[DRAFT] Convention on the Rights of the Disabled

[Linux and the X]

I'm planning a repeal of the recent Disability Rights Act, but want to have a replacement reasonably complete before starting on that.
e [09 Nov 2013]: Never mind, someone else is repealing DRA right now.

(human rights; mild)

RECALLING this Assembly's opposition to discrimination,

RECOGNISING that disabled people require accommodation, and

BELIEVING that provision of appropriate accommodations are a key part of ending discrimination,

THE WORLD ASSEMBLY

OBLIGATES member States to, at all levels of government, provide appropriate accommodations to disabled people in all future infrastructure, buildings, and institutions,

STRONGLY ENCOURAGES member States to modify existing buildings and infrastructure to include appropriate accommodations,

FORBIDS requiring proof of disability, or appropriateness of accommodations, that is disproportionate to the direct cost to the providing entity,

RECOMMENDS member States to impose substantially similar requirements upon the private sector,

REQUIRES that any person who is appointed a guardian or representative on the basis of their disability be permitted (a) to have their input considered to the extent possible, (b) to reject an appointment and have another made instead, (c) to have the guardianship order as narrowly-tailored as reasonable given their intellectual ability, and (d) to petition for reconsideration of the necessity or scope of the guardianship order,

REQUESTS that member States compile reports, containing no personally-identifiable information, on modifications to existing public buildings and infrastructure, accommodations provided by the private sector, and rejected and unusual public-sector accommodation requests, to be archived and made available by the Universal Library Coalition,

HOPES that member States will consider the principles of disability rights in the creation of domestic law, and

CLARIFIES that this resolution shall not bar further legislation on this subject, if additional legislation to protect the needs and rights of the disabled is deemed necessary by this assembly.

(1855 chars)

[Imperium Londinium]

I see no reason why this can't be submitted as a separate bill, it deals with the physically disabled, whereas the other deals solely with the mentally disabled. This doesn't replace it, it is a different thing altogether, and if it is treated as such then I would support it, however I do not support an attempt to repeal the Rights of the Disabled Act.

[Linux and the X]

I see no reason why this can't be submitted as a separate bill, it deals with the physically disabled, whereas the other deals solely with the mentally disabled. This doesn't replace it, it is a different thing altogether, and if it is treated as such then I would support it, however I do not support an attempt to repeal the Rights of the Disabled Act.

This is not limited to physical disability.

[Imperium Londinium]

REQUIRES that any person appointed a guardian or representative on the basis of intellectual disability be permitted to have their input considered to the extent reasonable given their intellectual ability, to reject an appointment and have another made instead, to have the guardianship order as narrowly-tailored as reasonable given their intellectual ability, and for reconsideration of the necessity of the guardianship order,

I would also like to point out a few issues:
1. If you repeal the aforementioned act, this is referring to a repealed act, and so is house of cards, ergo illegal.
2. Everything written here is stated in the Rights of the Disabled act,

1. It states this is a "last resort" measure, meaning it is only to be used when absolutely necessary.
2. It states that a "preferred responsible adult" is best, meaning the preferences of the individual are taken into account
3. It restricts the powers of the guardian to the least possible in the circumstances, so as to maintain liberty
4. It mandates that the guardian be removed at the earliest juncture possible

3. Your reference to "intellectual ability" would seem to indicate intelligence to be a factor, which is inherently discriminatory, whereas the Rights of the Disabled Act uses the term Sapience, which has an entirely different meaning.


I would hope that this assuages any concerns you have with the recently passes law, if this clause is removed and the wording tailored slightly to being a separate bill, you will have my full backing.

A repeal is unnecessary.

[Linux and the X]

1. If you repeal the aforementioned act, this is referring to a repealed act, and so is house of cards, ergo illegal.

Nowhere does this reference your resolution. If you're going to claim HoC violation complain about the first preambulatory clause.

2. Everything written here is stated in the Rights of the Disabled act,

Absurdly untrue. Your resolution is specifically about mandating nations use guardianship.

3. Your reference to "intellectual ability" would seem to indicate intelligence to be a factor, which is inherently discriminatory, whereas the Rights of the Disabled Act uses the term Sapience, which has an entirely different meaning.

Indeed it is! However, while we are opposed to the practice, which, incidentally, your resolution mandates, we recognise it is used and there is not popular support for banning it. Therefore, we seek to regulate the worst abuses, while leaving the door open for further regulation in future.

[Alqania]

"The Queendom tentatively supports this proposed replacement", Lord Raekevik announced. "I hope we shall be able to return with some critique once our Delegation has delved into the finer details."

[Linux and the X]

While, as you can see from the edit statement at the bottom of the post, I have already made some edits, in the interests of transparency henceforth I will also be posting this proposal on my Wiki, so a history of edits will be available.

[Abacathea]

While, as you can see from the edit statement at the bottom of the post, I have already made some edits, in the interests of transparency henceforth I will also be posting this proposal on my Wiki, so a history of edits will be available.

As it stands, I currently favour this proposal, I will keep an eye on your WIki as well to see how it develops further.

[Itariam]

DEFESA DOS HUMANOS

Tendo uma aplicação adequada sobre essas pessoas, a Assembléia devia discutir mais sobre os direitos humanos, aplicar projetos que defendem a vida, como trazer progresso ao próximo. Que formas iremos trazer a nossas gerações e que planos teremos a eles?
De acordo com uma visibilidade que vejo aqui nos fóruns é que são discutidos pensamentos egoísta, mas e o futuro, não há nada melhor do que ver a alegria estampada na face de alguém, por isso eu sou a FAVOR que isso seja lei para todos os países terem um compromissos responsáveis pelas vidas de todos, desde o rico, pobre, deficiente, magro, gordo etc... Temos um grande compromisso como governantes aplicar o conforto a todos, Jesus disse "AMAI O SEU PRÓXIMO COMO A TI MESMO...", não estou discutindo religião pois Jesus não é uma religião, devemos AMAR aquilo que fazemos e a quem nós servimos de qualquer maneira devemos defender a todos, e acabar com essa palhaçada de cultura e sociedade antiga que não passa de obras ignorantes que aplicam na mente das pessoas a odiar uns aos outros e depois alguns vem culpar Deus, a mãe o pai e outros. Vamos trazer a paz a alegria onde todos e todas são iguais uns aos outros, o dinheiro não diferencia ninguém mas a sociedade fez diferenciar.

POR FAVOR VAMOS AMAR UNS AOS OUTROS, ESSA É A ÚNICA ESPERANÇA DESSE MUNDO!


*Republica Federativa de Itaraiam*
Oficial Presidente

[Araraukar]

Might I remind the honorable Itariam delegation that all WA communication is supposed to be in English?

[Linux and the X]

I've made a slight change to the guardianship language to clarify and expand protections.

[Sovreignry]

*snip*

William kicks a gnome. "Can someone get a hold of building services and see about getting those universal translators fixed?"

[Linux and the X]

Given that there's a repeal of the Disability Rights Act about finished drafting, I'm bumping this up for finalisation.

[Frisbeeteria]

*snip*

William kicks a gnome. "Can someone get a hold of building services and see about getting those universal translators fixed?"

THE DEFENCE OF HUMANS

Having a proper implementation of these people, the Assembly should discuss more about human rights, implement projects that defend life, how to bring progress to others. Ways that will bring our generations and plans to have them?
According to a profile I see here is that the forums are discussed in egoistic thoughts, but what about the future, there is nothing better than seeing the joy on someone's face, so I'm PLEASE this is the law to all countries commitments having a responsibility for the lives of everyone from the rich, poor, disabled, skinny, fat etc ... We have a big commitment as rulers apply comfort to all, Jesus said "LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR LIKE YOURSELF ..." I am not discussing religion because Jesus is not a religion, we LOVE what we do and who we serve any way we defend all and end this farce of ancient culture and society that is just ignorant applying works in people's minds to hate each other and then comes some blame God, the mother's father and others. Let's bring peace where all the joy and all are equal to each other, the money does not differentiate anyone but society did differentiate.

PLEASE LET U.S. LOVE ONE ANOTHER, THAT IS THE ONLY HOPE THIS WORLD!


* Federal Republic of Itaraiam *
Official President

* kicks the server *
You can translate from Portuguese to English, but that doesn't guarantee contextual sense.

[Auralia]

FORBIDS the burden of proof of necessity upon the disabled person requiring accommodation be no greater than proportional to the costs not born by the disabled person of providing the accommodation,

What does this mean, exactly?

RECOMMENDS that member States to impose substantially similar requirements upon the private sector,

REQUIRES that member States consider the input of any person to whom a guardian or representative is appointed on the basis of their disability, to the extent reasonable given their intellectual ability, for the purposes of rejecting an appointment and having another made instead, having the guardianship order as narrowly-tailored as reasonable given their intellectual ability, and reconsidering the necessity of the guardianship order,

A couple of minor grammatical fixes and stylistic tweaks.

REQUESTS that member States compile reports, containing no personally-identifiable information, on modifications to existing public buildings and infrastructure, accommodations provided by the private sector, and rejected and unusual public-sector accommodation requests, to be archived and made available by the Universal Library Coalition,

Is there any real need for this? It seems like a waste of money at first glance.

[Linux and the X]

FORBIDS the burden of proof of necessity upon the disabled person requiring accommodation be no greater than proportional to the costs not born by the disabled person of providing the accommodation,

What does this mean, exactly?

The level of proof required for accommodation must be proportional — or less — to the cost to the provider of providing it

REQUESTS that member States compile reports, containing no personally-identifiable information, on modifications to existing public buildings and infrastructure, accommodations provided by the private sector, and rejected and unusual public-sector accommodation requests, to be archived and made available by the Universal Library Coalition,

Is there any real need for this? It seems like a waste of money at first glance.

If your government find it a waste of money, they may ignore the request. Unless you're the ULC, this clause doesn't actually mandate you do anything.

[Auralia]

The level of proof required for accommodation must be proportional — or less — to the cost to the provider of providing it

Thank you for the clarification. That seems reasonable.

If your government find it a waste of money, they may ignore the request. Unless you're the ULC, this clause doesn't actually mandate you do anything.

Ah yes, I thought it was a mandate at first. I stand corrected.

[United Federation of Canada]

STRONGLY ENCOURAGES member States to modify existing buildings and infrastructure to include necessary accommodations,

Would like changed to REQUIRE nations to do this,

RECOMMENDS member States to impose substantially similar requirements upon the private sector,

Would also like this REQUIRED,

FORBIDS the burden of proof of necessity upon the disabled person requiring accommodation be no greater than proportional to the costs not born by the disabled person of providing the accommodation,

Why? This creates a huge loophole and opens the whole system up to fraud.

REQUESTS that member States compile reports, containing no personally-identifiable information, on modifications to existing public buildings and infrastructure, accommodations provided by the private sector, and rejected and unusual public-sector accommodation requests, to be archived and made available by the Universal Library Coalition,

Unneeded committee and drain on WA financial resources for no reason. Nations should be perfectly capable of handling this themselves without WA oversight.

With the following changes, we would fully support, and ask our delegate to support as well.

[Wheeled States of Bifid]

FORBIDS the burden of proof of necessity upon the disabled person requiring accommodation be no greater than proportional to the costs not born by the disabled person of providing the accommodation,

I found this to be a little confusing. I believe an "undue hardship" clause would work better but other than that Bifid can support this.

[Linux and the X]

FORBIDS the burden of proof of necessity upon the disabled person requiring accommodation be no greater than proportional to the costs not born by the disabled person of providing the accommodation,

Why? This creates a huge loophole and opens the whole system up to fraud.

What sort of loopholes or abuse are you concerned about?

REQUESTS that member States compile reports, containing no personally-identifiable information, on modifications to existing public buildings and infrastructure, accommodations provided by the private sector, and rejected and unusual public-sector accommodation requests, to be archived and made available by the Universal Library Coalition,

Unneeded committee and drain on WA financial resources for no reason. Nations should be perfectly capable of handling this themselves without WA oversight.

With the following changes, we would fully support, and ask our delegate to support as well.

The ULC is not a new committee. It was created by res. 78; this merely clarifies that it is permitted and required to archive and make available these reports.

[United Federation of Canada]

Why? This creates a huge loophole and opens the whole system up to fraud.

What sort of loopholes or abuse are you concerned about?

Unneeded committee and drain on WA financial resources for no reason. Nations should be perfectly capable of handling this themselves without WA oversight.

With the following changes, we would fully support, and ask our delegate to support as well.

The ULC is not a new committee. It was created by res. 78; this merely clarifies that it is permitted and required to archive and make available these reports.

What sort of loopholes or abuse are you concerned about?

Let's say I am a billionaire, but I really do not want to spend my money on my own care. Should I be granted access to such care, which I have the financial means to pay for by myself while a person in poverty is forced to suffer do to a lack of service capability?

this merely clarifies that it is permitted and required to archive and make available these reports.

Why should the WA care about these things? It is a wholly sovereign matter.

[Wheeled States of Bifid]

Having given this further consideration I would also like to see stronger wording on the basis that if an able-bodied citizen has a right to something than a citizen with a disability should also have that right. Government institutions in particular should be required to be accessible unless doing so represents a true hardship.

[Linux and the X]

What sort of loopholes or abuse are you concerned about?

Let's say I am a billionaire, but I really do not want to spend my money on my own care. Should I be granted access to such care, which I have the financial means to pay for by myself while a person in poverty is forced to suffer do to a lack of service capability?

Fortunately, this is not a situation permitted in this Convention.

this merely clarifies that it is permitted and required to archive and make available these reports.

Why should the WA care about these things? It is a wholly sovereign matter.

Making these reports available is useful for people visiting a country (who will know how accessible it is) and for international coöperation in improving accessibility.

Having given this further consideration I would also like to see stronger wording on the basis that if an able-bodied citizen has a right to something than a citizen with a disability should also have that right.

That is already covered by the Convention on Civil Rights.

[Grays Harbor]

A quick question, if I may...

Would, or could, this section

RECOMMENDS member States to impose substantially similar requirements upon the private sector

be construed to require that all private homes include disabled access whether or not a disabled person requiring such access is in residence or not?

[Linux and the X]

A quick question, if I may...

Would, or could, this section

RECOMMENDS member States to impose substantially similar requirements upon the private sector

be construed to require that all private homes include disabled access whether or not a disabled person requiring such access is in residence or not?

I suppose it could, but I would consider someone who does that to be a damn fool.