Volume 3, #9
January 15, 2004

Morning Session

Commenced: 10:30 AM
Adjourned: 1:03 PM

IGHT TO EDUCATION

The Coordinator referred members to A/AC.265/2004/WG/CRP.3/Add.12 for this discussion.

Sierra Leone considered the option of having a comprehensive article on education and training. Any reference to training would include associates, life assistance, and informing the public of disability issues. Paragraph d in the article on mobility and 2(g) of the article on accessibility should also be included in this article.

World Federation of the Deaf (WFD) said the text was a compromise and that all disabled children, including deaf children, are ensured a right to education so they could fully participate in society. Inclusion is important, but there is more than one way to achieve education and the text should not restrict the freedom of choice. Footnote 3 should be included in the text because it would allow disabled teachers to teach both disabled and non-disabled students. This would be a way to inform the public on disability issues and help children accept diversity even at a young age. In some countries, there are legislative barriers that do not let disabled people teach. Footnote 5 should also be in the text because it does not imply that other disability groups cannot have inclusive education. The Convention should ensure that non-disabled children learn about disability and reflect the issue of diversity.

The Coordinator said the footnote would be discussed in the AHC.

The Inter-American Institute on Disability (IID) emphasized the importance of a broad approach and agreed with the WFD that the Convention had to be open to all options to cover the learning and teaching needs of disabled children. Inclusive education is important to avoid disabled children in being placed in segregated environments. Education is a way to overcome stereotypes of disability. It is important for teachers to have the responsibility of giving students not only a quality education but also in imparting values of diversity to bring about changes in the cultural environment.

Japan asked what was meant by "accessible education" in 2(i). 3(iv), in spite of the footnote, presumes that one approach to education is better than another. There is general agreement on the principle of right to choice in the footnote. Yet the right to choice may not mean much in the case of a child with severe or multiple disabilities where a regular school could not possibly cater to his needs. The footnote needs to be revised to reflect this.

Coordinator noted that although footnote 5 includes an element of a "right to choice" practicalities do arise. The language might be softened to show that not all members agree on this point.

World Federation of the DeafBlind described the personal experience of inclusive education for the deafblind- loneliness, and not being able to socialize with other students. There needs to be a creative solution so that one part is inclusive education and the other part is special. Deafblind people want inclusive education, but have to face the problem of society excluding them. The text needs to reflect that disabled children make choices in education, but many times it is the parent. Braille and sign language should also be addressed in the text and not just in a footnote.

Thailand commented that the right to education was "above all" in the article. PWD should have the right to choose inclusive education to the fullest extent possible, but there are practicalities. The first sentence in paragraph 4 should read "State Parties shall ensure that students who are blind have the right to be taught Braille and students who are deaf have the right to be taught sign language." Braille and sign language are different. Braille is a written script while sign language is a language. Paragraph 2 should mention the Individualized Education Plan (IEP) because it is a good tool for States to use to ensure the needs of students with disabilities are recognized and met with a "middle" approach to education.

Venezuela supported a title change to "Education and Training" because those who become blind later in life are left outside of the formal education system and need to have access to both formal education and vocational and mobility training. Professionals in these areas should be trained on to deal with PWD. The article should also refer to the three possible education methods for the deaf so that they are provided the opportunity to communicate in the "real world." Venezuela proposed that the second sentence in the chapeau (paragraph 1) should be placed elsewhere because the article does not deal exclusively with children and asked what "progressively" referred to.

China noted the language was different in the chapeau from the rest of the article because it refers to the education of children. The importance of general education for children is obvious, and repeats what is contained in the CRC. Three paragraphs discuss the objective of education. Is this appropriate and does this need to be emphasized in every article? Footnote 1 could distort the meaning of existing standards and international documents. Paragraph 2(including all subparagraphs) should be deleted.

Colombia supported that the title include the concept of education. Inclusive education should be favored in the article. Deaf children should not be left out and all three teaching methods should be promoted so that they can be fully integrated into society. Paragraph 1 should reference all PWD, not just children.

Canada suggested that "including access to early childhood and preschool education" should be changed to "including, where appropriate, access to early childhood education." In Canada, preschool education is not provided to all children, including children with disabilities.

Ireland said that some strong views were not accommodated in the text. There needs to be a stronger reference to Malaga Declaration (EU). The article needs to reflect the interest of the child. For example, it should reflect the opportunity to attend mainstream school if in the interests of the child.

Republic of Korea (ROK) noted some low levels of achievement for PWD in inclusive education environments though segregated education was not necessarily better. Special education may lead to lost opportunities of being in mainstream. The goal of inclusive education should be qualified in the article. In paragraph 4, "chose" should be replaced with "choose."

World Federation of the Blind said the article mixed general education and special education. Paragraph 2 should explicitly discuss general education while paragraph 3 should explicitly discuss special education. There is always a matter of choice in education and it should be in the hands of students and their parents. Paragraph 4 should not include the term "sensory disabilities" because this term also refers to the intellectually disabled in some countries. Deaf, blind, and deafblind should be specifically referenced because most intellectually disabled people are against special education. Paragraph 2 should also make reference to access to higher education in the general educational system with support. The footnotes should also be clearer so the AHC can consider them.

RIGHT TO WORK

Republic of Korea commented that Paragraph (a) calling for "an open and inclusive labor market" was too vague and presented no real options to the state. China suggested adding "promote" in the chapeau in addition to states' obligation to "safeguard".

Canada was concerned that the tendency to make lists can be counterproductive, inadvertently limiting rights of certain people in terms of labor agreements for example, establishing a hierarchy between measures that make it to the list and those that don't.

WNUSP responded that were it not for the fact that certain measures are specified in this article, they would not be understood. For example, equal remuneration for equal work of equal value career advancement, are rights that PWD are often denied. To the chapeau for the article should be added: "including, but no limited to:"

Sierra Leone affirmed its full support for this draft article.

Lebanon added "equal opportunities" to "equal remuneration for work of equal value"

Japan called for an explanation of Reasonable Accommodation as in Para (e). The implications if, for example, there is a dispute between the employer and worker need to be known to Japan.

Inclusion International agreed with Korea that this article was vague and in this respect stood in contrast to the article on the right to education. There should be consistency in the way the articles deal with the subject. Inclusive education needs to continue in the form of inclusive employment as PWD try to become integrated into the workplace. Inclusive employment is important for persons with intellectual disability, the practice needs support, it is mentioned in this article but not defined.

WBU highlighted the importance of work "to avoid poverty among PWD" who now constitute among the world's poorest of the poor. This phrase was added to the chapeau as an objective to the right to work.

Colombia called for the mention of "professional training" and "professional rehabilitation" applicable to people who have an accident in the workplace in (b), (g) and (j). "Recognized" alone may not be enough to describe the obligations here so perhaps there should be a mention of certification for those who receive this service as well as the presumption that PWD are competent workers.

LSN proposed an amendment to (h) to replace "protect" with "guarantee without discrimination the right of."

South Africa proposed integrating the notion of access to work, given the importance of the need for PWD to have reliable transportation to the workplace.

Rehabilitation International proposed adding "general" to "vocational guidance programs" in (b) that would subtly bring forward a preference towards inclusion and against passive labor market policies without calling for specialized "guidance programs". Given the non-market participation of PWD, (c) could specify this objective at the outset: "pursue active labor market policies and promote equal employment....". Colombia's amendment on professional training programs should be incorporated in the article on education.

Uganda recommended the article also address governments, they are a major employer, who could set an example.

Ireland generally agreed with this article except for para (h). The phrase "individual and collective labor agreements" needed to be removed since the protection the of PWD with regard to employment should be done through legislation.

Thailand asked for a specific and clear mention that nothing in this article would be taken to mean that disability could be used to discriminate against a person in seeking employment.

SOCIAL SECURITY AND AN ADEQUATE STANDARD OF LIVING

Venezuela recommended that the article also secure, in more detail that currently exists in para 1 (a), the provision of the technical and functional aids ? visual, auditory, mobility related ? without which they would not be able to exercise their rights.

Canada noted that the second para was drafted as a parallel to ICESCR and "access to clean water" was an addition to the provisions in that article. In order to avoid creating new rights this should be deleted.

The coordinator noted that perhaps access to clean water could be assumed to be included with the right to food.

WNUSP responded that there may be other source instruments besides the ESCR that mention this right. Additionally, the sub para (c) should be reworded so the PWD, and not their family members, are the central subjects. Sub para (d) should be broadened so that access is guaranteed beyond government housing programs, to private housing as well, in a nondiscriminatory fashion.

China called for the removal of "severe and multiple disabilities" in 1(c) since the emphasis in this subpara is the challenges posed by situations of poverty, which affects all PWD. The entitlement of various forms of financial assistance alone is insufficient, and income generation and self employment should be added to this list. The last clause in this paragraph, "which should not become a disincentive to develop themselves" should be deleted.

Ireland found "a large number of problems" with this text. It is indicative that Article 9 of the ICESCR, upon which this text is based, is 2 lines long. Ideally, the article should not extend beyond the first paragraph. Failing that, the following amendments / concerns were raised: 1(c) extends the range of the subjects of this convention, which would present "grave difficulties". 1(d) is overly prescriptive to the point where existing programs for government housing for PWD would be excluded. 1 (e) would need to be qualified with "appropriate" to "identify need" because income alone would not be a sufficient basis for determining tax benefits. 1 (f) does not take into account that life and health insurance are typically provided by the private sector, which is different from the obligations of the state provide health care. Canada's position on the provision on "access to clean water" reflects Ireland's concern about rewriting existing rights. This provision has been addressed as a part of the right to health, for example, and is an implementation measure of the right to an adequate standard of living, but should not be listed as a separate right. These rights are generally "couched in the language of progressive realization."

Lebanon proposed that another important vulnerable group, the elderly, be specified in I (b).

Inter American Institute on Disability echoed Venezuela's position functional aids and highlighted the importance of breaking down social security into its components as this was a broad term. PWD deserve dignified housing so that they can move around within their home.

Republic of Korea generally supported this article but sought clarification on whether the "earmarking" of government housing programs might add some potential inflexibility. Most of the subparas begin with the obligation to "ensure access"; however many PWD don't know which programs they may have access to, so the need "to inform" PWD should also be made clear.

WBU recommended a definition of "severe" disabilities for the purposes of 1 (c). Access to clean water is essential for separate mention because of the access issue ? PWD often cannot get to clean water which is essential even for food; the lack of it, among other things causes blindness. The paragraph on life and health insurance 1(f) should be retained.

Thailand supported China's position on severe and multiple disabilities. It proposed an amendment to para 1(f), which it "strongly supported", that takes into account that life and health insurance are mostly provided by the private sector. However, "states have the tools to regulate" this. States should "through legislative measures" ensure that any insurance cannot discriminate based on disability. This provision should remain in this article or the one on health. Regarding tax exemptions, this subpara should be amended to add "and their purchase of assistive technologies aiming to enhance their independence" so as to ensure that PWD are burdened by taxes.

Sierra Leone made the general comment that this convention should be geared to the majority of concerned states, which are developing countries, for whom the reality of implementation is a major issue. There is a large gap between the obligations in this article and states' capacity to implement. In Sierra Leone, for example, there is no governmental housing as such to begin with. The purpose of this meeting is to come to some form of a convergence of views.

Ecuador echoed the views of previous speakers regarding their socio-economic conditions, supported the inclusion of access to water and suggested an additional phrase "basic services."

Inclusion International questioned the term "severe" as it is applied often to people with intellectual disabilities, highlighted concerns with the EU's position seeking to "water down' this article, and emphasized the need to help PWD living in poverty.

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.

RIGHT TO LIFE

The Coordinator referred members to A/AC.265/WG/CRP.3/Add.18 for this discussion.

DPI said the right to life was a basic right. The article should address practices of euthanasia, bioethics, and forced abortion for PWD given their grave nature and frequency of occurrence in many countries.

LSN proposed a separate article on the situation of disabled people in armed conflict when they are more exposed to dangers. CRC Article 38 tackles the issue.

China said the right to life was a fundamental human right but various parties have not reached consensus on its definition. If it referred to the rights a child has after it is born, almost all States would protect the right. If it referred to a right to life before a child is born, all States might not admit and protect the right. A child that is not yet been born has the right to be born but mother also has right to choose freely. The issue also involves euthanasia, gene technology, and certain values and religions. The practices of various countries on this issue are not the same and the AHC should consider whether this right should be included in the Convention.

Coordinator said there was a footnote that discussed this issue. South Africa supported the article and LSN's proposal for a separate article on armed conflict. WFDB asked if the right to life also included a right to survive. Coordinator said this was a deeply vexing question for many. Thailand-supported the article and said that maybe members could find common ground on the issue of where life begins in the article. Many PWD are also deprived of life after birth (they are killed by their families or by others in the case of WW2). The article should support life as it is addressed in most human rights documents.

Afternoon Session

Commenced: 3:34pm
Adjourned: 6:00 p.m.

RIGHT TO LIFE (cont)

Lebanon supported the suggestion made by LSN at the morning session, noting that PWD under occupation might also be included under a relevant separate article.

Sierra Leone asserted that the word "survival" should appear in this text. This is not a new right, but an extension of the right to life. In addition, the word "survival" has the added benefit of covering such areas as armed conflict and even refugees without explicitly referring to them.

RI stressed that it is essential to bear in mind specific threats to right to life for PWD. Some reference should be made to prohibiting eugenic laws, policies and practice. RI agreed with LSN's proposal to include wording on situations of war, with the addition of the topic of post-conflict reconstruction and nation-building.

II raised concerns over the lack of detail in this article. This text is extremely short as compared with other articles. China asserted earlier that the rights of unborn children is a contested area, however the AHC should at least deal with practices such as late abortion that take place in the light of a disability, often in cases of Down syndrome. Some babies survive this practice. In addition, there is infanticide, which allows a doctor to kill a baby just before it is born. II requested that eugenic practices be prohibited, as stated by RI. Lastly the representative drew attention to a medical practice termed "pre-implementation diagnosis," in which only embryos which are deemed healthy are implanted. The others are thrown away or used for stem cell research.

Ireland recalled that the EU text does not include an article on the right to life, partly because attempting to define its content would risk undermining this right. There is a clear lack of agreement about which issues are relevant to the discussion. In the thematic consultation on this issue it was clear that there would never be agreement in that group. There is, however, agreement on the text as it now stands. It requires states to take "all necessary measures to ensure" the enjoyment of the right to life by PWD. There will certainly be diversions concerning how that will be done, but this text has the advantage of not excluding views expressed in the WG. As such, it is intended to cover the question of survival, without citing it explicitly. The delegate noted that "survival" is mentioned solely in the CRC. The formulation of this right in the WG text seemed to find a degree of acceptance. Ireland urged that it be sent to the AHC with the existing footnote, which stipulates that "there were different views expressed within the Working Group as to whether the Convention should include an article on the right to life."

Canada urged that the WG accept the text as presented and expressed satisfaction that the thematic consultation was able to settle on a proposal for the WG. The WG text on the table carefully follows language in Article 6 of the ICCPR. Canada opposed further suggestions--including the proposal of inserting "survival"-- on the basis that it would upset the agreement reached.

Germany concurred with Ireland's statements, but noted that due to its history, which includes the mass killing of PWD, it has a strong interest in an article on the right to life. A short article constitutes a compromise, yet it is essential to include it in the convention.

Sierra Leone called for the footnote to reflect both points of disagreement on this issue ? the content of the right to life and whether there should be an article on the right to life in the convention at all.

Uganda shared views expressed by II. As a compromise, perhaps the footnote could be expanded to reflect those sentiments. In this way, the AHC could have the "full story" and engage in discussion conscious of all the elements.

REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

RI raised several key points regarding the text. There was general agreement that such a concept was needed in the convention. There was also agreement to remain general and flexible, so that the text would reflect the various legal traditions, and be useful in several contexts. There was further consensus that the process for determining what constitutes a 'reasonable accommodation' should be "individualised" (centered on the needs of the individual) and "interactive" (between the PWD and the entity affected). There was also consensus that an entity does not have the power to force the PWD to accept a reasonable accommodation but at the same time, the PWD does not necessarily have the right to choose which accommodation he or she prefers if the range of accommodations available are all deemed reasonable. There was agreement that the notion of disproportionate burden should not be available to an entity if that entity could have accessed State aids and resources.

South Africa sought clarity how this footnote would fit into the whole draft. The representative drew attention to the definition of reasonable accommodation at the beginning of the Coordinator's draft and asked what was intended in presenting the definition as a footnote. RI responded that the draft text will not be altered, but the footnote included for clarification.

Thailand noted that the reasonable level of accommodation is defined at the "need level," not the "wish level." If the accommodation provided is considered reasonable than the person does not have the right to choose something else.

Uganda noted that the term reasonable accommodation is used more than once in the convention and explored whether it is appropriate to treat this elaboration as a definition. As such, wherever the term "reasonable accommodation" is found the text on the table would constitute the accepted definition. This is preferred to simply including it as a footnote in the Article on Equality and Non-Discrimination.

The Coordinator noted that paragraph 4 of the Coordinator's proposed article on Equality and Non-Discrimination contains a definition of reasonable accommodation. Perhaps with the inclusion of the footnote, it would be appropriate to delete the section of paragraph 4 in so far as it attempts to define reasonable accommodation. The reference to States Parties' obligations to provide reasonable accommodation would remain, but there would be no attempt to define it.

Lebanon clarified that the footnote does not address the definition, but paragraph 4 of the Article on Equality and Non-Discrimination does outline a definition of reasonable accommodation.

STATISTICS AND DATA COLLECTION

Sierra Leone stated that it had no problem with content of the text, especially with inclusion of the footnote. The word "should" should be changed to "shall" to be consistent with other articles. It is important to note that this issue is not just about data colletction but also usage of data, thus the process of data collection and then its usage should be clearly separated in the text. Also, the chapeau should reflect that States collect data on a voluntary basis.

Korea urged caution to ensure that these requirements do not conflict with national policies. There have been constitutional challenges regarding collection of data (regarding privacy), which could create problems if the convention obliges States to undertake activities that have been found to be unconsitutional in their countries.

India supported the need for statistics and data collection and its inclusion in the convention. Without the data, it is impossible to provide the necessary services, programs and support to PWD. Data needs to be collected in a professional and sensitive manner.

WFDB noted that in Denmark, it is forbidden to collect data around disabilities, in terms of identifying who is deafblind, etc. This text says that "States should encourage...", not that States should undertake data collection themselves. They could ask NGOs to do it and it should be done on a voluntary basis, as is reflected in the Standard Rules.

Sweden stated that it had many reservations on this subject. In particular, Sweden expressed concern about the assertion in paragraph 2 of the footnote that "Some members strongly support inclusion of this article..." Although there may have been view of including an article, support for including this article is not clear.

The Coordinator noted that this topic has been subject to the same process as all other topics. What is clear is that this article is still very open and there are strong views both for and against including it. It seems that balance of debate has shifted somewhat to favor its inclusion, with all of the safeguards reflected here, though a decision on this is subject to the balance of the discussion.

Morocco supported inclusion of this article. In order for governments to address the needs of PWD and allocate adequate resources, they need data and statistics.

Columbia noted, regarding Sierra Leone's suggestion, that using the word "should" was at the request of several delegations and it should be retained.

Asia Pacific Disability Forum supported inclusion of such a provision in the context of implementaion of the convention, noting that safeguards to protect the rights and privacy of PWD must be in place. Most organizations of PWD in the Asia Pacific region have struggled to get a disability dimension included in census efforts. With the competing demands for resources in all countries, this kind of information becomes a valuable tool for PWD to advocate for proper resource allocation to disability issues and for the development of national policies that address their concerns. This is done in the area of gender and has been impactful. It will also assist States in reporting efforts.

China said that many of the reservations appear to relate to concern about inappropriate methods of collection, possibility of abuse and also privacy concerns. There have not been any outright objections to data and statistics collection itself. What is clear is that if States do not know the numbers and situations of PWD, they cannot provide sufficient services, especially in large countries. Based on this, the convention should have an article on statistics and data.

Venezuala strongly supported the need to have statistics and data in the convention, noting that even the UN has data collection unit.

RI asserted that the common objective between States and NGOs is for this convention to tackle obstacles to the full enjoyment of the human rights of PWD. Rational policy development and reform requires rational policy tools, including statistics. Formulation, implementation and evaluation of policies must be based on accurate assessment of the situation and needs of the people concerned. This is what has been said by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and the importance of gathering statistics and data for policy purposes was strongly reiterated in the Malaga Declaration of ministers responsible for disability policy in the EU human rights system.

WNUSP cautioned that it may eventually oppose including this article. There is a difference between collecting information on disabilities and on collecting information on the enjoyment of human rights by PWD. The former is of concern for inclusion in a human rights treaty. For WNUSP to support this, the focus of the data collected should be on access and rights, rather than disability per se. Finally, we should not widen the scope of partnerships between governments and PWD to include a broad category of other stakeholders.

II expressed reservations as to whether this article belongs in a human rights treaty. If it is included, the title should be changed to "Protection of Data and Statistics", which is what is actually reflected in the text.

Serbia and Montenegro supported Sweden that this is not relevant to a human rights convention and raises serious concerns about privacy issues.

Ecuador supported inclusion of this article in convention. Statistics and data are a basic tool for planning for governements in all the work they do, especially with regard to meeting needs of citizens.

The Coordinator asked whether the suggestion by II to amend the title shifts the emphasis enough to make this easier for some delegations to support.

Columbia stated that the current title is more general and it is not clear that changing it to reduce scope of article is really useful. It could, perhaps, be changed to "Collection and Protection of Data and Statistics".

Sierra Leone suggested adding a footnote regarding II's proposed new title and then also articulating that any data collected on PWD, in whatever form, must not infringe on the human rights of PWD. There is potention this material ? its usage or storage ? to be misused.

Jamaica suggested adding language to the reflect the need for application of established research ethics in any data gathering.

Ireland noted that, regarding the title, some conventions use numbers rather than titles for the articles.

NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES

Canada commented that the small group discussions had led to general agreement on paragraphs 1 and 2, but had not reached consensus on the rest, partly because some, including Canada, felt that it should not elaborated further or be more prescriptive than the first two paragrapsh. Others felt that there should be more elaboration on what States should do. While both of those views are reflected in the footnotes, Canada was not satisfied that the footnotes accurately reflected items of consensus or the level of objection in some areas, and also asserted that the level of support for certain elements was over-represented. Canada made several suggestions to: reflect a higher level of disagreement in the small group; lessen the degree of prescriptiveness of the text; and avoid promoting a "strong" monitoring mechanism, as this might imply that is should be large. Canada also pointed out that this text discussed was developed by the Chair of the small group. Canada noted that the group had agreed that, to assist the AHC, the NGOs might develop a paper, but that if this is done it should be very clear that it represents the work of NGOs and not of the Working Group.

Ireland referred to the EU paper's suggestion that the question of monitoring be examined at a later stage in the context of the content and scope of the convention and to take into account work in other fora to review monitoring in other treaties. In principle, the first two paragraphs probably can be supported. It is difficult to see how item b in the footnote can claim that there was "consensus" for a strong and effective monitoring mechanism when the EU, among others, did not express views one way or another. If a paper is prepared for the AHC, it should be factual and not attempt to identify "preferred models" for monitoring.

Japan commented that some kind of implementation measures are needed but preferred a very simple statement so that it could be used in all countries. Therefore, paragraphs 1 and 2 might be acceptable but the views reflected in footnotes are too prescriptive. It would be preferable to delete items a, b and c from the footnotes and avoid trying to give guidance to the AHC.

The South African Human Rights Commission explained while there was no consensus at the small group meeting, there were strong views that these issues should be put forth to the AHC for further discussion. The footnotes are important so that the AHC is made aware of the issues as they were debated.

China stated that monitoring should be as flexible as possible. Paragraphs 1 and 2 are the result of extensive consultations and serve as a good basis for futher discussion. However, the footnote is too long. Many of the elements are provisions regarding rights and State obligations and are similar to the substantive articles. The footnote should be simplified by deleting points a, b and c. As noted by other speakers, there was no consensus on paragraph 3 b,

The Coordinator adjourned the meeting but stated that the remaining speakers on the list would be able to speak tomorrow.

The Working Group Daily Summaries are published by the Landmine Survivors Network, a US based international organization with amputee support networks in six mine affected / developing countries. They cover the intergovernmental proceedings of the Ad Hoc Committee on the human rights of people with disabilities. Reporters covering the Working Group meetings are Elizabeth Kissam, Jennifer Perry and Zahabia Adamaly and Joelle Balfe (editors). The Summaries are posted on line by noon the following day at www.worldenable.net and www.rightsforall.org They are translated into Japanese by the Japanese Society for Rehabilitation of Persons with Disabilities (dinf-j@dinf.ne.jp) and Spanish by the Inter American Institute on Disability (iidisab@aol.com) If you are interested in translating and disseminating the Summaries over the course of the Working Group meetings, and would like your contact information to be distributed, or have comments / questions, please write to Zahabia@landminesurvivors.org