The UN disability convention: Historic process, strong prospects, and why the U.s. Should ratify

On December 13, 2006, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The Convention is historic and path-breaking on several levels, both in protection terms for the world's 650 million persons with disabilities who may now draw upon its provisions in defense of their internationally-protected rights, and in relation to the unprecedented level of civil society input and engagement in the negotiation process. This sustained and constructive engagement has given rise to a dynamic process of dialogue, cooperation, and mutual trust that will fuel monitoring and implementation work, at national and international levels alike, long into the future. This Article describes both the negotiating process that gave rise to the treaty and the major themes and motivating tenets that underlie its substantive provisions. In so doing, it draws attention to the two overarching paradigm shifts ushered into international human rights law by the Disability Convention. These critical paradigm shifts are foundational to the Convention and the dynamic processes that brought it to life. Provided they continue to be actively and constructively embraced in the implementation phase, they will prove decisive in ensuring that the supervisory and subsidiary framework of international human rights law can successfully be engaged to effect real, meaningful, and enduring change for the day-to-day realities of persons with disabilities in all countries and regions of the world. The prospects for this are encouraging. The Convention received a record number of signatures on its opening date - eighty-four - and is expected to enter into force more rapidly than any other universal human rights treaty in history. In the face of such broad global support, the decision of the United States not to pursue ratification is highly troubling. The Article concludes that the U.S. position, particularly in light of the nation's strong historic commitment to disability rights, is unjustified and warrants reversal.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,357
External links
  •   Try with proxy.
  • Through your library Only published papers are available at libraries
    References found in this work BETA

    No references found.

    Citations of this work BETA
    Similar books and articles

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index


    Total downloads

    4 ( #198,584 of 1,088,782 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    1 ( #69,666 of 1,088,782 )

    How can I increase my downloads?

    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature

    Start a new thread
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.