Ghana ratifies Disability Rights Convention
On 21 August 2012, Ghana became the 119th country in the world to ratify the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CPRD). Ghana initially signed the Convention in March 2007, and the ratification process has taken over five years.
Human Rights Watch says that ratification of the Convention demonstrates a significant step towards upholding and protecting the human rights of the some 5 million people with disabilities living in Ghana (who account for one fifth of the population of the county).
The United States: CPRD progresses to floor vote in Senate
On the 26 July the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to send the CPRD to the full Senate vote (the next stage in the ratification process). Ratification would certainly place the United States in a position to address and promote the rights of persons with disabilities on a global platform and partake in international dialogue on the matter.
Click here to read more on the Human Rights in Ireland blog.
Recent Irish developments
Ireland signed the CPRD in 2007 but has yet to ratify the Convention.
Following the recommendation of the United Nations Universal Periodic Review group in April 2012, Ireland pledged to ratify the Convention “as soon as possible” and implement its provisions. As of September 2012 however, it is not clear when the Convention will be ratified and implemented into domestic law.
Recently, Ireland’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Anne Anderson, outlined the government’s commitment to the protection and promotion of Human Rights and significantly to the ratification of the CPRD. She made these statements in the course of the Irish government’s campaign to be elected to the United Nations Human Rights Council.
Click here to read an Irish Times article.
At the PILA/PILS Project June 2012 conference in Belfast, Michael Lynn BL presented a paper on using international standards beyond the ECHR in asserting human rights, with a significant focus on the CPRD. He discussed the case of M.X. v. Health Service Executive and the extent to which the CPRD guided the Court on how the Constitution and the ECHR should be interpreted.