Comments, proposals and amendments submitted electronically

Governments

EUROPEAN UNION

Draft Article 17
EDUCATION

1. States Parties recognise the right of all persons with disabilities to education. With a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, the education of children with disabilities shall be directed to:

EU Proposal: EU suggests replacing the second sentence by: “The education of persons with disabilities shall be directed to:”

(a) the full development of the human potential and sense of dignity and self worth, and the strengthening of respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and human diversity;

(b) enabling all persons with disabilities to participate effectively in a free society;

(c) the development of the child’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential;

EU Proposal: Replace "fullest" by "full".

(d) take into account the best interests of the child, in particular by individualising education plans;

EU Proposal: EU considers that the use of the word “promoting” would provide a more positive statement than “take into account”.

2. In realising this right, States Parties shall ensure:

EU Proposal: EU suggests rewording this to read “In realising this right, States Parties shall endeavour to ensure:”

a) that all persons with disabilities can choose inclusive and accessible education in their own community (including access to equal early childhood and pre school education);

EU Proposal: replace by “that persons with disabilities can avail of inclusive and accessible education (including equal access to early childhood and preschool education) and that such education shall be provided to the extent possible in the communities in which they live”

b) the provision of required support, including the specialised training of teachers, school counsellors and psychologists, an accessible curriculum, accessible teaching medium and technologies, alternative and augmentative communication modes, alternative learning strategies, accessible physical environment, or other reasonable accommodations to ensure the full participation of students with disabilities;

EU Proposal: Replace "the provision of required ... psychologists" with "Appropriate support including specialised training for teachers and other staff".

c) that no child with disabilities is excluded from free and compulsory primary education on account of their disability.

EU Proposal: EU suggests moving sub-paragraph c to become the first sub-paragraph.

3. States Parties shall ensure that where the general education system does not adequately meet the needs of persons with disabilities special and alternative forms of learning should be made available. Any special and alternative forms of learning should:

EU Proposal: Replace by “Where the general education system does not yet adequately meet the needs of persons with disabilities States Parties shall take appropriate measures to promote alternative forms of education. Any alternative forms of education provided under this Article should:”

(a) reflect the same standards and objectives provided in the general education system;

EU Proposal: EU suggests the following wording: “be closely linked to and reflective of the same curriculum and aim to reflect the same standards and objectives provided in the general education system, taking into account the learning and development needs of persons with disabilities”.

(b)be provided in such a manner to allow children with disabilities to participate in the general education system to the maximum extent possible;

(c)allow a free and informed choice between general and special systems;

EU Proposal: Reword to read “allow for choice between general and special education systems”

(d) in no way limit the duty of States Parties to continue to strive to meet the needs of students with disabilities in the general education system.

4. States Parties shall ensure that children with sensory disabilities may choose to be taught sign language or Braille, as appropriate, and to receive the curriculum in sign language or Braille. States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure quality education to students with sensory disabilities by ensuring the employment of teachers who are fluent in sign language or Braille.

EU Proposal: Reword this sub-paragraph as follows: “States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities may choose to be taught using a variety of communication modes and shall work to ensure quality education to students with disabilities by ensuring that teachers are able to use different communication modes.”

5. States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities may access general tertiary education, vocational training, adult education and lifelong learning on an equal basis with others. To that end, States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to persons with disabilities.

EU Proposal: EU suggests inserting the words “secondary and” before “tertiary” and that the last sentence of Paragraph 5 should read: “To that end, States Parties shall ensure that reasonable accommodation is provided”.

INDIA

Article -17(5bis)

The State shall provide for functional education to persons with severe, intellectual and multiple disabilities on a continued basis (again part of the compilation text but not in the country text).

KENYA

Draft Article 17
EDUCATION

Substitute the word ‘children’ with ‘person’ in 1 so that it reads:

1. States Parties recognise the right of all persons with disabilities to education. With a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, the education of children person with disabilities shall be directed to:

Substitute the word ‘child’s’ with ‘person’s’ in 1(c) so that it reads:

(c) the development of the child’s person’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential;

Substitute the word ‘child’ with ‘person’ in 1(d) so that it reads:

(d) take into account the best interests of the child person, in particular by individualising education plans;

Insert the phrase ‘professional training’ between the words ‘training’ and ‘adult’ in 5 so that it reads:

5. States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities may access general tertiary education, vocational training, professional training, adult education and lifelong learning on an equal basis with others. To that end, States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to persons with disabilities.

MEXICO

Article 17. Education

1. States Parties recognize the right of all persons with disabilities to education. With a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, the education of (persons with disabilities shall take into account their best interests and - Mexico) shall be directed to:

a) the full development of the human potential and sense of dignity and self worth, and the strengthening of respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and human diversity;

b) enabling all persons with disabilities to participate effectively in a free (and inclusive – Mexico) society;

c) the development of the (person’s – Mexico) personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential;

d) (satisfy the special educational needs of persons with disabilities. – Mexico)

2. In realising this right, States Parties shall ensure:

a) that all persons with disabilities can choose inclusive and accessible education in their own community (including access to early childhood and pre-school education);

b) the provision of required support, including the specialized training of teachers, school counsellors and psychologists, an accessible curriculum, an accessible teaching medium and technologies, (appropriate assistive devices – Mexico), alternative and augmentative communication modes, alternative learning strategies, accessible physical environment, or other reasonable accommodations to ensure the full participation of (persons – Mexico) with disabilities;

c) that no child with disabilities is excluded from free and compulsory primary education on account of their disability;

d) (promote access to scholarships and financial resources for persons with disabilities, without restricting that access for only those who course compulsory primary education. – Mexico)

3. States Parties shall ensure that where the general education system does not adequately meet the needs of persons with disabilities special and alternative forms of learning should be made available. Any such special and alternative forms of (teaching – Mexico) should:

a) reflect the same standards and objectives provided in the general education system;

b) be provided in such a manner to allow children with disabilities to participate in the general education system to the maximum extent possible;

c) allow a free and informed choice between general and special systems;

d) in no way limit the duty of States Parties to continue to strive to meet the needs of students with disabilities in the general education system.

4. States Parties shall ensure that persons with sensory disabilities have access to sign language or Braille, as appropriate, to facilitate their learning process and to follow the curriculum. States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure quality education for persons with sensory disabilities by ensuring the employment of teachers who are fluent in sign language or Braille.

5. States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities may access general tertiary education, vocational training, adult education and lifelong learning on an equal basis with others. To that end, States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to persons with disabilities.

UN System organizations

ILO

Intervention at the Third Session:

Draft Article 17 Education

- The ILO recognizes that training in employable skills is central to enabling persons with disabilities to earn a decent living. More emphasis is required on vocational training in the draft text. Thus, the ILO would welcome a focused coverage of vocational training in this article and agrees with the suggestion made by several delegates that the heading be amended to include Vocational Training.

- The current provision concerning equal access to general education and vocational training services and programmes is welcome. Several amendments to the existing text are suggested, however:

• States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities may access general tertiary education, vocational training, adult education and lifelong learning on an equal basis with others. To that end, States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to persons with disabilities. develop equal opportunity strategies, measures and programmes to promote and implement training for persons with disabilities, with the objective of reducing inequalities.

- Additional provisions are required to ensure that men and women with all types of disabilities, whether congenital or acquired later in life, and particularly those living in remote communities and rural areas, can also benefit from skills development. The ILO suggests the addition of the following provisions:

• States Parties shall ensure that, where the general vocational training system does not adequately meet the needs of persons with disabilities, alternative forms of vocational training, including workplace learning and other forms of non-formal training, shall be made available that provide opportunities for the development, recognition and certification of skills relevant to the labour market and the national qualifications framework.

• States Parties shall ensure that training instructors are adequately qualified to cater to people with disabilities, whether in general or alternative vocational training programmes.

• States Parties shall ensure provision of vocational, labour market and career information and guidance and employment counselling to persons with disabilities, supplemented by information on rights and obligations under labour-related law and other forms of labour regulation.

• States Parties shall ensure that vocational rehabilitation and training/retraining opportunities are open to people who acquire a disability in the course of their working lives.

OHCHR

See references to international human rights conventions and jurisprudence.

National Human Rights Institutions

NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS

Intervention at the Third Session:
Article 17

On behalf of National Human Rights Institutions and more particularly on behalf of the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, I would like to express our concern in 4 specific areas that are vital to the enjoyment of the right to education without any discrimination and on the basis of equality by all persons with disabilities.

1) We would recommend careful use of the concept of progressive realization in relation to the right to education, as majority of the states are committed to free and compulsory education for all, though limited to elementary education. In view of this we recommend shifting article 17 (2)(c) to article 17(1).

2) We would encourage minimizing any bias in the treaty for a particular approach to education. We therefore recommend that the text of article 17(3) should be placed after article 17(2)(a). This would indicate respect of and freedom of choice and autonomy for persons with disabilities as far as the selection of educational options is concerned.

3) The National Human Rights Institutions attach great importance to linguistic rights and appreciates the recognition of this right in the context of education. Therefore, we would support retention of the text as it appears in article 17(4). While we greatly appreciate the EU’s effort and skillful crafting of an alternative Article 17(4), we consider the working group text is clearer and recognizes in explicit terms the importance of transacting education in the language and script most conducive to the needs of the persons with certain disabilities.

4) And lastly, we are satisfied to note the support extended by several member states in recognizing the importance of access by people with disabilities to various forms of education.

ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Article 17 – Education

Footnote 55: … whether this draft article should cover training more extensively…

Footnote 56: … whether the focus of the chapeau should be solely on “children”…

The Commission is of the view that this draft Article should be inclusive of all levels of education – primary, secondary and higher education, and include vocational education and other forms of training. In this regard, not all provisions of the draft Article should be limited to “children”. At the same time, certain provisions might appropriately be directed to the unique needs of children.

2.(a) That all persons with disabilities can choose inclusive and accessible education in their own community (including access to early childhood and pre-school education);

Footnote 58: The intent of this draft article is to provide the right to choose inclusive and accessible education. There is no intention to create an obligation on students with disabilities to attend general schools where their needs may not be adequately met. …

3. States Parties shall ensure that where the general education system does not adequately meet the needs of persons with disabilities special and alternative forms of learning should be made available. …

Footnote 61: While members of the Working Group considered that choice was an important element of this paragraph, some members considered that the right to education was more important. Other members would have liked greater emphasis on the best interests of the child in this choice.

Different approaches were also identified with respect to setting out the relationship between the provision of specialist education services and the general education system. Some members considered that education of children with disabilities in the general education system should be the rule, and the provision of specialist education services the exception. Others thought that specialist education services should be provided not only where the general education system was inadequate, but should rather be made available at all times without a presumption that one approach was more desirable than the other. …

The Commission has particular concern with the notions above. The appropriateness of integrated versus segregated settings for the education of students with disabilities fosters much debate in the Ontario context.

The Supreme Court of Canada has also addressed this debate in the case of Eaton vs. Brant County Board of Education.16 According to the Court:

While integration should be recognized as the norm of general application because of the benefits it generally provides, a presumption in favour of integrated schooling would work to the disadvantage of pupils who require special education in order to achieve equality .... Integration can be either a benefit or a burden depending on whether the individual can profit from the advantages that integration provides.

The Commission's view is set out in its report The Opportunity to Succeed: Achieving Barrier-free Education for Students with Disabilities: Before considering placing a student in a self-contained, or specialized classroom, education providers must first consider inclusion in the regular classroom. In most cases, appropriate accommodation will be accommodation in the regular classroom with supports. However, every student with a disability is unique. In order to provide appropriate accommodation to all students with disabilities, education providers must, with the assistance of parental input, assess each student's particular strengths and needs, and consider these against a full range of placements, programs and services. Ultimately, appropriate accommodation will be decided on an individual basis.

Finally, with respect to the use of the term “adequately” in paragraph 3 of draft Article 17 above, the Commission’s view is that whether a general education system “adequately” meets the needs of students with disabilities is more a question of the status of the progressive realization of the right. In keeping with the notion that integration should be the norm of general application, the Commission suggests substituting into this paragraph the term “appropriately” to read, “States Parties shall ensure that where the general education system does not appropriately adequately meet the needs of persons with disabilities special and alternative forms of learning should be made available. … “

Non-governmental organizations

AUSTRALIAN NGOs

Interventions at the Third Session:

Draft article 17

Mr Chairman:

We support footnote 55 of the working group text, which suggests that Article 17 should make explicit reference to “training” in addition to education.

We recommend that references to children and primary education are replaced with broader terms to ensure this article applies to education at all life stages. This would allow sub-paragraph 5 to be deleted.

We strongly urge States to maintain the obligation to provide inclusive education to people with disability. We are disappointed that some States, including Australia, have sought to water down these obligations by qualifying phrases that impose duties on States. Education is essential to the proper realization of human rights. States who have made a commitment to equality for people with disability earlier in this debate cannot now abrogate that responsibility by reducing state obligations to mere options.

We recognize the importance of specialist education in disability specific language and skills for particular groups, but believe that such education should be provided inclusively within the mainstream education system. For example, it may be that a student enrolled in a mainstream educational facility will need to attend separate classes for the purpose of learning Braille or sign language.

Students receive much more than purely academic learning and development within an educational environment. Many social and life skills are also acquired, often informally. It is important that people with disability have the opportunity to interact with other students and teachers without disability for at least three reasons:

(a) people with disability, during and once we have completed our education, will be interacting with the wider community where broad life experience and skills are essential for continuing participation in society;

(b) interaction between students with disability and students and teachers who do not have disability promotes a general understanding and awareness of disability which in itself promotes a more inclusive society; and

(c) people with disability form life-long networks during their education. It is important that they have the opportunity to develop these networks with non-disabled as well as disabled people.

We strongly recommend that paragraph 1 is amended to recognise the right of all persons with disability to an inclusive education in a school of our choice in our local community and urge delegates to delete paragraph 3, which would justify continued discrimination against, and segregation of, people with disability.

Finally, we support the International Labour Organisation’s recommendations concerning greater recognition of school to work transitional education, and other vocational and vocational rehabilitation training in this convention.

BIZCHUT

Draft Article 17 – Education

(a) Achieving the right progressively?

It is not clear whether by the word “progressively” in the chapeau of clause 1, the intention is that the State will implement the steps in this clause gradually. If it is so, how is this right different from other rights mentioned in the Convention that do not include such a limitation?

(b) The right to choose inclusive education includes assistance that enables inclusion

Clause 2 explicitly states that in order to achieve the right to education on the basis of equal opportunity, the State will ensure that persons with disabilities can choose inclusive education and will provide the required support. However clause 3 states that when the general education system does not adequately meet their needs, special and alternative forms of learning should be made available (that is, a special education system). This does not confer on the general education system the responsibility to provide the support needed to make inclusive education a realistic choice. And so, the system appears to meet its responsibility by offering an unrealistic choice, between the mainstream system without the assistance necessary to enable inclusion, and the special education system.

In order to tackle this inconsistency and close the gap, a provision should be added to clause 3, stating that when the general education system, with the use of supplementary aids and services, cannot adequately meet the needs of a pupil, alternative forms of learning should be made available.

We would like to point out that the Israeli “Inclusion Law” was enacted in order to confront this very “non-choice” that was placed before parents and pupils, as described above.

(c) Encouraging employment of teachers with disabilities

As regards footnote 59 in the Convention Draft, we are of the opinion that encouraging the employment of teachers with disabilities has a great influence on creating models for emulation identification for the students, and that it should be stated explicitly in this Article.

(d) Accommodations in higher education

We suggest that the accommodations typical to academic studies, i.e. accommodations in the curriculum and examinations, be added to clause 5 that discusses accessibility in tertiary education.

(e) Listening to the child

We suggest that the principle of listening to the child in appropriate situations (depending on age and other factors) be determined.

Consideration should be given to the question whether this principle should be anchored specifically in the article concerning education, or in a more general way in the article discussing children with disabilities (Article 16).

EUROPEAN DISABILITY FORUM

Draft Article 17 Education

This is one of the most important and complex areas. Therefore, before making concrete comments to the draft article, some general comments might be useful on the objectives to be achieved with this article.

First and foremost, the right to education for all disabled children, youngsters and adults has to be recognised and this education has to be of the same quality as that of their non disabled peers.

The most complex is the issue of mainstream and special education. Special education can be provided in special schools, but also in special classes within mainstream schools.

The decision between special and mainstream education is an issue for which the level of economic development of countries needs to be taken into account.

In an economically developed country, the existence of special schools is difficult to justify. An exception to this general rule is the education of deaf children who use sign language as their first language. The organisations of the deaf defend the special schools as the preferred option. All other groups consider mainstream education as the preferred option.

Nevertheless, inclusion in mainstream schools can only be the best option if the adequate support is provided to the disabled child. As long as this support is not provided, special schools need to continue to exist to ensure the right for a quality education.

However, the general objective to be promoted is the integration in mainstream education.

Finally, meaningful choice is a key issue for the child and for the family, which plays a decisive role in the decision on which education type to choose. A reference to the key role of the parents in choosing the education of their disabled children, needs to be included.

The article has to cover more clearly all stages of education and cover all persons with disabilities. Therefore the reference in the initial section of paragraph 1 should refer to persons with disabilities and not only to children with disabilities. The same applies to paragraph 1 c). In order to avoid confusion, we suggest always to refer to education and not to learning.

EDF considers that the structure of the article is not very clear. In our view, the first paragraph should deal with the right to education and the right to the same quality education as the non-disabled peers. We suggest therefore that the paragraph 2c) is moved to paragraph 1.

Paragraph 2 should refer to the mainstream education system and paragraph 3 to special education.

EDF supports in paragraph 2b) the inclusion of a reference both to the need to have specialised support teachers as well as a general disability awareness training among all education professionals. A special reference to information and communication technologies should also be included in this paragraph.

Paragraph 3d should say “continue to realise the needs of students with disabilities”.

Paragraph 4 should better read “proficient in braille” instead of “fluent in braille” which seems to imply that braille is a language. This paragraph applies both to mainstream education and to special education.

Paragraph 5 of the article should include a non exhaustive list of assistance to be provided to persons with disabilities to ensure their participation in tertiary education and vocational training.

INCLUSION INTERNATIONAL

Article 17 on education does not provide a strong basis for inclusive education with recognition of the needs of individual groups. The Salamanca Statement must be the baseline for a new Convention.

INDIAN NGO CONSULTATIVE MEETING

Draft Article 17

31. The participants suggested addition of a new sub-para under article 17 as 17-6, which should be read as “States parties shall simultaneously promote special education system to meet the specific education needs of respective disability groups.”

INTERNATIONAL SAVE THE CHILDREN ALLIANCE

Article 17
Education and Training

The basic principle is that disabled children and adults, like all persons have a right to education and training. We emphasise the obligation of governments to provide compulsory and quality education for all children and adults.

We stress the fact that education and training is not only important to develop academic and practical skills but equally important to socialise with peers and to participate in society.

We wish to recognise the Salamanca agreement, Dakar agreement and Standard Rules on inclusive education 1. We emphasise the importance of equal access, utility of education and child-focussed methods enabling disabled children, like all children to achieve their full potential. We wish to avoid pre-selected training or any kind of education on the basis of perceived disability instead of the potential of the child.
We stress the importance of transformation of special education towards the preparation for and support of persons with disabilities in inclusive settings and to support the education system to become inclusive for all children and adults with disabilities 2. We want to recognise the ongoing importance of special education and training for those persons who can not fully develop their potential in inclusive settings because of specific learning requirements which can not be reasonably met in mainstream schools. However special education where needed has to be provided within the community and as far as possible within existing school structures.

Suggested changes

17.1 States Parties recognise the right of all children and adults with disabilities to inclusive education. The education and training of students with disabilities shall be directed to:

a. building a society that is inclusive to all

b->c; c->d; d->e

17.2 In realising this right, States Parties shall endeavour to ensure:

a. that all persons with disabilities can participate in inclusive and accessible education in their own community (including access to early childhood and pre-school education)

b. the provision of adequate support for change of the education system, positive attitudes of stakeholders; appropriate training and mentoring of teachers and educational support staff, student centred curriculum, flexible teaching methods, appropriate teaching aids and equipment, alternative and augmentative communication modes, an inclusive physical and learning environment, parent and community involvement , to ensure the full participation of students with disabilities

c. that no person with a disability shall be required to undergo any medical treatment or intervention, to correct, improve or alleviate any actual or perceived disability as a condition to inclusive and full education

17.4->3 States Parties shall ensure that students with communication3 disabilities have the right to education in alternative language and or with alternative communication systems, to become bi-lingual and to learn the communication, learning and mobility skills for inclusive education and full participation within the class or school environment. State Parties shall take appropriate legislative, administrative and other measures for full inclusive education of all students with disabilities by ensuring appropriately skilled teachers and basic additional resources

17.5 States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities shall access secondary and tertiary education, vocational training, adult education and life long learning on an equal basis with others. To that end, States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to persons with disabilities.

Footnotes

1. Inclusive education is about changing schools to accommodate all students irrespective of individual learning needs, it is not about fitting students into existing schools

2. Save the Children has produced ‘Schools for All’ (2002) which is extensively used all around the world and available at www.savethechildren.org.uk/development

3. communication disabilities does not only refer to those persons who are blind and/or deaf, but also to those persons who have a major problem to contact others, to express themselves, to filter and handle information for various reasons (eg. People with autism, severe spasticity, learning and intellectual impairments)

JAPAN DISABILITY FORUM


<Article 17>Education

Footnote 55
The Ad Hoc Committee may wish to consider whether this draft article should cover training more extensively, drawing together the provisions on training in other articles.

JDF’s Comment
Article 17 shall focus upon education, while issue of the training shall be covered by Article 22 (Rights to Work) and other appropriate provisions.


Original Text of the Draft

1 States Parties undertake to ensure that each child with a disability within their jurisdiction shall enjoy, without discrimination of any kind on the basis of disability, the same rights and fundamental freedoms as other children.

Footnote 56

The Ad Hoc Committee may wish to consider whether the focus of the chapeau should be solely on “children”, since other provisions of this draft article refer to “persons” with disabilities.

JDF’s proposed Amendment

The term “progressively” in Draft Article 17(1) shall be deleted. With regard to Footnote 56, the term “children with disabilities” in Article 17(1) shall be replaced by “persons with disabilities” provided that education may include higher education.

Original Text of the Draft

2. In realizing this right, States Parties shall ensure:

(a) That all persons with disabilities can choose inclusive and accessible education in their own community (including access to early childhood and pre-school education)

JDF’s Comment to this part

The phrase in Paragraph 2(a) “that all persons with disabilities can choose inclusive and accessible education” must not be omitted.

Original Text of the Draft

3. States Parties shall ensure that where the general education system does not adequately meet the needs of persons with disabilities special and alternative forms of learning should be made available. Any such special and alternative forms of learning should:

(a) Reflect the same standards and objectives provided in the general education system;

(b) Be provided in such a manner as to allow children with disabilities to participate in the general education system to the maximum extent possible;

(c) Allow a free and informed choice between general and special systems;

(d) In no way limit the duty of States Parties to continue to strive to meet the needs of students with disabilities in the general education system.

Footnote 61

While members of the Working Group considered that choice was an important element of this paragraph, some members considered that the right to education was more important. Other members would have liked greater emphasis on the best interests of the child in this choice.

Different approaches were also identified with respect to setting out the relationship between the provision of specialist education services and the general education system. Some members considered that education of children with disabilities in the general education system should be the rule, and the provision of specialist education services the exception. Others thought that specialist education services should be provided not only where the general education system was inadequate, but should rather be made available at all times without a presumption that one approach was more desirable than the other. Some members of the Working Group, for example, highlighted the need for deaf and blind children to be allowed to be educated in their own groups. If the latter approach were to be taken, the Working Group considered that there should still be an explicit obligation on the State to make the general education system accessible to students with disabilities, without limiting the individual’s ability to choose either the general system or the specialist services.

JDF’s Comment to this part (1)

As to the comparison between the choice and the right to education made in Draft Footnote 61, the essential element of the right to education is “the provision of educational environment in which choice can be made .” (See the underlined portion)

Adequate and appropriate information as to the specialist education services shall be provided to the persons with disabilities and their guardians. Blind students and their guardians should be informed of the services available at schools for the blind, that have blind teachers who can teach Braille. Deaf students and their guardians should be informed of the services available at schools for the deaf, that have deaf teachers who can sign languages.

In addition, schools for the blind as a system should support blind children who are in general schools.

JDF’s Comment to this part (2)

“A free and informed choice (Paragraph (c))” is essential. Since no footnote is provided as to this provision, there should be no controversy. We support the incorporation of this provision in the Convention without any amendment.

Original Text of the Draft

4. States Parties shall ensure that children with sensory disabilities may choose to be taught sign language or Braille, as appropriate, and to receive the curriculum in sign language or Braille. States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure quality education to students with sensory disabilities by ensuring the employment of teachers who are fluent in sign language or Braille.

JDF supports the WFD’s proposal, stating:

Deaf children have the right to receive education in their own groups and to become bilingual in sign language and their national spoken and written language. They also have the right to learn additional foreign languages, both signed and spoken/written. Each state Party shall take legislative, administrative, political and other measures needed to provide quality education using sign language, by ensuring the employment of Deaf teachers and also hearing teachers who are fluent in sign language.

JDF’s Comment to this part (1)

Paragraph 4 lacks accuracy since it covers blindness and deafness, different sort of sensory disabilities, in one provision. Given the characteristic difference between Braille and sign language, they shall be covered by separate provisions.

JDF’s Comment to this part (2)

As to education of deaf children, a bilingual education of both national sign language and spoken/written language. As to education of blind children, it shall be noted that freedom or opportunity of people with low eyesight to use ordinary prints should not be ignored because of an excessive emphasis of the importance of Braille.

Original Text of the Draft

5. States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities may access general tertiary education, vocational training, adult education and lifelong learning on an equal basis with others. To that end, States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to persons with disabilities.

JDF’s proposed Amendment

As to Paragraph 5, the term “vocational training” shall be replaced by “vocational education” with regard to the point that vocational education is needed in latter half of the education period.

LANDMINE SURVIVORS NETWORK

DRAFT ARTICLE 17 COMMENTS

People with disabilities frequently find themselves forced into educational settings not of their choosing and/or often not appropriate to their actual needs, which in turn limit their opportunities to develop their full potential as individuals and to participate fully in society. It is therefore important that Draft Article 17 address the range of issues related to the education of people with disabilities. (For some examples of educational issues of relevance to people with disabilities, Cf. UN Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for People with Disabilities, Rule 6)

Draft Article 17(1) specifically states that the right of all persons with disabilities to education is a right to be achieved “progressively.” Although there are other draft articles in the Working Group text subject to progressive realization, those provisions are not consistently highlighted as such. The Ad Hoc Committee may wish to consider whether it is really necessary for Draft Article 17 to be subject to such treatment.

Footnote 56 notes the use of the term “children” in paragraph (1). Given that educational settings (particularly tertiary education) have relevance to adults as well, the Ad Hoc Committee may wish to examine the references to children throughout this article.

Footnote 59 and paragraph 3(d) both make reference to the “needs” of students and children with disabilities. The Ad Hoc Committee may wish to consider amending this language to instead read “rights and needs.”

Footnote 61 references the discussions about different options regarding mainstream vs. specialist education services. It should be noted that the expectation is that if specialist educational settings are offered, they should not be of a lower standard than the general or mainstream settings. (Cf. UN Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities, Rule 6, para. 8; UNESCO Convention Against Discrimination in Education, Article 5(1)(c))

WORLD BLIND UNION

EDUCATION
Article 17:

Training should be dealt with separated from education.

It is necessary that we speak about education only and do not replace this word the "learning".

The right to lifelong education for PWD:s on equal footing with non-disabled should be included.

Education should cover children and adults on equal footing within the country.

Under para 2 (a), the following words should be included (… can choose inclusive OR SPECIAL (residential) and accessible education in their own community…).

Under para 2 (c), employment of teachers with disabilities should rather be referred to in Article 22 Right to Work.

In para 3, footnote 61 second part it says: “…specialist education services and the general education system…”. “Specialist education service” is wrongly interpret and should be replaced by SPECIAL or RESIDENTIAL education.

Inclusive or special educational must not be seen as, either or, but rather as alternative and complementary. Full inclusion is often wrongly
interpreted to mean full-scale mainstreaming of all students with disabilities in the same class-room, no matter of disability and no matter of the possibility to utilise the lessons. Students who are Deaf, Blind and Deafblind gain more benefit in schools or classes of their own, with teachers and support staffs who are qualified and skilled in sign language, Braille and tactile communication skills.

Further down in footnote 61: “…individual’s ability to choose either the general system or the specialist services.” Education is an obligation and must not be interpreted as “specialist service”.

In para 4 with footnote 63: “…this issue could be addressed in draft Article 13 on freedom of expression and opinion.” This issue should
absolutely be dealt with here and not under Article 13.

WORLD BLIND UNION - INTERNATIONAL DISABILITY ALLIANCE

Draft article 17 - Education

1. States Parties recognise the right of all girls, boys, young people, women and men with disabilities to quality education. With a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, the education of girls, boys, young people, women and men with disabilities shall be directed to:

(a) building a society that is inclusive to all girls, boys, young people, women and men

(b) the full development of the human potential and sense of dignity and self worth, and the strengthening of respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and human diversity;

(c) enabling all persons with disabilities to fully participate effectively in a free and inclusive society;

(d) the development of the individual’s personality, talents and abilities to their fullest potential;

(e) take into account individual learning needs;

2. In realising this right, States Parties shall ensure:

(a) that all girls, boys, young people, women and men with disabilities can choose inclusive and accessible education in their own community including access to early childhood and pre school education;

(b) the provision of required support, including the specialised training of teachers and other educational staff, an accessible curriculum, accessible teaching medium and materials, appropriate assistive devices, alternative and augmentative communication means, alternative learning strategies, universally accessible built environment, or other reasonable accommodations to ensure the full participation of persons with disabilities;

(c) that no child with disabilities is excluded from free and compulsory primary education on account of their disability;

(d) that no person with disability shall be required to undergo any medical treatment or intervention to correct, improve or alleviate any impairment, any actual or perceived disability as a condition of inclusive and full quality education

(e) reflect the same standards and objectives provided in the general education system moving towards national educational plans and curriculums

3. States Parties shall ensure that:

(a) Deaf and deafblind children and young persons have the right to receive education in their own groups and to become bilingual in sign language and their national spoken and written language. They also have the right to learn additional foreign languages, both signed and spoken/written. Each state Party shall take legislative, administrative, political and other measures needed to provide quality education using sign language, by ensuring the employment of Deaf teachers and also hearing teachers who are fluent in sign language

(b) Blind, partially sighted and deafblind children and young persons, have the right to receive education in their own groups and to gain literacy, mathematics, geography and chemistry skills with learning materials, in Braille and or through alternative formats including assistive devises.

Daily life skills and mobility training must be provided parallel with the class room education, in order to gain full independence. This also includes right to an education provided by teachers with competence to teach communication skills and have received training relevant to the specific needs of blind, partially sighted and deafblind persons.

4. States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities shall access secondary and higher education, vocational training, adult education and lifelong learning on an equal basis with others. To that end, States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to persons with disabilities.

WORLD FEDERATION OF THE DEAF

Draft Article 17, Education

Item 4 should be rewritten. WFD proposes that item 4 be divided so that there are separate points for Deaf education in sign language; and a point of its own for Braille and education for blind people. The World Blind Union should write the point for education of blind people.

WFD would like to propose the following as the paragraph regarding education for Deaf people, to be added to Article 17:

Deaf children have the right to receive education in their own groups and to become bilingual in sign language and their national spoken and written language. They also have the right to learn additional foreign languages, both signed and spoken/written. Each state Party shall take legislative, administrative, political and other measures needed to provide quality education using sign language, by ensuring the employment of Deaf teachers and also hearing teachers who are fluent in sign language.

Support for both mother tongue medium education and bilingual teachers is in “The Hague Recommendations Regarding the Education Rights of National Minorities” from the High Commissioner on National Minorities of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (see www.osce.org/hcnm/); and also the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (www.unesco.org ) Education in a Multilingual World, UNESCO Education Position Paper, 2003 and Safeguarding of Endangered Languages.