Back to:Modifications by Governments

Proposals to the draft text - Chile

OBSERVATIONS ON THE TEXT OF THE CONVENTION

PREAMBLE:

We recommend that an item should be added following item (d), in the following terms:

( ) Valuing the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, held in 2001 in South Africa, an important landmark which led to General Assembly resolution 56/168, which calls for the elaboration of a comprehensive and integral international convention to promote and protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities, based on the holistic approach to the work done in the fields of social development, human rights and non-discrimination.

We recommend that item (f) should include the concept of abandonment. The text would then read as follows:

Further recognizing that discrimination and violence against any person on the basis of disability, or the abandonment of such a person, constitute a violation of the inherent dignity of the human person..

We recommend that the proposed item (g) should be modified to include the concept of "potential". The text would then read as follows:

(g) Recognizing further the diiverse nature of disabilities and therefore the wide range of abilities, skills, potential and functional competencies of persons with disabilities,

Note: This item should not include any mention of "needs", because to do so might distort the desired proactive meaning.

We consider the proposal made by Argentina, the European Union and the Syrian Arab Republic in item i) to be appropriate; the phrase "in its various forms" should be added and the text would then read as follows:

(i) Recognizing the importance of international cooperation in its various forms for improving the living conditions of persons with disabilities in all countries, in particular in the developing countries.”

We propose that a reference to "and of the international community as a whole" should be added to item (j). The text would then read as follows:

(j) Emphasizing also the existing and potential contributions made by persons with disabilities to the overall well-being and diversity of their communities, and that the promotion of full enjoyment by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms and of full participation by persons with disabilities will result in significant advances in the human, social and economic development of their societies and of the international community as a whole in the eradication of poverty.

We propose that item (o) should be replaced by the following:
Note: In any case, the ideal location of this proposal would be before item (j) (indicated in the previous item).

o) Noting that poverty contributes to increasing disability indices in States and that also has a negative effect on the quality of life of persons, and that there is often a close connection between disability and poverty, efforts must continue to promote and implement the Millennium Development Goals in terms of eradicating poverty, in order to mitigate and where possible eliminate the marked negative effects of poverty on the disabled population worldwide.

We recommend replacing item (q) with the following:

q) Recognizing the importance of accessibility to the physical, political, social, economic and cultural environment, and of proper access to justice for persons with disabilities, and emphasizing that access to information and communication constitutes an essential means to the achievement of those objectives, as well as the use of accessible technology in its various forms, which enables persons with disabilities to fully enjoy their human rights and fundamental freedoms;

We recommend modifying item (r) as follows:

Convinced that a Convention dealing specifically to the human rights of persons with disabilities will contribute significantly to improving the Human Development Index of this group and of the world population in general, and to redressing the profound social disadvantages of persons with disabilities, promoting their participation with equal opportunities in the civil, political, economic, social and cultural spheres in both developing and developed countries;

We agree with the proposal made by Kenya in order to include an item referring to the rights of the child. After that item, we recommend that an item to the following effect should be added:

Noting the worldwide trend towards gradual ageing of the population in a process of demographic transition, recognized by the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing, 2002, which affects the increase in the population of older persons and therefore the appearance of disability in that age group.

STRUCTURE OF THE CONVENTION

The document which has served as the basis for the work of the ad hoc committee reflects a structure for the Convention which contemplates, in a balanced way, the status of the rights of persons with disabilities and the particularities which make them operational (with a moderate level of detail), together with provisions which deal clearly with the issue of non-discrimination. We believe that such a structure fulfils the needs of persons with disabilities in the various parts of the world and the problems facing them, also including the orientations and commitments to be entered into by States in that regard.

It would not be plausible to produce a Convention having solely an anti-discrimination approach. To do so would exclude important aspects of rights which vary according to the needs of persons with disabilities, an area of great importance, since the various international agreements which deal generally with civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights have been unable to provide a complete answer and an affirmative interpretation for States with a view to specifying the fulfilment of human rights and fundamental freedoms in relation to persons with disabilities. Clearly, a broad and comprehensive Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities must bear in mind both aspects: the diversified enumeration of rights, and anti-discrimination provisions.

In this structure, preceded by an inspiring preamble, there appears to be concordance between the description of the purpose of the agreement and its fundamental principles. It is therefore appropriate to define those points which are most central and most frequently used in the Convention, avoiding the need to arrive at an article with many definitions which may prove ineffective, provided that States can conceptualize in their domestic legislation and public policies such terms, words and expressions as they see fit according to their realities and requirements, using a greater or lesser level of detail as appropriate. We therefore consider that the definitions should be limited to: "persons with disability"; "discrimination on the ground of disability"; universal design and inclusive design (thus incorporating the topic of accessibility and reasonable accommodation) and equality of opportunities.

Lastly, a worldwide convention such as the one under consideration must contain specific articles concerning monitoring and follow-up of the application of its provisions, making them operational in the framework of international human rights law. Otherwise, the instrument would remain merely a declaration of principles and intentions.

COMMENTS ON THE TERMS OF THE CONVENTION

TITLE OF THE CONVENTION

Observations:

1.- In naming an international agreement, the United Nations tends to use simple, concise language.

2.- In the case of international agreements for the comprehensive promotion and protection of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of certain vulnerable groups, the central element of the title is a description of the subject whose rights are to be protected, for example, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.

3.- One exception to the trend towards concise titles is the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. Experience shows, however, that since the full title is not easy to use, the acronym CEDAW is generally used in referring to that Convention. Among those who are not well informed on the subject, significant numbers of people refer to that agreement as the " Women's Rights Convention" or the "Women's Convention".

4.- The preamble, proposals and general principles relating to the proposed Convention clearly set out the various matters to be covered by the instrument. It is therefore unnecessary to enumerate the various aspects to be covered clearly in the title of the Convention, which would make such a title long and cumbersome.

5.- While an international convention is a legal instrument binding upon the States parties, it is equally important that it should be designed so that the text can be appropriately known and used by the general population of the nations concerned, and particularly by the group whose rights it seeks to promote and protect in a broad and comprehensive manner. This supports the idea of a simple title for the Convention, reflecting its most basic elements.

6.- For these reasons, we are convinced that the title of the Convention should be concise and precise, referring directly to the type of instrument involved (a convention), the subjects of law who are the targets of the instrument (persons with disabilities) and lastly that it should mention "rights" as a generic reference to its entire contents.

7.- The title should therefore be “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”.

ARTICLE 1 – PURPOSE:

This article should state the two structural aims of the Convention, namely to promote and protect rights and to combat discrimination. We therefore propose the following language, using simple terms and avoiding any elements which will be stated in the rest of the text:

“The purpose of the present Convention shall be to promote and protect the full enjoyment by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms, and to prevent any form of discrimination”.

ARTICLE 2 – PRINCIPLES

We recommend that a reference to "personal self-determination" in item (a), integrating the Costa Rican proposal regarding "independent life of persons". The text would then read:

(a) The dignity, individual autonomy, personal self-determination and independent life of persons.

We propose modifying item (d) as follows:

d) Respect for diversity as an essential element of the human condition.

Observation: It is inappropriate to use the expression "acceptance of disability" here. This article is setting out basic principles, and it is therefore not desirable, in mentioning "difference", to narrow the subject-matter by referring to "acceptance of disability".

We recommend incorporating a new item (f)

f) The recognition, promotion and protection of diversified rights the object of which is to permit the enjoyment and exercise by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Note: The purpose of this statement is to enshrine the existence of new rights which specify and put into practice human rights and fundamental freedoms in relation to persons with disabilities. The general statements contained in the International Covenants on Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights have not fully responded to this category of persons or given an assertive interpretation to that effect.

We support the proposal by certain countries that the following should be included in the basic principles:

- International cooperation, gender equality, personal development and enjoyment at all stages of life, accessibility and universal and inclusive design (this reference includes the elimination of barriers and obstacles)

Observations on other proposals:

- The reference to the adoption of remedial measures should be included in article 4, on General Obligations.

- In this area, it should also be stated that in the adoption of these measures, the social model should be chosen rather than the medical model. These two references do not correspond to the status of "principles".

ARTICLE 3 -- DEFINITIONS

Definitions should be given for points which are the most central and play the greatest role in the Convention, to avoid arriving at an article containing a large number of definitions which could prove to be futile. In their internal legislation and public policies, States can define such terms, words and expressions as they see fit in accordance with their realities and requirements, using a greater or lesser level of detail as appropriate. We therefore believe that the definitions should be limited to: persons with disability, discrimination on the ground of disability, universal/inclusive design, and equality of opportunities.

Persons with disabilities:

Preliminary note: In the proposed definition, some elements contained in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) have been applied, that is, those which are useful because they integrate aspects of deficiency from a broad perspective with those which refer to the personal and social development of the individual, and in relation to his or her environment. We should lean towards a definition which does not refer only to the area of medicine, but includes the elements of the individual in his or her daily life and participation in the social sphere, in relation to surrounding factors.

It will suffice to make a broad reference to deficiencies from the viewpoint of corporal structures and functions, which will make it possible to consider many persons whose limitations do not fall strictly within the physical, sensory, mental and psychic spheres.

We believe that a broad definition permits full understanding as to the conceptualization of the subject of law, enabling States to adopt this multifocal approach in their domestic legislation.

We are even more convinced that there should be agreement between the definition of the subject of law of this Convention and the proposed classification which is tending to be implemented increasingly in many countries at the worldwide level (ICF).

We believe it is unnecessary to define "disability" in the abstract sense, since that should be left to other instruments, but not in an International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The condition described does not present itself independently from the subject who is experiencing it and who is the holder of the rights and freedoms promoted and protected by this Convention.

- Persons with disabilities: Those persons who, as a result of one or more deficiencies in their bodily structures or functions, experience limitations in everyday activities and/or restrictions on their participation in the various areas of social life; those circumstances may have been created or worsened by the various factors and environmental factors surrounding the individual."

Discrimination on the ground of disability: Its definition is dealt with in article 7, on equality and non-discrimination.
Universal design and inclusive design: Original design and configuration of spaces, items, products and technologies taking into account the diversity of the conditions of users and of the situations they experience throughout their lives, in order to provide better quality of life for all persons.

Accessibility: A condition fulfilled by an environment (space), element, product or technology which is usable by all persons, safely, comfortably and with the greatest possible independence.

The ability to independently enter, remain, pass through and exit from spaces and use items, products and technologies with an appropriate level of safety, independence and comfort.

Equality of Opportunities: Those measures, actions or exemptions, as appropriate, which tend to place persons with disabilities in a position to be able to enjoy and fully exercise their human rights and fundamental freedoms.

ARTICLE 4 GENERAL OBLIGATIONS

We propose modifying item (a), integrating the input from Argentina and India into the original proposal, in accordance with the alternative language which we propose:

(a) To adopt legislative, administrative and other measures to give effect to the present Convention and to amend, repeal or nullify any laws and regulations and to discourage customs or practices that are inconsistent with it. With regard to economic social and cultural rights, States parties shall undertake such measures as can be implemented immediately, deciding on the implementation of other measures to the maximum extent of their available resources, including international cooperation

We propose modifying item (c) as follows, to incorporate the input from various States (including Chile):

(c) Cross-cutting integration of the various aspects relating to persons with disabilities into all economic and social development policies and programmes, including those involving international cooperation, avoiding their separate or isolated treatment.

We propose modifying item (f) to incorporate certain observations proposed by States (including Chile). The text would read as follows:

(f) To ensure the development, availability and use of universally designed spaces, goods, services, equipment and facilities. Those spaces, goods, services, equipment and facilities shall meet the specific needs of persons with disabilities with the necessary adaptations, according to the disability involved and at the lowest possible cost.

We support the initial idea of Kenya to incorporate into this item, with input from Chile, the following references::

- To establish efficient and effective structures to monitor the application and implementation of the provisions of the Convention;

- To provide special protection and support to persons with multideficit and to persons with disabilities whose vulnerability is greater owing to armed conflicts, natural disasters or their status as minors, older persons, women or those living with HIV/AIDS, inter alia.

We support the idea of modifying item 2 to incorporate input from various States including Chile. The text would read as follows:

In the design, formulation, implementation and assessment of policies and legislation to give effect to the present Convention, States shall adopt the appropriate measures to ensure sufficient consultation with persons with disabilities, their families, care-givers and organizations representing them, guaranteeing their full participation in this process and recognizing the expertise and leadership that such persons can provide in this field.

We recommend including a new item into article 4, as follows:

(new item) To include in their national budgets the provision of specific resources enabling broad and comprehensive treatment of issues relating to persons with disabilities in their respective national jurisdictions, including the financing of mechanisms to monitor and assess compliance with the rules and to ensure the implementation of the provisions of this Convention.

ARTICLE 5 – PROMOTION OF POSITIVE ATTITUDES TOWARDS PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

We support the proposal of Mexico to change the title of this article to “Creation of a culture of respect and inclusion”, since it is more comprehensive to speak of a culture, which incorporates the elements of “positive attitudes” (original proposal) and “creation and raising awareness” (proposal of South Africa).

The Mexican proposal agrees with the wording contained in some of the sub-paragraphs of the preamble and in article 2 on general principles of the Convention.

Paragraph 1:

We support the proposal of Uganda to include the reference to “their needs, potential and contribution” and the term “diversity” suggested by Chile, which agrees with the preamble and principles of the Convention.

Therefore, sub-paragraph (a) would read as follows:

“a) Raise awareness throughout society regarding persons with disabilities, their diversity, needs, potential and contribution to society.”

We suggest the addition of the phrase “negative practices” to the original wording of sub-paragraph (b). Therefore, it would read as follows:

b) Combat stereotypes, prejudices and negative practices about persons with disabilities.

We propose that sub-paragraph c) should be replaced, since it makes reference to the role of “subject of law” and includes elements contained in other suggested modifications to the original drafting. We propose the following drafting:

c) Promote a culture regarding persons with disabilities as subjects of law, in accordance with the provisions of the present Convention.

Paragraph 2:

We propose to modify sub-paragraph a) by incorporating the addition by several States and Chile, in the latter case by including the phrase “proactive conduct”; it would read as follows:

a) Initiating and maintaining effective public awareness campaigns and policies designed to receptive attitudes and proactive conduct for the respect and protection of the rights of persons with disabilities.

In the original version of sub-paragraph b), we support the suggestion of Costa Rica to include a reference “in their population”, which would read as follows:

b) Promoting awareness in their population, in particular among all children…..”

In sub-paragraph d), we support the suggestion of Uganda to include the reference to “their families”; it would read as follows:

“d) Working in partnership with persons with disabilities, their families and representative organizations…..”.

ARTICLE 6: STATISTICS AND DATA COLLECTION

We support the proposal of Uganda to include the word “protection” in the title, which would read “Collection and protection of statistics and data”. The inclusion of the word “protection” is decisive, in as much as the commentary on the article takes into account some aspects regarding privacy and confidentiality in the delivery and collection of information on persons with disabilities and their families, which therefore requires the aforementioned safeguards.

In the first paragraph of the article, Chile proposes the inclusion of “ public policies, tabulation, census and the degree of the exercise of and respect for rights”. The suggestions of other States should also be incorporated, therefore it should read:

“In order to formulate and put into practice appropriate provisions, norms and public policies to promote and protect the rights of persons with disabilities, States parties should include in their programmes to gather data, statistics and censuses, measures for the compilation, tabulation, analysis, codification and dissemination of this information, as well as the environment surrounding persons with disabilities and the degree to which they exercise their human rights and fundamental freedoms and those rights are respected. The process of collecting, compiling, maintaining and preserving this information shall…..”

We propose modifications to sub-paragraph c) incorporating the contributions of some States (Mexico, Jordan and New Zealand) and of Chile, in the latter case adding the words “their families”; the revised text would read as follows:

c) The governmental authorities responsible for statistics in the States Parties shall ensure that the design and implementation of data collection is done in partnership with persons with disabilities, their families, their representative organizations and all other interested stakeholders;

There is a proposal to include in sub-paragraph e) a reference to transport as an essential area of access that should be verified through the collection of data and statistics. We support the idea of Algeria to add “health care”, but in a broader formulation referring to health care programmes, and also adding a reference to “support through medicines and technical assistance as appropriate”, as it is an element of interest and very important to large numbers of persons with disabilities; the text would read as follows:

d) Include detailed information on their access to public services, rehabilitation programmes, education, training, employment, housing, transport, health care, support (subsidies) for medicines and technical assistance as appropriate as well as other relevant areas, describing the barriers and obstacles faced by persons with disabilities in the exercise of their rights.

We support the alternate drafting of sub-paragraph f) proposed by Mexico, as it provides more comprehensive safeguards:

f) Establish regulations and mechanisms to safeguard disability statistics and ensure their appropriate use.

We support the proposal of Lebanon to include a paragraph 2, because it introduces statistical information on disability into the overall world view of the country. Chile would like to add to its proposal the final objective of the cross-cutting analysis of these statistics, which is “their comprehensive consideration in legislation and public policy”.

“2. States parties should include disability figures among the indicators to assess the development of the country reflecting the close link between poverty and disability when relevant, conducting a cross-cutting analysis of those statistics for their comprehensive consideration in legislation and public policy.”

ARTICLE 7: EQUALITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION

In the first paragraph, we share the view of Canada that ethnic origin should be included, in addition to including health, marital status, belief, and culture as proposed by the Group of African States, age, proposed by Kenya; Chile recommends including genetic makeup and living with HIV/AIDS.

There is a proposal to add to sub-paragraph b) the definition taken from the Interamerican Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities of the Organization of American States or to supplement the definition by the Working Group with the elements covered by that Convention not found in this article. For example, when referring to the purpose or effect of impairment, the Interamerican Convention adds impede or nullify.

Discrimination on grounds of disability: shall mean any distinction, exclusion or restriction based on a disability, past disability, result of a prior disability or perception of a present or past disability, which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by the persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Discrimination does not include a distinction or preference adopted by a State Party in order to promote the independence, personal development and social integration of persons with disabilities, as long as they are not obligated to accept such a distinction or preference.

We support the proposal of Japan, the Group of African States and Canada to include at the end of paragraph 3 of this article the phrase: “and consistent with international human rights law”; the paragraph would read as follows:

3. Discrimination does not include a provision, criterion or practice that is objectively and demonstrably justified by the State Party by a legitimate aim and where the means of achieving that aim are reasonable, necessary and consistent with international human rights law.

While this article refers to protection against discrimination, it seems important to us to acknowledge that the occurrence of discrimination would result in the appropriate penalty against those responsible. This could appear in article 5 as a second paragraph, article 5 (b) as follows:

b) The occurrence of discriminatory actions or omissions shall result in the application of penalties against those responsible, in accordance with the procedures established by law.

ARTICLE 8: RIGHT TO LIFE

We recommend including in article 8 a reference to “the various stages” in the life of a person and support the proposal of Jordan to pay special attention to armed conflicts and natural disasters. Therefore we propose the following inclusive drafting:

“States Parties reaffirm the inherent right to life of persons with disabilities in their various stages, and shall take all necessary measures to ensure its effective enjoyment by them, in particular in situations of armed conflict and natural disasters, in accordance with international law, human rights, refugee and international humanitarian law”.

Article 9: Equal recognition as a person before the law.

It is proposed that the title of this article should reflect its contents, which is legal capacity, to the extent that its provisions refer to the legal capacity of a person with disabilities to acquire rights and assume obligations.

The wording of subparagraph (b), drafted by the working group, is acceptable. The word “accept” should be replaced by the word “recognize” and the sub-paragraph would thus begin:

(b) “Recognize that persons with disabilities have full legal capacity….”.

With regard to subparagraph (c), it should be borne in mind that at law, legal capacity involves:

- Capacity to enjoy : the capacity to acquire rights which are inherently unrestricted;

- Capacity to exercise: capacity to take action within the realm of the law, including assuming obligations.

This latter capacity may require in very exceptional circumstances assistance from third parties. Therefore, the wording of subparagraph (c ) drafted by the working group is acceptable.

However, given the importance of the issue and in the interest of safeguarding the human rights and fundamental freedoms of people who are so impaired as to require assistance on a more continuing basis and support or assistance from third parties in exercising their legal capacity ( which is referred to as formal assistance), the Convention should provided that such assistance should always be strictly exceptional and accompanied by a number of safeguards for the protection of persons, including the adoption of a decision on due process sanctioned by duly constituted tribunals (inter alia, the right to be duly notified or informed, the right to have full answer and to defence, be allowed time to produce evidence, the right to appeal and periodic revisions), the involvement of a public advocate in the process to protect the interests of the person with disability; the framework for the decision on formal assistance should always be respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals, oversight from time to time to ensure that such assistance is adequate, using the protection of the above-mentioned rights and freedoms as a frame of reference.

We support the working group’s proposal to incorporate Kenya’s input to the effect of inserting in subparagraph (e) the right to use or dispose of property; the subparagraph would read as follows:

(e) “Take all appropriate and effective measures to ensure the equal right of persons with disabilities to own or inherit use or otherwise dispose of property….”

A specific and separate article on access to courts for persons with disabilities as a form of the so-called equal protection under the law in exercise of their rights is proposed. While this international convention has dealt with the different types of access that should be guaranteed to persons with disabilities, it is vital to stress the issue of "access to courts", a broad concept which covers various substantive and procedural aspects. Such access constitutes one of the main pillars of the exercise of citizenship rights and has been particularly difficult for persons with disabilities, owing to the barriers and obstacles in that area which them their day in court. Here, we are referring not only to the right of persons with disabilities to bring an action for discrimination or violation of their rights because of their disabilities, but also to the prosecution of such action in various areas under the jurisdiction of civil, criminal, labour, neighbourhood courts etc, with the person with disabilities being either the plaintiff, defendant, complainant, respondent, witness, petitioner or appelant in non-contentious proceedings etc. Therefore, the following wording is proposed:

"Pursuant to the principle of equal protection before the law in the exercise of human rights, States should guarantee adequate access to courts for persons with disabilities, facilitating their effective role as direct or indirect parties to contentious and non contentious legal proceedings"

ARTICLE 10 – LIBERTY AND SECURITY OF THE PERSON

In article 10, paragraph 1(b), we support the Working Group's proposal in which all that remains is to incorporate a reference to "due process". The text would then be as follows:

(b) "...are not deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily, nor in any circumstances on grounds of their disability. Any deprivation of liberty shall be based on a judicial decision with the application of the guarantees of due process."

We support the Ugandan proposal to include an item in the following terms: "When lawfully deprived of their liberty measures shall be taken to ensure that they receive rehabilitation while confinement."

Note: Nonetheless, it should be noted that the correct location of this item is in paragraph 2 of this article, rather than in paragraph 1 as it appears in the draft currently before us.

We support the inclusion of an item dealing with the situation where persons with disabilities are compulsorily interned in establishments, along the lines of the proposals put forward by the European Union, which set out safeguards and guarantees for such cases in the following terms:

3 (i) States Parties shall accept the principle that forced institutionalization of persons with disabilities is illegal, save in exceptional circumstances in accordance with the procedures established by law and with the application of appropriate legal safeguards.

ii) The law shall provide that in any case of forced institutionalization of persons with disabilities, the best interests of the person concerned will be fully taken into account”.

ARTICLE 11 – FREEDOM FROM TORTURE OR CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT

We support paragraph 2 as drafted by the Working Group, incorporating into the reference to "medical or scientific experimentation" the proposal by Thailand to refer to "other forms" of experimentation. In today's world, experiments may be invented which are different from those of the medical and scientific areas (for example, experiments of an advertising or commercial nature). The text should therefore read:
2. "In particular, States Parties shall prohibit persons with disabilities from medical, scientific or other forms of experimentation..."

Observation:

Forced institutionalization is dealt with in this article, and also in paragraph 2 of the following article on freedom from violence and abuse. We therefore recommend that it should be left in this article, which is the most appropriate location.

If not, the Ad Hoc Committee should consider combining the two articles into one, which under the title of the current article 12 would include a paragraph dedicated solely to freedom from torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

ARTICLE 12 – FREEDOM FROM VIOLENCE AND ABUSE

In paragraph 1, we support the proposal of the Republic of Korea that the concept of "abandonment" should be included. Abandonment is a particularly severe form of violence and abuse which is often found in the case of certain persons with disabilities who are particularly vulnerable, such as those living with multiple disabilities.

Also in paragraph 1, we support the New Zealand proposal to include a reference to “economic abuse”. This is a situation which occurs quite often, when a third party or parties exploit the property or income of a disabled person who, often for reasons of dependency on the person concerned, is unable to defend him- or herself appropriately or to escape from this type of abuse. Economic abuse also occurs when an employer hires a person with a disability on a salary lower than that of other workers having the same functions, and in cases where a third party responsible for the maintenance of the disabled person therefore seeks to limit or restrict the latter's life in the exercise of his or her rights.

The text should therefore read:

1. “States Parties recognize that persons with disabilities are at greater risk, both within and outside the home, of abandonment, violence, mental of physical abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including economic and sexual exploitation and abuse...”

In paragraph 2, we support the proposal by Kenya that measures should be adopted to provide particular protection to persons with disabilities from armed conflict.

The language proposed by the working group in paragraph 3 is very similar to that which appears in the second part of paragraph 1 of the same article, which begins after the consecutive point, as follows:

"States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social, educational and other measures to protect them..."

Observation: Since the purpose of both provisions is the adoption of measures and the preventive and protective nature that they imply, we recommend merging those two statements.

We support the proposal by New Zealand regarding the training of those working with persons with disabilities to identify and prevent cases of violence and abuse.

We support the proposal by the European Union for an article 3 bis recognizing the principle that forced interventions on persons with disabilities are illegal save in exceptional circumstances.

We support the proposal by New Zealand to replace the current paragraph 4, incorporating important language concerning the monitoring of institutions by independent authorities, which include persons with disabilities, and for the monitoring reports to be made available to the public (combined with the final proposal by Mexico in this article).

Article 13: Freedom of expression and opinion and access to information

In the heading of this article, we endorse the proposal of Liechtenstein, which makes general references to "alternative appropriate modes of communication", wording which covers the diversity of such modes of communication. If specific references are to be made to some of those modes, they could be cited as examples, since over time other diverse mechanisms of communication could continue to be developed that would be covered by the wording we endorse. The text would thus read:

"States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities can exercise their right to freedom of expression and opinion through alternative appropriate modes of communication of their choice......"

In subparagraph (b) we are of the view that the verb should be emphatic in the proposal being advanced, in which case the word "accepting" should be replaced by the word "incorporating", whose meaning is more binding and denotes a requirement. Therefore, the text would begin as follows:

(b) "Incorporating the use of alternative modes of communication by persons with disabilities in official interactions".

In subparagraph (c), we endorse the proposal of various States (New Zealand, Trinidad and Tobago, Lebanon, Jordan, Costa Rica and Yemen) to incorporate the idea of providing education or training to non-disabled persons in the use of alternative communication modes in their interactions with people with disabilities.

In subparagraph (f), we endorse Jordan's proposal to replace the word "encouraging" with the word "requiring", since we are referring to private entities that provide services to the public, and not to just any entities. We also endorse Trinidad and Tobago's proposal that public entities by covered by this requirement in order to be consistent. In other words, if private entities are required to comply, the public sector should equally be compelled to do so. Therefore, the subparagraph would read thus:

(f) "Requiring private and public entities that provide services to the general public to provide information and services in accessible and usable formats....."

In subparagraph (g), we endorse Jordan's proposal to replace the word "encouraging" with the word "requiring", since access to services provided by the mass media is of vital importance to the development of people in contemporary societies. Therefore, the text would read as follows:/b>