| Daily
Summary related to Draft Article 24
PARTICIPATION IN CULTURAL LIFE,
RECREATION, LEISURE AND SPORT
Prepared by Landmine Survivors Network
Volume 3, #7
January 13, 2004
Morning Session
Commenced: 10:17 AM
Adjourned: 1:03 PM
RIGHT TO TAKE PART IN CULTURAL LIFE, RECREATION, AND LEISURE
World Federation of the Deaf generally supported the article because
it gave possibilities for a person to develop personality and be part
of society and included a paragraph that supported the language and culture
for the deaf. Paragraph 3, should be elaborate to affirm that general
cultural opportunities should be available to the deaf. In this context,
deaf children who have yet to learn to read in right should also be able
to access national sign language translation for videos and TV programming.
National sign language interpretation should also be provided in general
cultural activities. Allowing for both forms of access would allow deaf
people to create their own cultural activities, but also be able to partake
in general cultural opportunities that are available to the rest of society.
World Federation of the DeafBlind called this article important for the
deaf-blind many of whom are natural artists. Beethoven wrote his most
famous symphonies when he was deaf, and Monet painted some of his best
paintings when he was visually impaired. Because the deafblind do not
have much access to information from the outside, they instead develop
inner-artistic talent and creativity. However in order to develop inner
creativity, deafblind people also have to experience what others have
done. They need to feel and touch the products that have resulted from
the creativity of others. In this sense, museums should also be accessible
to the deafblind.
Japan supported the article in principle but had one suggestion on paragraph
2. As copyright is not only protected by domestic law but also international
law, the phrase “in accordance with international agreements” should be
added to the end of the paragraph to avoid any misunderstanding in interpretation.
For example, although Braille is a rather exceptional case, audio tapes
are provided to both PWD and people without disabilities.
Although Ireland supported the general intent and thrust of the article,
it referred the WG to Article 8e of the EU Draft because it had an issue
with how the first part of the article was formulated. The article was
related to accessibility and reasonable accommodation, the members should
look at it in the context of what has been developed on those concepts.
Ireland shared Japan’s concern on paragraph 2, because though it agreed
with the concept, “intellectual property rights are a minefield in international
law.” Another concern was that paragraph 3 might be better placed in an
article on the recognition of diversity. With regard to paragraph 4, a
great deal of sport/leisure activity is voluntary and independent from
government, such as the Special Olympics. In this context, the wording
of the paragraph should take account of other organizations and associations,
not just government.
The World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry (WNUSP) noted
the relevance of 1(a) to those who have psycho-social disabilities as
it can help them reach the stature of artist and allow for their contributions
to be recognized. Scientific contributions are sometimes included in this
area.
The Inter-American Institute on Disability (IID) said that this article
is important to the integral development of PWD. As noted by WFDB, active
participation in cultural opportunities is necessary for PWD to develop
their own cultural identity and creativity. In order for this to happen,
people with physical disabilities must have physical access to those opportunities,
and those who are deaf and/or blind must be provided with interpretation,
closed captioning, easy to read materials, and/or materials in Braille,
such as Costa Rica has done by adopted legislation requiring disability
access to national nature areas for PWD. As a result of the legislation,
people with physical disabilities can visit volcanoes and blind people
can fully enjoy historic and natural areas. With regard to sports, IID
said that PWD should not only have access to competitions as a spectator
but also sports in general, including equipment, trainers and facilities.
Colombia supported Ireland and IID and said that PWD must be able to
participate in all sport activities. Columbia suggested that 1(b) would
be better placed in Article 15 as it relates to accessibility to information
in alternative formats. Similarly, the question of intellectual property
should be addressed in Article 15.
Thailand echoed previous concerns on the issue of intellectual property,
regardless of its placement the text. Copyright laws are meant to protect
creators but it should not create a disadvantage for any group of people.
In some cases, this law has been used and distorted in such a way that
causes restrictions on PWD, who need access to literature in formats even
if a text was meant to be published in only print. If there is a provision
against modification in copyright laws, it could restrict the access to
alternative formats. The US addressed this with an amendment to copyright
law in 1996 stipulating that transferal to electronic text (so as to provide
an alternative format), will receive copyright exemption. The convention
will need to be very careful with regard to such legalities, but it should
ensure that such laws not bring about unreasonable restrictions on PWD.
Thailand also suggested that the word “tape” should be replaced with “multimedia”
in 1(b) to take into account the needs of the dyslexic, illiterate, and
blind. Concerning sport, although it is true that many organizations are
independent, many receive subsidies from government. To this end, there
is no reason not to mention these organizations in the article.
LSN said that the article was important to both PWD and those who did
not have a disability and noted that for PWD in particular, sports can
be “a fast track to rehabilitation”. As a person who had participated
in the 1996 Summer Paralympics in Atlanta, he noted that while the Olympic
games are seen by millions, the Paralympics are seen only by a few hundred.
LSN suggested that four points be considered on this issue. (1) International
sport activities for the disabled and non-disabled should be merged; discrimination
should not be justified by the fact that disabled athletes also compete
among themselves. The national teams should be composed of both sectors
in one tournament with separate events. This will help to raise awareness
and help remove stereotyping regarding the capabilities of people with
disabilities and helps promote the sports of people with disabilities.
(2) Disabled children should not be prevented from participating in sports
and cultural activities in school. (3) Countries should take positive
measures to attract PWD to participate in sports. (4) Sport clubs should
have special activities for the disabled, even if they cater to the non-disabled.
There should not be separate clubs for the disabled and non-disabled.
Jamaica commented that the hospitality industry incorporates all factors
of the hotel industry and tourist trade. Access to culture, recreation,
and sport opportunities can create economic empowerment if necessary support
is available to PWD. In this light, sporting activities for the disabled
are important, if rehabilitation and incorporation into the larger society
is to take place. International cooperation is important in this article
and should not be limited to resource/financial support. International
institutions (such as the International Olympic Committee, and the International
Cricket Union) should have a role in developing sporting activities for
PWD (irrespective of disability).
Canada concurred with the comments made by Japan and Ireland on intellectual
property rights in paragraph 2 and said that both Colombia and Japan’s
suggestions could be a helpful first step in dealing with this issue.
Also, because paragraph 4 is trying to capture the idea that PWD should
have equal opportunity to participate in these activities; the phrase
“equal access” should be added to 4(b) and 4(c). Provisions regarding
how sporting organizations should be organized should be avoided, as this
would go beyond the mandate. As a general comment, the use of the world
“recognition” should be avoided because it could create unintended legal
implications.
China said this article should ensure the equal footing of the disabled
in these areas of activities and noted the positive effect of participation
on self-image. In addition to emphasizing non-discrimination, the article
should mandate that States ensure disabled participation in cultural life
and leisure (ex. Special Olympics) and should provide support for such
activities.
Inclusion International emphasized the talent of those who are intellectually
disabled and their ability to enrich society with creativity. In this
regard, cultural life should not be limited to academic and sophisticated
topics. Though movements like the Special Olympics are necessary, people
with intellectual disabilities should also participate with non-disabled
people in order to learn new skills. To this end “segregated sports are
fine” but the article should ensure that PWD can compete with the non-disabled
as well.
WFD noted the importance of dealing with international copyright laws
as this would also protect and cover professional artists with disabilities.
Disabled people should have access to education so that they can pursue
any profession, including in the arts. If facilities are provided to allow
this, there are unlimited opportunities for PWD to pursue these careers,
just as a deaf actor who received an Oscar has done. With regard to paragraph
3, the wording should be changed For example, some countries have a national
deaf theater and national TV broadcasting companies and journalists who
express themselves with sign language.
The Coordinator said the issue of copyrights clearly needed to be resolved,
but as Ireland said, the WG does not have expertise in this field. The
issue should be identified for the AHC to deal with.
Uganda commented that as many theaters and stadiums in developing countries
are not accessible and the article on accessibility should also apply
to these facilities. Issues of accessibility should also be considered
when developing new facilities. The article should also do more than recognize
that PWD should partake in such activities, but mandate that State Parties
should promote these activities to the disabled. For example, in many
countries, the government promotes national sport teams at a regional
and international level. Disabled games and sports should receive equal
funding and promotion.
Mexico said that the article should eliminate barriers and ensure equal
access to these activities for PWD. It should also refer to culture, recreation,
tourism, and sport. Sports also should be promoted at an early age for
PWD. In this context, Mexico supported the use of incentives to reach
high level of competition.
WFB raised the problem of the lack of commercial interest in technologies
that would allow blind people enjoy movies in a language that they do
not speak. These interests lie in copyright laws, which restrict the access
of the blind to such information. The article should address this problem.
WFB supported Thailand’s position on the use of the word “multimedia.”
and reminded delegates of the existence of disabled sport organizations,
such as the International Blind Sports Organization (IBSO), which are
a good way for disabled people to take part in sports. More generally,
the WFB commented that because many issues have been referred to the AHC,
many NGOs will not have a chance to weigh in on the issues in which they
have expertise.
Lebanon supported the proposals made by LSN and Mexico and suggested
that the word “including” be replaced with “and” in paragraph 4, because
sport activities are not only leisure activities.
Disability Australia Limited supported the views expressed by LSN and
Lebanon and suggested that the chapeau of the article be elaborated to
qualify the statement and apply the principles of non-discrimination and
equality. With reference to sports, there has been experience of carrying
out reasonable accommodations for PWD in this area, but the absence of
standards of adjustments makes things difficult. For instance, many blind
people play golf and different solutions have been developed to allow
them to play. However, there is no exchange on these parameters/solutions,
and the presence of different solutions to meet their needs prevents participation
in main events and competitions, even at a national level. To this end,
wording should be added to the text to reflect the intent of the paragraph
on sports and “encourage the development of standards to allow for reasonable
adjustments.” A formal mechanism of international cooperation is needed
to exchange knowledge and experience on the issue of adjustments for PWD
in sports.
Volume 3, #9
January 15, 2004
Morning Session
Commenced: 10:30 AM
Adjourned: 1:03 PM
PARTICIPATION IN CULTURAL LIFE, RECREATION, LEISURE AND SPORT
The Coordinator referred delegates to A/AC.265/2004/WG/CRP.3/Add.21 for
this discussion.
Landmine Survivors Network (LSN) proposed that paragraph 4 be changed
to say “State Parties shall recognize the right of PWD to participate
on an equal basis with others in recreation, leisure and sport activities.”
In order to make clear that the article was not calling for disabled and
non disabled people to compete in the same events, “mainstream” should
be replaced with “fullest extent possible” in 4(a).
Disabled People International (DPI) said the text should make specific
and direct reference to the need for disabled children to have the opportunity
to take part in sport, leisure, and recreational activities in school.
This will nurture acceptance of disability at a young age.
Ireland referred members to Article 5(a) in the EU Draft because the
implications of paragraph 3 had to be considered. The question is whether
paragraph 3 should be in the article on education or in the more general
article on equality before the law.
China proposed that “and in sport activities designed especially for
PWD” be added after “international levels” in 4(a). It is not reasonable
to think that all PWD can participate in the Olympics. Games for the disabled
are also important.
Coordinator noted that paragraph 4 referred to mainstreaming, which is
a slightly different concept.
Japan said the article was too prescriptive. Television programs, theaters,
and film companies are usually commercially run. Was it possible to ask
State Parties to ask commercial entities to provide for the elements in
1(c)? Paragraph 3 singles out deaf people. The culture of Braille should
also be discussed in addition to the culture of sign language. This Convention
is for all PWD.
Disability Australia Limited said the reference to mainstream sports
because some PWD compete with the non-disabled almost at par. The article
should promote both special sports and access to mainstream ones with
support. In response to Japan, Braille is a written script and does not
have the status of being a language.
World Federation of the Deaf (WFD) echoed that sign language was a language.
Interpretation to the language in cultural and recreation settings is
a way to ensure access to it. Providing interpretation is not a way of
giving more rights to deaf people. UNESCO has issued a new report on “Preserving
and Promoting Cultural Diversity” which states that minority languages
should be promoted and protected. Sign language is mentioned as a minority
language and this report should be linked to the article.
Thailand supported equal opportunity for PWD to participate in mainstream
sports but also supported the concern China raised. Many sports are not
offered as mainstream sports and are specific to disability groups. These
sports should also be promoted. In Paragraph 3, sign language is comparable
to other languages while Braille is comparable to print. Both should be
recognized but not in the same manner. 1(c) should be more flexible because
some theaters and movies are offered by the private sector. The United
States’ FCC regulations, however, are a good example on how the State
can enforce regulations to ensure access. Such access is technically possible
but requires commitment and understanding.
Ireland clarified that it was not in favor or against paragraph 3, but
wanted to study the implications of it and where it should be placed in
the Convention.
Back to Draft Article
|
