Anna Lawson

Potential, principle and pragmatism in concurrent multinational monitoring: disability rights in the European Union

This article responds to some of the limitations of traditional human rights monitoring systems by identifying the potential for more dynamic methods of recording and reporting rights-based evidence. The article distinguishes between ‘consecutive’ and ‘concurrent’ models of monitoring and between hierarchical and non-hierarchical monitoring systems. Using the example of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, a principled framework for systems development in this field is outlined. The practical contingencies of designing and implementing new monitoring tools across 34 European countries are then reviewed. The article concludes that more flexible and dynamic reporting tools can help to make states more accountable for the implementation of their human rights obligations and facilitate policy exchange and the sharing of good practice. Recent developments within the European Union disability field offer potential for adaptation to other human rights fields and to other regions of the world.

Disability equality, reasonable accommodation and the avoidance of ill-treatment in places of detention: the role of supranational monitoring and inspection bodies

This article focuses on the way in which disabled people who are deprived of their liberty are treated in places of detention. It argues that human rights law demands that disabled people should not be discriminated against while in detention and that the non-discrimination obligation includes a reasonable accommodation obligation. The nature of this obligation is explained, together with the heightened profile given to it in the context of places of detention by Article 14 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. A number of cases decided by supranational bodies are used to demonstrate how failures to provide reasonable accommodations to disabled detainees may result in inhuman or degrading treatment, as well as in discrimination. The extent to which principles of disability equality and reasonable accommodation are incorporated into the guidance issued by three supranational systems for monitoring places of detention is also examined. It is suggested that, in all three instances, more could and should be done to highlight the importance of ensuring that places of detention develop systems for guaranteeing that reasonable accommodation is provided to disabled detainees and that this would play an important role in reducing the risk of exposing disabled people deprived of their liberty to inhuman, cruel or degrading treatment.

The European Union and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Complexities, Challenges and Opportunities

One of the many novel aspects of the CRPD is the fact that it is the first UN human rights treaty to have made explicit provision for signature, ratification (or ‘formal confirmation’) and accession by ‘regional integration organisations’ alongside States. Article 44 deals specifically with these organisations and reads as follows:

Accessibility Obligations in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities : Nyusti & Takács v Hungary : current developments/case notes

Article 9 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is an innovative provision which articulates, for the first time in a UN human rights treaty, a right to accessibility. Article 9(1) requires States Parties to take: appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and communications, including information and communications technologies and systems, and to other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)

 To date, the CRPD has been ratified by 25 EU Member States and the EU itself.  The CPRD is driving wide-ranging legislative changes in and across the EU, and this momentum is likely to continue thanks to the convention’s in-built monitoring mechanism.  Despite lack of progress on the proposed equal treatment Directive, some EU countries have extended protection against discrimination on the grounds of disability beyond employment and occupation, the areas already covered by EU law.  Legal capacity remains one of the areas with the largest number of reforms at the national level linked to CRPD ratification.  Many Member States are taking steps towards more inclusive education systems.  Legal reforms have also affected legislation on involuntary placement and involuntary treatment with most Member States reforming their legal frameworks before, and after, the CRPD entered into force.  European and national jurisprudence is increasingly drawing on the CRPD, acting as an additional driver of reform. 05/2015

The Unfinished Story of EU Disability Non-Discrimination Law

The adoption of a developed disability policy, including the adoption of disability non-discrimination legislation, is a relatively recent concern for the European Union. For most of the history of the EU, the founding Treaties contained no explicit reference to disability, and therefore no disability-specific competence existed. Nevertheless, occasional references to disability, and disabled people, were found in a handful of legal instruments and soft law initiatives, although these did not amount to an attempt to develop a broad disability policy or programme until relatively recently. From a competence-related perspective, the major breakthrough occurred with the Amsterdam Treaty, which came into force in 1999, and which included the first explicit mention of disability. The inclusion of Article 13 (now Article 19 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)) in the European Communities Treaty in 1999 sparked a flurry of academic speculation on its potential value and implications for EC non-discrimination law on grounds including disability. The rapid adoption of two directives, the Racial Equality Directive and the Employment Equality Directive, based on Article 13 EC, generated a further round of academic discussion. Since then the legal situation has evolved significantly: Member States have transposed the directives and a body of related case law has emerged in both the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) and within some Member States. Meanwhile the Council has declined to adopt a Commission proposal for a new non-discrimination directive to fill some of the perceived gaps left by the initial two directives.