3B. Regional Level

Table of Contents

  1. EU Charter of Fundamental Rights
  2. The African Charter on Human and People’s Rights
  3. The Inter-American Convention
  4. Regional Agreements in Asia

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

Source: Body of Knowledge

Before discussion of the charter itself, there is a short review of what preceeded its adoption in 2000. Fifty years earlier, the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR) formed the European Court of Human Rights as a protection mechanism that any European could use if they felt their civil and political rights were being violated. In 1961, the European Social charter extended these to fundamental social and economic rights; it also names ability status specifically as a point which could not be discriminated against.

In light of these two predecessors, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000) set to collate and provide consistency to all EU member states. It is based on its two predecessors, alongside rights within specific constitutional traditions of some EU member states, the Community Charter of Fundamental Social Rights of Workers, and other international conventions that the EU or member states were accountable to. The Treaty of Lisbon made the charter legally binding in 2009.

Article 26 recognizes the right to community living for people with disabilities. Article 21 prohibits discrimination on various things, including 'genetic features,' 'disability,' and 'age.'

Source: EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

Reading the full text of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, here are other articles that I view as being relevant to the lives of Disabled people:

Source: Equality and Human Rights Commission, What is the Charter?

I actually had to go hunting for this link, and when I finally found it the top of the page gives a warning reading 'This Charter no longer applies to the UK.'

Material here is very similar to that found in the Body of Knowledge. We also get some more clarification on the difference between the Convention and the Charter.

[Comparison between European Human Rights Convention and Charter]
Document Drafting Body Interpreted By
Convention Council of Europe (Strasbourg) European Court of Human Rights
Charter The European Union Court of Justice of the EU

The authors also suggest that the Charter could be viewed as a larger framework of which the Convention forms only a part. Indeed, they operate within two different apparatuses-- after the UK withdrew from the EU, the Convention remained relevant while the Charter no longer was applicable.

Additionally, an advisory body called the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, or the FRA, provides advice regarding the charter to EU Member States and institutions.

Source: Council of Europe, The European Social Charter

Note that this section is entirely regarding the European Social Charter, not to be mistaken with the European Union Charter of Fundamental Human Rights.

At the section titled 'The Charter at a Glance,' we are introduced to the Social charter as the counterpart of the European convention. Protecting social and eceonomic rights, the Charter places special attention on those it calls 'vulnerable persons:' old adults, children, Disabled people, and migrants. It also calls itself the Social Constitution of Europe.

Sidenote: Interesting to contrast this attitude towards the attitude presented in the Body of Knowledge, which is very much pro-EU Charter and writes off the Social Charter as being of an older era.

In the section, European Social Charter and European Convention on Human Rights, we get an absolutely granular discussion of how the Charter and Convention work together. Where there is overlap, the Charter tends to be more specific. To give a very banal example, the Convention grants the right to marry and then the Charter will ensure equality between spouses. Freedom of assembly and association is covered under the Convention, while the Charter identifies specific obligations and rights specific to trade unions.

Also note that while the Charter was taken up in 1961, an Additional Protocol was released in 1988, and the Revised Charter was adopted in 1996. It seems that all three of these things kinda comprise the 'Social Charter,' when that term is employed generically.

In the section, European Social Charter and EU Law, we learn that there is no uniformity amongst EU members when it comes to whether they have signed onto the Social Charter and its iterations of 1961, 1988, and 1996. All EU members are of course, signatories to things like the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the laws of EU itself has basically covered all of what the Social Charter did, "albeit with some differences of both form and substance." The section seems to conclude saying that it would be nice if there was more uniformity, almost mourning the fact that the EU laws have superceded it on many fronts.

The African Charter on Human and People’s Rights

Source: Body of Knowledge

The African Charter on Human and People's Rights was adopted in 1981. It does not explicitly name disability status as a category that can't be disciminate, but as is the pattern that we've seen with these other documents, this document has indeed been wielded to serve that purpose.

The African Disability Rights Protocol, adopted as an extension to the charter in 2018, is not yet come into force. It requires 15 ratifications. The ADRP takes from the CRPD and adapts it to its regional context.

For example, Article 11 of the ADRP starts off the same as Article 8 of the CRPD when it describes prevention of harmful practices. The ADRP goes on to name 'witchcraft, abandonment, concealmnent, ritual killings, or the association of disability with omens' as specific harmful practices that should be prevented.

Source: Organization of African Unity, African Charter of Human and Peoples' Rights

This is an excellent source but it's not accessible. It's a scanned PDF.

I did some digging and HTML version of the African Charter of Human and People's Rights

One damning observation, right from the start is that the IAAP gets the name wrong. It's not People's rights. It's Peoples' rights, as in the rights of many different sovereign 'peoples,' nations in other words.

I'd also like to quote a section of the preamble here:

Conscious of their duty to achieve the total liberation of Africa, the peoples of which are still struggling for their dignity and genuine independence, and undertaking to eliminate colonialism, neo-colonialism, apartheid, zionism and to dismantle agressive foreign military bases and all forms of discrimination, particularly those based on race, ethnic group, colour, sex, language, religion, or political opinions.

What a resonating paragraph, and when I think of Congo, Sudan, and Palestine in 2024, it almost brings me to tears.

Article 2 names a bunch of different characteristics that can't be used as basis for discimination. Disability isn't one of the things names, but is qualified through "other statuses" which is named at the very end.

Article 9 discusses the right of every individual to receive information. I assume that this could be used as support for accessible information and communication.

Source: University of Pretoria, #RatifyADRP: Call on African leaders to ratify the African Disability Rights Protocol

This is a video that basically has a bunch of people from diverse African nations speaking in their languages and calling on their leaders to ratify the disability rights protocol. We also learn that at the time of the video's production (2021), no state had ratified it, though 12 states has signed it.

It's a powerful video but there's no transcript provided, meaning it's not accessible according to WCAG 2.2. Especially due to the various languages being spoken, it isn't accessible. Maybe... fix that?

Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Persons with Disablities

Source: Body of Knowledge

The Inter-American Convention, adopted 1999, precedes the CRPD. It was signed in Guatamala and is the first regional treaty adressing the rights of Disabled people specifically. Article III of the Convention adresses architectural, transporation, and communication obstacles across a range of domains spanning the full breadth of human life be eliminated 'to the extent possible.' Again, even before the CRPD came into force, legislators were talking about caveating accomodation with 'reasonable'-ness.

Source: Full Text of Inter-American Convention

It's much shorter than the CRPD.

Article I defines disability through a medical-functional lens with a small nod to the social model.

Article II is a general statement of objective: the elimination of all forms of discrimanation against persons with disabilities and promotion of their full integration into society.

There are two parts to Article III. The first part is as the Body of Knowledge describes: a call for environmental accessibility. The second part is a major call to prevent disabilities as much as possible, and provide early detection and treatment at a young age. It also asks for stigma-reducing education campaigns to be aimed at the public.

Regional Agreements in Asia

Source: League of Arab States, Arab Charter on Human Rights

I'm quite unsure what they want us to get from this, because they've just linked the text of the Arab Charter and provided zero context. I do feel like I'm swimming in deep water here.

Article 3 and Article 40 are the relevant ones here.

Article 3 is the general anti-discimination clause that names a bunch of characterstics that cannot serve as the basis for discimination, of which physical and mental disability are explicitly named.

Article 40 is concerned with the rights of Disabled people. Accessibility to public and private spaces is part of this, as is education and health services, social services to Disabled people and people who support them, and the promise to 'do whatever is needed to avoid placing those persons in institutions.'

The domain of information and communications isnt' really mentioned in Article 40, and the obligation is purely levied on the state.

Source: ASEAN Human Rights Declaration

Signed in 2012 by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. ASEAN comprises of the following: Brunei, Combodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam.

In terms of anti-discimination provisions, Article 2 is what we normally see. Disability is one of the categories that is explicitly named.

ASEAN then doubles down and in Article 4, reaffirms that the rights of Disabled people, as well as women, children, elderly, migrant workers, and other vulnerable groups, and inalienable and indivisable from human rights.

Unlike the Arab Charter, Disabled people don't get their own article.

Source: ESCAP, Incheon strategy

ESCAP stands for 'Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific' and god this PDF is massive.

The Incheon strategy is heavily tied to the CRPD. They are based on the same principles. The Strategy has 10 goals, and the one concerned with accessibility is Goal 3. It covers physical spaces, assitive tech and accessibility of ICT. Accessibility of websites is a metric they will measure when taking into account the effectiveness of the Incheon strategy.

Again, they just lead us directly to the full text of the declaration and present it with no context. It is my understanding that at this point, the Incheon strategy was subsumed by the Jakarta Declaration in 2023, rendering the whole point moot?

IAAP, I'm confused.