Personal tools
Elections and DisabilityEvery vote counts. The secret ballot is the cornerstone of democracy and the right to vote is universal. These are the absolutes of election rights, and are among the phrases which motivate, even inspire, election workers, who in many nations face daunting challenges as they strive to carry out free and fair elections. Yet in many elections, these best of intentions rarely extend to or enfranchise citizens with disabilities. The election laws of most nations establish criteria that limits the right to vote for people with psychiatric disorders. This criterion varies widely among nations. In some, those determined by court order to be insane cannot vote. In others, the right to vote is lost when a court appoints a legal guardian. In other nations still, the franchise is lost when someone is institutionalized, or even when someone is "known to be insane." No standards govern these laws, which seem subject to stereotypical and outdated views of mental disability. The Elections and Disability Encyclopaedia topic review examples of election practices which create barriers for voters with disabilities, acquaint election authorities with emerging international standards on the electoral rights of disabled citizens and assist election authorities to identify specific strategies to enfranchise voters with different types of disabilities. Discrimination by Law and Mental DisabilityThe election laws of most nations establish a criteria that limits the right to vote for people with psychiatric disorders. This criterion varies widely among nations. In some, those determined by court order to be insane cannot vote. In others, the right to vote is lost when a court appoints a legal guardian. In other nations still, the franchise is lost when someone is institutionalized, or even when someone is "known to be insane." No standards govern these laws, which seem subject to stereotypical and outdated views of mental disability.
In consultation with global experts in the fields of disability, election law and practice, and international human rights standards, IFES and the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) have developed a "bill of electoral rights for people with disabilities," which argues that election law cannot discriminate against individuals with intellectual or psychiatric disabilities. Further, this "bill of electoral rights" has determined that a test of competency cannot be used to deprive any single individual or group of individuals of the right to vote, unless that same test of competency is applied to each and every citizens. For additional information on this important topic, see: http://www.electionaccess.org/en/resources/publications/458/
Discrimination by Law and the Secret BallotThe right to vote in secret is a cornerstone of democracy, and is recognized as such by nearly all nations through their ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The secret ballot is a feature of possibly every election law in the world. However, the practice of elections in nearly every nation results in the blind citizen being dependent on another to cast his or her ballot. And logic tells us that a secret between two people is no secret. If all citizens are to have equal access to the election process, then the election process must include procedures to enable blind citizens to cast a secret ballot. It is surprisingly easy to do so. In nations which use a paper ballot for voting, numerous jurisdictions have developed a ballot guide to help a blind voter independently mark the ballot. In most instances, this guide is a folder in which the regular ballot is inserted. The folder contains holes which correspond to the boxes on the ballot paper. On the folder are markers - sometimes Braille, sometimes raised bumps or lines - that help the voter navigate up and down the folder. Some election management bodies use a cassette tape as supplementary guide to the folder. For examples of ballot guides from Mexico, see: http://www.electionaccess.org/en/resources/voter-education/tactile-ballot-guides/467/ In jurisdictions using electronic voting systems, markings in Braille may be used (Brazil) or a combination of Braille and synthesized voice. These approaches are becoming must more common in the United States, where federal law now requires all voting systems to be accessible to blind and disabled voters by no later than 2006. Removing Barriers for Voters with Mobility LimitationsElection authorities wouldn't dream of placing a polling station at the top of a rugged mountain, miles from the nearest village. Yet, for a wheelchair user or an elderly voter who uses a walker, a second floor polling station is just as inaccessible as that mountain. As more and more disabled citizens seek to take their place in society, and as society's age, public agencies need to put into place strategies that are inclusive and that promote full and equal participation. In selecting polling stations, election authorities should envision having level access from the curbside outside of the polling station all the way inside the building to the polling booth itself. And that polling booth should be at table height, reachable by someone using a wheelchair. At an absolute minimum, all polling stations should be on the ground floor and election authorities should consult with their local disability organizations to develop standards for selecting polling stations. Many industrialized nations have established guidelines for polling station design, and it is common to see election sites with temporary and/or permanent ramps to ensure easy access. It is also becoming increasingly common to see polling sites in homes for the elderly, at hospitals, and in other settings where elderly or disabled people gather. A few developing nations have begun to address the issue of polling place accessibility. The best of these efforts begins with a commitment to have ground floor voting only, and working toward having ramped entrances to all polling stations. Election Monitoring By Citizens with DisabilitiesSince 2000, IFES has worked with disability organizations in eleven nations to train over 1,300 people with disabilities to serve as election monitors. This exercise contributes to election reform, as disabled citizens become knowledgeable of the election process, and become informed partners to election management bodies. In countries as diverse as Albania, El Salvador, and Ghana, disability groups have developed collaborative relationships and formal agreements with election commissions, resulting in specific reforms to the election process. For example, as a direct result of election monitoring exercises in Albania and El Salvador, election authorities have agreed to ground floor voting. In Ghana, the election authorities agreed to develop and pilot test a ballot guide for blind voters. Election monitoring by disabled citizens can also lead to a change in public attitude about the rights and abilities of people with disabilities, and about their ability to play a positive role in shaping a democratic society. For reports on election monitoring activities Timor-Leste, see: http://www.electionaccess.org/en/resources/voter-education/videos/430/ and in Indonesia, see: http://www.electionaccess.org/en/resources/publications/165/
Emerging International StandardsThe International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) establishes clear benchmarks for the world's election laws and practices. Over the past two years, the ICCPR, IFES and the International IDEA - two of ACE's project partners - have launched an effort to develop international standards of electoral access for citizens with disabilities. Central to this effort is the involvement of representatives of global and national disability organizations, regional and national electoral bodies, and multilateral agencies that promote democracy and human rights. Much of this important work has been funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency. In September 2002, IFES and IDEA convened a four-day meeting in Sigtuna, Sweden, at which approximately 45 representatives of disability organizations, election agencies, parliaments, and international democracy agencies met to draft and approve a "bill of electoral rights for persons with disabilities," and accompanying guidelines for election agencies. The "bill of electoral rights" is available, in multiple languages, including English, French, Spanish, Bosnian, Macedonian, Serbian, Albanian, and Bahasa Indonesian, at: http://www.ifes.org/election-materials/bill-electoral-rights-citizens-disabilities These guidelines address a number of key issues, including election rights and competency; election standards for assisted voting, and election standards for mobile and off-site voting. IFES, IDEA, the Inter-Parliamentary Union, and disability and election experts are currently at work on phase two of this effort to develop model election law provisions to ensure full electoral participation by disabled citizens. A draft version of these provisions can be received by contacting IFES' human rights advisor, Jerry Mindes, at [email protected]. Comments are most welcome.
Resources
Links to Disability OrganizationsToo many election laws are written by people who assume they know what is best for voters with disabilities. All too often, this results in election law provisions which perpetuate stereotypes about disability, and treat disabled voters as second class citizens. To put an end to these shortcomings, election management bodies are encouraged to consult regularly and openly with organizations of people with disabilities, and to seek their input in the design of outreach programs, in the design of ballots, and in the establishment of criteria to select polling stations. The following global disability organizations have affiliates in most nations:
ContributorsFrom 2001-2006, Jerry Mindes led IFES' global initiative to enfranchise people with disabilities and also guided IFES' work in the broader field of human rights and elections. Mr. Mindes is a recognized expert on issues affecting the political, social and economic advancement of people with disabilities in developing nations.
Iraq: Increasing Engagement of the Election Commission with Persons with DisabilitiesBy Jacky Sutton Background to disability rights awareness in IraqIraq signed the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in January 2012 and ratified it in March 2013. [1] Ratification requires Iraq to introduce anti-discrimination legislation and eliminate laws and practices prejudicial to people with disabilities (Art. 4(1)). CPRD aims to “promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity” (Art. 1). It shifts the emphasis from a charitable or medical approach to impairment to one that is based on a framework of fundamental, and therefore existing, human rights. This means recognising the agency of the person rather than seeing them as victims - a view which is a factor in global patterns of exclusion and removal of autonomy, which varies according to religious or cultural contexts but consistently positions people with disabilities as cursed, tragic, marginal or passive against a social norm of “able-bodiedness” or “ability”. CPRD asserts that disability is an evolving concept that results from the interaction between an individual’s capabilities and non-responsive and non-inclusive environments, which are characterised by factors identified by the first ever Global Report on Disability by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Bank as including cultural prejudice, inadequate policies, lack of data, inadequate funding, lack of accessible services or inaccessible buildings or information. [2] The CPRD takes a dynamic, inclusive and revolutionary approach that is not reflected in current Iraqi constitutional or cultural norms. A report from the USAID-funded Access to Justice Program in 2014 found that, “While most Iraqis with disabilities consider their impairment to be the source of the problems they face, they also note that families, society at large and government institutions present key obstacles to their enjoyment of life, health, mobility and full participation in society.” [3] Iraq’s Constitution (2005) guarantees social and health security in the case of “employment disability” (Art. 30:2) and State “care” for “the handicapped and those with special needs”, declaring that it shall “ensure their rehabilitation in order to reintegrate them into society, and this shall be regulated by law” (Art. 32). [4] The 2005 Constitution has been criticized as being unrepresentative and the 55-member Iraqi Constitution Drafting Committee as reflecting expatriate rather than Iraqi concerns. Nonetheless the inclusion of government responsibilities for disability care, which continued a trend initiated in the 1950s, opened the way for developing legal frameworks to support the human rights of people with disabilities pre-CPRD. In the 1970s Iraq had the most advanced health care systems in the developing world; the Iran-Iraq war increased the pressure on this system as veterans returned from the front lines with mental and physical injuries. Subsequent government oppression and war-mongering caused widespread mental trauma [5] while UN sanctions compounded the problems for those with physical impairments or mental illness. [6] During the years of Ba’ath Party oppression and the UN sanctions, many medical professionals fled to Europe, where many of them had been sent for government-funded training in the 1970s and 1980s. Some of them returned to Iraq in 2003 and drafted a Mental Health Law that sought to destigmatise mental illness and open the way for a more inclusive society. [7] However in the chaos that followed the removal of Saddam Hussein and the dismantling of effective government, disability rights were pushed to the side and medical professionals, many of whom had been members of the Ba’ath Party in order to gain access to employment or foreign scholarships, were dismissed from their jobs [8] or targeted by criminal gangs or sectarian militia [9] and left the country. [10] People with disabilities are eligible to receive cash transfer benefits and specified services from the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (MOLSA), as well as basic health care and rehabilitative services from the Ministry of Health (MOH). The cash transfer benefit is available to qualified vulnerable Iraqis living below the poverty line, and includes persons with disabilities as a specific targeted group. These entitlements are protected under laws passed in 2009 to compensate victims (or their families) of military operations and terrorist attacks, in 2013 on the “Care of Persons with Disabilities and Special Needs,” and the Social Protection Law of February 2014. In the Kurdistan Region of Iraq a law passed in 2011 provides stipends to persons with disabilities and special needs, whose applications are assessed by a special committee, and a 2012 law mandated a three percent quota for public sector employment. However the UN’s human rights office has reported problems with these processes and allegations of unfair treatment. [11] There are no accurate statistics on the number of people who define themselves as ‘disabled’ in Iraq, but war, sanctions, terrorism and carcinogenic pollutants from depleted uranium have taken a heavy toll on the physical and mental health of its population. [12] 2011 estimates from the Ministry of Health, based on research carried out in 2009, indicated a figure of one million, which was the figure cited by the Iraqi Association of Disability Organizations. But in the same year WHO estimated two million people living with disabilities in Iraq [13] while USAID’s Access to Justice (A2J) Program in 2013 cited MOH figures of three million, or 15 percent of the population (compared to a global average of 10 percent). [14] The A2J report notes that the MOH (Baghdad) based its estimates on the numbers of registered Persons With Disabilities (PWDs) – noting that the criteria for “disability” were established by the 1980 Social Security Law as: “Any person who lacks or loses his/her capacity to totally or partially work because of a defect in his/her physical, mental or psychological capacity.” It is not clear whether the Ministry in Baghdad included PWDs in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, who fall under the regional MOH. A2J also notes that while PWDs are theoretically entitled to the same rights and protections guaranteed to all Iraqis however, many of them lack awareness of their rights or are not able to fulfill the extensive bureaucratic requirements to access those rights. [15] The social stigma surrounding mental illness also means that some carers are unwilling to seek support. Women and girls with disability, according to the A2J report, face double discrimination as a result of gendered barriers to employment and public goods and services, and the stigma surrounding disability. [16] In late 2013, according to the US Department of State Report on Human Rights Practices, [17] a new Commission for Persons with Disabilities and Special Needs was established headed by MOLSA to implement the law. But the Commission has been caught in the administrative paralysis of the new government and subsequent national emergency of ISIS. In addition, disability in Iraq has become politicised because of the economic crisis in the country and the growing sectarian divide. Between 2003 and 2013 Iraq’s economy failed to stabilise, despite the optimism of the immediate post-invasion period. Corruption has become endemic, building on the opportunistic practices that were institutionalised during the era of sanctions and arbitrary rule, and exacerbated by growing sectarianism. Many of the older generation of PWDs are veterans of Iraq’s war with Iran, most of whom were Shia, while violence against civilians by Coalition forces, Iraqi armed forces and terrorists was and still is sectarian in nature. In this context, disability - or rather access to government disability benefits - has become a perverse asset to be mobilised and exploited in a daily struggle for survival, [18] while public support for PWDs is used by politicians to guarantee a voting bloc and access to international donor support and credibility. [19] Moving from charity to civil rights in electoral processesIt was against this background that, in May 2012, the author began to investigate the opportunities for ensuring that persons with disabilities in Iraq had access to electoral information in an appropriate format and were fully aware of their rights to vote and to stand for public office. The next election, for Iraq’s governorate councils, [20] was scheduled for April 2013, with the landmark parliamentary elections set to take place a year later. Elections in the Kurdistan Region were set for October 2013, but the Kurdistan Regional Electoral Office (KREO) was under the administrative authority of the Baghdad-based Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC), which was the body responsible for developing new policy frameworks for all electoral events and referenda in Iraq. The IHEC was established by Law 11 (2007) to replace the Independent Election Commission of Iraq (IECI), which had been created under Coalition Provisional Order 97 in 2004. Prior to this, voting in Iraq was a charade, with IHEC staff sharing memories of pre-marked ballot papers being handed in “elections” organised in 2002 in which the only candidate, Saddam Hussein, won 100 percent support for his continued rule. [21] In 2005 the IECI, with the support of the United Nations, organized national elections, which were boycotted by many members of the Sunni community and which saw the international experts taking the leading role in the absence of experienced local electoral staff. Between 2007 and 2012 international support for the IHEC focused on building the capacity of the IHEC and its Board of Commissioners to implement basic electoral processes with the maximum degree of consistency and transparency possible. This in itself was an uphill struggle as the IHEC has been subject to political interference reflected during Board meetings as well as through recruitment and staff management processes. In addition the media and civil society organizations were largely ignorant of electoral processes. Media entities were either burdened with the legacy of Saddam-era propaganda and conspiracy misinformation, while the staff of new media outlets was often partisan or inexperienced. Civil society organizations, meanwhile, had evolved a way to access donor funding and they too were characterized by inexperience or opportunism with no solid understanding of electoral systems and processes. At that time, IHEC did not collect data on the registration or turnout of PWDs, and while assisted voting was referenced in IHEC Regulation 18 (2009) and the Polling and Counting Procedures (March, 2010), the requirement for assistance was narrow, referring to a “voter who is illiterate, blind, with severed hands or cannot write for any reason” and did not comply with Iraq’s CRPD obligations. The procedures were written by the Training and Procedures Department, and the author organized some in-house training for staff on international good practices in providing accessible information and facilities for PWDs and on the history of disability rights, as well as the CRPD contextualized for the Iraqi situation. It became clear that while staff agreed that physical impairments should not constrain independent voting, most were adamant that people with mental illness or intellectual impairments should not vote or run for office. This in turn led to discussions on how to define mental illness, particularly in the context of Iraq, where some level of post-traumatic stress was the norm. [22] The author repeated these informal discussions with staff in the Public Outreach Department (POD), which was responsible for voter education and engagement with the media. These too indicated a strong prejudice against people with mental illness or intellectual impairment in the context of voting rights. Almost all those asked said that such people should not be allowed to vote, although no one was able to accurately define either mental illness or intellectual impairment. Nonetheless, the staff was intrigued with the idea of sign language translators for audio visual PSAs, and for posters encouraging deaf people to vote. Discussions on the language used on voter education material, which was formal and technical, and the font size were not fruitful as the person responsible for crafting the texts took pride in his literary style and considered vernacular or simple vocabulary insulting to the electoral process, while the head of the Graphic Design Section was also focused on aesthetics rather than accessibility. Overall, the issue of the rights of PWDs to a secret and independent vote was not seen as a priority by the IHEC Chief Electoral Officer, who considered that the IHEC had first to ensure a comprehensive registration of voters without special needs before seeking to enlarge the franchise. With regard to international community and civil society initiatives, the USAID implemented the Access to Justice Program, which was aiming to raise awareness of the rights of marginalized Iraqi communities, including persons with disabilities, women, orphans, internally displaced persons, religious and ethnic minorities. In addition, the Iraqi Association of Disability Organizations was set up in 2009 to unite the different disability organizations across the country (except for in the Kurdistan Region, where NGOs operate under separate regional laws). IADO was the main lobbying organization behind Iraq’s signing the CRPD in 2012 but had largely remained focused on obtaining material benefits for its members. The author met with IADO representatives and worked with them to draft a memorandum of understanding with IHEC that focused on realistic, measurable goals that could be achieved by April 2013. In September 2012 a new Board of Commissioners was appointed after the term of office of the previous Board came to an end. [23] After tense wrangling among the political blocs in Parliament, [24] the confirmation of the ninth member of the Board, a Turkoman, Sunni woman, Ms. Gulshan Kamel, was a boost to the low level advocacy being carried out by the joint UN-IFES disability and gender rights teams. [25] Ms. Kamel had been the head of the Public Relations Section of the POD and as such had been proactive in supporting the rights of women and ethnic minorities. She welcomed the idea of promoting the rights of PWDs, and formally encouraged meetings between IADO and IHEC, the first of which was organised that month. Unfortunately the POD had developed its “Media Campaign Budget” for the Governorate Council Elections and this gave it little flexibility to incorporate “new” stakeholder groups. Its limited exposure to PWDs meant that the IHEC was unsure how to consult with this important stakeholder group, and the meetings that did take place were difficult to organize because of the lack of access to the IHEC office building. The Commissioners’ offices, as well as those of the UN and IFES, were on the third floor and elevator was not working. Given that most of the IADO delegation members had physical impairments, this impeded their access to the Green Zone and then to the IHEC itself. Nonetheless IADO produced its draft MOU, a modified version of the one drafted in consultation with the author, and both IHEC and IADO agreed to continue dialogue. The UN and IFES presented a strategic plan, “Access Iraq 2013” to the Board of Commissioners for their approval; unlike the IADO plan which focused primarily on physical access to polling centres, the UN-IFES plan took a rights-based approach. After intense consultations, the author secured agreement from POD that every Public Service Announcement (PSA) produced by the IHEC as part of its public awareness and voter education campaigns would include a representation of a person with a physical or sensory impairment. As a result, both broadcast PSAs and animated cartoons for YouTube included people in wheelchairs and blind people and had a sign language translator. The POD also developed two posters featuring a deaf person and a blind person, reminding people of the rights of PWDs to non-discriminatory access to electoral processes and information.  Source: Iraq Independent High Electoral Commission Official Website http://www.ihec.iq/en/index.php/news/3762.html. The IHEC made arrangements with the Ministry of Transport to have some vehicles available to take people with physical impairments to polling centers.
[2] World Health Organization, World Report on Disability, 2011. Available at: http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report.pdf?ua=1. [3] USAID, Iraq Access to Justice Program, "Values of Access to Justice and Persons with Disabilities in Iraq", p. 11. Available at: http://www.iraqaccesstojustice.org/assets/usaid-iraq-access-to-justice-program---values-of-access-to-justice-and-persons-with-disabilities-in-iraq.pdf. [4] Constitution of Iraq, 2005. Available at: http://www.iraqinationality.gov.iq/attach/iraqi_constitution.pdf. [5] Abed, Riadh, “Tyranny and Mental Health” British Medical Bulletin 2004; 72 1-13; also USAID, Iraq Access to Justice Program, "Values of Access to Justice and Persons with Disabilities in Iraq", pp. 25-26. Available at: http://www.iraqaccesstojustice.org/assets/usaid-iraq-access-to-justice-program---values-of-access-to-justice-and-persons-with-disabilities-in-iraq.pdf. [6] Kammel, Kari, "Rebuilding the mental health system in Iraq in the context of transitional justice." DePaul J. Health Care L. 11 (2007): 369 - 375. [7] Ibid. [8] Ibid. [9] USAID, Iraq Access to Justice Program, "Values of Access to Justice and Persons with Disabilities in Iraq", p. 11. Available at: http://www.iraqaccesstojustice.org/assets/usaid-iraq-access-to-justice-program---values-of-access-to-justice-and-persons-with-disabilities-in-iraq.pdf. [10] Abed, Riadh, “Tyranny and Mental Health” British Medical Bulletin 2004; 72 1-13. [11] UNAMI Human Rights Office/OHCHR, Report on Human Rights in Iraq: January - June 2013. Available at: http://www.uniraq.org/images/humanrights/HRO_Human%20Rights%20Report%20January%20-%20June%202013_FINAL_ENG_15Dec2013%20(2).pdf. [12] USAID, Iraq Access to Justice Program, "Values of Access to Justice and Persons with Disabilities in Iraq", p.10. Available at: http://www.iraqaccesstojustice.org/assets/usaid-iraq-access-to-justice-program---values-of-access-to-justice-and-persons-with-disabilities-in-iraq.pdf. [13] World Health Organization, Iraq. Available at: http://www.emro.who.int/irq/iraq-news/ministry-of-health-of-iraqwho-launch-global-report-on-disability.html. [14] USAID, Iraq Access to Justice Program, "Values of Access to Justice and Persons with Disabilities in Iraq", p.11. Available at: http://www.iraqaccesstojustice.org/assets/usaid-iraq-access-to-justice-program---values-of-access-to-justice-and-persons-with-disabilities-in-iraq.pdf. [15] Ibid., pp. 15-19. [16] Ibid., pp. 28-30. [17] US Department of State, Iraq 2013 Human Rights Report. Available at: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/220565.pdf. [18] This phenomenon was also seen by the author while working in the Gaza Strip in 2010 in the aftermath of Operation Cast Lead; a “disability mafia” had been established that controlled the distribution of prosthetics, adult diapers and care packages. The discussions in working groups established by the UN to manage the allocation of charity was devoid of any talk of human rights and focused instead on handouts and efforts by those present to exclude others from benefits. [19] Al-Hakim foundation Website: http://www.alhakimfd.org/WorkingTowardsMDGS.html. [20] Elections were originally scheduled for all provinces in Iraq outside the Kurdistan Region. [21] BBC News, Saddam 'wins 100% of vote', 2002. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2331951.stm. [22] Abed, Riadh, “Tyranny and Mental Health” British Medical Bulletin 2004; 72 1-13; also USAID, Iraq Access to Justice Program, "Values of Access to Justice and Persons with Disabilities in Iraq", pp. 25-26. Available at: http://www.iraqaccesstojustice.org/assets/usaid-iraq-access-to-justice-program---values-of-access-to-justice-and-persons-with-disabilities-in-iraq.pdf. [23] UN Iraq, The Board of Commissioners of the Iraqi Election Commission Fact sheet, 2013. Available at: http://www.uniraq.org/images/Electoral/20130918_FS2-BOC-En.pdf. [24] Aswat Al Iraq, SRSG Kobler welcomes appointment of IHEC Board of Commissioners, 2012. Available at: http://en.aswataliraq.info/(S(hgcut1avmg2zuz55kdutt0i3))/Default1.aspx?page=article_page&id=150650 - the Christian bloc in Parliament backed a male, Christian candidate against Ms. Kamel, while the UN backed the single female Board member. [25] The UN was taking the lead in joint UN-IFES gender rights initiatives, while IFES was taking the lead in joint UN-IFES disability rights activities. [26] Iraq Independent High Electoral Commission Official Website, IHEC urges voters with disabilities to vote in the upcoming Governorate Council Elections. Available at: http://www.ihec.iq/en/index.php/news/3762.html. Jordan: Barriers Preventing the Electoral Participation of Persons with DisabilitiesBy Ezra Karmel * IntroductionSince ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in 2008, the Jordanian government has accomplished meaningful progress toward protecting the rights of persons with disabilities to participate in political life in Jordan. The most significant successes in this regard have been achieved since the establishment of the Independent Electoral Commission in 2012. In the 2013 general parliamentary elections – and especially in the subsequent sub-elections – persons with disabilities enjoyed considerably better conditions than in any previous elections. Despite this progress, however, key barriers remain, and much more must still be done to 1) make voting stations more accessible, 2) improve transportation for persons with mobility disabilities, and 3) enhance awareness so that all persons with physical disabilities know that they can vote and are aware of the special accommodations that have been made to enable them to do so. Even more work needs to be done to ensure that persons with mental disabilities are able to engage in the electoral process. While persons with physical disabilities are legally entitled to vote in Jordan (and are usually only prevented from doing so as a result of insufficient accessibility or awareness), Jordanian law continues to deny persons with mental disabilities the freedom to exercise their voting rights. Jordan’s Legal Commitments to Ensuring that Persons with Disabilities Enjoy the Right to VoteJordan has committed itself to protecting the political rights of persons with disabilities through both its domestic laws and its ratification of international conventions. The most important of Jordan’s international commitments in this regard is the CRPD, which the Kingdom ratified without stipulating any reservations. UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), Adopted December 13, 2006, Entered into Force on May 3, 2008[1]Article 29 of the CRPD outlines the steps that states parties must take to protect the political rights of persons with disabilities: States Parties shall guarantee to persons with disabilities political rights and the opportunity to enjoy them on an equal basis with others, and shall undertake: (a) To ensure that persons with disabilities can effectively and fully participate in political and public life on an equal basis with others, directly or through freely chosen representatives, including the right and opportunity for persons with disabilities to vote and be elected, inter alia, by: (i) Ensuring that voting procedures, facilities and materials are appropriate, accessible and easy to understand and use; (ii) Protecting the right of persons with disabilities to vote by secret ballot in elections and public referendums without intimidation, and to stand for elections, to effectively hold office and perform all public functions at all levels of government, facilitating the use of assistive and new technologies where appropriate; (iii) Guaranteeing the free expression of the will of persons with disabilities as electors and to this end, where necessary, at their request, allowing assistance in voting by a person of their own choice; (b) To promote actively an environment in which persons with disabilities can effectively and fully participate in the conduct of public affairs, without discrimination and on an equal basis with others, and encourage their participation in public affairs, including: (i) Participation in non-governmental organizations and associations concerned with the public and political life of the country, and in the activities and administration of political parties; (ii) Forming and joining organizations of persons with disabilities to represent persons with disabilities at international, national, regional and local levels.
In complying with the CRPD’s requirement that it be translated into national legislation, Jordan appointed a special committee in 2006 headed by HRH Prince Raad Bin Zeid to review the existing Disabled Persons Law of 1993.[2] The following year, Jordan passed the Law on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (No. 31), 2007, which replaced the 1993 law. The Law explicitly outlines Jordan’s commitment to ensuring that persons with disabilities are able to vote: Law on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Law No 31) 2007[3]Article 4 (G) 1: The right of persons with disabilities to run for elections and cast ballots in various domains and avail them to accessible and suitable facilities that shall enable them to vote by secret ballot. 2: The rights of persons with disabilities to have a suitable environment to participate effectively in all public affairs without discrimination, including the right to participate in non-government organizations and bodies related to public and political life
In the same year as Jordan passed the Law on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, HM King Abdullah II also approved the National Disability Strategy, which was designed to be implemented through two phases (2007-2009 and 2010-2015). More holistic, yet less detailed, than the Law on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Strategy aims to achieve greater respect for the rights of persons with disabilities and to foster their integration in social, economic, and public life. The National Disability Strategy is less explicit about voting rights than the Law on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, but it includes as one of its “five main outputs” the “[f]urther integration of persons with disabilities in different areas of life (educational, professional, social, cultural, political and employment)”.[4] Ensuring that persons with disabilities are able to exercise their rights requires more than just passing laws and strategies that specifically focus on persons with disabilities; it requires changing all of a country’s laws to reflect the same commitment to the rights of persons with disabilities. In addition to passing laws that explicitly focus on the rights of persons with disabilities, therefore, Jordan’s Higher Council for the Affairs of Persons with Disabilities (HCD) has devoted significant efforts to ensuring that surrounding legal frameworks are disability mainstreamed. Most pertinently, Jordan’s national Election Law has been reformed in an effort to enable persons with disabilities to participate:
Election Law for the Chamber of Deputies (Law No. 25) 2012[5]Article 41 The procedures stipulated in Article (39) of this law [which outlines the procedures for casting votes] shall be followed to enable persons with disabilities to exercise their right to vote through their escorts, while taking into consideration any special procedures specified for this purpose by the Executive Regulations.
While the Election Law for the Chamber of Deputies is vague in regards to persons with disabilities, the Executive Instructions of the IEC are much more comprehensive. The most salient of the Executive Instructions is No. 10 of 2012:
IEC Executive Instruction (No. 10) 2012 (Executive Instructions Relating to Polling and Counting)[6]Procedures for Persons with Disabilities Article (8) A. Priority for polling shall be given to voters with disabilities. B. Persons with disabilities shall exercise their right to vote by themselves if they are able to do so, according to the same steps and procedures stipulated in Article (7) of these instructions. C. Voters with disabilities who are not able to vote by themselves shall exercise the right to vote through the use of an escort of their choice (the escort should not be less than 18 years of age on election day), according to the provisions stipulated in Article (7) of these instructions, taking into consideration the following procedures: 1: The polling and counting committee shall verify the identity of the person accompanying the person with disability by examining his ID and checking that there is no ink on the smallest finger of his left hand, and shall register his name in a special list prepared for this purpose. 2: The two ballot papers shall be handed over to the voter himself or to the person accompanying him if the voter is unable to take them. 3: The person with a disability and his escort shall be informed that the latter shall write the name of the candidate on the ballot paper of the local electoral district and mark the name, number, and code of the list the voter wants to vote for. 4: The person accompanying the disabled voter shall write down the name of the candidate chosen by the voter on the ballot paper of the local electoral district and shall mark the name, number, and code of the list chosen by the voter on the ballot paper of the general electoral district. 5: The person accompanying the disabled voter shall fold each of the two ballot papers separately and shall head, together with the disabled person, towards the two boxes to put each paper in the box allocated to it. 6: The voter and the person accompanying him shall then head towards the polling and counting committee and the disabled voter shall dip the index finger of his left hand in the special ink. The person accompanying him shall dip the smallest finger of his left hand in the same ink. D. If one of the persons with disabilities comes to the polling room unaccompanied by a person to help him, the head of the polling and counting committee shall help him in the voting booth, confidentially, by writing down the name of the candidate for whom the voter wants to vote on the ballot paper of the local electoral district and marking the list which he wants to vote for on the general electoral district’s ballot paper. The name of the head of the polling and counting committee shall be recorded in a special log stating that he helped the voter cast his vote.
2013 National Elections: A Step In the Right DirectionDespite the fact that the newly established IEC had only limited time to prepare for the 2013 parliamentary elections, it worked hard to ensure that persons with disabilities were better able to enjoy the franchise than in previous elections. On Election Day, the IEC gave priority to persons with disabilities at voting stations and brought together youth volunteers to help persons with disabilities at all rural stations. Not only was the election staff trained to accommodate persons with disabilities, but it also closely followed the Executive Instructions and voters with disabilities were therefore able to bring an escort with them to help them vote. These measures proved particularly important for persons with visual disabilities, as braille ballots are not yet available in Jordan. The IEC also put up posters and distributed brochures in the voting stations, which explained voting procedures simply and pictorially. On some of these brochures and posters, pictures of persons with disabilities were also included. On the ballots themselves, pictures of candidates (for regional seats) and list logos (for national seats) were included to help illiterate voters and voters with hearing disabilities (because of the high rate of illiteracy among the latter). Through these measures, persons with disabilities enjoyed a more inclusive voting process than even before. Crucially, instances of verbal vote casting – which had previously constituted a very prevalent practice among voters with disabilities – were almost eliminated in the 2013 elections.[7] As a result of the success of these new voting mechanisms, disability persons organizations (DPOs) and independent electoral monitors noted very few transgressions in the actual voting process. However, both DPOs and independent monitors highlighted three key shortcomings in the electoral process: 1) insufficient awareness campaigns for persons with disabilities, 2) a lack of disability accessibility at voting stations, and 3) a lack of disability accessibility to and from voting stations. Insufficient Awareness Campaigns for Persons with DisabilitiesBefore the election, the IEC produced TV ads and films about electoral procedures and voting rights that included sign language translation.[8] It also produced more bespoke videos for persons with disabilities that explained the accommodations available to help them exercise their right to vote. The IEC also made its website accessible for persons with visual disabilities. Despite this campaign, however, independent election observers and DPOs noted that the lack of awareness among persons with disabilities nonetheless represented a key impediment to the participation of persons with disabilities in the electoral process.[9] In a focus group convened with persons with disabilities, most participants indicated that they had not voted. A number of participants stated that they did not vote because they were either unaware of their right or they did not know that it was necessary to pick up a voter card in advance of Election Day.[10] Moreover, some participants said that they did not vote because they had received insufficient information about how the process worked and what platforms candidates stood for.[11] Independent election monitors reported that even though much of the IEC’s awareness campaigns had sign translation and tailored videos for persons with disabilities, insufficient understanding of the electoral process was particularly acute among persons with hearing disabilities.[12] Election observers noted that many persons with hearing disabilities did not understand how the electoral process worked. Some, for instance, did not know how many votes they were able to cast or the difference between regional and national seats. While persons with hearing disabilities were able to bring an escort to assist them, many arrived at the voting station without an escort (perhaps because they were unaware of their right to bring one), and most of the stations lacked a staff member capable of communicating in sign language. In fact, sign language translators were only available in 36 stations, covering nine of Jordan’s 12 governorates.[13] Appreciating the shortcomings of the awareness campaigns during the general elections and able to devote greater time to raising awareness, the IEC launched a much more effective awareness campaign for the subsequent sub-elections in 2013. Independent election monitors noted that the awareness campaign launched for the last sub-election, which took place in Irbid, was extremely comprehensive and very inclusive, and that voters with disabilities were much better informed about their voting rights and electoral procedures.
Lack of Disability Accessibility at Voting StationsMonitoring groups also highlighted the lack of physical accessibility at most of the polling stations. This factor is crucial, as there is no option to vote remotely in Jordan. While Jordanian law does not require that polling stations be accessible to persons with disabilities (although the Executive Instructions state that persons with disabilities should be given priority to vote), the IEC has fortunately prioritized increased accessibility.[14] Despite this prioritization, however, the IEC was unable to make significant improvement to voting station accessibility for the 2013 elections because it had insufficient time before the election to conduct a full accessibility assessment.[15] Because of this time limitation, the IEC was forced to rely upon the voting stations that had been chosen by the Ministry of Interior for the previous election. Very few of these stations were accessible: of the 1,484 stations that were used in the 2013 elections, only 226 were reported as being accessible.[16] The IEC, therefore, tried to disseminate information regarding the location of these stations so that persons with disabilities would register at them.[17] However, when the IEC had sufficient time to conduct an assessment of the polling stations following the elections, it reported that even many of the 226 supposedly accessible stations were far from being accessible. 99 of the 226 stations had stairs at the entrance and no ramp, and out of 749 voting rooms that were above ground level in the stations, only 279 were accessible to persons with mobility disabilities.[18] The IEC’s ability to effectively provide accessible stations to persons with disabilities has, according to Samar Tarawneh, Head of the Procedures and Training Department of the IEC, also been limited by a lack of information about persons with disabilities, their numbers, and their geographical locations in the Kingdom.[19] These limitations are a result of the general information deficit regarding persons with disabilities in Jordan. Not only is there a dearth of data about voters with disabilities, there are not even clear statistics about the number of persons with disabilities in the Kingdom or where they are located. In the last Jordanian census, which was conducted in 2004, the government’s Department of Statistics (DoS) calculated that there were 62,986 persons with disabilities in Jordan (of a total population of 5,103,639).[20] As such, the census indicates that persons with disabilities accounted for only 1.23 percent of Jordan’s population in 2004. The HCD recently conducted field tests in Amman and Zarqa in cooperation with the DoS. These tests showed that persons with disabilities in those areas account for 13.12 percent of the population (a number that reflects the nationwide calculations of numerous international organizations).[21] The methods used during the field tests, which are derived from the methodology of the Washington Group on Disability Statistics, will be employed by the DoS to determine the number of persons with disabilities in Jordan when it conducts surveys for its 2015 Census this November. The implementation of these more comprehensive techniques should yield more accurate statistics and, therefore, help the IEC to better reach persons with disabilities in future elections. To further enhance electoral inclusiveness for persons with disabilities, the IEC has produced a new manual that will be distributed to all stations in preparation for the next elections. The IEC will also assess and rate voting stations, giving each station a letter grade to indicate its level of accessibility. Top rated stations, noted Nidal Bukhari, the Head of the Planning and Field Coordination Department at the IEC, will be very sparse and will primarily represent stations located in the schools that USAID has recently constructed.[22] While Bukhari indicated that these schools are still not perfectly accessible, they represent the most accessible structures in many communities. The IEC is planning to implement a very comprehensive awareness campaign for the next parliamentary elections (which will likely take place in 2017), so that persons with disabilities can take advantage of the accessibility assessments that have been done. The importance of this campaign will drastically increase if the government’s newly proposed election law passes. The draft law eliminates voter cards, allowing Jordanians who are on the voter list to simply bring their ID to voting stations on Election Day. While this change could be very positive (as many persons with disabilities were unable to vote in the last elections because they did not know that they needed to pick up a voter card in advance), it also means that information regarding accessible stations cannot be provided to persons with disabilities when they go to pick up their voter cards and, thus, the information will likely have to be disseminated solely through awareness campaigns. The IEC stated that if the law passes, discussions would then begin about how to address this issue.[23]
Lack of Disability Accessibility to and from Voting StationsIn addition to the inaccessibility of the voting stations themselves, persons with mobility disabilities were also limited by the absence of accessible transportation options. Because Jordan lacks an accessible public transit system, transportation restrictions prevented many persons with disabilities from obtaining voter cards or casting their ballots. In the absence of public transportation options, election candidates and parties usually fill this vacuum, providing transportation to voters across the country. While candidates are also willing to offer transportation to persons with disabilities, the majority of persons with disabilities in the focus group held for this paper stated that they either did not know this was an option or they did not possess any information about which candidates offered such services. Other participants noted that they would prefer to not have to rely on candidates for transportation to voting stations. To address this issue of transportation, a handful of NGOs tried to provide persons with disabilities with accessible transportation during the 2013 elections. Likewise, some DPOs directly provided money to persons with disabilities so that they could take taxis to the voting stations.[24] While the IEC recognizes that transportation is a key problem, the Head of its Planning and Field Coordination Department stated that all the IEC can do is work to locate stations as close as possible to public transportation routes.[25] Persons with Mental DisabilitiesThe commitment that Jordan has demonstrated in trying to protect the voting rights of persons with physical disabilities has not been matched by a similar commitment to the rights of persons with mental disabilities. Despite the obstacles that persons with physical disabilities continue to face in trying to exercise their right to vote, Jordanian law protects their freedom to exercise this right and the IEC is clearly working to protect this freedom. Persons with mental disabilities, however, are legally denied the ability to exercise their right to vote in Jordan. In the 2012 Election Law, Article 3 (D) outlines the grounds upon which Jordanians can be “deprived of their right to vote”.[26] Within this article, “[a]ny person who is insane or demented or has been sequestered for any other reason” is included. This exclusion of “insane” persons from the franchise is also present in Article 3 (C) of the new draft election law, which was proposed by the government in August 2015, and in Article 15 (B) of the current Municipalities Law.[27] The law provides no clear definition of what constitutes being “insane or demented” and the IEC does not have a schema for categorizing who should be denied the right to vote. Yet, the term is nonetheless applied, and persons with mental disabilities can have their names removed from the voter list. Neither the Ministry of Interior nor the IEC automatically removes names from the list, but any Jordanian can report a person whose name is on the voter list as being mentally unfit to vote.[28] This reporting process can occur at two junctures: 1) when the Department of Personal Issues, which initially compiles the voter list, publishes the list and 2) when the list is transferred to the IEC, which again publishes the list before the election is held. Once a person is reported, the case is transferred to Jordan’s Sharia Court, which subsequently decides if a Jordanian is fit to participate in the electoral process.[29] These laws and procedures are in clear violation of the CRPD. In its preamble, the CRPD defines persons with disabilities as “those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.”[30] As such, the stipulations that are outlined in the CRPD to protect persons with disabilities’ freedom to exercise their right to vote apply to all of these persons, not to one category less or more than any other. Moreover, the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD Committee), the body that monitors the implementation of the CRPD has declared that states must repeal laws that exclude persons with disabilities from voting on the basis of an actual or perceived mental disability; failure to do so, according the CRPD Committee, constitutes disability discrimination.[31] The ambiguous exclusion of “insane or demented” persons not only denies some Jordanians their right to vote, but also discourages all persons with mental disabilities from voting. Because no work is done to encourage persons with mental disabilities to vote, many are unaware that they even possess the right to vote. Due to this lack of awareness, moreover, families often prevent members with disabilities from voting. The absence of awareness serves to reinforce the pervasive social stigma that surrounds persons with mental disabilities in Jordanian society (particularly in rural areas of the Kingdom) and exacerbates their exclusion from all forms of social engagement. ConclusionSince its ratification of the CRPD, and especially since the creation of the IEC, Jordan has made significant progress toward protecting the rights of persons with disabilities to engage in the Kingdom’s electoral processes. Many of the barriers to participation that still remain are a function of wider shortcomings in the implementation of the CRPD in Jordan. The inaccessibility of public buildings and transportation does not just affect persons with disabilities’ opportunities to participate in elections; it severely limits their engagement in all aspects of social, economic, and political life. In tandem with these accessibility issues, is the persistence of social stigma surrounding disabilities. While discrimination against persons with physical disabilities has slowly declined in Jordan in recent years, persons with mental disabilities continue to be ostracized. This ostracism is manifest in Jordan’s denying persons with mental disabilities the freedom to exercise their right to vote, and the widespread belief that this exclusion is acceptable. Achieving a more inclusive electoral process in Jordan will require not only amendments to Jordan’s legal system so that the rights and freedoms of persons with disabilities are better protected and accessibility is guaranteed, but also the transformation of society’s perceptions of persons with disabilities and their rights. * Ezra Karmel is the Head of Research at the Identity Center for Human Development, a Jordan-based NGO focused on political development in the MENA region. His research focuses on electoral reform, decentralization, social movements, and the rights of persons with disabilities. During his past three years in Jordan, he has also worked to monitor elections in the Kingdom and led projects to develop youth capacity to conduct research and engage in civil society. Originally from Canada, Ezra holds an MA in History from the University of Victoria. [1] UN General Assembly, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 24 January 2007, Article (1). <http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf> [2] United Nations Economic and Social Council for Western Asia (ESCWA), “Mapping Inequity: Persons with Physical Disabilities in Jordan,” 2009. <http://www.escwa.un.org/divisions/div_editor/Download.asp?table_name=divisions_other&field_name=ID&FileID=1194> [3] Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Law No. 31 for the Year 2007, Law on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. [4] Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, National Disability Strategy, Amman, February 6, 2007. <http://www.mindbank.info/item/551> [5] The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Law No (25) for the Year 2012, Election Law to the House of Representatives. <http://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/mideast/JO/jordan-election-law-no-25-of-2012/view> [6] Independent Electoral Commission, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Executive Instructions No (10) for the Year 2012, Executive Instructions Related to Polling and Counting. <http://entikhabat.jo/Documents/EI10EFINAL.pdf> [7] Author Interview with Mohammed Hussainy, Head of Integrity Coalition for Election Observation, Amman, September 16, 2015. [8] IEC, “Program of Technical Accreditation for Election Staff,” 262. [9] Author Interview with Asia Yaghi, Director of I Am a Human Society for Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Amman, August 17, 2015; and Author Interview with Zuhair Sharafa, Chairman of the Equality Party (focused on the rights of persons with disabilities), Amman, September 20, 2015. [10] Focus group led by author and facilitated by I Am a Human Society for Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Amman, September 6, 2015. [11] The IEC noted that another key factor that prevented persons with disabilities from voting was persons with disabilities apathy toward voting. See IEC, “Program of Technical Accreditation for Election Staff,” 263. This lack of prioritization was reflected in the focus group, as many participants stated that they did not believe voting would make a difference to their situations or rights. [12] Author Interview with Ali al Batran, National Coordinator of Integrity Coalition for Election Observation, Amman, September 10, 2015. [13] Independent Electoral Commission (IEC), “Program of Technical Accreditation for Election Staff: Introduction to Elections Management,” 2013, 262. [14] Democracy Reporting International, “Assessment of the Electoral Framework, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Final Report,” March 2013, 43. [15] IEC, “Program of Technical Accreditation for Election Staff,” 261-262. [16] This shortcoming reflects a general lack of legal obligation to ensure the environmental accessibility of public buildings in Jordan. In fact, Article 4 (E) of the Disabilities Law only requires that changes be made to ensure accessibility “where possible”. As a result, there remains a widespread dearth of accessible public buildings – and especially of schools, wherein the majority of polling stations are located. See Ezra Karmel et al., “Securing Inclusive Education Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities: Cost Effective Steps for Addressing Gaps Between Legislation and Implementation,” Identity Center, Amman, Jordan, April, 2015. [17] While the Department of Personal Issues in the Ministry of Interior was also supposed to provide persons with disabilities with information about which stations were accessible (and subsequently register voters for these stations), persons with disabilities who went to the Department noted that in most cases this information was unavailable. Several persons with disabilities in the focus group noted that they had to tell the Department which stations were accessible. In other cases, the Department simply registered persons with disabilities at stations that they could not access. [18] IEC, “Program of Technical Accreditation for Election Staff,” 262. [19] Author Interview with Samar Tarawneh, Head of the Procedures and Training Department of the IEC, Amman, September 15, 2015. [20] Jordan Department of Statistics, “Population and Housing Census, 2004.” <http://www.dos.gov.jo/dos_home_e/main/> [21] See Karmel, “Securing Inclusive Education Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities,” 3. [22] Author Interview with Nidal Bukhari, Head of the Planning and Field Coordination Department of the IEC, Amman, September 15, 2015. [23] Author Interview with Samar Tarawneh, Head of the Procedures and Training Department of the IEC, Amman, September 15, 2015. [24] Author Interview with Asia Yaghi, Director of I Am a Human Society for Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Amman, August 17, 2015. [25] Author Interview with Nidal Bukhari, Head of the Planning and Field Coordination Department of the IEC, Amman, September 15, 2015. [26] The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Law No (25) for the Year 2012, Article 3(D). [27] Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Law No. 13 for the Year 2011, Municipalities Law, Article 15 (B). <http://www.lob.gov.jo/AR/Pages/AdvancedSearch.aspx> [28] Author Interview with Nidal Bukhari, Head of the Planning and Field Coordination Department of the IEC, Amman, September 15, 2015. [29] Official Letter from Riad al Shk’ah, President of the Independent Electoral Commission, to Identity Center, August 25, 2015. [30] UN General Assembly, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 24 January 2007, Preamble. [31] Communication No. 4/2011, UN CRPD Committee 2013: paras. 9.4-9.6, quoted in Janet E. Lord and Michael Ashley Stein, “The Domestic Incorporation of Human Rights Law and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,” College of William & Mary Law School, Faculty Publications. Paper 665, 116. <http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/665/> |
