Download full text
(334.4Kb)
Citation Suggestion
Please use the following Persistent Identifier (PID) to cite this document:
https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-427409
Exports for your reference manager
Parallel Report to the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: in the context of the Initial Report of Germany under Article 35 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
[research report]
Abstract "Germany has made steady efforts to implement the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (CRPD) since it came i
nto force in 2009. The Federal Government, the
Länder
, and the
municipalities are studying the aims of the CRPD and striving (to varying degrees) to promote equa... view more
"Germany has made steady efforts to implement the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (CRPD) since it came i
nto force in 2009. The Federal Government, the
Länder
, and the
municipalities are studying the aims of the CRPD and striving (to varying degrees) to promote equal rights
and participation for persons with disabilities within their jurisdictions. Numerous steps have been taken
in the name of the Convention to promote the rights of persons with disabilities.
It is particularly encouraging that many non
-
governmental actors, including persons with disabilities, now
f
eel closely involved with the Convention’s ma
ndate and are working actively to implement its stipulations.
One point of criticism, however, is that these positive developments in many cases have failed to go hand
in hand with a paradigm shift in public policy towards more self
-
determination and equal
participation
for persons with disabilities. The real structural changes that would lead to this shift have yet to be made.
In the view of the National Monitoring Body (NMB), the State Party (SP) is far from having taken all the
p
ossible and necessary ste
ps for the implementation of the Convention in the period from 2009 to 2015.
In many cases, the significance and scope of the Convention have failed to have any legal or practical
i
mpact. For example, no human rights perspective is discernible in the development of government
programmes (see Article 6: Protection against Violence for Women and Girls, and Article 14: Rights of
People in Psychiatric Care), in legislative measures, or in administrative and court decisions (Article 9:
Extending Accessi
bility). Although participation by persons with disabilities and their representative
organisations is frequently possible, it does not always take place in suitable and meaningful formats
(Article 4: Participation).
Finally, some of the Convention’s specifications, such as the principle of inclusion, have a socio
-
political
di
mension. A controversial public debate about inclusion is underway in Germany, which is reflected in
some parts of this report (Article 24: Requirements of an Inclusive School System; Article 27: Employment
in Workshops).
Many leading institutions in the State Party (Federal Government and the provinces (
Länder
))
are in favour
o
f preserving special facilities for persons with disabilities in their existing form. In some sectors
–
such a
s
education, housing, and the workplace
–
this entails the preservation of double structures (Article 19: De
-
institutionalisation) which, however, carry the danger of segregation and discrimination.
Overall, it is clear that the specifications of the CRPD
have not yet had sufficient impact on the everyday
r
eality of persons with disabilities in Germany. Emphatic recommendations from the CRPD Committee will
be necessary to prompt policymakers to address the existing problems, known points of conflict, and
un
resolved implementation issues with the necessary determination.
A
further
point of
criticism
concerns
the
State
Party
’s approach to
its
reporting obligations
in
this
pr
ocedure,
which
fal
ls
well
short
of
its
pot
ential.
While the Initial Report (2011) mentions a series of
initiatives and programmes for promoting the participation of persons with disabilities as well as listing
measures to ensure
their equality, no sufficiently self
-
critical analysis of existing problems and deficits in
the implementation of the Convention has been carried out so far. Many articles of the
State Party’s
report
simply outline the legal situation without addressing its implem
entatio
n in practice, so that the
State
Party’s
portrayal of the situation is ultimately unsatisfactory.
The State Party has not succeeded in responding to the CRPD Committee’s List of Issues with sufficient
a
wareness of the problems and necessary solutions and in
adequate detail. Some of its answers fail to
address the issues at all. Particularly problematic are the responses concerning the jurisdiction of the
Länder
, some of which do touch on the various problems, but only in greatly simplified form while others
a
re passed over in their entirety. No proper overview emerges from these descriptions." (author's abstract)... view less
Keywords
Federal Republic of Germany; international agreement; UNO; disability; handicapped
Classification
Law
Free Keywords
UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention; Staatenberichtsprüfung; Parallelbericht; Monitoring-Stelle zur UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention
Document language
English
Publication Year
2015
City
Berlin
Page/Pages
39 p.
Status
Published Version; reviewed
Licence
Deposit Licence - No Redistribution, No Modifications