Part II The law: International human rights law and disability Section II Other international and regional human rights instruments and disability Following are examples of the evolving jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee on disability, drawn from various concluding observations issued to States parties. Autonomy: Ensuring legal safeguards regarding denial of legal capacity leading to institutionalisation In 2013, the Human Rights Committee expressed concern at the absence of legal safeguards and due process relating to the confinement of persons with disabilities who have been deprived of their legal capacity in the Czech Republic.159 Autonomy: Ensuring adequate safeguards dealing with the deprivation of liberty The Human Rights Committee has expressed concern at the absence or weakness of due process and safeguards with respect to people with psychosocial disabilities being deprived of their liberty. With respect to Latvia, the Committee drew attention to the: … lack of State regulation of the application of compulsory medical treatment, physical restraints and restrictions of the right to privacy in psychoneurological hospitals.160 The Committee also expressed concern at the continuing use of caged beds in psychiatric institutions in the Czech Republic.161 Political participation: Ensuring the right to vote The Human Rights Committee recently recommended that the Czech Republic, Hong Kong (China) and Paraguay review their respective electoral laws to ensure that they do not discriminate against persons with mental, intellectual or psychosocial disabilities by denying them the right to vote for reasons that are disproportionate or that have no reasonable and objective relationship to their ability to vote.162 This focus on civil and political rights is vital for persons with disabilities since it spans concepts such as autonomy, equality and participation, especially political participation. NHRIs with a focus on civil and political rights can easily integrate disability perspectives into this work and highlight this in their engagement with the Human Rights Committee. 5.2. THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS AND DISABILITY When the UN CRPD was being drafted, economic, social and cultural rights were seen by many participants as being part of the problem. Their goal, then, was to reframe these rights in order to deliver autonomy and dignity of people with disabilities, not entrap them in segregated services with ‘compensation’ for their absence from the mainstream. This richer understanding of the place and purpose of economic, social and cultural rights also informs the current understanding within the Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR Committee). Many of the more important obligations in the UN CRPD are to be achieved progressively. In understanding what this means, including the kind of latitude that States have and the boundaries on this latitude, reference must be made to the CESCR Committee’s famous General Comment No. 3 (1991) on the nature of States parties’ obligations.163 Though general in scope, this document is a valuable reference when trying to determine the nature and scope of obligations of ‘progressive achievement’ in the UN CRPD (of which there are many). 159 CCPR/C/CZE/CO/3, para. 13. 160 CCPR/C/LVA/CO/3, para. 16. 161 CCPR/C/CZE/CO/3, para. 14. 162 See, for example, CCPR/C/CHN-HKG/CO/3, para. 24. 163 Available at http://ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/cescr/pages/cescrindex.aspx. Chapter 5: UN human rights instruments and related processes | 73