Response Ida

8/20/2019 Response Ida

1/74

page 1

International Disability Alliance (IDA)1

Member Organisations:Disabled Peoples' International, Down Syndrome International, Inclusion International,

International Federation of Hard of Hearing People,orld !lind "nion, orld Federation of t#e Deaf,

orld Federation of t#e Deaf!lind,orld $etwor% of "sers and Sur&i&ors of Psyc#iatry,

rab Organi(ation of Disabled People, )uropean Disability Forum,*ed +atinoamericana de Organi(aciones no ubernamentales de Personas con

Discapacidad y sus familias -*IDIS., Pacific Disabiilty Forum

International Disability Alliance contribution to OHCHR Thematic Studyon The participation o! persons "ith disabilities in political and public li!e

Office of t#e "nited $ations Hig# /ommissioner for Human *ig#ts

"nited $ations Office at ene&a, /H 0100 ene&a 02Fa34 560 11 708 72 29);mail:registry#e rticle reBuires states parties to t#e /on&ention ensures t#at persons wit# disabilitiespolitical rig#ts and t#e ability to e3ercise Con t#e basis of eBuality wit# ot#ers4C >#is articlereBuires a number of actions by /ontracting Parties and rele&ant organi(ations and personsin&ol&ed in election processes and ot#er aspects of participation in political and public life4

1 >#e International Disability lliance -ID. is a uniBue, international networ% of global and regionalorgani(ations of persons wit# disabilities4 )stablis#ed in 0777, eac# ID member represents a largenumber of national disabled persons organi(ations -DPOs. from around t#e globe or from a specific

region, co&ering t#e w#ole range of disability constituencies4 ID t#us represents t#e collecti&e global&oice of persons wit# disabilities counting among t#e estimated A=2 million persons wit# disabilitiesworldwide4

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/74

page #

In response to Human *ig#ts /ouncil H*/*)S0A0=, *ole of international cooperationin support of national efforts for t#e reali(ation of t#e rig#ts of persons wit# disabilities, w#ic#called for OH/H* to do a study on Ct#e participation of persons wit# disabilities in politicaland public lifeC, t#e International Disability lliance sent out a Buestionnaire to organi(ationsof persons wit# disabilities -DPOs. around t#e world4 >#is contribution is based onresponses to our Buestionnaire and on our own findings41 e also relied on t#e online studyby t#e International Foundation for )lectoral Systems -IF)S.,Election laws, constitutionsand regulations around the world, and their effect on the electoral participation of citizenswith disabilities.@ #ere possible we supplemented t#is wit# ot#er information, in particular,laws allowing for guardians#ip, w#ic# impact t#e enEoyment of rele&ant rig#ts, in differentcountries4 e focus mostly on national le&el laws but local laws and practices also impactenEoyment of t#e rig#ts to participate in political and public life4

s recogni(ed by article 17 of t#e /*PD, t#ere are &arious forms of t#e rig#ts to participationin political and public life4 >#e rig#t to &ote is a %ey dimension of t#ese rig#ts and for t#isreason, our contribution focuses on t#e rig#t to &ote4 It is a gateway rig#t in t#at protection of

t#is rig#t also #as a serious impact in t#e protection of ot#er rig#ts: w#en t#e rig#t to &ote ista%en away, so is t#e ability protect ot#er rig#ts4 !ut before turning to t#e rig#t to &ote, a fewot#er %ey aspects of t#e rig#ts to participate in political and public life may be #ig#lig#ted4

Depri&ation of legal capacity as a barrier to t#e capacity to form or belong to associations

In some places, infringement of t#e rig#t to eBual recognition before t#e law, contrary toarticle 01 /*PD, can result in persons wit# disabilities being pro#ibited to Eoin or belong toassociations4 It can also create difficulties for organi(ations of persons wit# disabilities to beable to open a ban% account or to access funds in it4 >#e lac% of eBual recognition before t#elaw, as seen by t#e depri&ation of legal capacity, can stem from a deeply rooted preEudicet#at persons wit# disabilities s#ould be t#e obEect of protection rat#er t#an acti&e agents in

t#eir own li&es, w#o may be enabled to protect t#eir own rig#ts4 Many laws setting upguardians#ip systems stipulate t#at a legal act -w#et#er any act, certain acts, or all legalacts. of t#e person subEect to guardians#ip is or can be nullified4 >#is can t#erefore includelegal acts t#at a person mig#t want to ta%e to protect t#eir own rig#ts, suc# as to form or Eoinan association4

*estrictions in forming or Eoining associations

$O laws and widespread discrimination in society also negati&ely impact enEoyment of t#erig#t to participate in political and public life4 In some places, t#ere are $O laws t#at restrictt#e rig#t to freedom of e3pression or freedom of association t#at affect also negati&elyorgani(ations of persons wit# disabilities4 For e3ample, in *ussia, t#e $O ct does notadeBuately pro&ide for organi(ations of persons wit# disabilities being organi(ations of publicinterest or pro&ide t#em t#e rig#t to retain and use t#eir properties and buildings w#ic# t#ey#ad before t#e law came into power4 Measures are needed to guarantee t#e rig#ts ofpersons wit# disabilities to free association4 Discrimination against persons wit# disabilitiesneeds to be pro#ibited regarding members#ip in citi(ens' associations4

+ac% of support by most States to t#e establis#ment and functioning of DPOs

In many countries t#ere is insufficient support to t#e establis#ment and functioning of DPOs4>#is undermines t#eir capacity to fulfil t#e role foreseen by article 6 -@. of t#e /*PD4 rticle

2 >#e ID Secretariat #as stri&ed to pro&ide t#e most accurate information possible but laws andregulations c#ange freBuently4 indly send notification of any error to info


3/74

page

6 -@. reBuires consultation wit# persons wit# disabilities and t#eir representati&eorgani(ations on decisions affecting t#eir li&es4 >#e absence of organi(ations of persons wit#disabilities and lac% of capacity building of t#ose organi(ations can seriously #inder t#eability of persons wit# disabilities to #a&e sufficient information, platform or &oice to engageeffecti&ely in law; and policy;ma%ing and ot#er similar processes affecting t#eir li&es4 ssuc#, ot#er people are ma%ing decisions wit#out including t#e rig#ts of persons wit#disabilities and wit#out consulting t#em4 >#is perpetuates e3clusion from society4

>#ese ot#er forms of participation in political and public life are important in t#eir own rig#t4>#ey are also lin%ed to t#e rig#t to &ote, w#ic# can #elp to protect t#ese ot#er aspects ofarticle 174 If it is not an e3#austi&e account of t#e current situation in all countries, t#is contributionpro&ides an o&er&iew and calls for recommendations to allow t#e full participation of personswit# disabilities in political and public life around t#e world -see Section A.4

14 *lobal o+er+ie" o! persons "ith disabilities, right to +ote

>#e rig#t to &ote is a crucial means of recogni(ing eBuality in society, a person's eBualitybefore t#e law, and is a way of protecting all of one's ot#er rig#ts4 If a person is not allowedto &ote, #e or s#e does not #a&e t#e same c#ances to ma%e c#anges to society, or toimpro&e laws and policies affecting t#eir li&es, on an eBual basis wit# ot#ers in society4 >#esame is true if one is not allowed to be elected4 >#is relegates t#e disenfranc#ised person toa position of subEugation to t#e rest of society4 >#e protection of ot#er rig#ts falls away w#enpersons are depri&ed of t#e rig#t to &ote4 For e3ample, one cannot e3press one's willpolitically in order to ma%e impro&ements in t#e policies in t#e areas of #ealt#, education,employment, access to goods and ser&ices, etc4 ; all aspects of life4

>oday, in many countries of t#e world, a serious democratic gap e3ists t#at is caused by t#e

depri&ation of t#e rig#t to &ote of persons wit# disabilities4 >#e situation of enEoyment bypersons wit# disabilities of t#e rig#t to &ote &aries from country to country, and includesmany good practices and legal de&elopments reflecting t#e standards now ens#rined in t#e/*PD4 et, t#ere are a great number of restrictions and e3clusions and a correspondingneed for many c#anges to discriminatory legislation4 lt#oug# t#e situation is still bad inmany countries, t#e encouraging news is t#at efforts are underway in many places to re;e3amine t#e disenfranc#isement of persons wit# disabilities, w#et#er by law or practice4Some countries #a&e ta%en important steps towards full participation of persons wit#disabilities in political issues, as reBuired by t#e /*PD and ot#er laws stipulating t#e rig#t toeBuality4

Positi&e e3amples

For instance, Canada ser&es as a good e3ample of #ow t#e efforts of organi(ations ofpersons wit# disabilities, t#e federal courts, t#e legislature, and t#e go&ernment all combinedto eliminate restrictions on t#e rig#t to &ote in its federal election law between 0799;077@46 More recently, t#e -etherlands followed suit wit# a 1229 amendment of its constitution tostri%e out a pro&ision denying persons wit# psyc#osocial or intellectual disabilities t#e rig#t to&ote=, also t#us remo&ing t#e same restriction on t#e same group of persons standing for

4 >#e legislature went beyond t#e reBuirements of a court decision and did a complete repeal ofparagrap# 06 -6.-f. of t#e federal election law4 -See below, Cmericas, /ases4.5 rt4 =6 -1.-b. of t#e 079@ constitution -repealed.4 C-1. >#e following persons s#all not be entitled to

&ote: -b. anyone w#o #as been deemed legally incompetent by irre&ocable Eudgement of a courtbecause of mental disorder4C -Cb4 #iE die %rac#tens on#erroepeliE%e rec#terliE%e uitspraa% wegens eengeesteliE%e stoornis onbe%waam is rec#ts#andelingen te &erric#ten4C. >#e different &ersions of t#e


4/74

page .

parliamentary electionA4 /enya and 0ganda #a&e some direct representation of personswit# disabilities in legislature and local councils as well as representation t#roug# t#emainstream trac%4 Austrias constitution e3pressly pro&ides for non;discrimination againstpersons wit# disabilities and its national electoral legislation is broadly consistent wit# t#ispro&ision48 Italy, by means of t#e Basaglia law9, eliminated restrictions in its electoral law tot#e rig#t to &ote of persons wit# intellectual and psyc#osocial disabilities74 S"edens constitution and t#e electoral law e3pressly state t#at persons wit# disabilities may &ote and#a&e t#e rig#ts to &oting assistance and accessibility402 In Spain, t#ere is a support systemfor persons wit# disabilities w#o are elected members of t#e )lectoral !oard4South A!rica#as made efforts to ma%e its national Parliament accessible to persons wit# disabilities4

>#ere are a range of accessibility solutions t#at #a&e been de&eloped, suc# as !railletemplates, or !raille ballots, accessibility c#ec%lists for polling stations, and ot#ers4 Howe&er,because of t#e #istorical and ongoing disenfranc#isement of some groups of persons wit#disabilities, accessibility measures are lac%ing for suc# groups e&en w#ere t#ey do enEoyt#eir rig#t to &ote4 ccessibility is t#us only being increased for t#ose w#o #a&e not beendepri&ed of t#e rig#t to &ote4 !ut anot#er reality is t#at e&en w#ere a law mig#t restrict t#e

rig#t to &ote, a more progressi&e election law or manual will ma%e pro&ision for accessibilityfor persons wit# disabilities wit#out circumscribing t#is group4 In some places, t#ere isprogress towards uni&ersal suffrage w#et#er by means of c#anges to legislation or t#roug#accessibility laws and practice4 !ut occurring at t#e same time as t#is global trend is t#econtinued spread of old e3clusions into new laws, w#ere t#e /*PD is not yet t#erefore beingfully applied4

>#e Cproper EudgmentC test for &oting

round t#e world, t#e depri&ation of t#e rig#t to &ote occurs based on t#e assumption t#atpersons w#o can CEudgeC can &ote, and t#ose w#o cannot CEudgeC s#ould not &ote4 >#ere aremany t#ings wrong wit# t#is assumption4 Most significantly, it is counter to article 17 /*PD

w#ic# does not allow for any e3ceptions4 It eBuates discrimination on t#e basis of disabilitycontrary to article = /*PD4

>#is discrimination can #appen in a number of ways4 test of w#et#er a person possessest#e Cproper EudgmentC for &oting is sometimes applied during or because of a legalincapacitation process4 Or, it can be applied to persons w#o #a&e or are CsuspectedC of#a&ing psyc#osocial or intellectual disability by ot#er persons w#et#er in electionadministration or ot#er4 In eit#er case it constitutes discrimination on t#e basis of disability4>#is test is only applied to persons wit# disabilities and not to any ot#er member of t#egeneral population4 For t#e rest of t#e population, no one may as% w#at is a CgoodC or aCbadC &ote t#ere is no competence test for &oting by t#e general population4 )&ery ot#erperson is entitled to &ote wit#out anyone assessing t#e supposed Buality of t#eir &ote4

Ha&ing a test on Cproper EudgmentC t#at is applied only to certain groups of persons -in t#iscase, persons wit# disabilities. is itself discrimination4 Judges, medical e3perts, electoral

/onstitution are a&ailable for comparison at #ttp:www4st;ab4nlwetgrondwet4#tmK#1p046 rt4 =A47 Parliamentary )lection +aw -0771, last amended 1221.8 rticle 00 of +aw $o4 0920789 of 0@42=407894

9 rticle 1 -0. and rticle @ of t#e Presidential Decree no4 11@07A8 [email protected] Howe&er, Italy'sconstitution -0769. still contains a pro&ision restricting t#e rig#t to &ote in t#e case of incapacity -art469 -6. -&ailable in )nglis# at #ttp:www4ser&at4unibe4c#iclit22222G4#tml..410 Swedis# /onstitution -0786., a&ailable at #ttp:www4ri%sdagen4setemplatesrGpageGGGGA@=84asp34

http://www.st-ab.nl/wetgrondwet.htm%23h2p1http://www.st-ab.nl/wetgrondwet.htm%23h2p1http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/it00000_.htmlhttp://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/it00000_.htmlhttp://www.riksdagen.se/templates/r_page____6357.aspxhttp://www.st-ab.nl/wetgrondwet.htm%23h2p1http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/it00000_.htmlhttp://www.riksdagen.se/templates/r_page____6357.aspx


5/74

page 2

commissions and family members s#ould not be permitted by law to ma%e suc# anassessment, nor s#ould t#ey be ma%ing suc# an assessment4

>#e assumption is t#at it is acceptable -for t#ose not e3cluded from decision ma%ing. toma%e and enforce a fitness determination arbitrarily lea&es power in t#e #ands of ot#erpersons to ta%e away a rig#t t#at is uni&ersal4

Moreo&er, w#at constitutes a CgoodC &ote is subEecti&e4 >#ere is no way clearly to draw t#eline between a CgoodC &ote or a CbadC &ote wit#out relying on t#e e&aluator's own criteria forw#at is reBuired to &ote or w#at ma%es a CgoodC &ote4 ssuming t#at t#ere are actual criteriat#at are used, t#e assessment of w#et#er a person wit# a disability meets t#ese criteria isalso subEecti&e4 part from t#e more important fact t#at it is not anot#er person's rig#t toma%e t#is determination, t#ese subEecti&e criteria are in&ariably going to be different, and willbe applied differently from person to person and case to case4 Cproper EudgmentC test isopen to arbitrary application and abuse4

$o ot#er person #as t#e rig#t to ta%e away t#e rig#t to &ote from a person wit# a disability,

regardless of t#e disability4 In addition, doing so contributes to persons wit# disabilties'continued subEugated position in society and to discrimination4 Disrimination is bot# a causeand effect of t#is disenfranc#isement4

/ontradictory aims of inclusion and e3clusion

Many constitutions restrict t#e rig#t to &ote of persons wit# disabilities e&en w#ile sayingelsew#ere in t#e same document t#at t#ey stand for t#e principle of uni&ersal suffrage4+egislation on elections and restriction of legal capacity also restricts t#e rig#t to &ote4 #erelaws on guardians#ip and legal capacity e3ist or suc# procedures are being implemented,usually in t#e name of CprotectionC of adults wit# disabilities, t#ese also are being used torestrict a person's rig#t to &ote, w#et#er by a blan%et decision mandated by a finding of

CincapacityC, or on an indi&idual decision of a Eudge4 +aws on t#e person and recognitionbefore t#e law are sometimes found in t#e beginning parts of many ci&il codes around t#eworld, s#owing t#at lawma%ers ga&e some importance to being recogni(ed -or not. as alegal person before t#e law4 >#e /*PD underlines t#e rig#t to eBual recognition before t#elaw, and laws t#at deny t#e rig#t to &ote fail to meet t#e standard of t#e /*PD4

>#ose most affected

!y far, t#e persons most discriminated against in t#is conte3t are persons wit# psyc#osocialand intellectual disabilities4 !ut persons wit# p#ysical and sensory impairments alsoe3perience widespread discrimination in t#e political and public sp#eres4

#ile many laws #a&e been amended to remo&e discriminatory pro&isions against personswit# p#ysical disabilities, in t#e area of t#e rig#t to &ote, many remain regarding persons wit#psyc#osocial and intellectual disabilities4 it# respect to depri&ation of t#e rig#t to &ote ofpersons wit# intellectual or pysc#osocial disabilities, t#ere are different names used wit# t#esame effects4 s wit# ot#er disenfranc#ised groups, t#ere #a&e been many discriminatorynames used in t#e past, and sometimes still in law: ClunacyC, CidiotsC, CinsanityC ; all of t#eseterms #a&e been t#e subEect of &oting legislation4 Many constitutions and laws spea% of, andforbid &oting and contestation by, persons of Cunsound mindC, or someone w#o #as beensubEect to CinterdictionC in t#e Frenc# legal tradition still to be found in many ci&il codesaround t#e world400

11 >#e term CinterdictC means to forbid by decree, -from t#e +atin interdicere -Linterpose by speec#,

pro#ibit4 It comes from *oman law and referred to an e3ercise of aut#ority by t#e praeter orproconsul to order t#at somet#ing not be done4 See Dictionary of ree% and *oman ntiBuities,Jo#n Murray, +ondon, 098=4


6/74

page 3

>#e depri&ation of t#e rig#t to &ote can be lin%ed to different legal processes, fore3ample,Cdepri&ation of legal capacityC, Clegal incapacitationC, CinterdictionC, Cguardians#ipCor CprotectionC procedures, w#ic# affect persons wit# disabilities4In some cases persons recei&ing a negati&e determination in a legal incapacitationprocedure will be automatically crossed off from &oter lists in ot#er cases, a Eudge mustdecide yes or no and in yet ot#er cases, a Eudge will decide to ma%e t#is depri&ation, and isnot ot#erwise pro#ibited from doing so by t#e law itself4

!ut all persons wit# disabilities are affected

Persons wit# sensory or p#ysical disabilities are also greatly affected by discriminationagainst persons wit# disabilities in t#e conte3t of &oting4 >#e laws are still in a process ofbeing c#anged to ta%e out discriminatory pro&isions t#at would limit t#e rig#t to &ote of t#eseconstituencies4 Older persons wit# all %inds of disabilities are &ulnerable to legalincapacitation bot# because of psyc#osocial or intellectual or p#ysical disabilities or bot#,and t#ey are t#us more &ulnerable to t#e correlating loss of enEoyment of t#eir rig#ts4 >#is

discrimination against older persons wit# disabilities is based on disability, age, or bot#4Howe&er information is lac%ing on implementation of t#e rig#t to &ote of older persons wit#disabilities4 #ile t#is contribution focuses mostly on adults wit# disabilities, discriminationand failure to educate persons wit# disabilities about t#eir rig#t to &ote begin in pooreducation4 /#ildren wit# disabilities are in many cases not taug#t about political participationas are ot#er c#ildren4 Inaccessible premises, cultural acti&ities, and sc#ool transportation,and a #ig#er cost of li&ing because of inaccessibility and t#e #ig# costs of needed ser&icesor eBuipment, can e3clude t#em from sc#ool acti&ities t#at teac# leaders#ip, social andpolitical s%ills4

it# regard to p#ysical disabilities, in some places, a state doctor's medical certificate isreBuired in order for a person to be eligible as a candidate or to #old go&ernment positions4

C"ni&ersal suffrageC: but not for persons wit# disabilities

>#ere are contradictory aims in e&idence, wit# constitutions and laws on one #andguaranteeing uni&ersal suffrage, and elsew#ere, and sometimes e&en in t#e samedocument, ma%ing e3ceptions for persons wit# mental, psyc#osocial or intellectualdisabilities4 Put anot#er way, constitutions or election laws gi&e on one #and w#at restrictionclauses or ot#er laws, procedures or practices t#en ta%e away4

One can consider some e3amples of inconsistent national legal landscapes li%e t#is4 On one#and, a go&ernment may pro#ibit an employer from discriminating in #iring practices, ande&en fine t#e employer, so t#at a person wit# a disability enEoys eBuality of opportunity4 !ut

on t#e ot#er #and, t#e same go&ernment would not let t#at person &ote4 Or, many legalsystems recogni(e in criminal law, on one #and, t#at t#e disability of a &ictim can be anaggra&ating circumstance for t#e purpose of sentencing t#e perpetrator, again in t#e interestof safeguarding rig#ts of persons wit# disabilities in a way to guarantee eBual enEoyment oft#em4 !ut, in t#eir constitutional and electoral law, t#ey fail to gi&e t#e same persons t#e rig#tto be a &oter4 >#us, t#e same person could bot# belong to a protected class of &ictims andalso a disenfranc#ised group4 rguably t#ere could be less need to pre&ent &iolence orcrimes t#roug# sentencing if t#e protected group were more empowered, including by &oting4

$ew constitutional principles !ut also more of t#e same discrimination in ot#er new laws

longside of t#e increased global recognition of t#e rig#ts of persons wit# disabilities,specific constitutional principles #a&e emerged, suc# as: nondiscrimination against personswit# disabilities fair representation of persons wit# disabilities consultation wit#, and


7/74

page 4

participation of persons on or in decisions affecting t#eir li&es and also of course eBuality ofopportunity for persons wit# disabilities4 ccessibility is also now a rele&ant principle -as int#e /*PD art4 @ -eneral principles., and is also a stand;alone rig#t in art4 7 /*PD4.

!ut e&en w#ere t#ese occur, legislation can be internally inconsistent wit# t#ese principles,or related laws can be inconsistent4 lso, despite positi&e de&elopments in some places, inot#er places, e&en new laws passed after t#e entry into force of t#e /*PD fail to pro#ibitdiscrimination on t#e basis of disability and also continue to e3clude e3plicitly groups ofpersons wit# disabilities from t#e rig#t to &ote or be elected4 Old pro&isions e3cludingpersons wit# disabilities continue to be copied in new laws, despite t#e fact t#at in ot#ercountries, people are wor%ing to eliminate t#ese restrictions or #a&e already done so4

Noting restrictions plus uni&ersality, eBuality, eBuality of opportunity, and accessibility: t#eydon't add up

>#ere are also contradictory aims t#at are &isible by t#e fact t#at t#ere are, on one #and,&oting restrictions for persons wit# disabilities, alongside electoral laws t#at reBuire

accessibility for persons wit# disabilities based on nondiscrimination, eBuality, and eBuality of opportunity, on t#e ot#er #and4 In some places, new election laws and regulations enactedafter t#e /*PD to increase accessibility are Cfig#tingC wit# old, and old;fas#ioned,constitutional e3clusions4

nd, among nondiscrimination and accommodation pro&isions, and in accessibility practice,often, suc# pro&isions or efforts only concern persons wit# p#ysical or sensory disabilities4>#is still reflects t#e greater lac% of power in society suffered by some groups w#o #a&e stillne&er #ad t#e rig#t to &ote4 $on;inclusi&e accessibility laws, e&en, discriminate againstpersons wit# mental, psyc#osocial or intellectual disability as compared to not only t#egeneral population but also to all persons wit# disabilities, in a way t#at is not permitted byt#e /*PD4 01 >#e /*PD reBuires eBuality and nondiscrimination for all persons wit#

disabilities4 >#e lac% of inclusion in accessibility pro&isions reflects t#e same discriminationagainst persons wit# psyc#osocial or intellectual disabilities t#at e3ists in t#e constitutionsand ot#er legislation4 In comparison, France and Swit(erland -alt#oug# t#ey currently stillta%e away t#e &ote of persons under guardians#ip. at least #a&e accessibility pro&isions int#eir electoral codes t#at refer to all persons wit# disabilities4

C!adC CaccommodationsC

In addition, some CaccommodationsC are made, but many of t#ese reflect an outmodedapproac# to t#e rig#ts of persons wit# disabilities, and a non;inclusi&e and inaccessiblesociety4 >#is includes t#ings suc# as: -0. bringing mobile &oting to Cspecial institutionsC,Cwelfare #omesC, or ot#er institutions w#ere persons wit# disabilities are li&ing0@ or -1.

ma%ing it t#e onus of t#e &oter to ma%e written reBuests to an aut#ority, in order to switc#from an inaccessible local polling station, to a furt#er one t#at is accessible -@. postal &oting,pro3y &oters, or &oting assistance t#at is needed only because it is used to compensate forinaccessibility -and not always effecti&ely or guaranteeing secrecy of &ote. -6. similarly,

12 lt#oug# t#is is t#e case, for t#e purpose of t#is contribution, e3amples of accessibility efforts and&oting assistance, e&en if only for some limited groups, are still included under good practices in t#iscontribution, to recogni(e impro&ements for, and efforts by, rele&ant groups of persons wit#disabilities, w#o #a&e often been be#ind suc# c#anges4 !ut in fact, t#e e3clusion of w#ole groupsfrom t#ese efforts is a bad practice w#ere t#is occurs4 >#is point is not repeated in t#e paper eac#time we mention partial accessibility or &oting assistance efforts, but we include t#is as one of t#emain conclusions and recommendations of our contribution413 For instance, in /(ec# *epublic, Ireland, Poland, Serbia, and *ussia4


8/74

page 5

CallowingC a person wit# a disability to &ote from t#eir car, or on t#e sidewal% in t#e street, orto mail in t#eir &ote, if t#e polling station is not accessible4

O&erall, &oting assistance is a good de&elopment as persons wit# disabilities are entitled to a&oting assistant of t#eir c#oosing under t#e /*PD, but at t#e same time, t#e moreautonomous and well designed &oting systems, t#e less need t#ere will be for assistance4Many of t#ese accommodations are in fact good de&elopments, but must be seen in conte3t,and, t#ey s#ould be real options and not t#e only options4

In t#e bigger picture, t#e way a State is encouraging t#e use of alternati&e forms of &otings#ould be e3amined in &iew of obligation to include persons wit# disabilities in all aspects ofsociety and to promote independence, autonomy and dignity4 o&ernments s#ould reducet#eir own reliance on alternati&e &oting and &oting assistance as a substitution for pro&idingfully accessible elections4 Finally, many CaccommodationsC do not adeBuately protectautonomy, independence and confidentiality of t#e &ote and as mentioned e3clude somegroups of persons wit# disabilities4 Discrimination can still be mas%ed in supposedCaccommodationsC4

+ac% of accessibility and good accommodations

>#ere is lac% of accessibility of polling stations06, &oting information, and ballots4 Still notenoug# persons wit# disabilities are #olding office, and national parliaments and localgo&ernments are often inaccessible4 In some places, countries #a&e made efforts to ma%et#eir national parliaments accessible, as reBuired by art4 17 /*PD4

>#ere is a lac% of accessibility measures to ma%e go&ernment accessible to persons wit#disabilities, w#et#er go&ernment websites, public information, captioning of parliamentaryprocedures, simultaneous broadcasting of sign language interpretation, sign languageinterpretation of t#e news, etc4 >#ere is lac% of support for and promotion of organi(ations of

persons wit# disabilities -DPOs. as reBuired by t#e /*PD4

s mentioned many accessibility pro&isions and efforts only ta%e into account some but notall persons wit# disabilities4 dditional consultation is needed among different disabilityconstituencies4

$ew tec#nology, accessible inno&ation and inclusi&e de&elopment

ccessibility needs to be built into go&ernment administration of elections as an ongoingprocess4 >#is is necessary because tec#nology c#anges4 Inclusi&e inno&ation is needed4 saccessible electronic &oting systems, it needs to be ensured t#at t#ese are ones t#at may beable to be operated in a &ariety of ways and not rely on a single sense or ability of t#e &oter4

For e3ample, a system t#at pro&ides output only in a &isual format mig#t not be accessible topersons wit# &isual impairments, and one only relying on sound would not be accessible topersons wit# #earing impairments, etc4 Funds used to purc#ase &oting eBuipment andsystems and to build election infrastructure need to be spent inclusi&ely so t#at persons wit#disabilities will also benefit from t#em4

& Inconsistencies bet"een international and regional standards12

>#e /*PD reBuires, in article 17, t#at States Parties guarantee to persons wit# disabilitiespolitical rig#ts, and, t#e opportunity to enEoy t#em on an eBual basis wit# ot#ers4 States must

14 For e3ample, inaccessible sc#ools are sometimes used for polling stations, suc# as in +ebanon andSweden415 See also /*/ art4 1 -0.4


9/74

page $

ensure t#at persons wit# disabilities can effecti&ely and fully participate in political and publiclife on an eBual basis wit# ot#ers, directly or t#roug# freely c#osen representati&es, includingt#e rig#t and opportunity for persons wit# disabilities to &ote and be elected4 $otably, nogroup of persons wit# disabilities is e3cluded in article 174 Parties #a&e to meet t#eseobligations by doing a range of t#ings, suc# as:

- ensuring t#at &oting procedures, facilities and materials are appropriate, accessibleand easy to understand and use

- protecting t#e rig#t of persons wit# disabilities to &ote by secret ballot in elections andpublic referendums wit#out intimidation, and to stand for elections, to effecti&ely #oldoffice and perform all public functions at all le&els of go&ernment, facilitating t#e useof assisti&e and new tec#nologies w#ere appropriate

- guaranteeing t#e free e3pression of t#e will of persons wit# disabilities as electorsand to t#is end, w#ere necessary, at t#eir reBuest, allowing assistance in &oting by aperson of t#eir own c#oice

States also #a&e to promote acti&ely an en&ironment in w#ic# persons wit# disabilities can

effecti&ely and fully participate in t#e conduct of public affairs, wit#out discrimination and onan eBual basis wit# ot#ers4

>#ey #a&e to encourage t#eir participation in public affairs, including:

- participation in non;go&ernmental organi(ations and associations concerned wit# t#epublic and political life of t#e country, and in t#e acti&ities and administration ofpolitical parties

- and forming and Eoining organi(ations of persons wit# disabilities to representpersons wit# disabilities at international, national, regional and local le&els4

International /o&enant on /i&il and Political *ig#ts -//P*., article 1=

rticle 1= of t#e //P* pro&ides for t#e rig#t to &ote and uni&ersal suffrage40A Specifically, itpro&ides t#at L)&ery citi(en s#all #a&e t#e rig#t and t#e opportunity, wit#out any of t#edistinctions mentioned in article 1 and wit#out unreasonable restrictions: -a. >o ta%e part int#e conduct of public affairs, directly or t#roug# freely c#osen representati&es -b. >o &oteand to be elected at genuine periodic elections w#ic# s#all be by uni&ersal and eBualsuffrage and s#all be #eld by secret ballot, guaranteeing t#e free e3pression of t#e will of t#eelectors and -c. >o #a&e access, on general terms of eBuality, to public ser&ice in #iscountry4 >#e plain language of article 1= //P* emp#asi(es uni&ersality and eBuality4

Howe&er, reflecting t#e general trend of e3clusion and discrimination against persons wit#disabilities, in 077A, t#e Human *ig#ts /ommittee publis#ed a eneral /omment on t#erig#t to &ote t#at indicates t#at, in t#e /ommittee's &iew, it is acceptable to limit t#e rig#t to&ote or to #old office for persons wit# psyc#osocial or intellectual disabilities4

>#e /ommittee stated: C64 ny conditions w#ic# apply to t#e e3ercise of t#e rig#ts protectedby article 1= s#ould be based on obEecti&e and reasonable criteria4 For e3ample, it may bereasonable to reBuire a #ig#er age for election or appointment to particular offices t#an fore3ercising t#e rig#t to &ote, w#ic# s#ould be a&ailable to e&ery adult citi(en4 >#e e3ercise oft#ese rig#ts by citi(ens may not be suspended or e3cluded e3cept on grounds w#ic# areestablis#ed by law and w#ic# are obEecti&e and reasonable46or e7ample8 established

16 "$ International /on&ention on /i&il and Political *ig#ts -07AA., entry into force 1@ Marc# 078A4


10/74

page 19

mental incapacity may be a ground !or denying a person the right to +ote or to holdo!!ice4C08 -)mp#asis added4.

>#is eneral /omment #as in fact led some States to oppose c#anges to t#eir laws, arguingt#at t#is eneral /omment allows for t#e depri&ation of t#e rig#t to &ote for persons wit#

psyc#osocial or intellectual disabilities, and implying t#at t#is eneral /omment ta%esprecedence o&er t#e /*PD, despite t#e #ig#er legal status of t#e /*PD as a -more recent.#uman rig#ts treaty4

>#e legal landscape #as c#anged since t#e /ommittee's adoption of t#is eneral /omment,in more t#an one way4 s mentioned, t#e /*PD reBuires guaranteeing eBual enEoyment ofpolitical rig#ts, including t#e rig#t to &ote and be elected4 rticle 17 does not pro&ide for orallow limitations and it does not ma%e e3ceptions for any groups of persons wit# disabilities4

In addition, t#e processes for Cestablis#ingC -i4e4, ma%ing an administrati&e or Eudicialdetermination to t#is effect. Cmental incapacityC, and t#e depri&ation of legal capacity itself-instead of supported decision;ma%ing., do not #old up to scrutiny under t#e rig#t to eBual

recognition before t#e law of persons wit# disabilities as recogni(ed in article 01 /*PD4>#ese processes and t#e assumptions t#at lie beneat# t#em are based on an older,discriminatory approac# to persons wit# disabilities and t#eir role in society, as well as adifferent &iew of society itself4 >oday, discrimination on t#e basis of disability is e3presslypro#ibited by t#e /*PD -as it also is, in some constitutions or anti;discrimination legislation.4>#e pro#ibited discrimination includes t#at w#ic# occurs as eit#er a cause or an effect ofdisenfranc#isement4 >#e /*PD recogni(es t#at societies t#emsel&es must c#ange torespect #uman di&ersity and eBuality of all persons4

/ouncil of )urope

/urrently, t#ere are ongoing negati&e de&elopments wit# respect to t#e /ouncil of )urope?sL/ode of ood Practice in )lectoral Matters -Opinion 0721221.094 >#is is a document of t#e/ouncil of )urope's C)uropean /ommission for Democracy t#roug# +aw -Nenice/ommission.C407 >#e /ode of ood Practice contains a bad pro&ision on t#e depri&ation oft#e rig#t to &ote and be elected, w#ic# reflects discrimination against persons wit#disabilities4 It pro&ides t#at L>#e fi&e principles underlying )urope's electoral #eritage areuniversal, equal, free, secret and direct suffrage.12 Howe&er, it neglects to include t#eprinciples of non;discrimination and accessibility w#ic# now also form a part of )uropeanelectoral #eritage4 In addition, it t#en pro&ides t#at t#ere are e3ceptions to uni&ersal suffrage,including:

Ld4 Depri&ation of t#e rig#t to &ote and to be elected:i4 pro&ision may be made for depri&ing indi&iduals of t#eir rig#t to &ote and to be

elected, but only subEect to t#e following cumulati&e conditions:ii4 it must be pro&ided for by lawiii4 t#e proportionality principle must be obser&ed conditions for depri&ing indi&iduals

17 Human *ig#ts /ommittee, eneral /omment $o4 1=: >#e rig#t to participate in public affairs, &otingrig#ts and t#e rig#t of eBual access to public ser&ice -rt4 1=. -077A. -//P*/10*e&40dd48.,a&ailable at #ttp:www4un#c#r4c#tbsdoc4nsfQ19SymbolQ17d2b8f21@e9dAd797921=A=0e226bc2ebROpendocument418 )uropean /ommission for Democracy >#roug# +aw -Nenice /ommission., /ode of ood Practicein )lectoral Matters, uidelines and )3planatory *eport, adopted by t#e Nenice /ommission at its=1nd session -Nenice, 09;07 October 1221., /D+;D -1221. 1@ re&, Strasbourg, 1@ May 122@,a&ailable at #ttp:www4&enice4coe4intdocs1221/D+;DQ191221Q1721@re&;e4pdf 419 #ttp:www4&enice4coe4int20 Section I, Principles of )urope?s electoral #eritage, ibid4

http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/d0b7f023e8d6d9898025651e004bc0eb?Opendocumenthttp://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/d0b7f023e8d6d9898025651e004bc0eb?Opendocumenthttp://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/d0b7f023e8d6d9898025651e004bc0eb?Opendocumenthttp://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/d0b7f023e8d6d9898025651e004bc0eb?Opendocumenthttp://www.venice.coe.int/docs/2002/CDL-AD(2002)023rev-e.pdfhttp://www.venice.coe.int/docs/2002/CDL-AD(2002)023rev-e.pdfhttp://www.venice.coe.int/http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/d0b7f023e8d6d9898025651e004bc0eb?Opendocumenthttp://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/d0b7f023e8d6d9898025651e004bc0eb?Opendocumenthttp://www.venice.coe.int/docs/2002/CDL-AD(2002)023rev-e.pdfhttp://www.venice.coe.int/


11/74

page 11

of t#e rig#t to stand for election may be less strict t#an for disenfranc#ising t#emi&4 >#e depri&ation must be based on mental incapacity or a criminal con&iction for aserious offence4&4 Furt#ermore, t#e wit#drawal of political rig#ts or finding of mental incapacity mayonly be imposed by e3press decision of a court of law4

>#e /ode of ood Practice also lac%s references to e3press inclusion of persons wit#disabilities, accessibility, and &oting assistance4

>#e Parliamentary ssembly reBuested t#e Nenice /ommission to de&elop its acti&itiesaimed at impro&ing t#e conditions for t#e effecti&e e3ercise of election rig#ts by groupsfacing special difficulties410 roups recei&ing more concern were foreigners w#o were legalresidents, prisoners, and members of t#e military4 Persons w#o are Lresidents of nursing#omes were also mentioned in an opinion of t#e Nenice /ommission on t#e Labolition of&oting restrictions4

In October 1202, t#e Nenice /ommission adopted a draft CInterpreti&e Declaration to t#e

code of ood Practice in )lectoral Matters on t#e Participation of People wit# Disabilities in)lectionsC,11 w#ic# would, if adopted in its current form -draft as of 1202., include arestriction on t#e rig#t to &ote of persons wit# psyc#osocial or intellectual disability4 It repeatsw#at is in t#e L/ode of ood Practice4 Specifically, it in&o%es t#e principle of Luni&ersalsuffrage but t#en immediately would limit t#is, by saying also t#at: L$o person wit# adisability can be e3cluded from t#e rig#t to &ote or to stand for election on t#e basis of#er#is p#ysical andor mental disabilityunless the depri+ation o! the right to +ote and tobe elected is imposed by an indi+idual decision o! a court o! la" because o! pro+enmental disability&C1@ >#e Nenice /ommission s#ould eliminate t#is e3ception from its draft4

)uropean /ourt of Human *ig#ts

>#e )uropean /ourt of Human *ig#ts recently dealt wit# t#e issue inKiss v. Hungary 164 Int#at case, Mr4 laEos iss #ad been placed under partial guardians#ip as #e wase3periencing manic depression4 >#e Hungarian /onstitution contains an absolute &oting banfor people under guardians#ip so #e was pre&ented from ta%ing part in t#e general elections4He broug#t #is case to t#e )uropean /ourt of Human *ig#ts, w#ere t#e /ourt found t#at a&iolation of art4 @, Protocol no4 0 -uni&ersal suffrage. based on an indiscriminate remo&al of&oting rig#ts, based solely on a mental disability reBuiring partial guardians#ip4 It consideredt#at generali(ed classification of groups of persons wit# mental #ealt# problems andintellectual disabilities s#ould be a&oided as a basis for t#e restriction of t#eir #uman rig#ts4 Itawarded Mr4 iss damages and legal fees4 Howe&er, t#e /ourt did not go far enoug# as itfailed to critici(e t#e situation in w#ic# a court limits t#e rig#t to &ote in indi&idual cases andimplied t#at t#is could be done as long as certain criteria or procedures were in place4

/ouncil of )urope /ommissioner for Human *ig#ts

fter t#e Kiss decision, t#e /ouncil of )urope /ommissioner for Human *ig#ts, >#omasHammarberg, subseBuently made a statement reaffirming uni&ersal suffrage and t#e rig#t to&ote of all persons wit# disabilities4 1= Specifically, #e critiBued it for not ruling out Ct#epossibility in all circumstances of depri&ing a person of t#e rig#t to &ote ; as long as t#e

21 See, e4g4, *ecommendation 0806 -122=.422 See nne3 II: Nenice /ommission's CInterpreti&e DeclarationC: )ncouraging a Democratic ap423 Section II40414 &ailable at #ttp:www4&enice4coe4intdocs1202/D+;DQ191202Q172@A;e4pdf 424 laEos iss &4 Hungary, pp4 no4 @99@12A, /ouncil of )urope: )uropean /ourt of Human*ig#ts, 12 May 1202, a&ailable at #ttp:www4un#cr4orgrefworldcountry,,,,H"$,,6bfAA=f=9,24#tml

http://www.venice.coe.int/docs/2010/CDL-AD(2010)036-e.pdfhttp://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,,,HUN,,4bf665f58,0.html.http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,,,HUN,,4bf665f58,0.html.http://www.venice.coe.int/docs/2010/CDL-AD(2010)036-e.pdfhttp://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,,,HUN,,4bf665f58,0.html.


12/74

page 1#

criteria and t#e procedures were acceptableC4 He noted t#at t#ere were no e3ceptions in t#erig#ts in t#e /*PD and t#at t#e /*PD reBuires /ontracting Parties to Crecogni(e t#atpersons wit# disabilities enEoy legal capacity on an eBual basis wit# ot#ers in all aspects oflifeC4 $oting t#at Ct#e &ery purpose of t#e /on&ention is to promote, protect and ensure t#efull and eBual enEoyment of all #uman rig#ts by all persons wit# disabilitiesC, #e stated t#atCt#is lea&es no room for procedures in w#ic# Eudges or medical practitioners would assesst#e &oting competence of a person and t#en gi&e a green lig#t ; or not4 s we do not test t#atcapability for someone wit#out disabilities, t#is would amount to blatant discrimination4C1A Heemp#asi(ed rat#er t#e need to pro&ide support for persons in need of t#is to e3ercise t#eir#uman rig#ts instead of ta%ing away suc# rig#ts4 He stated, CIn t#ese situations societys#ould offer assistance to ma%e it possible for t#e indi&idual to e3ercise t#em, including tota%e part in political life4 >#e /on&ention places an obligation on go&ernments to ensure t#atsuc# assistance is pro&ided if needed, including in e3ercising t#e rig#t to &ote4C nd rat#ert#an Eust #elping persons wit# disabilities c#ange to meet e3isting conditions, instead, Coursocieties s#ould see% to adapt and to accommodate e&eryoneC4 He noted t#at e3perience incountries, w#ose constitutions guarantee t#e rig#t to &ote of persons wit# psyc#osocial andintellectual disabilities to &ote and be elected, s#ows t#at fears t#at t#is approac# would

cause any real problems were unfounded4 He emp#asi(ed t#e need for our societies toCreflect t#e di&ersity of t#eir citi(ens and benefit from t#eir &aried e3perience and %nowledgeCas called for in t#e /ouncil of )urope Disability ction Plan4

OS/) ODIH*

>#e Office for Democratic Institutions and Human *ig#ts -ODIH*. of t#e Organi(ation forSecurity and /o;operation in )urope -OS/). #as indicated t#at it appro&es of repealingpro&isions t#at disenfranc#ise persons wit# disabilities -as in $et#erlands., citing t#e needfor consistency wit# t#e /*PD4 It stated: L>#e e3pansion of t#e franc#ise to personsdeclared incapable for reasons of disability is consistent wit# OS/) commitments regardingt#e uni&ersality of t#e franc#ise, t#e )uropean /on&ention on Human *ig#ts444 as well as t#e

"$ /on&ention on t#e *ig#ts of Persons wit# Disabilities418

/*PD /ommittee

>#e /*PD /ommittee itself #as weig#ed in, applying article 17 in its consideration of t#eState reports of bot# >unisia and Spain -t#e only two countries to #a&e been considered todate by t#e /ommittee.4 In its /oncluding Obser&ations on >unisia, it recommended: L@=4>#e /ommittee recommends t#e urgent adoption of legislati&e measures to ensure t#atpersons wit# disabilities, including persons w#o are currently under guardians#ip ortrustees#ip, can e3ercise t#eir rig#t to &ote and participate in public life, on an eBual basiswit# ot#ers4 >#us it called for t#e reinstatement of t#e rig#t to &ote for persons w#o arecurrently depri&ed of t#eir rig#t to &ote4 In its /oncluding Obser&ations on Spain, t#e

/ommittee went into more dept# and made more e3plicit t#e lin% between depri&ation oflegal capacity and t#e rig#t to &ote4 It called on Spain to re&ise rele&ant offending legislation:

LParticipation in political and public life -art4 17.

25 See >#omas Hammarberg statement, CPersons wit# disabilities must not be denied t#e rig#t to&oteC, 11 Marc# 1200, a&ailable at #ttp:commissioner4cws4coe4intti%i;&iewGblogGpost4p#pRpostId0184 For an easy;to;read &ersion of t#e statement, see #ttp:www4e;include4euennews872;council;of;europe;commissioner;for;#uman;rig#ts;says;Bpersons;wit#;disabilities;must;not;be;denied;t#e;rig#t;to;&ote426 ibid427 OS/)ODIH*, $et#erlands, )arly Parliamentary )lections, 7 June 1202, OS/)ODIH* )lection ssessment Mission *eport, a&ailable at #ttp:www4osce4orgodi#relections801=0, pp4 A;84

http://commissioner.cws.coe.int/tiki-view_blog_post.php?postId=127http://commissioner.cws.coe.int/tiki-view_blog_post.php?postId=127http://www.e-include.eu/en/news/790-council-of-europe-commissioner-for-human-rights-says-qpersons-with-disabilities-must-not-be-denied-the-right-to-votehttp://www.e-include.eu/en/news/790-council-of-europe-commissioner-for-human-rights-says-qpersons-with-disabilities-must-not-be-denied-the-right-to-votehttp://www.e-include.eu/en/news/790-council-of-europe-commissioner-for-human-rights-says-qpersons-with-disabilities-must-not-be-denied-the-right-to-votehttp://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/71251http://commissioner.cws.coe.int/tiki-view_blog_post.php?postId=127http://commissioner.cws.coe.int/tiki-view_blog_post.php?postId=127http://www.e-include.eu/en/news/790-council-of-europe-commissioner-for-human-rights-says-qpersons-with-disabilities-must-not-be-denied-the-right-to-votehttp://www.e-include.eu/en/news/790-council-of-europe-commissioner-for-human-rights-says-qpersons-with-disabilities-must-not-be-denied-the-right-to-votehttp://www.e-include.eu/en/news/790-council-of-europe-commissioner-for-human-rights-says-qpersons-with-disabilities-must-not-be-denied-the-right-to-votehttp://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/71251


13/74

page 1

684 >#e /ommittee is concerned t#at t#e rig#t to &ote of persons wit# intellectual orpsyc#o;social disabilities can be restricted if t#e person concerned #as been depri&ed of #isor #er legal capacity, or #as been placed in an institution4 It is furt#er concerned t#at t#edepri&ation of t#is rig#t appears to be t#e rule and not t#e e3ception4 It regrets t#e lac% ofinformation on standards of e&idence or grounds, and criteria used by Eudges w#en depri&ingpersons of t#eir rig#t to &ote4 It notes wit# concern t#e number of persons wit# disabilitiesdenied t#eir rig#t to &ote4

.5& The Committee recommends that all rele+ant legislation be re+ie"ed to ensurethat all persons "ith disabilities regardless o! their impairment8 legal status or place o! residence ha+e a right to +ote and participate in public li!e8 on an e:ual basis "ithothers& The Committee re:uests the go+ernment o! Spain to amend art& o! theOrganic ;a" 2

.& ?7amples by region>#is section pro&ides a sampling of t#e situation from places around t#e world4 t t#ebeginning of region is a s#ort summary of t#e situation in t#at region4 it#in eac# regionsection, t#ere are sections on: 04 ood practices, 14 *estrictions, @4 +ac% of accessibility andaccommodations, and 64 Sample cases -sia and mericas sections only.4

6404 frica>#ere are some important good practices t#at #a&e ta%en place, suc# as recognitionof rele&ant constitutional principles and nondiscrimination in new constitutions4 Manycountries pro&ide for some &oter assistance, if not e3plicitly pro&ided for by law aswould be better4 Howe&er, t#e &ast maEority of countries we considered depri&epersons wit# psyc#osocial or intellectual disability or w#o #a&e been CinterdictedCfrom &oting4 ccessibility measures #a&e been implemented for some groups insome places, but in ot#er places, t#ere is no accessibility4 Members of t#e Pan; frican Parliament are currently elected by frican legislatures419 >#us, groups ofpersons e3cluded from election to national legislatures are t#ereby also pre&entedfrom c#oosing representati&es in t#e Pan;frican Parliament4 >#e Protocolestablis#ing t#e Pan;frican Parliament also pro#ibits persons from remainingmembers, President or Nice;President if #e or s#e is Cis unable to perform #is or #erfunctions because of p#ysical or mental incapacityC417

640404 ood practices

Following are some e3amples of some good practices in frica4

?thiopia: >#e electoral law pro&ides t#at Ct#e disabledC and Ct#e blindC or Cot#erwisep#ysically disabledC -not narrowly circumscribed. may &ote accompanied by an assistant oft#eir c#oosing4@2

28 rt4 = -0., Protocol to t#e >reaty )stablis#ing t#e frican )conomic /ommunity *elating to t#e Pan; frican Parliament -1222., a&ailable at #ttp:www4africa;union4orgruleGprotprotocol;panafrican;parliament4pdf 429

See art4 = -6. -c. and art4 9 -c., Protocol to t#e >reaty )stablis#ing t#e frican )conomic /ommunity*elating to t#e Pan;frican Parliament -1222. -adopted at t#e O" Summit in +omT, >ogo., a&ailableat #ttp:www4africa;union4orgruleGprotprotocol;panafrican;parliament4pdf 4

http://www.africa-union.org/rule_prot/protocol-panafrican-parliament.pdfhttp://www.africa-union.org/rule_prot/protocol-panafrican-parliament.pdfhttp://www.africa-union.org/rule_prot/protocol-panafrican-parliament.pdfhttp://www.africa-union.org/rule_prot/protocol-panafrican-parliament.pdfhttp://www.africa-union.org/rule_prot/protocol-panafrican-parliament.pdfhttp://www.africa-union.org/rule_prot/protocol-panafrican-parliament.pdfhttp://www.africa-union.org/rule_prot/protocol-panafrican-parliament.pdfhttp://www.africa-union.org/rule_prot/protocol-panafrican-parliament.pdf


14/74

page 1.

*hana: >#ere were pre&iously some attempts to in&ol&e persons wit# disabilities w#o arew#eelc#air users to be part of t#e electoral support at polling stations, to ensure t#at personswit# disabilities #ad access to &oting4 >#e /onstitution contains some positi&e references topersons wit# disabilities@0 and guarantees to a limited degree appropriate facilities forCdisabled personsC in public places@14 >#ere is also some &oting assistance in #ana, in t#atCa &oter w#o is incapacitated because of blindness or ot#er p#ysical causeC may be assistedby a person of #is or #er own c#oice4 >#e assistant is supposed to %eep t#e &ote secret4 >#efact t#at t#e person reBuired &oter assistance is recorded along wit# t#e name of t#e &oter4

/enya@ >#e new /onstitution of 1202 of enya ma%es some specific pro&isions regardingt#e rig#ts of persons wit# disabilities and contains a constitutional general principle on fairrepresentation of persons wit# disabilities@@4 -!ut see restrictions, below4. >#e /onstitutionobliges t#e State to promote t#e use of enyan sign language, !raille, and ot#ercommunication formats and tec#nologies accessible to persons wit# disabilities4@6 >#e Statemust address needs of persons wit# disabilities@= and nondiscrimination on t#e basis ofdisability is included@A4 rt4 =6, Persons wit# Disabilities, includes an obligation to Censure t#eprogressi&e implementation of t#e principle t#at at least fi&e percent of t#e members of t#e

public in electi&e and appointi&e bodies are persons wit# disabilities4C@8

#ile t#ere can beproblems wit# Buota systems, more broadly spea%ing suc# affirmati&e action and usingdi&ersity as a positi&e criterion in applications for Eobs are positi&e de&elopments4

In addition, t#e /onstitution reBuires Parliament to enact legislation on elections4 -rt4 91-0..4 >#e /onstitution specifies t#at t#e legislation on t#e conduct and super&ision ofelections and referenda for elections must ta%e into account t#e special needs of personswit# disabilities4@9

>#e /onstitution stipulates t#at t#e $ational ssembly will include twel&e membersnominated by parliamentary political parties to represent yout#, persons wit# disabilities, andwor%ers4@7 In addition, t#e Senate will include two members, being one man and one woman,

representing persons wit# disabilities4 >#e /onstitution also reBuires Parliament to enactlegislation to promote t#e representation in Parliament of persons wit# disabilities,62 andcounty assemblies are also to include persons wit# disabilities604 >#e &alues and principles

30 )lectoral +aw -07A=, last amended 122=., arts4 10 -6., A6 -= and -A., at #ttp:aceproEect4orgero;enregionsafrica)>)leclaw4pdf&iew431 See arts4 17 and @8, #ana /onstitution -0771., a&ailable at#ttp:www4politicsresources4netdocsg#anaconst4pdf 4 Howe&er, art4 17 also contains negati&epro&isions, pro&iding for nonconsensual treatment in respect of #is or #er residence and Cspeciali(edestablis#mentsC4 t t#e same time, it attempts to pro&ide for affirmati&e action for persons wit#disabilities to engage in business432 rt4 17 -A., #ana /onstitution -0771.433 rt4 90 -c.434 rt4 8 -@. -a., enya /onstitution -1202., a&ailable at #ttp:aceproEect4orgero;enregionsafrica)t#e;constitution;of;%enya;1202&iew435 rt4 10 [email protected] rt4 18 -6.437 /onstitution -1202., art4 =6 -1.438 See arts4 91 -0. -d. and 91 -1. -i.439 rt4 78 -0. -c.440 rt4 022 -b.441 rt4 088 -0. -c.

http://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/africa/ET/Eleclaw.pdf/viewhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/africa/ET/Eleclaw.pdf/viewhttp://www.politicsresources.net/docs/ghanaconst.pdfhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/africa/KE/the-constitution-of-kenya-2010/viewhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/africa/KE/the-constitution-of-kenya-2010/viewhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/africa/ET/Eleclaw.pdf/viewhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/africa/ET/Eleclaw.pdf/viewhttp://www.politicsresources.net/docs/ghanaconst.pdfhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/africa/KE/the-constitution-of-kenya-2010/viewhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/africa/KE/the-constitution-of-kenya-2010/view


15/74

page 12

of public ser&ice include affording adeBuate and eBual opportunities for appointment, trainingand ad&ancement, at all le&els of t#e public ser&ice, of persons wit# disabilities461

n electoral law includes &oting assistance by a person c#osen by t#e person wit# adisability -blind persons, persons wit# p#ysical disabilities or incapacitated &oters.46@

auritius@ >#e constitution and law specifically pro#ibit discrimination on t#e basis ofdisability4

-iger@ >#e electoral code contains a pro&ision on &oting assistance466 $iger also #as &otingby pro3y Cin cases of p#ysical disability or incapacityC6= -but see discussion elsew#ere onpro3y &oting.4 !lind persons are allowed to be accompanied by guides4

Republic o! Congo@ >#e )lectoral law pro&ides for &oter assistance for persons wit#disabilities -not narrowly circumscribed. by a &oter of #is c#oice or a polling place official46A

Senegal: )&ery &oter wit# an impairment ma%ing it impossible to introduce t#e ballot in t#e

en&elope and slide it into t#e ballot bo3 is, on #is or #er reBuest, entitled to be assisted by a&oter's c#oice or a member of t#e polling station684 >#e group of persons wit# disabilities w#omay get assistance is not narrowly circumscribed4 >#e $ational ssociation of t#e DeafSenegal -$SS)$. is acti&e to promote disability rig#ts4 person wit# disability waselected as a member of Parliament and selected as Hig# /ommissioner for Persons wit#Disabilities4

South A!rica: >#e !ill of *ig#ts in t#e Sout# frican /onstitution outlaws discrimination onany ground, including disability4 It furt#er recogni(es sign language as a language to bede&eloped4 +abor legislation reBuires 1 percent of Eobs in t#e public sector to be occupied bypersons wit# disabilities4 lt#oug# t#ere can be problems wit# Buotas in practice, affirmati&emeasures using disability as a positi&e criterion for #iring is a good practice4 >#e

Independent )lectoral /ommission -I)/. liaises, collaborates and interacts wit# indi&idualsand organisations in t#e disability sector, inter alia, wit# D)FS, t#e Sout# frican $ational/ouncil for t#e !lind -S$/!., t#e $ational /ouncil for Persons wit# P#ysical Disabilities,Disabled Persons Sout# frica -DPS, and t#e Office on t#e Persons wit# Disabilitieslocated in t#e Presidency4

Tunisia@ >#e >unisian constitution is in t#e process of being re&ised and it is #oped t#at itwill s#ow good practices by pro#ibiting discrimination on t#e basis of disability, byguaranteeing uni&ersal suffrage wit#out limitations on t#is for persons wit# disabilities4

Bimbab"e: Persons wit# disabilities, especially t#ose wit# &isual impairments, #a&e t#e rig#tto c#oose an assistant during &oting469 >#e disability sector and Uimbabwe )lectoral

/ommittee are wor%ing on action plans and ad&ocacy4

42 rt4 1@1 -0. -iii.443 $ational ssembly and Presidential )lections ct -last re&ised 1227., sections 1@, 1A, @0, 664 !utsee art4 9@ -0., /onstitution -enya. -1202.444 rt4 AA4 It pro&ides t#at any elector wit# a p#ysical disability or wit# a disability w#ic# ma%es itimpossible for #im to insert #is ballot into t#e en&elope and to place it into t#e ballot bo3 is aut#ori(edto be assisted by an elector of #is c#oice or by a polling station official445 )lectoral /ode -0777., art4 86446 rt4 70, )lectoral +aw of t#e *epublic of /ongo -1220.447 rticle +48A, )lectoral /ode448 >#e &oter assistance pro&ision addresses assistance for &oters Cincapacitated by blindness or ot#er p#ysical causeC4 )lectoral ct of 1229, arts4 =0 -0. -a. and A2 -0.4


16/74

page 13

640414 *estrictions

?thiopia: >#e /onstitution lac%s nondiscrimination on t#e basis of disability4 >#e electorallaw e3cludes Cnotoriously insane personsC from &oter registration674 Only )t#iopians Cw#oseelectoral rig#ts are not legally restrictedC can elect or be elected4=2 It furt#er states t#atCw#ere electors are con&icted, rendered insane or deceased, courts, #ospitals and pollingstations, respecti&ely, s#all #a&e t#e duty to fort#wit# report t#e incident to t#e oredaelectoral offices4=0

*hana: In #ana t#e /onstitution states, C)&ery citi(en of #ana of sound mind #as t#erig#t to &ote and entitled to be registered as a &oter for t#e purpose of public elections andreferendaC=1, w#ic# imposes restrictions mainly to persons wit# intellectual and psyc#osocialdisabilities to &ote4 CPeople w#o #a&e been committed to an asylum or Eudged criminallyinsane are not eligible to registerC=@4 >#e same criteria are used in t#e /onstitution and)lectoral law=6 to pro#ibit people becoming candidates for electi&e positions4== $ationallegislation in #ana s#ows concerns about accessibility for persons wit# &isual and p#ysicalimpairments in t#e e3ercise of &oting rig#ts and political participation=A4 Howe&er, t#isignores t#e obligation ensure t#e eBual participation of persons wit# psyc#osocial andintellectual disabilities, w#o are t#us twice e3cluded from society, #a&ing also been e3cludedin t#e /onstitution4

person cannot be registered as a citi(en unless t#ey can spea% and understand anindigenous language of #ana4=8 >#e /onstitution pro&ides for nonconsensual treatment inrespect of t#e residence of a person wit# a disability and also for Cspeciali(edestablis#mentsC4 It e3cludes persons wit# psyc#osocial or intellectual disability from &oting-persons w#o &ote must be Cof sound mindC and may not a member of Parliament orPresident.4=9 >#e Noter *egistration Official's Manual -077=. gi&es as a rationale for t#eCsound mindC reBuirement t#at " >#e law reBuires t#at a &oter be able to distinguis# between

rig#t and wrong and understand t#e c#oices put before t#em on a ballot4C It states: CPeople

49 rt4 12, )lectoral +aw -07A=, last amended 122=.4 See /onsolidated )lection +aws of )t#iopiaincluding 122= amendments, at #ttp:aceproEect4orgero;enregionsafrica)>)leclaw4pdf&iew450 rt4 06 -1.451 rt4 @8 -0.452 rt4 61, #ana /onstitution4 #ttp:www4politicsresources4netdocsg#anaconst4pdf 53 Noter *egistration Official?s Manual: #ttp:aceproEect4orgero;entopics&oter;registration&r3Go22@4pdf&iew

54 rts4 8-0. and 7, -1., )lectoral +aw4#ttp:www4ec4go&4g#userfilesfilepresidentialGparliamentaryGelectionsGlaws4pdf 55 rt4 A1, #ana /onstitution states, L person s#all not be Bualified for election as t#e President of#ana unless444-c. #e is a person w#o is ot#erwise Bualified to be elected a Member of Parliament444Section 76 -1.: L person s#all not be Bualified to be a member of Parliament if #e444-b. #as beenadEudged or ot#erwise declared444-ii. to be of unsound mind or is detained as a criminal lunatic underany law in force in #ana456 rt4 @1, )lectoral +aw: L-0. >#e presiding officer, on t#e application of a &oter w#o is incapacitatedbecause of blindness or ot#er p#ysical cause from &oting in t#e manner directed in t#ese regulations,s#all permit t#e &oter to be assisted by a person of #is own c#oice4 -1. #en #e accedes to t#ereBuest for a &oter under sub;regulation -0., t#e presiding officer s#all record in t#e register oppositet#e name of t#e &oter t#e fact t#at t#e &oter was assisted and t#e reason for assistance457 /onstitution -0771., art4 7 -1.458 Section 0 -71..4

http://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/africa/ET/Eleclaw.pdf/viewhttp://www.politicsresources.net/docs/ghanaconst.pdfhttp://www.politicsresources.net/docs/ghanaconst.pdfhttp://www.politicsresources.net/docs/ghanaconst.pdfhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/topics/voter-registration/vrx_o003.pdf/viewhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/topics/voter-registration/vrx_o003.pdf/viewhttp://www.ec.gov.gh/userfiles/file/presidential_parliamentary_elections_laws.pdfhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/africa/ET/Eleclaw.pdf/viewhttp://www.politicsresources.net/docs/ghanaconst.pdfhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/topics/voter-registration/vrx_o003.pdf/viewhttp://aceproject.org/ero-en/topics/voter-registration/vrx_o003.pdf/viewhttp://www.ec.gov.gh/userfiles/file/presidential_parliamentary_elections_laws.pdf


17/74

page 14

w#o #a&e been committed to an asylum or Eudged criminally insane are not eligible toregister4=7

/enya: alt#oug# t#e /onstitution includes t#e principles of fair representation of personswit# disabilities, and uni&ersal suffrageA2, it disBualifies persons declared Cof unsound mindCfrom being registered as &oters at elections or referenda4A0 In addition, persons can bedisBualified from being elected as a member of Parliament if t#e person is Cof unsoundmindC4A1 lt#oug# t#ere are progressi&e de&elopments in t#e /onstitution, some persons wit#psyc#osocial or intellectual disability would be e3cluded from &oting4 >#e e3istence ofspecific representation of persons wit# disabilities cannot be an e3cuse to e3clude personswit# disabilities from &oting4 >#e electoral law stipulates t#at a person disBualified from beingregistered as an elector can appeal, and may not be disBualified for t#irty days, or later, att#e discretion of t#e Minister4A@

ala"i: >#e /onstitution contains restrictions -sections =0-1.-b., [email protected]., 92-8.-a..e3cluding persons wit# actual or percei&ed mental disability from t#e rig#t to &ote4

ali: >#e Electoral Law -122A. states t#at electors must #a&e t#eir ci&il and political rig#tsand not be subEect to a legal incapacitation by law or pronounced by a EudgeA6, and t#atpersons depri&ed of t#eir rig#t to &ote by a Eudicial decision and t#ose w#o are se&erelyincompetent s#ould not be registered to a &oter listA=4

-iger : >#e /onstitution pro&ides for eBuality of opportunity for persons wit# disabilities in&iew of t#eir promotion andor social reintegretionAA, but t#e )lectoral /ode -0777. states t#atCt#e interdictedC s#ould not be entered on t#e electoral roll4A8 In practice, reportedly, personswit# se&ere disabilities are not &oting but not because t#ey #a&e been legally incapacitated4>#e )lectoral /ode also reBuires presidential or parliamentary candidates to #a&e anotari(ed declaration of candidacy t#at includes a medical certificate dated wit#in t#reemont#s and issued by doctors of public administration4A9

Republic o! the Congo@ >#e /onstitution lea&es election eligibility and CincompatibilitiesC tobe fi3ed by law4 It e3cludes persons Cnot in a #ealt#y p#ysical and mental state, confirmed bya group of t#ree doctors under oat#, designated by t#e /onstitutional /ourtC from being acandidate for office of President4A7 It is as%ed of e&ery citi(en to #a&e an electoral card or anidentification card and be registered on t#e electoral roll4 !iometric ID cards are now

59 p4 7460 rt4 90 -d.61 rt4 9@ -0. -b.462 Section 77 -1. -e.463 $ational ssembly and Presidential )lections ct -last re&ised 1227., section 84

A6 rt4 18, )lectoral +aw, +aw $o4 2A;266 -6 Sept4 122A.,

a&ailable at #ttp:www4sgg4go&4mlJournal2/od)lect4pdf 4 rticle 18: CSont Vlecteurs, les citoyensmaliens des deu3 se3es WgVs de di3 #uit -09. ans au moins, Eouissant de leurs droits ci&iBues etpolitiBues et ne tombant pas sous le coup des interdictions prV&ues par la loi ou prononcVes par le Euge4C65 rt4 194 C $e doi&ent pas Xtre inscrits sur la liste Vlectorale les personnes pri&Ves du droit de &otepar une dVcision de Eustice et les incapables maEeurs4C66 rt4 1A, /onstitution -1= $o&4 1202.67 rt4 9468 rt4 61, )lectoral /ode -0777.469 rt4 =9, /onstitution -1221.4

http://www.sgg.gov.ml/Journal0/CodElect.pdfhttp://www.sgg.gov.ml/Journal0/CodElect.pdf


18/74

page 15

reBuired for all citi(ens, t#ey are difficult to get and it mainly affects people wit# disabilities inrural areas w#o are reBuired to tra&el wit# t#e considered difficulties4

Senegal: dults depri&ed of t#eir legal capacity cannot be registered on t#e electoral list,and are t#us automatically depri&ed of t#e rig#t to &ote482

0ganda: Persons wit# mental and intellectual disabilities are not allowed to &ote or to standfor office on t#e belief t#at t#ey are mentally unsound4 $ominations to political positions canbe bloc%ed using t#e grounds of past e3perience of mental or psyc#osocial disability, w#ic#is discrimination4 In addition, alt#oug# persons wit# disabilities #a&e direct politicalrepresentation at national and local le&els, t#e )lectoral /ommission does not fund t#eelections of persons wit# disabilities at lower le&els, i4e4 +/ = to &illage le&els, gi&ing t#eopportunity only to leaders Cw#o are ric#C4

Bimbab"e@ Uimbabwe's constitution e3cludes persons wit# pysc#osocial or intellectualdisability80, but t#e more recent electoral law guarantees t#e rig#t of e&ery citi(en to &ote andpresent t#emsel&es for office and pro#ibits discrimination on t#e basis of disability in t#is

regard81

4

6404@4 +ac% of accessibility and accommodations

?thiopia: >#ere are largely no accommodations for deaf persons t#us far4 Deaf persons arelac%ing information and unable to get information in sign language4

*hana: >#ere is a lac% of !raille ballots and no accommodation for persons wit# intellectualdisabilities4 >#ere is a lac% of election information, specifically in sign language, easy readand !raille4 lt#oug# t#e law pro&ides for some &oting assistance t#ere are not mec#anismsput into place, in practice4

ali: Information is not distributed in accessible languages and formats4 $o information isa&ailable in !raille, sign language, easy to read format, or sign language interpreters at t#epolls4 In addition, t#ere is no action in consultation to promote &oting rig#ts for persons wit#disabilities4 Nisually impaired persons do not #a&e !raille ballots4 person may accompanyt#e &oter but t#e &oter is not sure w#et#er t#eir will was e3pressed4 Persons wit# sensoryand intellectual disabilities are not enabled to e3ercise t#eir rig#t to &ote4 Persons w#o are#ard of #earing or deaf lac% access to t#e information on t#e candidates and electiondiscussions4

auritius@ During t#e May 1202 elections radio stations reported t#at some persons wit#disabilities were not able to &ote because of inaccessible &oting premises48@

70 rticle +41A-8., )lectoral /ode4

71 Sc#edule @, section @ -1.: L>#e following s#all be disBualified for registration as a &oter for t#eperiods stated #ereunder; -a. any person w#o is found or declared in accordance wit# any ct relatingto mental #ealt# to be mentally disordered or defecti&e as defined in t#at ct, for so long as #e is somentally disordered or defecti&e -b. any person w#o is declared by order of t#e Hig# /ourt to beincapable of managing #is own affairs, for so long as t#at order remains in force4 Sc#edule @ section0 states t#at any candidates for electoral office must be eligible to be registered as a &oter472 )lectoral ct of 1229: L)&ery citi(en #as t#e rig#t ; to participate in go&ernment directly or t#roug#freely c#osen representati&es, and is entitled wit#out distinction on t#e grounds of race, et#nicity,gender, language, political or religious belief, education, p#ysical appearance or disability444to stand for office and cast a &ote freely473 "4S4 Dept4 of State, 1202 Human *ig#ts *eport: Mauritius, a&ailable at#ttp:www4state4go&gdrlrls#rrpt1202af0=6@=74#tm4

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/af/154359.htmhttp://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/af/154359.htm


19/74

page 1$

-igeria@ Inaccessible polling points, lac% of !raille ballots, and lac% of sign language supportfor deaf prsons or accessible political parties' ads, lac% of pro&ision for persons missinglimbs, are mentioned as problems4

-iger : >#ere is total lac% of accessibility of polling stations, and !raille ballots andinformation are not pro&ided for blind persons4 Information is not pro&ided in !raille, signlanguages, or easy to read formats4 >#e cost of an identity card can be pro#ibiti&e topersons wit# disabilities4 >#ere is a lac% of training for election personnel4

Republic o! Congo@ In practice, no accessibility is pro&ided including electoral campaigns4>#ere are no laws, decrees, action plans, programmes, and practical measures to ensuret#e accessibility of &oting material and polling stations and boot#s to persons wit#disabilities4 Persons wit# disabilities are obliged to comply wit# t#e &oting procedure in eBualterms wit# ot#ers, no e3emptions apply4 Information about elections is not a&ailable in signlanguage for deaf people and in !raille for blind and &isually impaired persons4

Senegal@ Information is not a&ailable in !raille, sign language, or easy;to;read formats4

>#ere are no sign language interpreters present at polling stations4

0ganda: t#e )lectoral /ommission is reluctant to !raille ballot papers for t#e &isuallyimpaired w#o are !raille literate, alleging t#at &ery few people can read !raille yet it is &erycostly to process, in "ganda4 >#is subEects &isually impaired persons to depend on guides or readers to cast t#eir &otes w#o mig#t not be &ery reliable4

Bimbab"e@ >#ere is minimal to no accessibility or accommodation in &oting processes4Nenues are not accessible4 >emporary accessible structures are a&ailable only afterreBuesting t#ese4 >#ere is no !raille, and sign language interpreters are not pro&ided by t#eState4 $o definite procedures #a&e been put into place to allow for independent &oting ofpersons wit# disabilities, especially t#ose wit# &isual impairments4 Information on &oter

education and on t#e candidates is not disseminated accessibly or inclusi&ely, as a result ofnegati&e attitudes by t#e community, t#e go&ernment and t#e Uimbabwe )lectoral/ommittee4

6414 >#e mericasOn t#e face of national legislation alone on t#e rig#t to &ote, /anada and Me3ico bot##a&e better situations t#an do ot#er countries in t#e mericas4

/anada #as done important wor% to remo&e an offending pro&ision from its federalelections act and to remo&e restrictions on t#e rig#t to &ote at federal le&el4 It #asmade impro&ements on accessibility but needs to ta%e more proacti&e steps toensure t#at t#e go&ernment ta%es on responsibility for t#is and does not s#ift t#eburden of accessing &oting to t#e &oter, as it currently does by reBuiring &oters wit#disabilities to reBuest a transfer in writing in ad&ance to switc# from an inaccessibleto an accessible polling station4 !ut in t#e mericas, w#ere t#ere are restrictions ont#e rig#t to &ote in federal constitutions and ot#er laws in almost all ot#er countries, itemerges as a leader in t#is regard4

Me3ico too% t#e important steps of pro#ibiting discrimination on t#e basis of disabilityin its national constitution, recogni(ing uni&ersal suffrage in its federal election law,and pro#ibiting any action impeding &oters from &oting4

ll +atin merican countries still restrict t#e rig#t to &ote of persons wit# psyc#osocialand intellectual disabilities4 >#e "nited States of merica #as not ta%en adeBuate


20/74

page #9

steps at t#e federal le&el to ensure eBual access to &ote of all persons wit#disabilities4 it#in t#e "4S4, by far most states restrict t#e rig#t to &ote of persons wit#psyc#osocial and intellectual disabilities4 Howe&er, it is encouraging t#at some statesin t#e "4S4 are mo&ing a#ead in t#is regard, to rationali(e t#eir &oting laws wit# t#erig#t to eBuality of all persons wit# disabilities4

641404 ood practices

Argentina: >#e enforcement aut#ority must ta%e appropriate measures to ensure t#eaccessibility, confidentiality and pri&acy for t#e e3ercise of political rig#ts of people wit#disabilities486 >#ere is a program at national le&el since 122A wit# t#e purpose of facilitatingaccessibility in polling stations to guarantee t#e rig#t to &ote of persons wit# disabilities4 s of today, its recommendations were not applied4 For t#e 1200 elections, t#e Ministry of Interiorissued some recommendations on #ow to address and to assist persons wit# disabilities and#ow to use t#e accessible polling station4 So far, accessibility measures were only applied asa pilot test4 >#ere is no information a&ailable regarding t#e implementation of accessiblepolling stations in t#e upcoming October 1@rd 1200 elections4 >#ere were no broad campaign

on t#e rig#t to &ote wit# cross;disability approac#4 For t#e primaries in 1200, *)DI, P"SSM, /)+S and ot#er #uman rig#ts organi(ations wit# t#e support of t#e ntidiscrimination Office -I$DI., t#e public ministry of t#e city of !uenos ires ->. andt#e $ational Mental Healt# Direction, initiated a campaign for t#e rig#t to &ote of personsinstitutionali(ed in psyc#iatric institutions4 >#ere is &oting assistance in t#at t#e president oft#e polling station s#ould assist t#e person wit# p#ysical impairments to &ote, if needed48=

Canada@ >#e /onstitution pro&ides for t#e rig#t to interpretation for deaf persons48A t t#efederal le&el in /anada today, all citi(ens 09 or older may &ote488 >#is was not t#e case until077@, w#en persons wit# psyc#osocial and intellectual disabilities were finally gi&en t#e rig#tto &ote4 pro&ision e3cluding Ce&ery person w#o is restrained of #is liberty of mo&ement or

depri&ed of t#e management of #is property by reason of mental diseaseC was struc% out oft#e anada Elections !ct in 077@4 >#is was a response to a Federal /ourt of /anada casefinding it to be in conflict wit# section @ of t#e /anadian /#arter of *ig#t and Freedoms,guaranteeing e&ery citi(en of /anada t#e rig#t to &ote489 >oday, t#ere are no restrictions in/anada?s constitution or Elections !ct on t#e rig#t to &ote for persons wit# disabilities,including on grounds of depri&ation of legal capacity487 )lections /anada -go&ernment of/anada. produced a wor%ing paper on C>#e )lectoral Participation of Persons wit# Special

74

rticle 02=, +aw $o4 1A,=8075 rt4 76, +aw4 no4 07476= amended by +aw no4 1=,9=9476 rt4 06, Section =, C+egal *ig#tsC, /onstitution ct of 0791 -/anada.4 C party or witness in anyproceedings w#o does not understand or spea% t#e language in w#ic# t#e proceedings are conductedor w#o is deaf #as t#e rig#t to t#e assistance of an interpreter4C77 rt4 @, Section @, C)lectoral *ig#tsC, /onstitution ct of 0791 -/anada., pro&ides for a general rig#tto &ote: C)&ery citi(en of /anada #as t#e rig#t to &ote in an election of members of t#e House of/ommons or of a legislati&e assembly and to be Bualified for members#ip t#erein4C &ailable at#ttp:laws4Eustice4gc4caeng/onstpage;004#tmlKanc#orsc:8478 )lections /anada, >#e )&olution of Federal Noting *ig#ts for /anadians wit# Disabilities, )lectoralInsig#t -pril 1226., a&ailable at #ttp:elections4careseimarticleGsearc#article4aspRid08YlangeYfrmPageSi(e=479 See arts4 @;6, in Part 0, /anada )lections ct -S4/4 1222, c4 7., a&ailable at #ttp:laws;lois4Eustice4gc4caengacts);14204

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-11.html#anchorsc:7http://elections.ca/res/eim/article_search/article.asp?id=17&lang=e&frmPageSize=5http://elections.ca/res/eim/article_search/article.asp?id=17&lang=e&frmPageSize=5http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-2.01/http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-2.01/http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-2.01/http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-11.html#anchorsc:7http://elections.ca/res/eim/article_search/article.asp?id=17&lang=e&frmPageSize=5http://elections.ca/res/eim/article_search/article.asp?id=17&lang=e&frmPageSize=5http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-2.01/http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-2.01/


21/74

page #1

$eedsC to e3amine t#e need for and ma%e recommendations on &oter outreac#492 ccess to&oting, #owe&er, remains Cune&enC at t#e pro&ince le&el490

>#e /anadian $ational Institute for t#e !lind -/$I!. distributes information on elections toblind and partially sig#ted persons on be#alf of Federal, Pro&incial and Municipalo&ernments4 >emplates are to be a&ailable on reBuest for electors wit# &isualimpairments491 !allots are a&ailable in alternati&e formats at t#e polls4 >#e go&ernmentwebsite publis#ing its election law #as employed a tool%it9@ to ma%e t#e website accessible, it#as an accessibility lin% on t#e front page of t#e legislation website, and #as postedinformation about its use of web accessibility standards t#ere496 Information is madea&ailable in !raille, digital and large print4 >#ere is some training for polling officers duringt#e regular pre;election training, informing and educating t#em on #ow to ensure t#e rig#t to&ote of persons wit# disabilities t#roug# accessibility and accommodation reBuirements forpolls but more is needed4

Federal electoral law pro&ides for #ome &oting -section 16@40., and states t#at persons wit#disabilities can apply to transfer to anot#er polling station in order to &ote at an accessible

polling station -section 0=7.49=

-Howe&er, t#is would not be needed if all polling stations wereaccessible, and it s#ifts t#e onus to t#e rig#t;#older4.

ccommodations include: -i. le&el access for polling stations -ii. transfer certificates foroccasions w#ere t#ere is not le&el access at a polling station -iii. mobile polling forinstitutions, nursing #omes, etc4 -i&. ballot bo3es are mo&ed from room to room in #ospitals,institutions, etc4 w#ere residents are unable to lea&e t#eir bed -&. public education andelection information as outreac# to &oters wit# disabilities -&i. training for returning officersand elections officials on t#e needs of &oters wit# disabilities -&ii. templates for mar%ingballots for t#e &isually impaired -&iii. communications assistance t#roug# means of aninterpreter -i3. Lspecial ballot -ad&ance mail;in ballots. and ad&ance polling4

In one /anadian pro&ince, Ontario, t#e elections office reBuired t#e /#ief )lections Officer toma%e a report of barriers and problems encountered in elections wit# accessibility andincidents of restricted access as well as measures to correct t#e problem4 During elections att#e municipal, pro&incialterritorial and federal le&el, it #as become commonplace to #old allcandidates meetings on t#e issue of disability4 >#ese are generally coordinated by a di&ersityof disability groups in t#e Eurisdiction in Buestion4 Ot#er initiati&es #a&e ta%en place in localassociations for community li&ing to educate people wit# intellectual disabilities and t#eirfamilies and friends about t#e rig#t to &ote, #ow to &ote, t#e electoral process and t#eplatforms of t#e candidates in t#e current election4 Noting assistance in /anada can be pro&ided by a deputy returning officer on reBuest by anelector w#o cannot read or #as a p#ysical disability, in t#e presence of t#e poll cler%4 It canalso be pro&ided by a friend or related person,9A pro&ided t#at friend or relati&e ta%es an oat#

and #as not assisted any anot#er person to &ote in t#e election4

Chile: People wit# disability wit# an impairment t#at ma%es it difficult to &ote on t#eir ownmay be accompanied to t#e &oting station by anot#er person w#o is an adult, and s#all be

80 -1228., a&ailable at #ttp:www4elections4caresrecpartpaperspecialGneedsspecialGneedsGe4pdf 481 ibid482 rt4 0=6 -1., /anada )lections ct483 eb )3perience >ool%it -)>.84 #ttp:laws;lois4Eustice4gc4caengccessibility9= /anada )lections ct4 486 rt4 0==4

http://www.elections.ca/res/rec/part/paper/special_needs/special_needs_e.pdfhttp://www.elections.ca/res/rec/part/paper/special_needs/special_needs_e.pdfhttp://tbs-sct.ircan.gc.ca/projects/gcwwwtemplateshttp://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Accessibility/http://www.elections.ca/res/rec/part/paper/special_needs/special_needs_e.pdfhttp://tbs-sct.ircan.gc.ca/projects/gcwwwtemplateshttp://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Accessibility/


22/74

page ##

entitled to elect to be assisted in t#e act of &oting4 In case of doubt as to t#e nature of t#edisability of t#e &oter, t#e President s#all consult t#e ot#er polling wor%ers to adopt t#eir finaldecision4 If #e or s#e c#ooses to be assisted, #e or s#e must communicate &erbally, in signlanguage or in writing to t#e president of t#e &oting station, t#at a trusted person , wit#outdistinction of se3, will Eoin #im or #er at t#e polling station, disallowing t#e President or anyot#er person to impede or #inder t#e e3ercise of t#e rig#t to be assisted4 >#e secretary oft#e table s#all record t#e assisted &ote, and bot# t#e &oter's and #is assistant identity498

Noters w#o enter t#e &oting station may not stay t#ere for more t#an a minute, e3cept forpersons wit# disabilities, w#o may use a reasonable time499

Costa Rica@ >#e court may design special ballots for citi(ens wit# limited mobility t#atpre&ents t#em from using t#e regular ones497

*uatemala@ In a proEect in uatemala, t#e International Foundation for )lectoral Systems-IF)S. trained guides to assist &oters wit# disabilities on )lection Day, built ramps to pollingcenters, and de&eloped and distributed tactile &oter education materials4

amaica@ >#e /onstitution contains restrictions -sections @8 -1. -c. and 62 -1. -f.. e3cludingpersons wit# actual or percei&ed mental disability from t#e rig#t to &ote4

e7ico: Me3ico pro#ibits discrimination on t#e basis of disability in its /onstitution472 Itsfederal election law indicates t#at &oting is a rig#t and obligation, and t#at t#e &ote isCuni&ersal, free, secret, direct, personal, and non;transferableC4 It also ma%es any actionpro#ibiting t#e &oter from &oting illegal470 Me3ico's &oting assistance pro&ision in its federalelectoral law only ma%es pro&ision for persons wit# p#ysical disabilities, yet, itsolling lace#uideboo$ %&'''( s#ows a more inclusi&e approac#, indicating t#at &oting assistance maybe gi&en by a companion -presumably of t#e person's c#oosing. to persons w#o are Cblind,&isually impaired, or incapacitated in suc# a way as to p

Documents

Response Ida