 |
Regional Workshop towards a
Comprehensive and Integral International Convention on Protection and Promotion of the
Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities |
 |
|
Regional Workshop towards a
Comprehensive and Integral International Convention on Protection and Promotion of the
Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities |
|
| Home : Final Report UNITED
NATIONS REPORT OF REGIONAL WORKSHOP TOWARDS A COMPREHENSIVE AND INTEGRAL CONVENTION ON THE PROTECTION AND PROMOTION OF THE RIGHTS AND DIGNITY OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIESBANGKOK, THAILAND,
|
 |
The Convention should build on human rights laid down in the existing UN human rights treaties and norms. |
|
Human rights are universal, indivisible, inter-related, and interdependent and fully apply to people with disability notwithstanding the development of this Convention. The crucial role of this Convention is to articulate how the specific human rights protections required by people with disability will apply. |
|
The Convention should aim to achieve the highest levels of the full range of human rights for people with disability. |
|
The most fundamental elements of the Convention cannot be subject to a State reservation. This would be incompatible with the purpose of the Convention. The fundamental elements of the Convention must be clearly identified. |
|
Detailed implementation guidelines should be developed to elaborate the obligations set out in the Convention. |
|
There is a need to stress pro-active obligations on State Parties to take legislative and administrative measures to ensure equality of opportunity and outcome for people with disability. There is a need to clarify the different types of active measures that might be necessary to achieve the obligations set out in the Convention. Such active measures would not be regarded as discriminatory. |
|
A broad, inclusive and flexible definition of disability, which accommodates evolving understandings of that term, should be included in the Convention. |
|
A definition of accessibility is required in the Convention. This definition should be comprehensive, based on the proposed definition put forward by the Bangkok Forum on Women and Disability,[1] incorporating issues from the "Manila Declaration on Accessible ICT",[2] from the "Bangkok Recommendations" on the elaboration of an international convention,[3] and from the Panel presentation to the second session of the Ad Hoc Committee on "New and emerging approaches to definitions of disability.[4] |
|
States parties should recognize that women and girls with disability may be subject to multiple discrimination and that focused, gender-specific measures and protections will be necessary to ensure that women and girls enjoy human rights and fundamental freedom on the basis of equality of outcomes with men. |
|
States parties should recognize that:
may be subject to multiple discrimination and that focused, population group specific measures and protections will be necessary to ensure that these groups enjoy human rights and fundamental freedom on the basis of equality of outcomes with others. |
|
The Preamble ought to refer to the potential and actual contribution made by people with disability to the overall economic, social, cultural, civil and political well-being and diversity of the community. |
|
The Preamble should include a statement about the critical importance of the inclusion of people with disability as the basis for policy and program development, and the economic and financial advantages of inclusion. |
|
People with disability should enjoy the same rights as people without disability at the standards prevailing in that State. |
|
The role of international cooperation in implementation of this Convention was noted. Disability impact assessments, and disability action plans, should be key criteria in the grant of aid to States. |
|
State parties must recognize the human rights of people with disability, and family members of people with disability, and their supporters, to form independent associations for representation and self-help. State parties must provide recognition and financial support to such associations as a pre-condition to the realization of the civil and political rights of people with disability. |
|
This Convention should include "achievement of independent community living" in the Preamble as a major cross-cutting goal. Independent community living should be defined in detail. |
|
An appropriate definition of ‘informed consent’ ought to be included in the definition section of the Convention. |
|
Review and monitoring of the application of the Convention should be timely and regular. The review process should be informed by people with disability, recognizing the vital role played by people with disability and their organizations. |
|
States parties shall establish a framework to monitor, promote and enforce compliance with this Convention, which includes an independent national institution which follows the "Paris Principles".[5] That independent national institution will be established in consultation with people with disability and organizations representing people with disability. |
|
Statistical resources should include both quantitative and qualitative data for monitoring and reporting purposes. Data collection should have scientific rigor and international comparability. |
|
Intergovernmental organizations and corporations should recognize and respect the human rights of people with disability set out in this Convention. |
|
In relation to the articles concerning individual communication procedures and inquiry procedures, the Group failed to reach consensus, although the majority felt that these articles should be included in the Convention text. Therefore, this issue will be brought to the attention of participants in the forthcoming intergovernmental meetings (including the meeting to be held in Beijing, 4-7 Nov. 2003) and the Working Group commissioned by the Ad hoc Committee. |
The Workshop had a working paper and three basic documents for its consideration:
(1) "Bangkok Discussion Draft on the elaboration of a comprehensive and integral convention on the promotion and protection of the rights and persons with disabilities." Working paper for Regional Workshop towards a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities (Bangkok, 14-17 October 2003);
(2) "Bangkok Recommendations on the Elaboration of a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention to Promote and Protect the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities." Report of the Expert Group Meeting and Seminar on an International Convention to Protect and Promote the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities (Bangkok, 2 to 4 June 2003);
(3) "Statement of Recommendations" of the UNESCAP Workshop on Women and Disability: Promoting Full Participation of Women with Disabilities in the Process of Elaboration on an International Convention to Promote and Protect the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities (Bangkok, 18-22 August 2003);
(4) "Reconsidering the disability dimension in development cooperation activities; building national capacities for full participation and equality." Basic document for the Regional Workshop towards a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities (Bangkok, 14-17 October 2003).
The Workshop also had contributed and participation papers to facilitate its consideration of the agenda; the list of Workshop documents is presented in Annex III.
Under item 1 of the provisional agenda, Ms. Keiko Okaido, Deputy Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP) opened the Regional Workshop. (A summary of her remarks is presented in the summary of proceedings.)
Under the item 2 of the provisional agenda, Workshop participants elected the following officers by acclimation:
Chairperson: Ms Venus Ilagan, Chairperson, Disabled People International, Republic of the Philippines;
Vice Chairperson: Mr Frank Hall-Bentick, International Representative of Disability Australia;
Mr Zhifei Shen, Vice President, China Disabled Person's Federation;
Mr Eiichi Takada, Honorary Board Member of the World Federation of the Deaf, Japan;
Mr Muhammad Majid Qureshi, Director, Special Education, Pakistan;
Rappoteour: Mr Majid Turmusani, Ministry of Martyrs and Disabled, Afghanistan;
Ms. Heidi Forrest, President of People with Disability Australia;
Mr Ryosuke Matsui, Vice President for Asia and the Pacific, Rehabilitation International, Japan.
The Chairperson invited the views of participants on the provisional agenda, which they adopted as the programme of work..
A representative of the Government of Japan, Mr Toshihisa Takata (Permanent Representative of Japan to UNESCAP), presented the keynote statement to the Workshop.
Mr. Takata welcomed participants to the Regional Workshop. He stated that his Government attaches great importance to the promotion and protection of the rights of persons with disabilities was pleased to assist the current expert meeting. He recalled that his Government had welcomed the consensus decision of the second session of the Ad Hoc Committee to establish a Working Group to prepare and present a draft text to the third session of the Ad Hoc Committee. He stated the determination of his Government to make active contributions in its capacity as a member of the Working Group and that his Government was committed to the effective involvement of the non-governmental community in the process of elaborating a comprehensive and integral convention on the rights of persons with disabilities as well. In that regard he noted that an attorney, expert in international law and disability policy and a person with a disability, had been a member of the Delegation of Japan to the second session of the Ad Hoc Committee and was also a participant in the current expert meeting. Mr. Takata expressed his best wishes for productive deliberations and a successful outcome of the Regional Workshop.
A representative of the UNESCAP secretariat provided an introduction to the purposes and expected outcome the Workshop. She stated that participants were expected to develop the "Bangkok draft proposed elements" and to formulate a set of "General Recommendations" on elements and principles for the "Bangkok draft proposed elements" for adoption as a Workshop outcome. She added that after the Workshop a set of General Recommendations and further suggestions on the "Bangkok draft proposed elements" will be incorporated into the "Bangkok Discussion Draft" with the assistance of resource persons and facilitators to the UNESCAP secretariat, which will be made available to the Beijing Regional Seminar on the Comprehensive and Integral Convention, to be held from 4 to7 November 2003 with the participation of high-ranking governmental officials who are expected to review, discuss and formulate a policy-oriented statement on the question of the elaboration of a comprehensive and integral convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Both the "Bangkok Discussion Draft (version 2)" and the statement expected to be adopted at the Beijing Regional Seminar will be submitted to the Ad Hoc Committee, in accordance with General Assembly resolution 57/229, which invited the views of Governments and the United Nations system on the elaboration of a new international convention on the rights of persons with disabilities; copies of these materials will be made available by UNESCAP for the information and comment as appropriate to the Special Rappoteur on Disability of the Commission for Social Development, Sheika Hissa bint khalifa bin Hamad Al-Thani as well as to the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat.
Concerning modalities of reviewing and elaborating the Bangkok Discussion Draft, one participant noted that since each country had its own experiences and views on the process of elaborating the new international convention, it would not be realistic to consider the draft text of the meeting to be the final draft of a convention. She noted in this regard that her office had only recently received the "Bangkok Discussion Draft" and had not had the time to review the paper in detail; she expressed the view that the Workshop discussions might better be considered to be "brainstorming" on a draft text of elements of a convention. In her view, the new convention should reflect rights based approaches; its content should be well-balanced, to obtain wide support, be consistent and harmonize with other human rights instruments, and allow appropriate flexibility in the treatment of economic and social rights.
The representative of UNESCAP thanked the participant for her thoughtful comments and recalled that the current meeting is an expert consultation and not an intergovernmental meeting; participants were invited in their individual capacity. Comments of meeting participants would be incorporated as appropriate in the outcome document of the meeting.
Several participants stated agreement with the proposed organization of work and complimented UNESCAP on the "Bangkok Discussion Draft". Some expressed the view that one task of the meeting would be to seek ways to summarize and shorten the "Bangkok draft proposed elements". Other participants expressed that view that the question of persons with psychiatric, intellectual disabilities and children and elderly with disabilities should be reflected in the consideration of the Bangkok Discussion Draft.
Under agenda item 6, Ms. Susan Appleyard (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) provided an introduction to United Nations human rights treaties and the treaty body system in the light of the "Bangkok Discussion Draft".
Ms. Appleyard described several common characteristics of United Nations treaty bodies: appointment of individual experts, periodic meetings held in
Geneva or New York two to three times per year to review reports of State parties and related communications, State Parties submit reports to the respective treaty body every two to five years, depending on the particular human rights treaty, adoption by the respective treaty body of specific recommendations on future action by State parties, and adoption of "General Comments" which explain specific meaning of articles in the respective human rights treaty. She then described the individual communication and inquiry procedures of United Nations human rights treaties.
Ms. Appleyard observed that the "Bangkok Discussion Draft" includes provision for establishment of a separate treaty body – a committee - although the human rights treaty monitoring system is an issue being addressed in the current reform of United Nations procedures. Treaty body reporting also is a subject of debate internationally, particularly as this pertains to redundancy in preparation and submission of periodic reports of State Parties.
Ms. Appleyard provided a brief introduction to the work of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights its Special Procedures. She noted the need to incorporate the disability dimension in mainstream Special Procedures and that disability issues be better reflected in annual reports submitted to the Commission on Human Rights and in the country missions.
(i) Overview of developments towards a proposed convention and implications for building national capacities for equalization of opportunities
Under the agenda item 7a, Mr. Clinton Rapley(resource person) reviewed historical developments towards a proposed convention with its relations to concerns of development and capacity building. He recalled that the process had been going on for 15 years, beginning with a United Nations expert meeting (Stockholm, 17-22 August 1987), which considered progress in the implementation of the United Nations Decade of Disabled Persons (1983-1992) and recommended adoption of a convention on the rights of persons with disabilities by the General Assembly. The question was considered by the General Assembly in 1987 and 1989, which ultimately led to the decision to adopt in 1993 the Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities". The Rules provide normative and technical guidance and include a monitoring mechanism to measure progress in implementation and appointment of a Special Rapporteur by the Secretary-General – the first of whom was Mr. Bengt Lindqvist (Sweden).
The landmark decision of the General Assembly to actually initiate a process of elaborating a comprehensive and integral convention was based on the statement of President Vincente Fox of Mexico where he noted that if processes of global development were to be sustainable and just, no one should be excluded. To that end the delegation of Mexico was proposing the elaboration of a new international convention to promote and protect the rights of persons with disabilities in 2002.
The Ad Hoc Committee of the General Assembly invited inputs from expert meetings at interregional and regional levels to contribute to a process towards a proposed convention, but the focus of the technical exchanges has been mainly on structure and proposed content of the new convention, with little attention directed national capacity building.
In this regard, absence of persons with disabilities in any of the eight development goals of the Millennium Declaration, lack of efforts to incorporate the disability dimension in mainstream coordination tools of the United Nations system for development cooperation were mentioned. Categorizing persons with disabilities as members of a vulnerable group in guidelines for preparing the "Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers" of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund was cited as yet another problematic phenomenon that leads to invisibility and perpetuation of insufficient capacity building for persons with disabilities.
He concluded that reinforcing the disability dimension in mainstream development cooperation activities in order to empower and building capacities of persons with disabilities to participate on the basis of equality in social life and development ultimately is related to progress in the elaboration of a comprehensive and integral convention on the rights of persons with disabilities.
In the discussion some participants questioned why persons with disabilities are absent in major policy documents. In reply it was noted that the General Assembly would consider a major review of progress in implementation of the development goals of the Millennium Declaration, at which time interested Governments could raise the point and seek appropriate adjustments to these texts. One participant noted a paradigm shift in approaches to advancement of persons with disabilities in which some Governments wish to focus on human rights approaches, which assume participation in development, while other Government are concerned with developmental approaches to advancement of persons with disabilities and promotion of their rights.
ii) Report on the Bangkok Recommendations and later developments
Under the agenda item 7b,Professor Andrew Byrnes (Centre for Public and International Law, Faculty of Law, Australian National University) made a presentation covering 1) significance of the Bangkok Recommendations, 2) nature, structure of the Discussion draft, 3) advantages/disadvantages of partially reiterating existing rights in the Discussion draft.
As to the significance of the Bangkok Recommendations, he said that the Bangkok Recommendations underlined a pressing need for new convention and it outlined a possible structure for and contents of a new proposed convention. An important underlying principle set out there was to reaffirm existing human rights and filling in inadequacies of those rights by tailoring them into specific situations of persons with disabilities.
On the nature and structure of the Discussion draft, he explained that it was based on the Bangkok Recommendations and composed of six parts. Though 85 percent of the rights might be reiterations of existing rights in other treaties, some provisions such as "Rights of Access" were introduced as innovation.
He articulated a number of advantages/disadvantages of partially reiterating existing rights in the Discussion draft. The advantages included increased acceptability to governments, the application of existing international jurisprudence and reporting on disability being easier, and reaffirming the comprehensive nature of disability rights. The disadvantages include that the draft was too lengthy, possibly not particularly user-friendly (persons with disabilities, governments), limits opportunities for reformulating specific rights, and the repetition of existing rights.
He further pointed out five questions to be answered in the course of working group discussions. These were 1) whether the statement of existing rights guaranteed under other human rights treaties is appropriate, 2) in what respects the statements of rights need to be further tailored to explicitly address issues of concern to persons with disabilities, 3)what additional provisions need to be included, 4) what the scope of States’ obligations should be, in particular, the extent to which some or all of these obligations should be viewed as capable of immediate realization or as subject to the obligation of progressive realization, 5) what general limitations clauses (if any) should be as appropriate.
In a discussion following the presentation, one participant observed that revisions to the text should reinforce the shift from persons with disabilities as subjects of care to agents of pluralistic development. Another expressed a concern, that the outcome of the workshop should duly reflect ESCAP region characteristics (poverty and other issues) and be simple and short enough to obtain as many Asian Pacific governments endorsement as possible at the next Working Group under the Ad Hoc Committee. The text should focus on the obligations of States to promote and protect the rights of persons with disabilities.
Partially responding to these concerns, other participants said that the present Workshop was not a place of negotiation concession but of sharing diverse views and opinions. It was also noted that persons with disabilities do not live in a homogenous world in which rapid changes were occurring. There was an observed need to recognize that persons with disabilities have rights, most of which would not have financial implications.
Others expressed that some of articles on the civil/political rights contained in the Bangkok Discussion draft should be put together and simplified. One participant noted that the current text did not address mainstreaming and integration of persons with disabilities and suggested that revisions might start with issues of integration and access to generic services. Another participant observed that inclusion and inclusiveness should embrace those not generally associated as the set of persons with disabilities, such as those who experience acute active conditions or the situation of indigenous people.
Some participants identified accessibility as a topic that should be addressed in each article of the convention while others suggested that it should be treated in the preambular section as a single, over-arching article.
Other issues identified for consideration in the revised text include personal independence of persons with disabilities and "independent living"; a need to address rehabilitation as an activity that encompasses more that health services; support for families of severely disabled persons and intellectually disabled persons; a need to mention decisions makers for those with disabilities who are not able to self-determine and require the personal assistances.
Professor Byrnes thanked participants for the thoughtful and constructive comments and suggestions. He noted that concepts had been identified that cut across several areas addressed in the draft text, accessibility in particular, and the need was to make appropriate references to this in the revisions. Principles were identified that are common to all areas of the convention. There was a need to identify priorities among articles in the revised text, which begged the questions of how much to incorporate from existing treaties and those articles which have clear implications for promoting the rights of persons with disabilities.
iii) Report of the Second Session of the Ad Hoc Committee on a Comprehensive and Integral Convention on Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities (16-27 June 2003, New York) (Ms Anuradha Mohit/UNESCAP)
Under the agenda item 7c, Ms Anuradha Mohit ( Human Rights Commissions in India) and an UNESCAP secretariat presented major decisions and views expressed by governments and disabled people’s organizations at the Second Session of the Ad Hoc Committee on a Comprehensive and Integral Convention on Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities.
Views shared were about objectives, principles, definition of discrimination, equal opportunity, access, complementarity between new and existing instrument, specific rights, monitoring mechanism. The presenters pointed out that, at the Committee, overwhelming majority of both developing and developed countries shared the same view on a proposed convention covering all of civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights, and maintain a twin-track approach. Concerns on poverty and development and broader definition of access, listing of specific rights to be covered in a proposed convention were other issues covered by this presentation.
Under the same agenda item 7c, representative from seven countries (China, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, Lebanon) who became Asian members of the Working Group under the Ad Hoc Committee shared developments in each respective country. These representatives were both from governments and NGOs and not necessarily actual delegates who participate in the Working Group. It was learnt that multi-sectoral dialogue and preparations on a proposed convention are under way in each country.
China. It was reported that China would contribute actively to activities of the Working Group. As a developing country, China would direct special attention to concerns of developing countries in the elaboration of a draft text of the convention. It would also make efforts to ensure that views and opinions of disabled persons and their organizations are appropriately reflected.
India. It was reported that Government of India intends to contribute its own draft text of a convention for the consideration of the Working Group; the text would include about 12 articles.
Japan. As presented in the statement of Mr Takata (Permanent Representative of Japan), Japan supports the convention process and will participate actively in activities of the Working Group; it holds regular discussions with the non-governmental community on the convention process.
Lebanon. It was reported that there is active Arab Region participation in the process of elaborating the convention. While Lebanon is a governmental representative, the view was also expressed that it would be useful if ESCAP and the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) would be able to elaborate a common substantive position regarding the elaboration of the new convention.
Philippines. The chairperson noted that as the only Philippine national at the meeting she could only make a general report of the activities of Government. She reported that the National Council on the Welfare of Persons with Disabilities had recently organized a dialogue on the Philippine participation in the Working Group. She also reported, in her capacity as President of Disabled Persons International, one of the 12 non-governmental organizations participating in the Working Group, that all 12 non-governmental organizations plan to meet from 12-14 December 2003 at Madrid to prepare positions for the Working Group.
Republic of Korea. It was reported that the non-governmental community had initiated efforts to mobilize views on the elaboration of the convention with a view to reflecting effectively disability concerns in the process of preparing a draft text of the convention.
Thailand. It was reported that efforts were underway in the Parliament on promulgation of a bill on the rights of persons with disabilities as a reflection of the importance that the Royal Thai Government attaches to the question. It was further noted that Government supports fully both the human rights and developmental approaches in the elaboration of the convention. Government did not intend to submit its own draft text but would work on a consensus draft.
Under the agenda item 8, Ms Kuhu Das (Director, Association for Women with Disabilities) shared main points from Statement of Recommendations adopted at the UNESCAP Workshop on Women and Disability, which were held in two phases, prior to the Workshop. Mainstreaming of disabled women’s issues in an elaboration process, including participation of disabled women in the process was shared.
Under the agenda item 9, Professor Andrew Byrnes (Center for Public and International Law, Faculty of Law, Australian National University), clarified issues to be dealt with in the working group discussions by reiterating questions on how much participants would like to elaborate existing rights with possible innovations. A view was expressed from the participant that discussions on civil/political rights and social/economic/cultural rights should be in the same working group. Importance of elaborating definition of access, inclusion of non-state actors, issues regarding international cooperation was raised as well.
After the discussion, it was decided that the formation of the four groupings would be the same but the "Other State Obligations" would be discussed in the working group 4 with issues on monitoring and reporting mechanism.
Under the agenda item 10, the participants were divided into the following four working groups;
Each group elected a facilitator and a rapporteur and led a discussion covering articles assigned. At the end of the day, four groups came back to the plenary room and shared a progress report from each group.
Under the agenda item 10, the working group discussions continued. At the end of the day, the participants gathered at the plenary room and a facilitator from each group made a report that is composed of a set of General Recommendations, specific textual modifications to the Bangkok Discussion Draft.
Professor Andrew Byrnes (consultant to ESCAP) observed that the proposal of two Working Groups to combine the set of articles dealing with civil and political rights into a single section on "rights of persons with disabilities" of the new convention with the set of articles on economic, social and cultural rights would have significant implications for more than 35 years of international action related to the two Covenants. He noted that civil and political rights traditionally are identified for immediate action while economic, social and cultural rights are implemented on a progressive basis in the light of their resource implications. He also observed that proposals related to complaint and reporting procedures – Part IV of the draft text - are based on relevant precedence from other human rights treaties.
Some participants commented on the proposed reporting procedures of the draft text and the presentation of the Working Group that dealt with the question. One noted that the proposed individual communication and investigation procedures proposed could present problems and affect the implementation of the new convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Reference was made to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which does not have such procedures and had experienced wide acceptance and ratification. Optional protocols may be a preferred alternative in the new convention on the rights of persons with disabilities, although some expressed the view that a protocol on reporting would not be an appropriate mechanism for complaints and reporting related to the new convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. The view was expressed that the measures to ensure the strongest possible protection of the rights of persons with disabilities were important to the success of the new disability convention. Individual complaint provisions were considered to be an essential element of the draft text if persons with disabilities were to be able to present their concerns to Governments; removal of individual reporting procedures would be tantamount to denying persons with disabilities access to protection measures of the new convention and its implementation as well.
One participant observed that the presentation of reporting procedures reflected a degree of micro-management, and the suggestion was made that such details were noted needed in the text. The view also was expressed that commission may be the better institutional arrangement to consider reports to be submitted in connection with implementation of the new convention to a committee. However, others replied that most all human rights treaties have committees to consider periodic reports and the proposed disability convention should follow that precedent.
Some participants expressed concerns over concepts on "integration/inclusion" vs "specialized/segregation. " Some may have such severe disabilities that they are best served by special education services attempt to participate in mainstream service offerings. Blind or deaf prefer specialized/segregated school to meet their special needs, which in turn lead them to fully participate in society later. Yet, another participant expressed the need for the draft text to provide support for integration/ inclusion and independent living. The view was expressed that this is best presented in the preamble to the new treaty and not elaborated as specific article.
Another participant raised the need for the new treaty to address the situation of persons with disabilities in rural areas and for the new convention to provide adequate support for access to productive resources to empower and enable persons with disabilities to pursue sustainable livelihoods in rural areas of Asia and the Pacific.
One participant expressed the view that definitions of disability in the new convention should reflect different national experiences and approaches to disability, and another commented on statistics and data collection related to the situation of persons with disabilities.
In his concluding remarks Professor Byrnes noted that the new convention should represent the best practices in promotion and protection of the rights of persons with disabilities and associated reporting and complaint mechanism. If the proposed reporting and complaint mechanisms were not as robust as other treaties, such as CEDAW, questions may arise as to the degree on international commitment to the rights of persons with disabilities. Communications on human rights treaties are optional and not all Governments have ratified these provisions in all treaties.
He observed that the discussion had identified several issues that would benefit from further review and discussion in connection with the revision of the current text. These were:
After the session, it was decided that the drafting committee composed of official rappoterus, vice-chairpersons, facilitators from each working group would synthesize General Recommendations from the groups and submit for the plenary for the adoption on the following afternoon. At the same time, Professor Byrnes would develop a draft for the "Bangkok draft proposed elements" for discussion for the participants as well. The Workshop was adjourned with confirmation of the procedure.
The "Drafting committee" established by the Workshop reviewed and discussed as set of General Recommendations on the ‘Bangkok Discussion Draft" and to elaboration of a new international convention, which were based upon input from the four Working Groups, for consideration in plenary.
Parallel to the activities of the "Drafting committee" Workshop participants had a panel discussion on the theme of "Barriers Persons with Disabilities
Face in Pursuing Professional Careers." Mr Sirimit Boonmoon, an attorney from Thailand, who had had polio, was the main speaker with Mr Pradit Charoenthaitawee, from the Human Rights Commission of Thailand as discussant. The presentation focused on legal and attitudinal barriers that can prevent persons with disabilities from pursuing professional careers. Organizations of disabled people's organizations can contribute to breaking down these barriers at all levels by networking and by promoting awareness of situations that can result in the violation of individual rights; the United Nations system was urged to address possible solutions for cases where national remedies would appear to be exhausted.
Under the agenda item 11, workshop participants had an in-depth review and discussion of the structure, content and presentation of draft articles in the second revision of "Bangkok Discussion Draft" / "Bangkok draft proposed elements, which resulted from the four Working Groups, as well as the "General Recommendations". In their discussion of the Bangkok draft proposed elements, participants discussed the need for special attention to be directed to representation of persons with profound disabilities, who might not be able to make informed choices or make claims on their rights. Some participants discussed proposed procedures for periodic reporting and individual communication and inquiry procedures. Participants noted that coordination between Governments and civil society, particularly, organizations of persons with disabilities, needs to be enhanced in the promotion and implementation of all United Nations human rights treaties. Comments and oral amendments to the revised text of the "Bangkok Discussion Draft" would be appropriately reflected in the final text to be prepared by the Workshop secretariat and circulated to participants.
Under the agenda item 12, following its consideration of the revised text of the "Bangkok Discussion Draft", the Workshop turned its attention to the General Recommendations compiled by the Drafting committee, which were adopted unanimously.
Under the agenda item 13, a representative of the UNESCAP secretariat made a brief closing statement to thank Workshop participants, resource persons, facilitators and rapporteurs for their hard work and contributions to Workshop proceedings.
On the second and the third days of the Workshop, participants formed the following four working groups to discuss the Bangkok Discussion Draft to develop General Recommendations and the Bangkok draft proposed elements (see Annex IV for report of working groups).
Globally, developments towards an international disability-specific convention have been accelerated during the last couple of years.
The United Nations General Assembly, by its resolution 56/168 of 19 December 2001, established an Ad Hoc Committee to consider proposals for a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention to Promote and Protect the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The first session of the Ad Hoc Committee was held in New York in 2002, and the subsequent General Assembly resolution, 57/229 of 18 December 2002 further encouraged Governments, United Nations bodies, including regional commissions, to make available to the Ad Hoc Committee suggestions and possible elements to be considered in proposals for a convention.
In the UNESCAP region, Governments declared the extension of the Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons, 1993-2002, for another decade, 2003-2012 through Commission resolution 58/4 of 22 May 2002. The Decade was renewed to improve on subregional differences in progress and give further impetus for full participation and equal opportunities of persons with disabilities.
As the policy and action guideline for the renewed decade, the High-level Intergovernmental Meeting to Conclude the Asian and Pacific Decade, Otsu, Shiga, October 2002 adopted the Biwako Millennium Framework for Action towards an Inclusive, Barrier-Free and Rights-Based Society for Persons with Disabilities in Asia and the Pacific (BMF).
The BMF promotes the paradigm shift from a charity-based approach to a rights-based approach to disability and development, and incorporates disability concerns into national policies and programmes for the purpose of achieving the targets of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDG). The BMF sets out seven priority areas[6], and it urges Governments to ratify core international human rights treaties, to support the elaboration of a proposed convention, and to include persons with disabilities at every-level of the elaborating process.
Following these resolutions and the BMF, UNESCAP organized the Expert Group Meeting and Seminar on an International Convention to Protect and Promote the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities held from 2 to 4 June 2003. The Meeting produced a comprehensive set of General Recommendations on the proposed convention, entitled ‘the Bangkok Recommendations.’
The Bangkok Recommendations were submitted to the Second Session of the Ad Hoc Committee, held from 16 to 27 June 2003 in New York, where Member States unanimously agreed to start elaborating a proposed convention. At this Committee, Working Group was established to develop a consolidated draft convention text for the Third Session of the Ad Hoc Committee to be held next year. This Working Group is composed of twenty-seven governmental representatives (Asia 7, Africa 7, America 5, Western Europe 5, Eastern Europe 3), twelve representatives of disability NGO and one representative from National Human Rights Institute. The Working Group is scheduled to be held from 5 to 16 January 2003 in New York.
Prior to the Workshop, two phases of Workshop on Women and Disability: Promoting Full Participation of Women with Disabilities in the Process of Elaboration on an International Convention to Promote and Protect the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities were held 18 to 22 August 2003 and 13 October 2003. This Workshop produced a Statement of Recommendations, which express unified support for a proposed convention with specific recommendations from disabled women’s perspectives.
The Regional Workshop towards a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention on Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities was held to contribute to the global elaboration process on a proposed convention, by sufficiently incorporating concerns of women and men with disabilities in Asia and the Pacific region. The region has the largest number of persons with disabilities (approximately 400 million) in the world. As the outcome of the Workshop, it intended to develop a draft of a proposed convention, entitled "Bangkok Draft on proposed elements of a comprehensive and integral convention on the rights of persons with disabilities."
UNESCAP invited individual experts of disability policies and human rights, and participants representing the previous Workshop on Women and Disability. All these experts were expected to contribute their substantive and technical knowledge to the Workshop as well as empowering themselves with direct involvement in a convention elaborating process. Experts were from governmental agencies, semi-governmental agencies and civil society organizations (organizations for persons with disabilities and self-help organizations of persons with disabilities). Persons with disabilities include those who have physical, visual, hearing and psychiatric disabilities. (see Annex I).
Immediately after the Workshop, Comments and oral amendments to the revised text of the "Bangkok draft proposed elements" would be appropriately reflected in the final text to be prepared by the Workshop secretariat and circulated to participants. This text will be made available to the Beijing Regional Seminar in November for high-ranking governmental officials. They will discuss and formulate a political statement on this in the end. Both this "Bangkok draft proposed elements" and the statement from the Beijing Seminar will be submitted to the Ad Hoc Committee with a copy to a special rappoteur on Commission on Social Development, and the Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA).
The workshop was attended by some 100 experts from more than 20 countries of the ESCAP region, resource persons and number of observers from 2 UN agencies, permanent missions, etc. (See Annex I).
Ms. Keiko Okaido, the Deputy Executive Secretary, UNESCAP, opened the workshop.
In her opening statement; she first expressed her gratitude to the Government of Japan, which has greatly supported the efforts of UNESCAP, both for the past and present Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons. She then extended her appreciation to the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA).
She explained the international and regional background of the Workshop and stressed its significance, citing the Workshop’s expected outcome, "the Bangkok Draft," will be submitted to the Working Group, commissioned under the Ad Hoc Committee for a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention to Promote and Protect the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in New York.
She showed her appreciation to the fact that experts from all of the seven Asian Block membership of the Working Group under the Ad Hoc Committee had come to the Workshop, and further appreciated that delegates from the China Disabled People’s Federation (CDPF) was present. The CDPF is the co-organizer of the follow-up Seminar in Beijing in November.
She concluded her opening statement by reaffirming the paradigm shift from a charity-based approach to a rights-based approach towards empowerment of persons with disabilities, the principle of the current Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons.
The Workshop adopted the following agenda:
Workshop participants reviewed, discussed and adopted in the final plenary a set of "General Recommendations" on elements and principles related to the ‘Bangkok Discussion Draft. / Bangkok draft elements of a comprehensive and integral convention on the rights of persons with disabilities’.
[1] "The term ‘access’ is not an act or state, but a liberty to enter, to approach, to communicate with, to pass to or from, or make use of physical, environmental and societal structures, systems and processes regardless of type and degree of disability, gender or age." Statement of Recommendations; United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific Workshop on Women and Disability: promoting full participation of women with disabilities in the process of elaboration of an international convention to promote and protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities (Bangkok, 18-22 August 2003).
[2] Manila Declaration on Accessible Information and Communications Technologies (ICT). "Report of Interregional Seminar and Regional Demonstration Workshop on Accessible Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) and Persons with Disabilities (Manila, 3-7, March 2003)" (A/AC.265/2003/CRP/7).
[3] "Bangkok Recommendations on the Elaboration of a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention to Promote and Protect the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities." Report of Expert group meeting and seminar on an international convention to promote and protect the rights of persons with disabilities (Bangkok, 2-4 June 2003)’ (A/AC.265/2003/CRP/10).
[4] Based on the presentation on accessibility issues by Dr. Scott Campbell Brown at the Panel discussion on "New and Emerging Approaches to definitions of disability: conceptual frameworks, varying contexts of definition and implications for promotion of the rights of persons with disabilities" held on 23 June 2003 at the second session of the Ad Hoc Committee on a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention on Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (New York, 16 to 27 June 2003); see also Report of Ad Hoc Committee (A/58/118 and Corr.1).
[5] United Nations General Assembly resolution 48/134 of 20 December 1993
[6] The seven priority areas are as follows: (1) self-help organizations of persons with disabilities and related family and parental associations, (2) women with disabilities, (3) early detection, early intervention and education, (4) training and employment, including self-employment, (5) access to built environments and public transport, (6) access to information and communications, including information and communications and assistive technologies, and (7) poverty alleviation through capacity-building, social security and sustainable livelihood programmes.
