The 2006 UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD or Convention) is a great step in the achievement of disability rights.

 Not only does the Convention fill a gap in international human rights law but it also brings a human rights dimension to disability issues. Furthermore, it creates a shift of paradigm no longer regarding disabled persons as persons who need assistance because of their impairments (the so-called medical model) but considering them as right-holders who should be integrated into society (the so-called social model).

The preamble of CRPD confirms this. This is not the only achievement of CRPD. In addition to enouncing the rights of persons with disabilities, the Convention outlines the institutional changes which States have to undertake in order to facilitate its implementation. Article 33(2) of CRPD requires that States designate or establish one or more independent mechanisms to promote, protect and monitor the implementation of the Convention taking into account the ‘Principles relating to the status and functioning of national institutions for the protection and promotion of human rights’.

These Principles, commonly called the Paris Principles, were drafted at the First International Workshop of National Human Rights Institutions held in Paris in 1991 and endorsed by both the UN General Assembly and Commission on Human Rights in 1993.4 By focusing not only on international monitoring but also on national monitoring, CRPD created another shift of paradigm.

The article adopts a two-pronged approach. On the one hand, it explains the functions of NHRIs. On the other hand, it evaluates whether NHRIs are suited to play the role of independent mechanisms. This includes an examination of the consequences for them of the reference to the Paris Principles in Article 33(2) of CRPD.

Article 33(2) of CRPD provides that States should designate or establish one or more independent mechanisms to promote, protect and monitor the implementation of the Convention taking into account the Paris Principles. This should be applauded, because human rights treaties rely on national monitoring. Although the importance of national monitoring has been acknowledged since the inception of the UN, it took more than five decades to provide for it in human rights treaties, first with OPCAT and then with CRPD.

The focus on independent bodies obliges States to consider how they will adapt their institutions as soon as and sometimes even before they ratify a human rights treaty. While this is good news, there are also obstacles. As shown in this article, Article 33(2) raises complex questions some of which have no definitive answers. The responsibility of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities will be huge in this regard.

You can read the full article here.