 |
 |
|
Article 21 - Freedom of expression and opinion, and access to information
Background Documents | Article 21 Background
Seventh Session | Fifth Session | Fourth Session | Third Session
Working Group | References
Fifth Session
Governments
Non-governmental organizations
Comments, proposals and amendments submitted electronically
Governments
EUROPEAN UNION
Proposed Modifications
to Draft Article 13
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND OPINION, AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION
States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities
can exercise their right to freedom of expression and opinion through Braille,
sign language, and other modes of communication of their choice, and to seek,
receive and impart information, on an equal footing with others, including by:
EU proposal: The EU suggests the following language between “opinion” and “including
by”: “through sign language, Braille and other modes and means of communication
of their choice and to seek, receive and impart information, on the basis of
equality”
(a) providing public information to persons with disabilities, on request, in
a timely manner and without additional cost, in accessible formats and technologies
of their choice, taking into account different kinds of disability;
EU Proposal: The EU suggests replacing "public" with "official”,
deleting the words “of their choice”, and adding “for persons with disabilities”
after “without additional cost”.
(b) accepting the use of alternative modes of communication by persons with
disabilities in official interactions;
EU proposal: The EU suggests adding “and means” after “modes”.
(c) educating persons with disabilities to use alternative and augmentative
communication modes;
EU proposal: The EU suggests replacing c) with the following wording:
“promoting opportunities for training to use alternative communication modes
and means”;
(d) undertaking and promoting the research, development and production of new
technologies, including information and communication technologies, and assistive
technologies, suitable for persons with disabilities;
EU Proposal: The EU suggests the following rewording; “promoting and
where appropriate undertaking the research, development and production of new
technologies, including information and communication technologies, and assistive
technologies, suitable for persons with disabilities;”
(e) promoting other appropriate forms of assistance and support to persons with
disabilities to ensure their access to information;
(f) encouraging private entities that provide services to the general public
to provide information and services in accessible and usable formats for persons
with disabilities;
(g) encouraging the mass media to make their services accessible to persons
with disabilities.
INDIA
Proposed modifications to draft Article 13
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND OPINION, AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION
The Indian delegation seeks to indicate the concept of "freedom of thought"
in both the title and the chapeau of Article 13.
The title would read: FREEDOM OF THOUGHT, EXPRESSION AND OPINION...
2(bis) States Parties shall protect the freedom of thought of persons with disabilities,
including:
(a) the freddom of choice whether to consider oneself a person with disability;
(b) the feddom to adopt and hold opinion and beliefs about the experience of
disability.
Non-governmental organizations
INTERNATIONAL DISABILITY CAUCUS
- Information sheet
The IDC would like to emphasize that draft article 13 of the Working Group Text
seems to focus on issues related to access to information and less on the other
aspects of the right to freedom of expression and opinion. We call on delegations
to include g aspects of the ICCPR which references elements of freedom of expression
and thought in the chapeau and body of article 13.
Why sign languages should be recognized in national legislation
Sign languages are not a method or mode of communication; they are natural languages
with their own grammatical structure. To date, 30 countries have recognized
sign languages in their national legislations. Most recently, the Government
of New Zealand has introduced a Sign Language Bill which should come into force
in mid 2005. Acknowledgment of Sign languages as real languages comes from serious
difficulties for Deaf people to access government services leading to injustices
being experienced by our colleagues. For example, Deaf people reported being
denied the use of interpreters in courts leading to a lack of access to justice.
In medical settings, the denied use of interpreters may lead to risks of misdiagnosis
and lack of informed consent. Furthermore, because sign languages are not recognized
on a legislative level, the majority of Deaf children are denied the use of
Sign language and cannot receive education in their own language. This results
in Deaf children being excluded from education, a fundamental human right.
Why we need to specifically identify Braille in the Convention
Braille is the primary literacy medium for Blind and Deafblind people and is
the only mode of communication used for writing and reading. As technology continues
to develop alternative modes of communication, Braille will remain fundamental
for reading and writing for Blind, Deafblind and partially sighted people. For
example, in one’s own home, a Blind person uses Braille to mark their spice
tins; a practical need that cannot be replaced by technology. For the non-visually
impaired community, the idea of removing written text as technology develops
would never be supported by society. Therefore, why should it be proposed to
remove the script for Blind persons in the case of Braille and replace it with
sound technology? Moreover, for Deafblind people, sound technology cannot replace
Braille. No country has so far recognized Braille as the legal script for blind
persons in their national legislations.
What is augmentative and alternative communication and why it is important
Some persons cannot communicate by speaking or writing because of a physical
(e.g. cerebral palsy) or intellectual disability. Our colleagues use augmentative
or alternative communication which may include a communication assistant, communication
boards, assistive technology or any combination of these modes. This is what
enables our colleagues to communicate and, therefore, is essential for the realization
of their human rights.
- Draft proposal
1. States parties shall take appropriate actions to ensure that:
(a) all persons with disabilities enjoy the same freedom of expression, thoughts
and opinion as that enjoyed by others;
(b) persons with disabilities can exercise their right to freedom of expression,
thoughts and opinion through languages, scripts, modes, means and formats of
communication of their choice, including but not limited to sign languages,
tactile communication techniques, captioning, plain and easily understood texts,
large print, Braille and augmentative and alternative communication, in order
to seek, receive and impart information on the basis of equality with others;
2. States parties shall take actions to:
(a) accept and promote the use of a variety of languages and modes and means
of communication by persons with disabilities in official interactions in order
to seek, receive, impart and access information and enable persons with disabilities
to communicate on an equal basis as others;
(b) provide training of assistants, intermediaries, interpreters, such as sign
language and tactile communication interpreters, note takers, readers and augmentative
and alternative communication assistants, to ensure that persons with disabilities
have access to information and the facility to communicate;
(c) officially recognise national sign languages in legislation to guarantee
linguistic rights for all deaf persons, and to ensure communication with their
families, immediate community and the general public;.
3. States parties shall protect the freedom of thought of persons with disabilities,
including:
(a) the freedom of choice whether to consider oneself a person with a disability;
(b) the freedom to adopt and hold opinions and beliefs about the experience
of disability;
(c) the freedom to choose practices of support for well-being, based on personal
thoughts, opinions and beliefs;
(d) the freedom from coercion that interferes with the capacity to freely produce
or sustain thought.
- Plenary intervention on access to information
February 3 2005, Kicki Nordström, World Blind Union
Thanks Mr. Chair,
On behalf of the International Disability Caucus (IDC) I will address the issue
on access to information as an obligation and a responsibility also for the
private sector.
To exclude obligations for the private sector for providing their information
in an accessible format is the same as to exclude persons with disabilities
from almost all kind of public information.
I am sure you wish to keep an obligation for pharmacy companies to label their
products with warning texts that the medicine should be kept away from children.
However if there is no obligation for the private sector to make their information
accessible for persons with disabilities, we will never have access to such
information.
On one hand you have already demanded the private sector to inform the general
public of their products, but on the other hand you have limited this obligation
by excluding persons with disabilities.
Why put criteria and obligations on companies, demanding them to making information
known to the general public, which does not apply to Persons with disabilities?
What you have done now in Article 13, is to exclude obligations for the private
sector to not making their information accessible for persons with disabilities,
and the result will be equal to excluding persons with disabilities from important
public information for ever!
Taking into account that more and more public services targeting the general
public are now being handling over from governments to the private sector, we
expect from you that you also accompany this transition with obligations for
making their public services accessible for all, including persons with disabilities.
If this obligation is not included in the transition you will as a result, end
up by building in a discriminating factor in this convention.
I hope this is not your intention?!
Thank you