Part II The law: International human rights law and disability Section II Other international and regional human rights instruments and disability The CEDAW Committee has commented on the failure of States to outlaw forced abortions and sterilisation of women with intellectual disabilities. Following its examination of Lithuania in 2014, the Committee said that: It is seriously concerned about the provisions that allow forced abortion and sterilization of women with intellectual disabilities without court authorization171 The Committee called on the State party to: Investigate claims of undocumented forced abortions and sterilization of women with intellectual disabilities in care institutions, put protocols in place to ensure compliance with the legal requirement of court authorization in such cases and ensure that offenders are punished. The CEDAW Committee has regularly highlighted the issue of poorer educational opportunities for girls with disabilities. For example, in 2014 it called on Peru to: Allocate sufficient human and financial resources for the implementation and monitoring of laws and public policies designed to combat discrimination in access to education and to include the use of temporary special measures in promoting the education of girls and women, in particular in rural areas and indigenous communities and among girls with disabilities.172 Following its examination of the United Kingdom in 2013, the Committee expressed concern about the impact of public spending cuts, arguing that: … the austerity measures introduced by the State party have resulted in serious cuts in funding for organizations that provide social services to women, including those that provide services for women only. The Committee is concerned that the cuts have had a negative impact on women with disabilities and older women.173 Accordingly, the Committee called on the State party to: … mitigate the impact of austerity measures on women and the services provided to women, especially women with disabilities and older women.174 Both the CEDAW Committee and the CRPD Committee place strong emphasis on intersectionality, specifically on the intersection between women and girls with disabilities. This focus is only set to grow as our understanding develops about the multiple disadvantages experienced by women and girls with disabilities. 5.4. THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND DISABILITY One result of segregation – and, in its worst form, institutionalisation – was the relative ‘disappearance’ of persons with disabilities from the community. This segregation placed people with disabilities in situations where they were especially vulnerable to violence, exploitation and abuse, which could take the form of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. This abuse was compounded, and perhaps perpetuated, by a lack of oversight of places where persons with disabilities were housed or served. There was also a degree of impunity for those who committed such acts. An important goal of the UN CRPD is to end such segregation and isolation and, indeed, to close down institutions. It also aims to protect people against torture and degrading treatment. While the UN CRPD incorporates both goals, it places an emphasis on ending the institutionalisation that creates vulnerabilities to abuse. At the same time, there is growing recognition of these issues among the Committee against Torture, to the point that the mere existence of institutionalisation is in itself increasingly being deemed a form of torture. 171 CEDAW/C/LTU/CO/5, para. 36. 172 CEDAW/C/PER/CO/7-8, para. 30. 173 CEDAW/C/GBR/CO/7, para. 21. 174 Ibid, para. 22. Chapter 5: UN human rights instruments and related processes | 75