did not consider the disability dimension and the EU countries
did not include, in their National Reform Programmes, positive reforms to tackle employment of persons with disabilities.
162 While in the majority of EU Member States the employment rate is higher than 70%. For more information, please see
European comparative data on Europe 2020 & People with disabilities, final report prepared by Stefanos Grammenos from
Centre for European Social and Economic Policy (CESEP ASBL) on behalf of the Academic Network of European Disability
Experts (ANED), December 2013, available at Word version 6.997 kB
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
48
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
with disabilities is lower than men with disabilities163, therefore men and women with disabilities
should be a priority group for national and European employment policies.
An important factor affecting the employment, but also unemployment and activity rate is the
degree of disability. At EU level severely disabled people are at higher risk of exclusion from the
labour market than moderate or non-disabled people. This means that measures aimed at the
general population will not impact on people with severe disabilities.
The unemployment rate of persons with disabilities is higher at all stages of the life cycle 164,
however the difference between employment of people with and without disabilities increases
with age165.
The Council of the European Union adopted recommendations for quality of traineeship in the
EU166. Young people with disabilities however are disregarded in particular as accessibility is
not included among the criteria to provide a high quality traineeship programme in the EU.
EDF calls for




Awareness raising by supporting trainings with the use of European Funds167
and developing benchmarking tools for exchange of information and practices
across EU168;
Reinforcing the legislative framework addressing discrimination in all areas of
life by adopting the proposal for the equal treatment Directive169;
Enhancing civil dialogue with NGOs, trade unions and organisations of
employers by involving them in all steps of the decision making and
implementation processes with regards to the Employment Directive.;
Making the EURES portal fully accessible to persons with disabilities, including
specific sessions on travelling and working abroad about persons with
disabilities;
163
Ibid.
EU SILC 2011, available at http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/microdata/eu_silc
165 This could be explained as: An initial disadvantage leads to unemployment and lack of experience which further increases
the initial disadvantage of persons with disabilities; An initial activity limitation might deteriorate through time increasing the
initial health disadvantage. This deterioration might be the result of the initial unemployment (poverty, living styles, etc.) For
more information, please see European comparative data on Europe 2020 & People with disabilities, final report prepared by
Stefanos Grammenos from Centre for European Social and Economic Policy (CESEP ASBL) on behalf of the Academic
Network of European Disability Experts (ANED), December 2013, available at Word version 6.997 kB
166 Council recommendation on a Quality Framework for Traineeships, Employment, Social policy, health and consumer
affairs, Council meeting, Brussels, 10 March 2014, available at
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/lsa/141424.pdf
167 European Social Fund for instance
168 The High Level Group on Disability were representatives of national authorities meet, could be used as a good platform to
exchange information and promote events at national level
169 Proposal for a Council Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion
or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation {SEC(2008) 2180} {SEC(2008) 2181}
164
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
49
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF









Monitoring the employment rate of persons with disability with a specific
indicator and including information in the Annual Growth Survey when defining
the priorities for reforms in the EU countries, National Reform programmes and
Country Specific Recommendations;
Develop sub-target related to increase the employment of persons with
disabilities in the European economic strategy170;
Including accessibility in the Council’s recommendations for quality of
traineeship in the EU;
The EC to prioritizes employment of men and women with disabilities in the
Country Specific Recommendations and in its employment strategy and
guidelines;
The EU to use the Social European Fund as a effective tool to improve the
levels of inclusion of women and girls with disabilities in access to labour
market and to reduces poverty;
The EC should facilitate transfer of good practices among Member States with
regards to employment of persons with severe disabilities and promote
development of special targeted measures addressing them;
The EC should support, inter alia, Public Employment Services in promoting
mobility of workers with disabilities in the open labour market. Rehabilitation
services and activation measures should be put in place to allow people to
returning to employment after a long term inactivity or in finding a new job after
losing one (e.g. to the economic crisis);
The EC should promote collective bargaining among social partners to make
inclusive labour market for persons with disabilities. Special attention should
be paid to accessibility, reasonable accommodation and non-discrimination;
The EC to give priority to decrease unemployment of young persons with
disabilities thus targeting youngsters with disabilities in the youth employment
policies.
Article 28: Adequate standard of living and social protection
The right to adequate standard of living and social protection are one of the eight areas for
action of the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020171. In order to analyse the EU role on the
European Union’s economic strategy so-called Europe 2020 aims at reaching an employment rate of 75% in
the EU, a sub-target should address specifically the employment rate of persons with disabilities
170
171
European Disability Strategy 2010-2020: A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe Initial plan to implement the
European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 List of Actions 2010-2015 {COM(2010) 636 final} {SEC(2010) 1323 final}
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
50
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
implementation of article 28, the area for action of the strategy on social protection sets the
reference framework.
The economic crisis has a greater impact on the standard of living of persons with disabilities
compared to the general population172, and especially vulnerable are persons with mental
disabilities, which at least in Sweden have the highest expenses due to their disabilities, and to
a greater extent live on benefits compared to other disability groups. To a greater extent
Persons at-risk of poverty have increased across the whole EU. Evidence based on EU-SILC
statistics supports the contention that people with disabilities face a higher risk of poverty than
people without disabilities.173 In 2011, 31% of persons with disabilities aged 16 and over lived
in households at risk of poverty or social exclusion as compared to 21 % for persons without
disabilities. This is a pattern in all EU Member States.174 ar
The risk of falling into poverty is increasing among families where additional costs due to a
disability have to be taken into account. Increases in co-payment requirements and the costs
of care may put appropriate services and medication beyond the means of many families.175
Austerity measures supported by the European Union directly and indirectly 176 affected the
wellbeing of people with disabilities with significant impact on their standard of living. A wide
range of mechanisms were used by EU Member States to reduce the real value of cash benefits
to people with disabilities with a significant impact on their ability to access basic goods and
services. There is a strong case to be made that many EU Member States are attempting to
avoid their obligation to provide assistance with disability-related expenses. 177
Assessing the impact of European governments’ austerity plans on the rights of people with disabilities – European report,
Hauben,
H.
et
al.
(2012),
European
Foundation
Centre,
available
at
http://www.efc.be/programmes_services/resources/Documents/Austerity2012.PDF
173 EU-SILC 2011, available at http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/microdata/eu_silc
174 European comparative data on Europe 2020 & People with disabilities, final report prepared by Stefanos Grammenos
from Centre for European Social and Economic Policy (CESEP ASBL) on behalf of the Academic Network of European
Disability Experts (ANED), December 2013, available at Word version 6.997 kB
175 Ibid.
176 In particular, in the field of health and education services no new financial resources were allocated by the Member
States. This caused an increase of the prize of medications and services, with a direct negative impact on high quality
services which are not affordable anymore. Apart from direct cuts to disability benefits, a number of other approaches to
reducing the real value of payments were evident in many countries. In some Member States delayed payments are a
significant factor in putting people with disabilities and their families under financial pressure. For more information, please
see EDF Report on the impact of the crisis on the rights of persons with disabilities
177 Assessing the impact of European governments’ austerity plans on the rights of people with disabilities – European report,
Hauben,
H.
et
al.
(2012),
European
Foundation
Centre,
available
at
http://www.efc.be/programmes_services/resources/Documents/Austerity2012.PDF
172
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
51
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
There is an absence of proper indicators for measuring social impacts including those that
concern the lives of persons with disabilities. There is no systematic information gathering, let
alone statistical information, available on the status of persons with disabilities.
Disability social protection systems, poverty reduction programmes, disability-related
assistance, public housing and other enabling services, retirement and benefit programmes are
part of the Social Inclusion and Social Protection (SPSI) Processes, which fall under the shared
competences between the EU and Member States178.
The EU seems to promote the idea that the prime goal of the EU Member States is to contain
public deficits and implicitly accepts thereby that EU Member States defer their efforts to
actively implement policies that reduce poverty and, to a lesser extent, policies that increase
employment.179
The degree of disability is an important factor to consider, as at EU level the percentage of
severely disabled people living in households at risk of poverty or social exclusion is 49%
compared to 22% for persons without disabilities.180
While the Europe 2020 strategy was recommending lifting people from the risk of poverty, the
Troika181 was prioritizing economic objectives that encouraged austerity measures.
EDF calls for the following:
 The EU has to move away from the austerity policy and bring back inclusion and equality
at the heart of its action;
 Ensure dialogue with civil society and in particular organisations of persons with
disabilities;
Article 153 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Therefore, the role of the EU is to “support
national measures to ensure the quality and sustainability of social protection systems for people with disabilities, notably
through policy exchange and mutual learning.”
179 The main policy framework in the field of EU SPSI is the Europe 2020 Strategy, which sets targets to lift at least 20 million
people out of poverty and social exclusion and to increase employment of the population aged 20-64 to 75%. The European
Semester provides the framework for steering and monitoring EU countries' economic and social reforms to reach the Europe
2020 targets. The challenges and proposed solutions are reflected in the Country-specific Recommendations. The
recommendations, however, seem to accept that Member States need to tackle economic stability and limit further
deterioration of the public finances in the first place and only as a secondary priority to seek the implementation of the
national targets that incorporate the common EU targets on employment, poverty reduction and school drop outs in the
National Reform Programmes.
180 European comparative data on Europe 2020 & People with disabilities, final report prepared by Stefanos Grammenos
from Centre for European Social and Economic Policy (CESEP ASBL) on behalf of the Academic Network of European
Disability Experts (ANED), December 2013, available at Word version 6.997 kB
181 Meeting of International Monetary Fund, European Commission and the European Central Bank. It is a vehicle for
economic and financial evaluation and for negotiation with Member States of the euro area.
178
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
52
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF



Country Specific Recommendations should include persons with disabilities as a target
group when trying to reducing poverty;
The EU must adopt new objectives concerning persons with disabilities in the review of
the Europe 2020 Strategy to mainstream disability rights in the European Semester
process to ensure the protection and enjoyment of human rights for Europeans with
disabilities;182
The EC should promote social security schemes that, together with activation measures,
will lift people with disabilities out of poverty and the risk of it, when pursuing the Europe
2020 poverty target.183
Article 29: Participation in political and public life
Persons with disabilities face a series of legal and practical barriers that prevent them from
exercising their right to participation in political and public life on an equal basis with others.
Those barriers take multiple forms. Legislation on legal capacity in several EU Member States
link the deprivation of citizens with disabilities of their legal capacity to their right to vote. In
some Member States, laws prevent persons with certain disabilities from holding public offices.
Barriers to the right to vote take the form of inaccessible voting procedures, including
inaccessible polling stations, making it practically impossible for persons with disabilities to cast
their ballot. Only 12 EU Member States out of 28 have accessibility standards for all polling
stations184. Moreover, most of standards focus only on persons with physical impairments, so
they still exclude other persons with disabilities. Reasonable accommodation measures for
blind persons, persons with intellectual disabilities or families of persons with intellectual
disabilities are missing.
Persons with disabilities have fewer opportunities to actively participate in public and political
life due to the inaccessibility of the information and due to processes that do not take into
account the needs of people with all impairments. In most Member States, the official websites
providing instructions for voting and information on candidates do not meet the internationally
182
Also called for in European Disability Forum, Manifesto on the European Elections 2014, available at http://www.edffeph.org/page_generale.asp?docid=33367
183
The European Union economic strategy called Europe 2020 aims at reducing by at least 20 million the
number of Europeans exposed to poverty and social exclusion by 2020
European Agency for Fundamental Rights, ‘The right to political participation of persons with disabilities: Human Rights
indicators’ (2014), p. 49
184
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
53
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
recognised standards for internet accessibility185. Political parties’ material is very rarely
available in alternative formats186.
Those barriers remain prevalent due to a low level of awareness about the needs of people
with disabilities among the various organisations involved in political processes, such as
election officials, political parties and communicators.
Furthermore, persons with disabilities face difficulties in accessing complaints mechanisms. 187
A report188 by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) analysed how the
right to political participation in the EU is being respected, promoted and fulfilled across the EU
and reveals that significant challenges remain which affect some people with disabilities more
than others
To ensure equal opportunities of participation in political and public life for persons with
disabilities, EDF calls for
 the European Commission, as the guardian of the Treaties, should take measures to
ensure that the right to vote in European elections enshrined in the Treaties is enforced
for all citizens;
 Political parties should open up a process aiming at making their activities inclusive and
expand opportunities for political participation of persons with disabilities. Electoral
meetings and programmes should be accessible;
 The EU should promote ambitious awareness-raising campaign on the right to vote and
political and public participation of all people with disabilities;
 The EU and its member States should improve the collection of data to measure political
participation of persons with disabilities;
 The EU should ensure that measures are put in place ensuring that persons with
disabilities who live in institutions are able to register and to vote.
Article 30: Participation in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport
The main barriers for persons with disabilities to participation in cultural life, leisure, recreation
and sports are mainly related to accessibility (Art. 9). Physical accessibility to many events,
185
Ibid., p. 46
Ibid., p. 9
187 Ibid., p. 53
188 FRA, op cit
186
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
54
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
places and activities is a problem as well as information about them. For people with
psychosocial disabilities a huge problem is also the lack of money.
Another obstacle to participation is the attitudinal barrier which prevents persons with
disabilities to participate fully because their needs are not taken into account in the design of
cultural activities, leisure, recreation or sports. Prejudices are common and the lack of
awareness and training of staff exacerbates this situation. There is for example a lack of
accessibility of cultural events/places for persons with intellectual disability.189
Even if provisions for persons with disabilities are taken, this is often in the form of separate
events and activities specifically aimed at persons with disabilities such as the Paralympics/
Special Olympics, etc. This does not result in mainstreaming and inclusion but it promotes
segregation from mainstream society. The situation is even worse for children with disabilities
who are not taken into account and are thus disadvantaged in comparison with their peers. 190
The obstacles to participation which have been identified relate particularly to the following
aspects of Article 30 CRPD:
The Commissions own funding programmes, i.e. the Culture Programme 2007 - 2013 191and
the MEDIA programme192 do not include accessibility as a criterion for the award of grants or
support of specific disability related projects. The EU report mentions that some projects have
been funded which include persons with disabilities but they do not give details about which
ones and how many. The EU report also states that the EU is committed to mainstream
accessibility in the European Capitals of Culture193 initiative but no concrete actions have been
taken to ensure this.
Publicity and promotional information are as important as physical access 194. This approach is
reinforced when one considers the role of education and economic status on peoples’ interest
in the arts195. Furthermore, since people with disabilities are more likely to have both poorer
189
EDF questionnaire on culture; answer by Inclusion Europe
EDF questionnaire on culture, answer by the Belgian Disability Forum
191 Culture Programme 2007 – 2013: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/culture/programme/about_culture_en.php (retrieved on 23
June 2014)
192 MEDIA Programme: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/media/index_en.php (retrieved on 23 June 2014)
193 Reference to the link which is dead.
194Arts and Disability Ireland. (2010) Shift in Perspective. An Arts and Disability Resource Pack :p.46
195 Lunn, P. and Kelly, E. (2008) In the frame or Out of the Picture? A statistical Analysis of Public Involvement in the Arts.
ESRI.
190
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
55
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
educational levels and lower income levels than people without disabilities, the need for
accessible publicity and promotional information is critical.
The EU has signed the Marrakech Treaty196 to Facilitate Access to Published Works by Visually
Impaired Persons and Persons with Print Disabilities in order to grant certain copyright
exemptions to create accessible versions of print media such as e-books. However, this was
not an EU initiative but it is an international treaty. The Commission previously issued a
Communication Communication on Copyright in the Knowledge Economy197 and started a
stakeholder dialogue in 2009 which had a Memorandum of Understanding198 as a result. The
EU legislation on Copyright of 2001 introduces an exception on reproductions for “uses, for the
benefit of people with a disability, which are directly related to the disability and of a noncommercial nature, to the extent required by the specific disability”. However this exception
does not guarantee as such the accessibility of printed and broadcasted material, but allows at
cost its reproduction with no additional copyright levy.
Furthermore the Audiovisual Media Services Directive199 encourages EU Member States to
ensure that media service providers make their services accessible but this is not an obligation.
The result is that subtitling/audio description for TV programmes and films is not always
available.200 Consider including encouragement to produce fair media portrayal of persons with
disabilities in revision of AVMS (maybe better in article 8?)
Access to sport is included in European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 and the EU funded
Special Olympics & Youth Paralympics are positive intiatives but which do not allow inclusion
of persons with disabilities in mainstream sport activities and events. It is not clear how the EU
tries to encourage EU Member States and sports organizations to adapt the sports
infrastructure and promote inclusive sporting events in practice.
EDF calls for

A legal obligation for public and private TV stations to provide access to digital media
and accessible program content (subtitles, audio descriptions, sign language, etc.);
196
Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print
Disabled of 27 June 2013, World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
197 Communication of the European Commission on Copyright in the Knowledge Economy (COM(2009)532 final)
198 2010 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on access to works by people with print disabilities:
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/initiatives/access/index_en.htm
199 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain
provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media
services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive), OJ L 95, 15/04/2010, p. 1–24
200 EDF questionnaire on culture, answer by the Belgian Disability Forum
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
56
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF








Include obligations to provide accessible (subtitles, audio description, spoken
subtitles, sign language etc) films in cinemas and other distribution platforms.
European standards related to accessibility of the built environment (Mandate 420)
which also applies to cultural venues, etc.;
Approval of grants under the “Creative Europe” Programme, in particular for media
and cultural institutions and projects only under the condition of an adequate
consideration of comprehensive accessibility and inclusion of persons with
disabilities;
Support of new initiatives to award good practices in accessibility such as the Access
City Awards to create more incentives to public authorities and providers of cultural
activities;
Promote the accessibility of museums, libraries and other cultural places by creating
a European label for accessibility and European standards for easy-to-read and
easy-to-understand information, as well as quality standards for the recognition of
the logo;
Promote a policy of reduced prices to access cultural places;
Support training for staff in cultural sector on accessibility via funding programmes;
A card available for persons with disabilities to facilitate access to culture
E. INFORMATION ON THE SPECIFIC SITUATION OF BOYS, GIRLS AND WOMEN WITH
DISABILITIES
Article 6: Women with disabilities
The principle of gender equality between men and women and the relevant EU gender equality
policies, such as the EU 2011-2020 Gender Equality Pact201 and the EU Plan of Action on
Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment (2010-2015)202 do not mainstream the rights of
women and girls with disabilities. Mutual oblivion between the gender and disability perspective
in EU policy has resulted in the invisibility of women with disabilities’ needs and women with
disabilities continue being the victims of multiple discrimination.203
As an annex to the Council conclusions on the European Pact for gender equality for the period 2011 – 2020, available at
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/lsa/119628.pdf
202 EU plan of action on Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment in Development 2010-2015, DG Development and
Cooperation (2010), available at http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/infopoint/publications/europeaid/227a_en.htm
203 EDF Manifesto on the Rights of Women and Girls with Disabilities in the European Union (2011), p. 17, available at
http://www.edf-feph.org/Page.asp?docid=26614&langue=EN
201
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
57
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The Beijing Platform for Action is an important tool at international level that aims at promoting
the “human rights of women” in 12 critical areas204. The EU has adopted indicators205 for the
follow up of the Beijing Platform for Action since 1999 and is currently reviewing its
implementation206. Amongst its three strategic objectives, there is “Ensure equality and nondiscrimination under the law and in practice”. However, the intersectional discrimination has not
been taken into account in these objectives and women and girls with disabilities’ concerns
have not been included.
The employment of women with disabilities – an urgent need to boost equal access to
employment
Of the 80 million people with disabilities, 46million are women and girls, representing 16% of
the total female population of the EU.207
While the European Commission 2013 study on the progress of gender equality 208 shows an
increase in women’s participation in the labour market for most of those in working-age, it does
not provide any data on the situation of women with disabilities, and it can therefore not be
assumed that they have also benefited from better access to the labour market.
Furthermore, the European Commission’s Strategy for equality between women and men 20102015209 mentions that particular attention needs to be given to the employment participation of
women with disabilities in order to achieve women’s economic independence but no policy was
developed to that effect.
204
The Platform for Action is an agenda for women's empowerment. It aims at accelerating the implementation of the Nairobi
Forward-looking Strategies for the Advancement of Women and at removing all the obstacles to women's active participation
in all spheres of public and private life through a full and equal share in economic, social, cultural and political decisionmaking. For more information, please see http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/platform/plat1.htm#statement
205 See conclusions of the Council of the European Union at http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/tools/statisticsindicators/platform-action/index_en.htm
206 The European Institute for Gender Equality is currently carrying out a study to review the implementation of the Beijing
Platform for Action in the EU. The results will be available in the second half of 2014. For more details, please see
http://eige.europa.eu/content/study-to-review-the-implementation-of-the-beijing-platform-for-action-in-the-eu-%E2%80%93beijing-20
207 European Parliament, Report on women with disabilities (2013/2065(INI), 14 October 2013, available at
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A7-2013-0329+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN
Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, Rapporteur: Angelika Werthmann, 10/10.2013
208 Report on Progress on equality between women and men in 2013, {COM(2014) 224 final} {SWD(2014) 141 final},
available at http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/swd_2014_142_en.pdf
209 European Commission, Strategy for Equality between women and men 2010-2015, COM/2010/0491 final, September 2010,
available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0491
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
58
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The Europe 2020 Strategy210 sets an employment target of 75% for women and men. However,
the Strategy fails to recognise that women are not at the same starting point as men on the
labour market, that women are not a homogeneous group and that specific measures are
required to ensure that all women, including women with disabilities, are put in place to increase
women’s equal access to employment. Subsequently, there are no country-specificrecommendations to boost the employment of women with disabilities in the European
semester process, which is the key implementing strategy of the Europe 2020 targets.
Recent studies show that women with disabilities are faring far worse than their male
counterparts at the employment market211, are more likely to experience poor post-school
employment outcomes, consistently earn less money, have more negative employment
experiences, and are routinely assigned to stereotypically “female” jobs212. In addition, women
workers or women accompanying their partners that move to another EU Member State often
lose their rights and social services.213
Further, women continue to earn 16% on average less than men and it is often at the moment
of childbirth that the gender pay gap kicks in, with life- long often irreversible consequences,
including the fact that women receive on average 40% less pension than men. Women with
disabilities face additional challenges due to their disability. Despite existing laws that protect
pregnant workers, more and more women, including women with disabilities are experiencing
discrimination in the work place as a direct result of pregnancy and/or birth.
The European Commission had proposed to strengthen the rights of pregnant workers and
women returning to work following childbirth and/or who are breastfeeding with the proposed
Maternity Leave Directive214, which was adopted democratically by a large majority of the
European Parliament on 20 October 2010. However, this proposal has been blocked by
210
European Commission, A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, COM(2010) 2020 final, available at
http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/COMPLET%20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20-%20Europe%202020%20%20EN%20version.pdf
211 Sonja Feist-Price, Neena Khanna: Employment Inequality For Women With Disabilities, 2003, pages 10-13, available at
http://www.uky.edu/Centers/HIV/Sonja%20Articles/Feist-Price%20&%20Khanna%202003.pdf
212 European Commission, Study on the situation of women with disabilities in light of the UN Convention for the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities, (VC/2007/317) 2009
213 EDF Manifesto on the rights of women and girls with disabilities in the European Union, p. 64, available at http://www.edffeph.org/Page.asp?docid=26614&langue=EN
214 European Parliament legislative resolution of 20 October 2010 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament
and of the Council amending Council Directive 92/85/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the
safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding
(COM(2008)0637 – C6-0340/2008 – 2008/0193(COD)) available at
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P7-TA-2010-0373&language=EN
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
59
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Member State governments in the Council of the European Union for over three years and the
European Commission has also threatened to withdraw the Proposal.215
Violence against women and girls with Disabilities
The 2014 Fundamental Rights Agency Survey on Violence against Women indicates a higher
prevalence of various forms of violence experienced by women with disabilities: in terms of
physical and sexual partner violence, 34% of women with a health problem or disability have
experienced this during a relationship (compared with 19% of women generally). 216
Violence against women and girls with disabilities is not just a subset of gender-based violence:
it is an intersectional category dealing with gender-based and disability-based violence. The
confluence of these two factors results in an extremely high risk of violence against women with
disabilities217.
As mentioned above, women with disabilities suffer discrimination in the labour market and,
when they find work, it is usually with low pay, low or no-status, and in poor working conditions
.This creates a situation where they are in the impossibility to leave the home or their living
environment where they suffer violence and abuse. Moreover, this lack of economic
independence prevent them to access many services (health, legal, psychological support, etc).
In addition, women with disabilities are at high risk of violence based on social stereotypes and
biases that attempt to dehumanize or infantilize, exclude or isolate them, and target them for
sexual and other forms of violence. Violence also has the consequence of contributing to the
incidence of disability among women.218
Further, women with disabilities face a number of obstacles in the justice system, including the
systematic failure of the court system to acknowledge them as competent witnesses. Often law
enforcement dismisses complaints by women with disabilities who need special assistance;
their testimonies, especially from women with prior health treatment are discredited. Also, very
few women shelters and services targeting women subject to violence are accessible to women
See press release European Women’s Lobby, July 2014, available at http://www.womenlobby.org/news/ewlnews/article/threats-to-withdraw-the-maternity?lang=en
216 For more information, please see FRA, Violence against women: an EU-wide survey, main results, 2014:
http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2014-vaw-survey-main-results_en.pdf
217 See Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against women, 2012 United Nations, A/67/22.
218 Ibid.
215
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
60
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
with disabilities219. A lack of knowledge among staff at crisis centers and advisory services may
give rise to a sense of uncertainty, which in turn may result in poorer support, and give what
you could call bad social access. This also may constitute an attitude barrier when it comes to
accommodating women with disabilities within support services.
Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights – respecting the integrity and dignity of
women and girls with disabilities
Access to sexual and reproductive rights is by-and-large impossible for women and girls with
disabilities. Informed consent on contraceptives is denied, whereas contraceptives are given
automatically. This is based on some medical professionals’ assumptions and prejudicial beliefs
that women with disabilities can transmit their disability to their baby or will not be able to take
care of their babies.
Further, Women with disabilities in Europe especially have faced cases of forced sterilisation,
which constitutes a serious violation to bodily integrity, freedom of choice and the entitlement
to self-determination of reproductive life.220 Women with mental disabilities may also be
discriminated against by having their children taken from them because of prejudices about
what psychiatric diagnosis mean, this happened recently in Sigtuna in Sweden, which the
municipality
was
condemned
for
by
the
Equality
Ombudsman.
http://www.do.se/sv/Press/Pressmeddelanden-och-aktuellt/2013/Diskriminering-nar-kommuntvangsomhandertog-barn/
Women with disabilities are stigmatised as asexual and dependent, which leads to their sexual
life being controlled by others.
219
While there is a general lack of shelter places and support services in Europe for women victims of male
violence, accessible services are practically inexistent. The Danish shelter movement stresses that “they are not
wheelchair accessible or the personnel do not have knowledge on how to welcome a woman with special needs
(mental health issues, cognitive impairments or women with sensory impairments such as blindness or
deafness). In addition, many women with disabilities depend on their perpetrator in order to carry out their daily
tasks and alternative services are not in place, which prevents these women from reporting that they are
experiencing violence. Another problem is the lack of access to communication facilities, both with the crisis
centres and with the telephone-based advisory services, as well as within society in general. The various types of telephonebased advice offered to women who are abused are not accessible to women with a communication disability who are
dependent on a special interpreter or on other aids which are not immediately available. See for more information: Women
Danish Council, Information for the UN Special Rapporteur on VAW, 2012
220 See for example the Ashley treatment: this severe violation of human rights and controversial medical procedure that limits
the growth of children with severe disabilities. It is estimated that there are 200 such cases in Europe. Through a set of medical
procedures on 12-year old girls with severe forms of disabilities, their body is maintained at a child’s development stage (growth
attenuation through bilateral breast bud removal, hysterectomy sterilization, hormonal treatments, operations on bones),
whereas the principle purpose of the treatment is intended to improve the person’s quality of life.
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
61
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Health care facilities, in particular beds and other material in gynecological units are not
accessible to the specific needs of women and girls with disabilities. Medical professionals are
not adequately trained and sensitized. There is a lack of information to women generally during
their pregnancy on what it is like to have a child with a disability.
However, the EU fails to incorporate the disability and gender perspective in an appropriate
way in its relevant health instruments. None of the four thematic priorities of the new EU Health
Programme 2014 – 2020, although directly relevant, mention neither health of persons with
disabilities nor the access to reproductive rights for women and girls with disabilities221.
EDF calls for
 the development of effective measures in order to mainstream disability in its
gender policies, programmes and measures, as well as to design and develop
specific positive action measures in order to achieve the advancement of women
and girls with disabilities in the EU;
 the European Institute for Gender Equality should provide guidance at European
and Member State level as regards the specific situation of women and girls with
disabilities, and play an active role in advocacy work to secure equal rights and
combat discrimination222;
 all EU legislation and policies implementing the Beijing Platform for Action to
include an intersectional approach and guarantee to all women and girls with
disabilities that their human rights are fully promoted and ensured;
 the inclusion of the gender perspective in EU mainstream employment policies
and to develop targeted employment strategies for women with disabilities in
order to ensure equal opportunities and equal wages for women with disabilities
in employment;
 the adoption of the 2010 Proposed Maternity Leave Directive;
 the promotion of the development of appropriate training materials on the
prevention of and response to violence against women with disabilities for all
sectors, in collaboration with women with disabilities;
221
Regulation (EU) No 282/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 on the establishment of a
third Programme for the Union's action in the field of health (2014-2020) and repealing Decision No 1350/2007/EC Text with
EEA
relevance,
OJ
L
86,
21.3.2014,
p.
1–13
(available
at
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2014.086.01.0001.01.ENG). The Programme has the budget of 449.4 million euros to
support health-related actions at the EU level and in the Member States.
222 EDF Manifesto on the Rights of Women and Girls with Disabilities in the European Union (2011), p. 27, available at
http://www.edf-feph.org/Page.asp?docid=26614&langue=EN
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
62
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF










the development of more qualitative and quantitative research on violence against
women with disabilities;
the provision of full accessibility for women and girls with disabilities to all
communication campaigns on violence against girls and women;
the inclusion of women with disabilities in their monitoring work on the Victim’s
Directive223 which include individual assessment to identify vulnerability and
special protection measures;
the promotion of Member States’ legislations, policies and practices to ensure
that the justice sector is responsive to and supportive of women with disabilities
who report cases of violence; to support innovative justice services, including onestop shops, legal aid and specialized courts, in order to ensure substantive and
procedural access to justice; and should involve women with disabilities in
shaping and restructuring the legal system;
the adoption of an EU Year on Violence against Women, including women with
disabilities;
the EU and the Member States to ratify and implement the Council of Europe
Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic
violence (Istanbul Convention)224 in order to respond to the specific situations and
multiple identity of women with disabilities;
The recognition of the realization of sexual and reproductive health rights as a
strategic priority for achieving gender equality and the empowerment of all
women, including women and girls with disabilities;
The inclusion in EU health policy of the universal access to information and
services on sexual and reproductive health rights for all women with disabilities;
The establishment of a permanent mechanism to collect data and clear
information on sexual and reproductive health rights of women in Europe;
The establishment of an EU mechanism to monitor the commitment made at the
Cairo and Beijing conferences, education programmes and actions at all level and
for all types of public.
223
Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards
on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA, OJ L 315,
14.11.2012, p. 57–73, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32012L0029. The EU Member
States have to implement the provisions into their national laws by 16 November 2015.
224 Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence, 2011,
available at http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/convention-violence/convention/Convention%20210%20English.pdf
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
63
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Article 7: Children with disabilities
Children with disabilities, including girls with disabilities face a number of barriers preventing
them from fully enjoying human rights and fundamental freedoms on an equal basis with other
children, as provided by the UN CRPD.
The institutionalization of children with disabilities results in the full deprivation of their basic
rights and freedom, including the right to make their own choices. The use of EU funds to
refurbish institutions and perpetuate this system has been documented225.
The mainstream education system is far from being fully inclusive.
Integrated child protection systems in the EU do not address enough the needs of children with
disabilities. While child protection is central in international legal frameworks on children rights,
concrete action for children with disabilities with measurable impact is yet to follow. As a
consequence, children with disabilities face higher risk of violence, abuse, neglect and bullying
than other children.226
The strong correlation between disability, on the one hand, and poverty, social exclusion,
institutionalisation and violence on the other has been recognised by the European Commission
in a 2013 Recommendation227. However, overall the visibility of children with disabilities in the
EU is lacking. Although European primary law commits the EU to protecting the rights of the
child both inside and outside its borders (TEU Article 4), the recognition of the specific situation
of children with disabilities has largely been declaratory in EU policy rather than underpinned
by targeted measures addressing their vulnerability or monitoring Member States’ respect of
EU policies.
European Network on Independent Living – European Coalition for Community Living, Briefing on Structural Funds
Investments for People with Disabilities: Achieving the Transition from Institutional Care to Community Living, December 2013,
pages 11 – 12
225
226
Jones, L et al. Prevalence and risk of violence against children with disabilities: a systematic review and metaanalysis of observational studies (2012), available at http://press.thelancet.com/childrendisabilities.pdf.
227
Commission Recommendation 2013/112/EU of 20 February 2013 Investing in children: breaking the cycle of disadvantage,
OJ L 59, 2.3.2013, p. 5–16, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32013H0112
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
64
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The European Disability Strategy recognizes the specific situation of children with disabilities228.
Yet it has not been followed by any single initiative addressing the rights of disabled children
specifically.
The EU Agenda for the Rights of the Child229, while acknowledging that children with disabilities
are “more vulnerable” and “deserve special protection” and cross-referencing the 2010
European Disability Strategy, does not propose any specific actions to address them. Moreover,
the Agenda focuses only on child protection, leaving out other rights.
The need to ensure participation of children, with or without disabilities, has been recognised230
by the EU, but concrete measures available to the public are largely limited to a Kids’ Corner.
The European Court of Justice has through a 2006 case231 concerning discrimination in
employment provided indirect protection to children with disabilities and confirmed their right to
care and family life through condemning discrimination of parents by association with their
disabled children.
EDF calls for:
- The EU should guide Member States in improving integrated protection systems for
children with disabilities, with an emphasis on alternative care and protection against
violence, abuse, neglect and bullying.
- Participation of children with disabilities in the decisions that concern them is imperative,
as well as a mechanism for monitoring the actual impact of EU guidance. The EU Child
Rights Forum could be the framework for such monitoring.
- As regards participation of children with disabilities, the EU Agenda for the Rights of the
Child should be followed by a new, forward-looking, strategic instrument that takes into
account the rights of all children, including children with disabilities.
F. INFORMATION RELATING TO SPECIFIC OBLIGATIONS
Article 31: Statistics and data collection
228
European Disability Strategy 2010-2020: A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe Initial plan to implement the
European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 List of Actions 2010-2015 {COM(2010) 636 final} {SEC(2010) 1323 final}
229 An EU Agenda for the Rights of the Child, COM/2011/0060 final, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0060
230 EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, Article 24(1).
231 Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 17 July 2008, Case C-303/06, S. Coleman v Attridge Law and Steve Law,
available at http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&num=C-303/06
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
65
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Few reliable data on overall disability prevalence are available at EU level and even less so
data that are gender disaggregated. This makes having a precise assessment of the situation
of people with disabilities across Europe more difficult.
This lack of data is due to the fact that there is:
- No comprehensive and disaggregated data by type of disability, gender and age on the
-
overall prevalence of disabilities are available at EU level
Very few, if any, disaggregated data by disability, gender and age are available in
statistics on the general population situation at EU level
Very few, if any, statistical data are available on barriers contributing to disability
conditions
The available data and studies at national level are very difficult to compare because of
the following main reasons:
o Different definitions are adopted across countries and in the same country by
different sectors of the public administrations according to their scope.
o Persons with disabilities may be recorded in different ways in case notes and
centralised data collections.
o Definitions of disabilities are used in different ways.
o In epidemiological studies of prevalence, case finding methods vary.
Current available data collections do not examine participation of people with disabilities in
other daily life areas than employment, such as access to sport, leisure and cultural activities,
political and public participation, access to general and specific to disabilities health care and
physical, psychological, social and vocational rehabilitation and habilitation services,
institutionalisation in segregating residential services vs. availability of alternative community
based supported living options.
These data are collected in the context of the Labour Force Survey ad-hoc module (LFS
AHM)232, in terms of people aged 15-64 reporting a longstanding health condition or a basic
activity difficulty, by sex and age. Other age populations with disabilities, including children and
older persons, as well as people living in segregating institutions are therefore excluded.
As the likelihood of disability increases with age, in the light of the current EU demographic
situation, the occurrence of disability is expected to increase. We should also remind that
232
Ad hoc module on employment of disabled people, supplementing the EU Labour Force Survey (LFS), 2007 (available at
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_SDDS/en/hlth_empdis_esms.htm)
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
66
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
disability prevalence in children is growing as well following to demographic changes in the EU.
The occurrence of congenital disabilities in new born, including very frequent disabilities such
as autism233, is progressively increasing because of the progressive delay of the reproductive
age, as well as of the increasing number of surviving premature babies following the progresses
of medicine. If those living in institutions are taken into account, the overall incidence is likely
to be even higher234. As a consequence, the disability prevalence in the EU population is likely
to be higher than registered by the LFS AHM.
The annual survey on Statistics on Income, Social Inclusion and Living Conditions (EU-SILC)235
data from 2006 to 2008 showed that on average over 30 % of respondents aged over 75 say
they are restricted to some extent, and over 20 % describe themselves as severely restricted.
According to the EU- SILC 2006 – 2008, including all persons aged 15 and above, on average
almost 8 % of respondents across Europe stated that they were severely restricted in ‘activities
people usually do, while 16.5% of respondents stated that they were restricted to some extent,
adding up to approximately 24.5 % of the population.
The data from SILC for persons of working ages 15-64 who say they are severely restricted or
restricted to some extent show a total percentage of 17.6 % of the population, which is in line
with the percentage found in the LFS AHM (15%). These findings confirm that if all age groups
are considered the percentage of people with disabilities is likely to be higher.
EDF calls for


disability statistical data to be collected for monitoring the situation of persons with
disabilities across the EU in all areas of daily life, not only in the field of employment;
such data collections to make reference to a common definition of disability which is
based on the UN CRPD definition236 across Member States, administrations and
services;
Autism Spectrum Disorders occur more commonly than Down’s syndrome, cystic fibrosis, and several childhood cancers.
More children are diagnosed with autism each year than with juvenile diabetes, AIDS or cancer, combined. See for more
information, The epidemiology of child and adolescent psychiatric disorders: recent developments and issues, E. Fombonne,
Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale, volume 7, issue 03, December 1998, pages 161-166.
234 Final Commission staff working document accompanying the Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions “ European
Disability Strategy 2010-2020: A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe” Brussels, 15.11.2010 SEC(2010) 1323
235
The
European
Union
Statistics
on
Income
and
Living
Conditions
(EU-SILC)
available
at
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/microdata/eu_silc
236 Article 1 of the UN CRPD states that persons with disabilities are those ‘who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual
or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society .
233
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
67
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF


To collect reliable data on barriers hindering the full enjoyment of their rights by
persons with disabilities according to the social model of disability;
Knowledge about disability prevalence is vital if effective policies and concrete
measures are to be planned and provided at the correct points in individuals’ lives. The
availability of reliable, sound statistics on the real situation of persons with disabilities
across the EU is a crucial step towards a better recognition of their needs and
implementation of their rights in all areas of life, not only in the field of employment.
Article 32: International cooperation
We welcome the progress made by the European Union in international cooperation and the
inclusion of the rights of persons with disabilities since the ratification of the UN CRPD.
While we deem opportune the adoption of a binding framework on inclusive development and
the rights of persons with disabilities, we recognise the adoption of the EU Disability Strategy
(2010 – 2020) as an important step towards the effective implementation of article 32 UN
CRPD.
We further commend the EU for its commitment to the inclusion of persons with disabilities in
several instruments under heading four of the Multi-Annual Financial framework 2014-2020.
This opens op further opportunities towards inclusive international cooperation and thereby the
implementation of article 32 of the CRPD.
Article 32, CRPD, states that "parties will undertake appropriate and effective measures with
regard to the realisation of the purpose and objectives of the UN CRPD", the EU has not yet
undertaken all appropriate measures to enhance EU disability-inclusive development policies
and programmes. Further, the perspective of women and girls with disabilities is not included
in EU development policies.
In addition, the lack of specific cross-cutting disability markers/indicators in all internal
templates, procurement and project monitoring mechanisms, the assessment of the effective
implementation of article 32 remains vague.
We would further like to highlight that the fragmented approach to disability in EU internal
governance leads to a lower efficiency in the implementation of the CRPD. In fact, despite the
fact that the rights of persons with disabilities are dealt with at several levels of all EU
institutions, we do not observe a horizontal approach to disability which would allow greater
coherence in policy making and coordination in the implementation of the CRPD.
EDF calls for
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
68
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF





the adoption of a binding strategic framework (for example a regulation) on disability and
international cooperation in the next 24 months, taking into account the perspective of
women and girls with disabilities. This framework should be accompanied by an Action
Plan containing time bound measures and responsible actors, such as the EU Strategic
framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy. According to article 4.3,
CRPD, we recommend that the representative organisations of persons with disabilities
are involved in the design, implementation and monitoring of the abovementioned
framework and action plan;
based on the failure of the recognition of the UN CRPD in several EU budget instruments
for the period 2014-2020, the adoption of appropriate steps to mobilise resources to
identify quality disability markers and investigate the feasibility of their implementation in
all EU funded projects by the mid-term review in 2017. Efficient markers and indicators
are essential to a qualitative data collection as mentioned in article 31 of the CRPD;
the establishment of a mechanism to increase coordination and coherence amongst the
different disability focal points across different EU institutions is established in the next
24 months. Furthermore, we underline the importance for the details of the disability
focal points in EU delegations should be made publicly available in accessible formats;
The recognition that International cooperation, as described in article 32 of the
Convention, is a significant tool in the promotion of accessibility and universal design.
The Committee recommends international development agencies to recognize the
significance of supporting projects improving ICT and other access infrastructure. All
new investments made within the framework of international cooperation should be used
to encourage the removal of existing barriers and prevent the creation of new barriers.
It is unacceptable to use public funds to perpetuate new inequalities. All new objects,
infrastructure, facilities, goods, products and services must be fully accessible for all
persons with disabilities. International cooperation should be used not merely to invest
in accessible goods, products and services, but also to foster the exchange of know-how
and information on good practice in achieving accessibility in ways that will make
tangible changes that can improve the lives of millions of persons with disabilities
worldwide. International cooperation on standardization is also important, as is the fact
that organizations of persons with disabilities must be supported so that they can
participate in national and international processes to develop, implement and monitor
accessibility standards. Accessibility must be integral part of any sustainable
development efforts, especially in the context of the Post- 2015 Agenda;
The establishment that UN CRPD compliance should be a condition for accession to the
EU since the enlargement process does not include explicitly disability in the negotiation
chapters;
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
69
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF


Systematic assessment of UN CRPD compliance projects in the EU AIDCO awarding
and evaluating mechanisms;
The production of a Disability and Development plan until 2020.
Article 33: National implementation and monitoring
1. Focal point
The Unit on the rights of persons with disabilities of DG Justice of the European Commission
is established as the focal point. The Unit is a vertical unit within the Commission and does not
have the coordinating role necessary to have a horizontal oversight of the UN CRPD
implementation. Moreover, the Unit is currently understaffed.
Consultation and involvement of persons with disabilities and their representative organisations
in the development and implementation of disability policies by the European Commission
happens on an ad hoc basis and there is no formal mechanism established to involve them
systematically. As mentioned under Article 9 of this section, the communication and
consultation tools of the European Commission are not accessible.
The European Commission’s inter-service group on disability engages all relevant DirectoratesGeneral. The purpose of the group is to raise awareness of disability issues and encourage
more inter-sectorial co-operation within the Commission in this field. The group meets on a
regular basis, but organisations of persons with disabilities have never been invited.
EDF calls for
 the establishment of a Disability Directorate-General with a horizontal and coordinating
mandate to mainstream the rights of persons with disabilities in the preparation of
policies and legislation and promote awareness about the Convention internally;
 the adoption of guidelines on the meaningful involvement and consultation of
organizations of persons with disabilities in line with Article 33, 3 CRPD and Articles 4,
3 CRPD in the development and implementation of disability policies by the European
Commission.
2. Coordination mechanism
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
70
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The Council Working Group on Human Rights (COHOM)237 has been established as the formal
coordination mechanism with the Member States. The Group is responsible for human rights
issues in the EU’s external relations and does not have the mandate to work on EU internal
human rights issues, which is the mandate of the Working Party on Fundamental Rights,
Citizens’ Rights and Free Movement of Persons (FREMP). The FREMP is responsible for
discussing human rights challenges inside the European Union and can coordinate an EU
action in response to violations by Member States. The mandate of this Working Group is
therefore more adequate for addressing issues of coordination between the implementation of
CRPD at EU and Member States’ level.
The EU report also mentions that with regards to reporting, the EU and the Member States
need to work in a spirit of sincere cooperation. However, the Commission sent the COHOM
Working Group only the draft EU report for information and the COHOM was not able to
meaningfully provide its views.
EDF has been invited to address its views on the establishment of the EU framework during
the COHOM meetings, but it is not involved in its proceedings nor informed on its agenda when
items related to the UN CRPD are covered.
The High Level Group of Member States' Representatives on Disability is set up to facilitate
cooperation between the European Commission and the EU Member States and between the
EU Member States themselves on the latest policies with regards to persons with disabilities.238
EDF is only invited as observer to part of the meeting alongside with other civil society
organisations, whose participation should be rethought in order to be consistent with the UN
CRPD. The meetings are more geared at providing information on EU policies and legislative
initiatives but do not facilitate exchange on the implementation of disability rights and do not
result in any concrete outcome or recommendation.
DEVELOP THE PROPOSAL OF NATIONAL PREPARATORY MEETING WITH DPO’s
237
The Human Rights Working Group (COHOM) was created under the Council of the European Union in 1987. It is composed
of human rights experts from Member States and the European Commission. The agendas of meetings cover the various
aspects of the EU's human rights policy such as action in international fora, dialogues with third countries, thematic issues and
mainstreaming.
238 For further information on the High Level group on Disability, see http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/socprot/disable/hlg_en.htm
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
71
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The EU Disability Strategy 2010-2020 has as one of its key actions the creation of an interinstitutional coordination mechanism to implement the CRPD239. This does however not exist
today yet.
EDF calls for
 The adoption of a transparent and elaborated agenda at Council of European Union,
preferably at the FREMP Working Group to coordinate the implementation of the
Convention by the EU and its Member States, with an involvement and systematic
consultation of the representative organisations of people with disabilities;
 The strengthening of the mandate of the High Level Group on Disability in order to
facilitate exchange on the implementation of disability rights that result in concrete
outcome and recommendations, with an involvement and systematic consultation of the
representative organisations of people with disabilities;
 The establishment of an effective inter-institutional coordination mechanism between
Commission Directorate Generals and the Parliament and the Council of the European
Union, with involvement and systematic consultation of the representative organisations
of people with disabilities
3. EU Framework for promoting, protecting and monitoring the CRPD
EDF, as the representative organization of people with disabilities in the EU is a full member of
the EU Framework. It has been appointed as Chair of the Framework for two years. 240
During the preparatory process, EDF raised the following concerns which are still not addressed
today:

The presumption that the framework participants can fulfill their tasks under Article 33,
2 CRPD without any changes to their structures, mandates or working methods does not
correspond to the requirements of the UN CRPD.

The involvement of the Commission in the framework contradicts article 33, 2 CRPD,
since the Commission has already been appointed as focal point, and mixing the two
239
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions, European Disability Strategy 2010-2020: A Renewed Commitment to a BarrierFree Europe, COM(2010) 636 final, “Mechanisms required by the UN Convention”, p. 10, available at http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0636:FIN:EN:PDF
240 For more information, please find the adopted papers on the Chair, Secretariat and Working methods of the EU Framework
at http://www.edf-feph.org/Page_Generale.asp?DocID=22112&thebloc=33400
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
72
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
functions is incompatible with the CRPD and the Paris Principles241. Moreover, it is the
same unit, EC Disability Unit that is both focal point and a participant of the monitoring
framework and as a consequence the same people dealing with the implementation of
the Convention and its monitoring. The European Commission argues that it has a role
as guardian of the Treaties to monitor the implementation of EU law by the Member
States. However, the Commission also performs this role outside the Framework and it
is therefore not necessary to be part of the Framework.

No resources have been allocated to the Framework, which is a limitation in terms of its
work and its visibility. This lack of resources for example made it in reality impossible for
another Framework member than the Commission to take up the role of secretariat of
the EU Framework.

The Council of the European Union has approved the decision of the establishment of
the Framework, but no official document has yet been published in the Official Journal
to ensure a legal certainty to the Framework. The note has remained at COHOM level,
although the Council has taken a decision on the basis of the note, but with no
discussion. Nonetheless the members of the Framework have agreed to an exchange
of letters, which should be published in the Official Journal. However, this has not been
confirmed yet.242
The current framework fulfils a number of the requirements as set under the Paris Principles,
but there are some gaps that will have to be addressed.
In the area of promotion, is EDF the only body in the EU Framework that has the task to
scrutinize compliance of EU legislation and policies with the Convention. However, there are
no mechanisms that ensure access of EDF to preparatory works, or to intervene in for instance
Parliament’s Committees or Council Working Groups. Moreover, there is no difference between
EDF as an ONG that is consulted in general on EU policy and as a member of the Framework.
The Fundamental Rights Agency has the task to raise awareness of CRPD in accordance with
Multi-Annual Framework and Regulation 168/2007/EC. Disability can be a thematic area of antidiscrimination and other areas following a cross-cutting approach. However, even if the FRA
241
The Principles relating to the status of national institutions (the Paris Principles), adopted by UN General Assembly
resolution 48/134 of 20 December 1993, available at http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/48/a48r134.htm
242
EDF has not received a confirmation of the publication in the Official Journal (Last checked on 22 July 2014)
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
73
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
can publish opinions on specific thematic disability topics it does not fulfill the strategic
engagement in awareness raising relating to the CRPD.
In the area of protection, the mandate of the European Ombudsman has some limitations since
it cannot review EU law for compliance with obligations under the UN CRPD. The European
Court of Justice is not part of the Framework, and in any case access by individuals (except
EU staff) and DPOs is in practice very difficult. A review of decisions setting up those bodies
and institutions could provide already an improvement in this area before reviewing the
Treaties.
In the area of monitoring, it is important to emphasize that even with certain changes, the
proposed framework of the EU could only function if there is a clear mandate for the Framework
members and necessary means allocated to do extensive monitoring activities relating to the
implementation of the CRPD.
EDF calls for





Reform of the EU Framework’s composition to formally establish a self-sustaining and
CRPD compliant Article 33.2 framework with a clear mandate to monitor the
implementation of the Convention,with the necessary financial and human resources to
operate independently of the EU institutions. The European Court of Justice should be
part of the Framework;
Explicit inclusion of the tasks relating to protection, promotion and monitoring of the
CRPD in the mandates of the Framework members;
A mechanism to be put in place to ensure adequate access to preparatory work or to
publish/hear reports on non-compliance;
The European Commission to give the Fundamental Rights Agency an explicit mandate
to raise awareness on CRPD and to issue opinion on draft EU legislation relating to
CRPD implementation through amendment of Multiannual Framework amendment of
Regulation 168/2007/EC;
To ensure direct access to the European Court of Justice for EU citizens and trade
unions to file complaints on violations of Convention.
G. INFORMATION RELATING TO THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONVENTION
EU
PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION’S
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
74
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The report’s section VI. on ‘Information relating to the EU public administration’s
implementation of the Convention’ has been well thought and written and there is progress on
several issues, in particular at European Commission level. However, the report shows
progress in regulation as regards mainly human resources policies, but there are no elements
as to assess the actual implementation, and a few gaps are evident from the report itself.
It is also positive to mention that a number of audits will be carried out or have been between
2013 and 2014, but no results are available.
Article 1 and 2: purpose and definitions
The EU report states that the EU institutions and agencies apply the definition of disability as
mentioned in the Staff Regulations243 (234). These Regulations have recently been reviewed
to include UN CRPD compliant definition on disability244 and the concepts of reasonable
accommodation245 and positive action. As much as this review reflects the social model concept
of disability, in practice disability is still seen inside the institutions as a medical issue and
receiving reasonable accommodations often as a privilege.
Moreover, this definition of disability in the Staff Regulations has not been transposed to other
EU internal instruments. As explained more in detail under Article 26 CRPD, the definition of a
person with a disability by the medical personnel of the joint sickness insurance scheme
(JSIS)246 is interpreted very restrictively and medically since people with disabilities and their
carers are only covered by JSIS if their disability entails shortened life expectancy 247. In
addition, the shortened life expectancy is not always interpreted favourably to persons with
disabilities.
EDF calls for
 That all internal instruments, policies and practices of the EU institutions be revised
to include the social model concept of disability as stated in article 2 CRPD and as
included in the Staff Regulations.
243
Regulation No 1023/2013 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials of the EU and the conditions of Employment of Other
Servants of the EU, OJ L 287, 29.10.2013, p. 15–62, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013R1023. The Staff Regulations entered into force on 1 January 2014 and apply to officials
of the EU, meaning any person who has been appointed to an established post on the staff of one of the institutions of the EU
and its agencies.
244 Article 1d, para. 4 Staff Regulations
245 This definition of reasonable accommodation may be considered in compliance with the UN CRPD, although they leave
some grey areas such as this is applied to the “essential functions” which may block reasonable adjustments in other areas of
the working life.
246 More information available at http://ec.europa.eu/pmo/info.sickinsurance_en.htm
247 Add reference on JSIS criteria for reimbursement
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
75
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Article 4: General obligations
The EU institutions do not have a comprehensive and across the institutions strategy on ways
to implement the CRPD internally for its staff and visitors. Disability is not a priority on the
internal agenda and has been so far addressed in a patchy way. For example, the Equal
Opportunities Committee in the European Commission is responsible for establishing an action
plan and studying how to improve equality of opportunities especially as regards gender
equality issues (237). Disability issues are however not a priority on the Committee’s agenda
and very little work so far has been undertaken to implement the CRPD at the Commission
level.
Disability Support Groups in the European Commission248, Council of the European Union and
the European Parliament bring together staff concerned with disability, either staff with
disabilities or carers of persons with disabilities. These groups are however not consulted and
involved in a systematic way in the development of internal instruments and policies to
implement CRPD. Their views are also not systematically taken into account. For example, in
the preparation of the EU report, these Disability Support Groups were not consulted and the
comments249 which they provided on their own initiative were not taken into account.
Moreover, these support groups lack resources since they are overloaded with requests for
advice and support which the responsible EU institutions’ services themselves have difficulties
responding to. For example, the human resources departments often rely on the Groups to find
solutions when hiring new personnel with a disability.
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is responsible for selecting staff for EU
institutions and agencies. However, the EU report gives no information on the number of people
involved in their selection procedures. For example, how many request for accommodations do
they receive in competitions? How many people with disabilities pass and how many fail in
competitions? What is the assessment of reasonable accommodation schemes? What is the
assessment of positive measures? Is there a way to support winners of competition for their job
interviews?
248
The European Commission Disability Support Group is an association for the staff of the European Commission as well as
other European institutions who are in charge of a person with a disability or a delay in development hindering their daily
activities. We currently have over 130 members including staff not only from the European Commission but also from the
Council, the European Parliament, EEAS, agencies as well as various delegations around the world.
249 For example: Questionnaire on the Implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities within
EU institutions: Internal Implementation Questionnaire, Input of the EC Disability Support Group;
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
76
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
Despite advances in this area, EDF still receives complaints on accessibility of EPSO exams
and information and persons that have won a competition with honours yet never get a job or
even an interview because of their disability.
EDF calls for
 A broad and comprehensive strategy to realize all relevant CRPD rights within the EU
institutions and agencies, taking into account the social model approach to disability.
Staff with disabilities, including carers of persons with disabilities should be involved in
the in planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating this strategy;
 A disability coordinator in the European Parliament, the European Commission and the
Council of Europe to raise awareness on CRPD internally and to put the above
mention strategy in place. This disability coordinator should be placed within the office
of the Secretary General;
 A duty for the disability coordinator and all services in charge of implementing the
strategy to report at regular intervals to the political authorities (for instance the VicePresident in charge) on their progress made in implementation;
 The establishment of a mechanism to ensure meaningful participation of the Disability
Support Groups in the development and implementation of internal instruments and
policies. Resources should be made available in order to build the capacity of these
Groups;
 The development of an EPSO formal policy on reasonable accommodations and
accessibility of its selection processes and exams, an accessible information and
communication strategy to reach out to candidate staff members with disabilities and a
policy to follow up on persons with disabilities who have won the competitions;
 EU to publish every two years the number of people with disabilities that passed the
competitions, received a job within the EU institutions or agencies, the reasonable
accommodations that EPSO has undertaken and the ways it has improved the
accessibility of its selection processes.
Article 5: Equality and non-discrimination, and Article 27: Work and employment
Although the Staff Regulation include a CRPD compliant definition of disability, as mentioned
above the system is still very much based on the medical approach to disability. The system
relies on medical approach assessments250, there are no provisions of access to information,
250
See Articles 28e and 33 Staff Regulations. Although the definition of a person with disability is in compliance with the UN
CRPD, the system relies on medical evaluations. There is a medical examination and an evaluation to assess if the person is
physically fit to perform the duties. There is also an invalidity committee form exclusively by doctors which evaluates
professional invalidity. Job retention strategy is quite deficient.
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
77
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
association of DPOs and competitions do not integrate positive action for persons with
intellectual, autism and psychosocial disabilities. This results in a low percentage of persons
with disabilities in the EU staff, a lack of comprehensive job retention strategies and a medical
assessment for professional careers.
Moreover, the internal rules in the EU institutions prohibit discrimination based on disability.
However, members of the European Commission Disability Support Group have reported
discriminatory comments and often do not say that they are a partner or carer of a person with
a disability.251
The European Parliament Bureau adopted an action plan for the promotion of gender equality
and diversity in the Parliament’s secretariat for 2009-2013, as mentioned in the EU report. The
Action Plan included a lot of excellent actions, such as reflexion with EPSO on employment,
possible recruitment quotas, adoption of internal rules on reasonable accommodation and EP
website compliance with WCAG guidelines. Unfortunately the Action Plan did not assign the
responsible persons or set deadlines, and has consequently not been implemented.
As mentioned in the EU report, the Parliament currently provides reasonable accommodations
on an ad hoc basis for persons with disabilities and difficulties exist in obtaining the
accommodations. The Parliament has for example rejected stage candidates’ applications on
grounds of administrative and organizational difficulties and not on the ground of the quality of
the applications, which were considered admissible.
Recently, the Secretary General of the European Parliament has drafted internal rules
implementing article 1, d, 4 of the Staff Regulations on how to assess and provide reasonable
accommodations to staff members with a disability. The criteria to assess reasonable
accommodation are however medical and lack flexibility. These internal rules are however not
formally adopted yet.
Moreover, there is no official budget line for providing the personnel and the Members of the
European Parliament with reasonable accommodations and support. Today, reasonable
accommodations are covered through the general expenditure allowance, which every Member
of the European Parliament receives from the Parliament. However, no additional budget is
foreseen for Members of the European Parliament with disabilities.
251
EC Disability Support Group input to the Questionnaire on the implementation of the UN Convention on the rights of persons
with disabilities within the EU institutions, p.4
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
78
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The European Parliament offers traineeships opportunities specifically for young persons with
disabilities. This good initiative fails to reach a satisfactory number of applicants with
disabilities, as they are not advertised efficiently and the information is not provided in
accessible formats.
At the European Commission, re-integration of persons who were unable to work for a long
period of time due to their disability can return to work on their own initiative. However, there is
no policy to prevent persons from leaving their job, to re-integrate them or to provide reasonable
accommodations to facilitate the re-integration. In this way, a person can be declared
‘permanently invalid’ and automatically put on retirement. The person is also not able, in case
he or she is no longer able to perform the essential job functions because of the disability to
change positions within the EU institution if the job status is different in the new function (from
permanent official to a contract agent for example).
EDF calls for:
 Review of Staff regulations for the invalidity committee to be transformed in a disability
committee composed by medical department, social workers, DPOs and the employee;
 The establishment of positive actions to ensure targeted competitions for persons with
disabilities (mainly intellectual and psychosocial);
 To proceed with an audit on UN CRPD compliance of the staff policies and practices of
EU institutions;
 A budget at the administration’s level of each institution to cover expenses for
reasonable accommodations, support and assistance;
 Training of all staff and in particular human resources departments on how to provide
reasonable accommodations and support for staff with disabilities;
 The European Commission to develop a quality framework for traineeship including
accessibility for disabled trainee as compulsory quality criteria;
 The European Parliament to better promote the traineeship opportunities for persons with
disabilities through accessible information and communication
Article 8: Awareness-raising
The EU reports lists good initiatives in the field of raising awareness on the UN CRPD inside
the institutions, but not all are systematic and built in the various mandatory trainings.
There is an overall lack of awareness on disability issues and the UN CRPD and from there
an ad hoc and patchy approach to handling disability requests.
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
79
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
EDF calls for
 The EU to launch a public information campaign on the Convention and its application
in the various spheres of life, in cooperation with organisations of persons with
disabilities. The campaign should aim to fully inform persons with disabilities — and
society at large — about their human rights, using various formats, media and modes
of communication such as Braille and sign language and other accessible formats, and
to encourage a culture of respect for those rights by means of information,
communication and education;
 Each EU institution and agency organizes a specific training module on the Convention
in the mandatory trainings for its staff, in cooperation with organisations of people with
disabilities;
 The European media to promote a positive image of persons with disabilities;
 The European schools to promote disability education as a cross-cutting theme in its
European Baccalaureate programmes.
Article 9: Accessibility and Article 21: Freedom of expression and opinion, and access
to information
The physical environment
Accessibility of EU institutions’ buildings is still problematic. Often accessibility is not considered
at the design stage of the building. The EU report states that ‘the EU institutions’ buildings
comply with Belgian regulations’ (paragraph 254). However, no further information is provided
on how. The Belgian regulations have also evolved 252 and cover today the renovations of
buildings. In addition, the fact that the EU obtained a building permit does not make them
necessarily compliant with the regulations since too often building permits are provided without
the accessibility requirements being respected or monitored afterwards. Also, it is not clear if
accessibility requirements are integrated in procurement procedures.
The interservice working group on accessibility responsible for accessibility questions in the
European Parliament works on an ad hoc basis and lacks overall strategy and vision. No
information is also provided on the outcomes of the three reports on progress towards
accessibility. In addition, Parliament’s Brussels Chamber and Committee rooms are not
accessible for wheelchair users at all. In Strasbourg’s Chamber, the wheelchair user can only
attend the meetings in the last row of the room.
The Regional Regulation on urban planning (Règlement Régional d’Urbanisme, titre IV sur l'accessibilité des bâtiments par
les personnes à mobilité réduite) applies not only for public buildings, but equally for new and existing constructions, including
the renovation of public buildings. More information available http://urbanisme.irisnet.be/fr/pdf/RRU_Titre_4_FR.pdf.
252
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
80
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
The Parliamentarium, the visitor’s center for the European Parliament fulfils many of the
accessibility requirements but is not fully accessible for all people with disabilities and at all
occasions and places. The interservice group on accessibility visited the building in 2012 and
encountered several obstacles such as inaccessible main entrance door, no provision of
brochures in Braille, easy to read, etc., incorrect placement of podotactile signs in the
elevators, etc. Also the public gallery in the Parliament is not accessible.
EU offices in some EU Members States, such as Spain, Hungary and Poland are accessible;
others are not accessible, as in Italy.253 In general, the EU offices, their activities and events
are little known for persons with disabilities.
Events and activities organized by the EU institutions are not accessible. For example, no
loops system and speech to text support for the EU commission tour event in Amsterdam
during spring 2014 was organized for hard of hearing people.
Access to information and communication
On access to info in general, there is a gap as regards easy to read or in general more
simplified info as well as with the fact that several consultations are only accessible in English
and use complex terminology.
Committee meetings of the European Parliament are inaccessible for deaf persons since there
is no provision of Sign Language interpreters and no speech-to-text. The Parliament’s live web
streaming also has no subtitling or sign language interpretation.
Despite some improvements in the accessibility of EU websites, there is still much room for
improvement, especially those that are interactive, such as “Your voice in Europe” 254 or “Your
Europe”255. The European Parliament’s website is only partially accessible for persons with
disabilities for example since only a few sections comply with the WCAG 2.0 standard. The layout of the websites of the different institutions and departments is also incoherent, which makes
it difficult for a person to navigate. No alternative source of information is provided for the person
253
Based on responses collected from EDF membership through a questionnaire sent out in June 2014.
Your Voice in Europe is the European Commission’s “single access point” to a wide variety of consultations, discussions
and other tools which enable you to play an active role in the European policy-making process, available at
http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/index_en.htm
255 Your Europe is a webpage that allows the European citizen and their family to know their rights and to find practical tips to
help them move around the EU, available at http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/index_en.htm
254
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
81
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
who is unable to navigate the websites. Europe Direct often is not able to provide the requested
information and to transfer to an EU official who could provide the answer.
Some smartphones applications (apps) funded by the EU such as Passengers rights
application256 or the more recent Going Abroad application257 have being denounced by
DPO’s for their inaccessibility258. Furthermore, live broadcasting and some dissemination
materials such as videos still need to be more accessible259. Last, the European Gender
Equality Institute does not provide accessible information on the rights of women and girls
with disabilities.
EDF calls for
 The development of an action plan on accessibility in the European Parliament, the
European Commission and the Council of the EU and the EU offices in the member
states that includes all aspects covered in article 9 of the Convention and allocates the
necessary resources to implement it;
 The designation of the EU Framework as responsible mechanism to monitor the
implementation of the action plans on accessibility;
 The EU institutions have to make a greater effort to incorporate accessibility measures
for their own staff and to their own infrastructure and to implement the CRPD internally.
Set up a general ‘accessibility’ budget for all institutions to ensure that their facilities,
procedures and workflow are accessible for persons with disabilities, including members
of the staff having a disability;
 Communication and information of EU institutions, agencies and bodies to have among
its priorities accessibility of printed and digital tools for persons with disabilities and
guidelines for portrayal of persons with disabilities. Translation and media services for
the use of language should be consistent with CRPD and sign language should be
provided;
 The EU institutions to ensure multilingual (including sign language) consultations and
provide information in accessible formats. Accessible formats mean that information is
provided by using text, audio, video (equipped with subtitles and/or sign language
interpretation) and/or electronic means so as to be accessible to all;
256
Available at http://ec.europa.eu/transport/passenger-rights/en/mobile.html
Available at http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/going_abroad/index_en.htm
258
See the test conducted by the European Blind Union on 30 June 2014, available at
https://twitter.com/euroblind/status/483641445510021120
259 The Digital Agenda for Europe included some actions concerning accessibility for persons with disabilities, however the
European Commission still disseminates inaccessible content such as the video to promote their results. See for example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyjEtzW5VZs
257
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
82
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF



All events and activities organized by the EU institutions and its local branches in the
Member States to develop a strategy on accessibility for all people with disabilities;
To audit EU institutions websites to assess their accessibility and invest the appropriate
resources to solve the problems and train the members of the staff on how to maintain
them accessible;
When procuring external communication services (such as the development of an app
or an advertisement), the EU institutions must require them to be accessible.
Article 24: Education
There are currently 14 European Schools in the European Union. These are mainly attended
by students whose parents work for a European institution.
The report states that “the integration of pupils with special needs (SEN) in the European
Schools (ES) is an issue of great importance for the Commission, which sits at the Board of
Governors on behalf of all EU institutions.” However, the today’s SEN policies, budget and
practices in ES do not reflect this concern of the Commission.
The ES do not have an inclusive policy. The ES speak of a case by case admittance (para.
267) and not of an individual assessment of needs which would comply with an inclusive
policy once the child is enrolled in the school. The enrollment of a child with a disability in the
ES is under the discretionary power of the school board itself since the ES can conclude to be
incompetent to respond to the child’s needs. In other words, children with disabilities are
discriminated against when enrolling in the ES system.
The report also states that children receive appropriate support according to their needs.
However, the availability and quality of support provided differs from school to school and from
language section to language section. SEN assistants often do not speak the language of the
child and this is in particular problematic for children with intellectual disabilities, autism, and
multiple disabilities who have to follow class in other sections than their mother tongue. This is
contrary to the European schools’ main goal to provide education in the national languages of
the EU MS so that the pupils can be integrated in their national systems afterwards once back
home.
The ES has a European Baccalaureate certification that is awarded to students who pass the
final year exam at a European School. No reasonable accommodations are however foreseen
to this curriculum for children and youngster with disabilities. Most problematic are the
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
83
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF
secondary level because there becomes more apparent when the youngster is not able to
follow the curriculum.
In some cases children with disabilities are re-directed to other schools. In 2012, the reason
for re-directing in 32% of 102 terminated contracts was that the pupil moved to a more
‘adequate’ school.260 Contrary to what is mention in the report, in some cases no follow up or
guidance is organized from the ES. Parents are obliged to put their child in a Belgian school
but this is problematic when the child does not speak one of the Belgian national languages.
In the latter, the child is obliged to attend an international school which implies high tuition
fees that the ES pays for partly.
In addition, cuts in the SEN budget have been announced by the Secretary General of the
European schools261 in 2011. The Commission argues that the budget needs to be under
control because during last 3 years the number of SEN children has increased with 34%262.
However, the 34% increase does not reflect the reality since SEN pupils only are a very small
% of total amount of pupils263. The SEN Policy Group264 also confirms that “the increase in the
number of SEN pupils in the European schools has slowed down compared with the year 2009.
In addition, the amount of support and, consequently the cost per pupil decreased during the
last year”265.
Besides the EU institutions, all EU funded agencies are also bound to promote, protect and
monitor the rights of persons with disabilities as described in the CRPD when carrying out their
functions. The EU institutions funding the European Schools should take their responsibility
and European schools must set an example as they strive for excellence. Inclusion improves
educational attainment for all children.
EDF calls for
260
Statistics on the integration of SEN pupils into the European Schools in the year 2012, presented at meeting in April 2013
of Board of Governors, based on findings and recommendations of Special Education Needs Policy Group, 2013-01-D-28-en3, available at http://www.eursc.eu/fichiers/contenu_fichiers2/1888/2013-01-D-28-en-3.pdf.
261 2011 Annual report of the Secretary General to Board of governors of the European Schools, 2011-02-D-39-en-2, available
at http://www.eursc.eu/fichiers/contenu_fichiers2/1666/2011-02-D-39-en-2.pdf
262 Answer by European Commission Vice-President on letters from Commission’s and Parliament’s Disability Support Group.
The answer states that the number of SEN pupils has increased from 411 pupils in 2008, 619 in 2010 and 640 in 2011.
263 More precisely: 2008=1, 96% SEN children of total school population; 2010= 2,72%, 2012=2,94%
264 Statistics on the integration of SEN pupils into the European Schools in the year 2012, presented at meeting in April 2013
of Board of Governors, report SEN Policy Group, Ibid.
265 Statistics on the integration of SEN pupils into the European Schools in the year 2012, presented at meeting in April 2013
of Board of Governors, report SEN Policy Group, Ibid.
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
84
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org
DRFirffF


The adoption of a plan and allocation of the necessary financial and human resources
to develop and implement an inclusive quality education system at all levels of the
European schools. This plan ensures the provision of reasonable accommodation and
support, including with regards to an individual curriculum for each child in his or her
mother tongue section;
The adoption of a plan and allocation of budget for the compulsory training of teachers
in inclusive education techniques in respect of persons with disabilities, including use of
appropriate and augmentative and alternative modes, means and formats of
communication, educational techniques and materials to support persons with
disabilities
Article 25 and 26: Health, habilitation and rehabilitiation
The EU report mentions that staff in the EU institutions and their families are covered by a joint
sickness insurance scheme (JSIS). The JSIS in principle reimburses all staff members and their
families’ costs of medical fees up to 80-85 %. If you are a person with a disability or a parent of
a child with a disability, then you can apply to have the disability recognized as ‘serious illness’.
This recognition gives right to 100% reimbursement of the medical fees.
However, today recognition for serious illness is applied very strictly to people with disabilities:
only those disabilities that have a ‘life shortened expectancy’ are recognized as a ‘serious
illness’ and therefore applicable for 100% reimbursement. Also renewals of this recognition are
refused.
EDF calls for
 Applying the joint sickness insurance scheme without discrimination based on the nature
of the disability and ensuring that all people with disabilities are covered 100% for their
medical costs
Article 31: Statistics and data collection
The report mentions surveys at the Commission and Parliament’s level, but no results are
available. Also EPSO seems to have on-going surveys, yet no information is disclosed.
EDF calls for
 The publicity and dissemination of the results of these surveys and statistics in order to
allow for monitoring of the progress on the number of candidate-employees and
employees with disabilities in the EU institutions, in cooperation with organisations of
people with disabilities.
First Version July 2014 EDF alternative report
35 square de Meeûs
1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel +32 2 282 46 00
fax +32 2 282 46 09
85
info@edf-feph.og
www.edf-feph.org