On June 20th  IDEA hosted a presentation, in Regina, on the Convention on the Rights of Person’s with Disabilities (CRPD).  The guest speaker was Vangelis Nikias, CRPD Implementation Coordinator for the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) and was entitled The CRPD: Compliance, Implementation and Monitoring.  The stated purpose of the presentation was to help people “learn how they can be part of the effort to move the CRPD forward”!

The following represents the highlights of the presentation:

 ·The CRPD is the first international human rights instrument of the 21st century, reaffirms human rights of persons with a disability.

 ·Persons with disabilities, including Canadians, played a key role in the development of the CRPD and the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) believes that the continued active participation of persons with disabilities is necessary to create the political will to move forward with the convention.

 ·The “progressive language” in the Convention is the result of “states parties” of the U.N. listening to people with disabilities.

 ·Historic context:

      · The Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed in 1948 came out of the experience of World War II and was aimed at preventing similar experiences in the future.

      · The Declaration and the two related Covenants constitute the International Bill of Rights.

      · The Declaration recognized that “all human beings are born free and equal …..”  Unfortunately disability was not specifically identified as a “protected class” under the declaration leading some to believe specific action to address the ongoing exclusion of people with disabilities was not required.   

      · Prime Minister Trudeau wanted to base the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms on the Universal Declaration and the first draft of the Charter did not include disability.

      · Disability groups advocated for specific inclusion of disability under the Charter.  Not about creating distinct or separate rights but enjoyment and benefits of rights others have.   This lead to section 15 of the Charter.

 ·Section 5 of convention is modeled after section 15 of the charter.

 ·Charter took about 25 years to see tangible outcomes. Convention will take longer.

 ·Accessibility is set out as a principle and for the first time disability is recognized as a condition of humanity and a normal part of human existence.

 ·The Canadian delegation felt that it wasn't possible to define disability in the context of the convention.  Conditions that may make the list of disability would change over time. AIDS is an example.

 ·There was a need to reach a compromise between cultures, legal systems and social constructs across the world.  Despite this the Convention was negotiated in 5 years, the shortest in UN history.

 ·Article 4 is key because states parties agree to obligations.  The Charter uses a complaint driven human rights process.  Under the Convention states parties undertake measures to correct policies, practices, laws.

 ·Article 4 states that if a country's standards are higher than the convention, they must maintain those standards.  The Convention also obligates governments to consult with people with disabilities and organizations that represent them

 ·Progressive realization states parties will take action to implement changes to their maximum extent of available resources. Commitment to implement progressively but consistently.

 ·Compliance

   o Canada would be seen in legal compliance.

   o Legal compliance and enjoyment of full human rights are not the same.

   o 2 questions are key. What do people with disabilities experience? What gap exists between what we commit to and what we actually do both at domestic legal standards and international legal standards

 ·Monitoring

   o Article 33 talks about protection and promotion and implementation.

   o Next year Canada has to report on activity to implement in consultation with the provinces.

   o At present the Saskatchewan’s government’s point of contact is within the ministry of justice and it appears the human rights commission will monitor implementation.

   o Two functions. One has lead for implementation and the other for monitoring. Important to be clear that it's 2 processes.

 

 

On June 20th, 2011, IDEA hosted a presentation, in Regina, on the Convention on the Rights of Person’s with Disabilities (CRPD).  The guest speaker was by Vangelis Nikias, CRPD Implementation Coordinator for the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) and was entitled The CRPD: Compliance, Implementation and Monitoring.  The stated purpose of the presentation was to help people “learn how they can be part of the effort to move the CRPD forward”!

The following represents the highlights of the presentation:

 ·The CRPD is the first international human rights instrument of the 21st century, reaffirms human rights of persons with a disability.

 ·Persons with disabilities, including Canadians, played a key role in the development of the CRPD and the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) believes that the continued active participation of persons with disabilities is necessary to create the political will to move forward with the convention.

 ·The “progressive language” in the Convention is the result of “states parties” of the U.N. listening to people with disabilities.

 ·Historic context:

      · The Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed in 1948 came out of the experience of World War II and was aimed at preventing similar experiences in the future.

      · The Declaration and the two related Covenants constitute the International Bill of Rights.

      · The Declaration recognized that “all human beings are born free and equal …..”  Unfortunately disability was not specifically identified as a “protected class” under the declaration leading some to believe specific action to address the ongoing exclusion of people with disabilities was not required.   

      · Prime Minister Trudeau wanted to base the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms on the Universal Declaration and the first draft of the Charter did not include disability.

      · Disability groups advocated for specific inclusion of disability under the Charter.  Not about creating distinct or separate rights but enjoyment and benefits of rights others have.   This lead to section 15 of the Charter.

 ·Section 5 of convention is modeled after section 15 of the charter.

 ·Charter took about 25 years to see tangible outcomes. Convention will take longer.

 ·Accessibility is set out as a principle and for the first time disability is recognized as a condition of humanity and a normal part of human existence.

 ·The Canadian delegation felt that it wasn't possible to define disability in the context of the convention.  Conditions that may make the list of disability would change over time. AIDS is an example.

 ·There was a need to reach a compromise between cultures, legal systems and social constructs across the world.  Despite this the Convention was negotiated in 5 years, the shortest in UN history.

 ·Article 4 is key because states parties agree to obligations.  The Charter uses a complaint driven human rights process.  Under the Convention states parties undertake measures to correct policies, practices, laws.

 ·Article 4 states that if a country's standards are higher than the convention, they must maintain those standards.  The Convention also obligates governments to consult with people with disabilities and organizations that represent them

 ·Progressive realization states parties will take action to implement changes to their maximum extent of available resources. Commitment to implement progressively but consistently.

 ·Compliance

   o Canada would be seen in legal compliance.

   o Legal compliance and enjoyment of full human rights are not the same.

   o 2 questions are key. What do people with disabilities experience? What gap exists between what we commit to and what we actually do both at domestic legal standards and international legal standards

 ·Monitoring

   o Article 33 talks about protection and promotion and implementation.

   o Next year Canada has to report on activity to implement in consultation with the provinces.

   o At present the Saskatchewan’s government’s point of contact is within the ministry of justice and it appears the human rights commission will monitor implementation.

   o Two functions. One has lead for implementation and the other for monitoring. Important to be clear that it's 2 processes.