|
Back to: Third Session of the Ad Hoc Committee
Daily summary of discussions
Daily summary of discussions related to
Preamble
UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities
Third session of the Ad Hoc Committee - Daily Summary
A service made possible by Landmine Survivors Network *
Volume 4, #9
June 4, 2004
MORNING SESSION
Commenced: 10:17 AM
Recessed for informals: 10:48 AM
Reconvened: 11:15 AM
Adjourned: 12:55 PM
Ireland (EU) circulated its proposed amendments. The
Convention Title should read: “International Convention on the Full
and Equal Enjoyment of all Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by
Persons with Disabilities,” in order to focus on those ideas. In Preamble
(c), (P(c)), because PWD are already guaranteed the full enjoyment of
human rights under other Conventions, it proposed replacing “the need
for PWD to be” with “and that PWD are.” The revised paragraph would
read: “Reaffirming the universality, indivisibility and interdependence
of all human rights and fundamental freedoms and that PWD are guaranteed
their full enjoyment without discrimination.” It proposed deleting from
P(d), “and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights
of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families,” because this
has not reached the same status as the others listed and is not a core
human rights document. In P(f), it proposed replacing “violation of”
with “affront to” because violations refer to rights not dignity. It
suggested replacing, in the first clause of P(h), “the efforts and actions”
with “these various instruments and undertakings.” It proposed replacing
P(i) with the language of footnote 4: “Recognising the importance of
international cooperation for improving the living conditions of PWD
in every country, in particular in the developing countries.” In P(j),
it suggested removing “and the eradication of poverty” because P(j)
already discusses significant advances in the human, social, and economic
development which includes eradicating poverty. In P(m), it proposed
the deletion of the words “forms of,” and inclusion of “sexual orientation”
in the list of multiple or aggravated discrimination. It suggested addressing
the particular problems women and girls with disabilities face in P(n)(bis):
“Recognising that women and girls with disabilities are often subject
to multiple discrimination and therefore suffer particular disadvantage.”
Additionally it proposed moving the first sentence of Article 12 into
the Preamble as P(n)(ter): “Recognising that PWD, in particular women
and girls, are at greater risk, both within and outside the home, of
violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment
or exploitation, including sexual exploitation and abuse.” The EU suggested
revising P(o) to read: “Recognising that a disproportionately large
number of PWD live in conditions of poverty and mindful of the need
to alleviate the negative impact of poverty on PWD.” In P(r), it suggested
replacing “the human rights of” with “the enjoyment of human rights
by” on the first line because existing human rights documents already
deal with the rights themselves, while this Convention deals with PWD
enjoying those rights; and deleting the word “social” on the third line
because there is no need to qualify the term “disadvantage”. It proposed
adding a new paragraph, P(s), as follows: “Recognising the particular
circumstances of the child with disabilities and that the child with
disabilities should enjoy the right to a full and inclusive life in
conditions that ensure dignity, promote self reliance and autonomy and
facilitate their active participation in the community.” It does not
support a separate article, but believes it is important in the Preamble.
Chile was not ready to address the Preamble, but commented
on the importance of recognising Conference against Racism, Xenophobia
and other Related Forms of Discrimination, which gave rise to this Convention.
In P(o), dealing with poverty, it proposed adding a reference to the
Millennium Development Goals (MDG) related to poverty. It also recommended
adding a reference to human development indices, since the Convention
is designed to raise the development indices of the entire population,
particularly of PWD.
The Holy See recommended, in the interest of completeness,
amending P(a) by inserting “worth” after “inherent dignity.” This wording
is taken from Preamble paragraph 2 of the UN Charter.
Thailand supported the WG Preamble, and suggested
adding to P(g), after “recognizing further the diversity of PWD,“ the
words "their needs and requirements.” It suggested changing "economical"
to "economic."
Russian Federation (RF) commented that the draft Convention
and Preamble only talks about rights of PWD, followed by the obligations
of States. The ICESCR takes into account “that each individual has obligations
with respect to other individuals and the society to which he belongs,
should seek encouragement and compliance of the rights set forth in
this Covenant.” Similarly, this Convention’s Preamble should recognize
the obligations or responsibilities of PWD. It also proposed inclusion
of ICESCR, Article 2 in the Preamble: “Each State must take full account
within its existing resources of measures to ensure gradual, full implementation
of the rights set forth in this Covenant by all possible and appropriate
means.”
Syria proposed an amendment to P(i), similar to the
EU's proposed amendment: “Recognizing that international cooperation
is important in improving the conditions and circumstances of PWD, especially
in the developing countries.” Because the present draft does not include
the realities and concerns of many delegations, the words “and foreign
occupation of the other’s territories and properties” should be inserted
after “armed conflict in P(p)."
Kenya proposed three new paragraphs. The first would
read: “Recognizing that many persons with disabilities suffer double
or multiple discrimination because of their status as children, women,
refugees or internally displaced, older persons, people living in rural
areas and people living in informal settlements.” The second would read:
“Noting with concern that there exists, in various parts of the world,
harmful cultural practices and beliefs that have continued to impact
negatively on the rights of PWD.” The third would read: “Recognizing
that HIV/AIDS impacts negatively on PWD in all spheres of life.”
Sierra Leone pointed out that procedural discussions
are necessary because they guide the AHC's actions and may help to avoid
problems. It supported the EU's proposed Convention title change, so
that it would read “The international convention on the protection,
promotion, and full enjoyment of the rights and dignity of PWD.” In
P(c), the words “be guaranteed” should be deleted. P(d) should remain
as it stands, notwithstanding the footnote and comments of the EU as
to the status of Convention on Migrant workers. It supported Thailand’s
proposal for P(g), and the EU’s proposals for P(i) and P(o). In P(m),
“age” should be inserted after “language,” because children tend to
be marginalized. In P(p), “situations of” should be deleted, “s” should
be added to “conflict,” making it “conflicts,” and “human” should be
deleted. In P(r), “full enjoyment of the rights of PWD” should be inserted
after “specifically with the” and insert “and economic” after “profound
social.” It supported the EU’s proposed P(s) on children, in order to
create linkage between the Preamble and text; it supports a separate
article on children as well. In the absence of a consensus on separate
articles for women and the other groups that have been discussed, these
might be included in one paragraph in the Preamble to capture the substance
of these concerns.
Israel stated the Preamble sets the tone for the Convention
and assists in the construction of other instruments. In the title,
it is crucially important to retain “dignity” in the title, which can
be in addition to, but not in place of, “equality"; dignity is
a broader term, while equality is the major issue facing PWD. In P(d),
it supported the EU’s proposal to delete the reference to the Convention
on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of
Their Families, as this does not rank as a leading human rights convention.
P(m) should include “age.” It is necessary to mention children, women
and girls with disabilities in the Preamble to create a link with other
Conventions. However, it would not be advisable to include these in
the operative provisions of the Convention because that may interfere
with other Conventions. It proposed an additional, more explicit paragraph,
as follows: “Recognizing that a comprehensive, integral, interdisciplinary
approach to issues facing PWD is essential to the achievement of full
and effective equality for PWD.”
Morocco supported retaining the reference to the International
Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and
Members of their Families in P(d). In P(g), “disabilities” should be
made singular, amending the phrase to “persons with disability.”
Korea supported the EU’s proposal for a shorter Convention
title, which fully captures the spirit and purpose of this Convention.
In P(l), “and take leading roles” should be inserted after “actively
involved.”
Brazil supported the EU’s proposals to add sexual
orientation to P(m) and other amendments to P(o).
South Africa proposed added in P(c), “any form of”
before "discrimination.” P(g) should should be changed to “Recognizing
that PWD are not a homogenous group, but are diverse in their own right,”
because disability is part of humanity. In P(h), “equitable” should
be inserted before “participation as equal members of society.” P(i)
should read: “Emphasizing the importance of international cooperation
to promote the full enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms
of PWD.” In P(l), “especially those directly concerning them” should
be deleted, as it is extraneous and presents the risk of involving PWD
only in disability matters. P(p) should be amended to read: “Concerned
that situations of armed conflict cause disabilities and have devastating
consequences for the human rights of PWD.” In P(q), “political” should
be inserted after “physical” and “and cultural” should be inserted after
“economic,” because this captures the language and values of the ICCPR
and ICESCR.
Canada supported the EU's and Israel’s proposals to
delete the Migrant Workers Convention from P(d) referring to footnote
2. In P(m), “severe or multiple disabilities and of” should be deleted,
as it creates a hierarchy within the disability community and echoes
a medical model rather than a social model of disability. The word “ethnic,”
should be inserted after “national” in P(m), in order to bring it into
line with Article 2.1 of the CRC. It supported the EU’s proposal for
P(r), but the words “with equal opportunities” should be deleted, as
its meaning is unclear. Canada may have additional comments later.
Yemen recommended a clearer re-wording of the Preamble
and would submit proposed text later. In P(d), it is not enough to mention
CRC and CEDAW; there should also be specific reference to the conditions
in which WWD and CWD are living. In P(i), it is important to highlight
international cooperation, both here and in the Convention text. In
P(m), Yemen suggested deleting “severe and multiple disabilities” to
eliminate redundancy. In P(p), it highlighted that the current language
does not reflect the situation on the ground and recommended adding
“and foreign occupation of territories and assets of others” after “armed
conflict,” as proposed by Syria, because foreign occupation creates
conditions in which PWD cannot exercise their rights. At the end of
P(p), it suggested adding “and an increase in their number.” In P(q),
it suggested adding “political and cultural” after “economic,” and deleting
“including information and communication," because it is included
in the concept of culture.
Cuba made some proposals, reserving the option to
make future proposals. It supported P(c) as currently drafted. It supported
Chile's proposal to include an acknowledgment of Convention's origins
at the World Conference on Racism. It proposed adding a new paragraph
following P(d), which reads: “Recognizing that the exercise of the right
to development, as a universal inalienable right, is a prerequisite
to the integral and sustainable meeting of the needs of PWD.” In P(i),
it proposed adding “all” before “human rights.” Similarly in P(j), it
proposed adding “all” before “their human rights.” In P(m), it supported
deleting “severe or multiple disabilities” to avoid making distinctions
among PWD. In P(n) and P(r), it suggested adding “all” before “human
rights.” In P(o), it proposed replacing “mindful of the need” with “concerned
by the need” because the problem of poverty should be addressed with
the same degree of concern as persons in armed conflict; and it proposed
replacing “alleviate” with the stronger term “eradicate.” It stated
that the Preamble should address the need for solidarity, both “nationally
and internationally.”
India proposed amending P(g), because the word “diversity”
could mean range of either disabilities or social and economic conditions;
it suggested new text: “Recognizing the wide range of abilities, skills,
functional competencies and concerns of PWD.” In P(I), it suggested
replacing the word “emphasizing” with “recognizing” to strengthen international
cooperation. It reiterated its support for a separate Article on international
cooperation. In P(l), after “PWD," it proposed inserting “and their
families.” In P(o), it suggested inserting at the beginning the words:
“Mindful, that conditions of poverty can exacerbate the incidents and
situations of PWD.”
Palestine emphasized the need to highlight “the rights
of different groups” in the Preamble because some PWD are more vulnerable,
but it does not want to create discrimination between PWD. It supported
the proposals by Syria and Yemen to add the concept of foreign occupation
and armed conflict since these lead to increases in the number of PWD,
and occupation deprives PWD of certain services and development.
Namibia suggested adding “United Nations” before “Standard
Rules” in P(e). In P(i), it suggested deleting “emphasizing” as India
proposed, and adding a reference to the principles of international
cooperation. In P(j), it suggested replacing “made by” with “of.” In
P(l), it suggested deleting the last part of the paragraph, “especially
those concerning them”; PWD can be involved with all kinds of decisionmaking.
In P(m), it supported deletion of “severe and multiple disabilities,”
retaining only “PWD.”
Pakistan suggested deleting “comprehensive and integral”
from the title to conform with other conventions and to avoid qualifying
the Convention’s scope. In P(b), it suggested deleting “and in the International
Covenants on Human Rights” since it has not been universally accepted.
In P(d), it proposed replacing “reaffirming” with “recalling” since
not all Conventions have universal acceptance; but Pakistan stated that
all of these instruments should remain in the paragraph. In P(g), it
agreed with India’s proposal, except instead of “diversity of persons”
it suggested “recognizing further the diverse nature of disabilities.”
In P(i), it agreed with the need for a separate Article on international
cooperation, because an international Convention needs international
cooperation for implementation. In P(l), Pakistan supported India’s
proposal to include families, and proposed adding “and caregivers.”
In P(m), it proposed not listing all forms of discrimination because
it cannot be exhaustive and may lead to division or, if there is a list,
it should be in line with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
In P(r), it proposed changing the beginning to: “Convinced that a Convention
addressing specifically the rights and dignity of PWD”; and at end of
the paragraph, it would substitute “spheres” with “activities.”
Argentina supported Morocco's amendment to delete
“persons with” in P(g). P(h) has a translation error in Spanish. Paragraph
P(i) should be replaced with footnote 4. In P(m), it suggested deleting
“severe or” because this term is unclear. In P(o), it suggested a revision
as follows: “Mindful of the need to alleviate the negative impact of
poverty on causing disabilities and the quality of life of PWD.”
Lebanon agreed with the Syria’s proposal to add “foreign
occupation” to P(p), and agreed with the proposed amendment by Sierra
Leone. In P(i), it emphasized the importance of including international
cooperation in the Preamble; international cooperation offers benefits
to all countries. After the words “international cooperation” should
be inserted “because of its multi-faceted benefits to all member countries”;
after “enjoyment” should be added “all PWD”; and before “human rights”
should be added the word “all.” In P(g), it agreed with the addition
proposed by Thailand and Morocco. In P(j), it proposed replacing “societies”
with “communities.” In P(m), it agreed with the proposal by Canada and
Yemen to delete “severe and multiple”; and it proposed adding “and the
kind and degree of disability” after “language,” and deleting “multiple
or aggravated” before “forms of discrimination."
* Disclaimer
|
