The domestic incorporation of human rights law and the united nations convention on the rights of persons with disabilities

Washington Law Review

Volumn 83, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 449-479

  Lord, Janet E ^a,b   Stein, Michael Ashley ^b,c,d  

^a BlueLaw International LLP ^*  (United States)

^b Harvard Project on Disability

^c HARVARD LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

^d The College of William and Mary

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 61449261834     PISSN: 00430617     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (154)

1. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, G.A. Res. 61/106, U.N. Doc. A/RES/61/106 (Jan. 24, 2007) [hereinafter CRPD], available at http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/rights/convtexte.htm, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl.pdf.
2. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, G.A. Res. 61/106, U.N. Doc. A/RES/61/106 (Jan. 24, 2007) [hereinafter Optional Protocol].
3. Press Release, General Assembly, General Assembly Adopts Groundbreaking Convention, Optional Protocol on Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Delegations, Civil Society Hail First Human Rights Treaty of Twenty-First Century, U.N. Doc. GA/10554 (Dec. 13, 2006), available at http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/gal0554.doc.htm, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n3.pdf.
4. The CRPD text, along with its drafting history, resolutions, and updated list of States Parties is posted on the United Nations Enable website. See U.N. Enable, Promoting the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Full Participation and Equality in Social Life and Development (2006), http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/rights/, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n4.pdf.
5. See generally Michael Ashley Stein, Disability Human Rights, 95 CAL. L. REV. 75 (2007).
6. For a catalogue circa 2002, see Theresia Degener & Gerard Quinn, A Survey of International, Comparative and Regional Disability Law Reform, in DISABILITY RIGHTS LAW AND POLICY: INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL PERSPECTIVES 3, 25-45 (Mary Lou Breslin & Sylvia Yee eds., 2002). Over the last two years, the authors have been involved in disability-related law reform in roughly a dozen countries. For our perspective, see Michael Ashley Stein & Janet E. Lord, The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities as a Vehicle for Social Transformation, in NATIONAL MONITORING MECHANISMS OF THE CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos ed., forthcoming 2008) available at http://www.law. washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n6.pdf.
7. See Michael Ashley Stein & Penelope J.S. Stein, Beyond Disability Civil Rights, 58 HASTINGS L.J. 1203, 1203 (2007) ("[A] growing number of countries... have enacted disability-related legislation. Unfortunately, the continuing economic inequities and social exclusion of disabled persons worldwide severely calls into doubt the efficacy of these efforts. It also begs the question of whether any country adequately protects their disabled citizens.").
8. See CRPD, supra note 1, art. 35-36; Optional Protocol, supra note 2, art. 13 (1).
9. See CRPD, supra note 1, art. 30.
10. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, SOME FACTS ABOUT PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES 1 (2006), available at http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/pdfs/factsheet. pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449nl0.pdf.
11. In order for a treaty to have domestic legal effect, an act of government is frequently required to incorporate the treaty into domestic law. Such legal systems are considered "dualist" in nature, in contrast with "monist" systems where the State's legal system is considered to include international treaties without the need for separate, domestic-level action. See generally J.G. Starke, Monism and Dualism in the Theory of International Law, 17 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L.L. 66 (1936). While this traditional distinction between dualist and monist States has been criticized, it does help to underscore a fundamental difference among legal systems that impacts the reception of international-treaty obligations. Human rights scholars and practitioners must take heed of this distinction. For clear treatments of the domestic legal effects of treaties, and international law more generally, see ROSALYN HIGGINS, PROBLEMS AND PROCESS: INTERNATIONAL LAW AND HOW WE USE IT 205-18 (1994); MALCOLM N. SHAW, INTERNATIONAL LAW 99-136 (4th ed. 1997); John H. Jackson, Status of Treaties in Domestic Legal Systems: A Policy Analysis, 86 AM. J. INT'L L. 310, 314-15 (1992).
12. For earlier accounts that were drawn upon for this chapter, see Janet E. Lord & Michael Ashley Stein, The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in THE UNITED NATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS: A CRITICAL APPRAISAL (Philip Alston & Frédéric Mégret eds., forthcoming 2008), available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl2a. pdf; Michael Ashley Stein & Janet E. Lord, Future Prospects for the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in THE UN CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSON WITH DISABILITIES: EUROPEAN AND SCANDINAVIAN PERSPECTIVES (Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir & Gerard Quinn eds., forthcoming 2008), available at http://www.law.washington. edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl2b.pdf; Michael Ashley Stein & Janet E. Lord, The Normative Value of a Treaty as Opposed to a Declaration: Reflections from the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in IMPLEMENTING THE RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT 27-32 (Stephen P. Marks ed., 2008); Stein, supra note 5.
13. THOMAS BUERGENTHAL, DINAH SHELTON & DAVID STEWART, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS IN A NUTSHELL 347 (2d ed. 2002).
14. There is an extensive literature on the domestic incorporation of human rights standards and the processes by which this occurs. See, e.g., THE EFFECTS OF TREATIES IN DOMESTIC LAW (Francis G. Jacobs and Shelley Roberts eds., 1987); Antonio Cassesse, Modern Constitutions and International Law, 192 RECUEIL DES COURS 331 (1985); Felice Morgenstern, Judicial Practice and the Supremacy of International Law, 27 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L.L. 42 (1950); Ignaz Seidl-Hohenveldern, Transformation or Adoption of International Law into Municipal Law, 12 INT'L & COMP. L.Q. 88 (1963); Luzius Wildhaber & Stephan Breitenmoser, The Relationship between Customary International Law and Municipal Law in Western European Countries, 48 HEIDELBERG J. INT'L. L. 163 (1988).
15. See, e.g., Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment arts. 2-16, G.A. Res. 39/46, U.N. Doc. A/39/51 (Dec. 10, 1984) (entered into force June 26, 1987) [hereinafter CAT]; Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women arts. 2-6, G.A. Res. 34/180, U.N. Doc. A/34/46 (Dec. 18, 1979) (entered into force Sept. 3, 1981) [hereinafter CEDAW]; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights arts 1-5, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), U.N. Doc. A/6316, 999 U.N.T.S. 171 (Dec. 16, 1966) (entered into force Mar. 23, 1976) [hereinafter ICCPR]; International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination arts. 2-7, G.A. Res. 2106 (XX), U.N. Doc. A/6014, 660 U.N.T.S. 195 (Dec. 21, 1965) (entered into force Jan. 4, 1969) [hereinafter CERD],
16. See, e.g., SHAW, supra note 11, at 99-136; BUERGENTHAL, SHELTON & STEWART, supra note 13, at 247.
17. See generally MICHAEL BYERS, CUSTOM, POWER AND THE POWER OF RULES: INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW (1999) (noting the preoccupation of international legal scholarship with proving the content and relevance of international law and applying an interdisciplinary perspective to the study of power and rules within the customary-international-law process). Positivist approaches, as applied to the problem of translating international legal obligations into domestic law frameworks, understand municipal and international law as occupying separate and distinct realms, with international law made real only through the express legislative incorporation into domestic law. See generally SHAW, supra note 11, at 100-02; Harold Hongju Koh, Why Do Nations Obey International Law?, 106 YALE L.J. 2599, 2608-11(1997).
18. This may have as much to do with the limits of the international legal scholar's engagement with the broad spectrum of human rights work as it does with the narrowness of traditional human rights practice. This constriction is best reflected in the traditional focus of human rights advocacy on civil and political rights, chiefly through the mechanism of monitoring and reporting on violations. See, e.g., Kenneth Roth, Defending Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Practical Issues Faced by an International Human Rights Organization, 26 HUM. RTS. Q. 63 (2004) (explaining that nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are most effective when they concentrate on using shaming methods against clear civil and political human rights violations). Such an approach pushes economic, social, and cultural rights along with other forms of human rights promotion to the margins, especially for socially vulnerable groups. See also Janet E. Lord & Katherine N. Guernsey, It Takes a Treaty: Elbowing into the Human Rights Mainstream (March 2004) (paper submitted to the International Studies Association Annual Meeting, Montreal, Canada), available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449nl8.pdf.
19. See, e.g., Joshua G. Smith, Victoria K. Holt & William J. Durch, Enhancing United Nations Capacity to Support Post-Conflict Policing and Rule of Law (2007), available at http://www.stimson.org/pub.cfm? ID=483, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/ notes/83washlrev449nl9.pdf.
20. USAID rule of law programming typifies this approach and is heavily focused on both providing technical-assistance services privileging legal-framework reforms and training government officials and the judiciary. Sustained work to facilitate the effective engagement of civil-society actors in rule of law efforts, which could help to ensure that human rights ideas establish deep roots, is a lower programming priority. See, e.g., USAID, User's Guide to DG Programming 25-35, 41-15 (June 2006), available at http://www.usaid.gov/our-work/democracy-and-govemance/publications/pdfs/ ug.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/ notes/83washlrev449n20.pdf (cataloguing technical-assistance services in the rule of law realm with primary emphasis on top-down interventions). For an excellent analysis of the limitations of transformative social change via legal interventions alone, see Smita Narula, Equal by Law, Unequal by Caste: The "Untouchable" Condition in Critical Race Perspective, 26 WlS. INT'L L.J. 255 (2008) (arguing that constitutional and legislative approaches to addressing caste-based discrimination have not led to transformative social change).
21. Of particular interest in this context is international relations scholarship that looks to the role played by normative structures-rules, principles, and processes of international law-and claims that participation in human rights process is mutually constitutive, transforming actor identities and interests. See generally MARGARET KECK & KATHRYN SIKKINK, ACTIVISTS BEYOND BORDERS: ADVOCACY NETWORKS IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS (1998); SANJEEV KHAGRAM ET AL., RESTRUCTURING WORLD POLITICS: TRANSNATIONAL SOCIAL MOVEMENTS, NETWORKS, AND NORMS (2002); THE THIRD FORCE: THE RISE OF TRANSNATIONAL CIVIL SOCIETY (Ann Florini ed., 2000). More broadly, such work shows promise for explaining how systems of shared ideas, beliefs, and values work to influence social and political action. See, e.g., Christian Reus-Smit, Constructivism, in THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 209, 216-18 (Scott Burchill et al. eds., 2001).
22. The work of Ryan Goodman and Derek Jinks captures well how this important work could nonetheless be vitally enriched by interrogating an additional mechanism of social influence in human rights process. They point to shortcomings in the predominant mechanisms used to explain the power of human rights law-coercion and persuasion-and assert that coercion "fails to grasp the complexity of the social environment within which states act" and that persuasion "fails to account for many ways in which the diffusion of social and legal norms occurs." Ryan Goodman & Derek Jinks, How to Influence States: Socialization and International Human Rights Law, 54 DUKE L.J. 621, 625 (2004); see also Ryan Goodman & Derek Jinks, Toward an Institutional Theory of Sovereignty, 55 STAN. L. REV. 1749 (2003). Their conceptual framework for another mechanism of social influence-acculturation-is compelling, particularly insofar as it can help to explain the relational dynamics occurring within a contested human rights treaty process and against a highly relevant existing normative framework. Thus, acculturation, defined as "the general process by which actors adopt the beliefs and behavioral patterns of the surrounding culture" helps analyze mechanisms of influence at work within human rights law-making processes. Goodman & Jinks, How to Influence States, supra at 626.
23. GERARD QUINN & THERESIA DEGENER, HUMAN RIGHTS AND DISABILITY: THE CURRENT USE AND FUTURE POTENTIAL OF UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS INSTRUMENTS IN THE CONTEXT OF DISABILITY 1 (2002), available at http://www.nhri.net/pdf/disability.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n23. pdf.
24. Official Statement, U.N. Secretary-General, Secretary-General Hails Adoption of Landmark Convention on Rights of People with Disabilities, U.N. Doc. SG/SM/10797 (Dec. 13, 2006), available at http://www.un.org/News/Press/ docs/2006/sgsml0797.doc.htm, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n24a.pdf (stating that, once adopted, signed, and ratified, the Convention "will have an impact on national laws that will transform how people with disabilities can live their lives"); see also UN News Centre, Lauding Disability Convention as 'Dawn of a New Era,' UN Urges Speedy Ratification (Dec. 13, 2006), available at http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20975&Cr=disab, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449n24b.pdf.
25. See Stein, supra note 5, at 111-13 ("[B]ecause attitudes fomenting disability-related exclusion manifest to a greater degree in critiquing an environment's social construction, the framework provides an exemplar for why and how first- and second-generation rights applicable to women should be viewed and implemented holistically ....").
26. CRPD, supra note 1, art. 8 (mandating that States Parties "raise awareness throughout society, including at the family level, regarding persons with disabilities" and that States Parties also "promote awareness of the capabilities and contributions of persons with disabilities").
27. Id. art. 33 ("States Parties shall, in accordance with their legal and administrative systems, maintain, strengthen, designate or establish within the State Party, a framework, including one or more independent mechanisms, as appropriate, to promote, protect and monitor implementation of the present Convention. When designating or establishing such a mechanism, States Parties shall take into account the principles relating to the status and functioning of national institutions for protection and promotion of human rights.").
28. For discussion of the impact of mainstream legal-centric approaches to human rights practice to the disregard of other forms of human rights advocacy, see Lord & Guernsey, supra note 18, and Narula, supra note 20, at 327-40.
29. CRPD, supra note 1, arts. 32-40.
30. Id. art. 32 ("States Parties recognize the importance of international cooperation and its promotion, in support of national efforts for the realization of the purpose and objectives of the present Convention, and will undertake appropriate and effective measures in this regard, between and among States and, as appropriate, in partnership with relevant international and regional organizations and civil society, in particular organizations of persons with disabilities.") Article 32 lists examples of measures to promote international cooperation and inclusive programming. Id. art. 32.
31. See, e.g., CAT, supra note 15, art. 2; CEDAW, supra note 15, art. 2; ICCPR, supra note 15, art. 2; CERD, supra note 15, art. 2.
32. CRPD, supra note 1, art. 4 ("States Parties undertake to ensure and promote the full realization of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all persons with disabilities without discrimination of any kind on the basis of disability."). Following the general statement of obligation, Article 4 lists responsibilities which the States Parties assume through their support of the CRPD. Id. art. 4.
33. Id. art. 4.
34. Id. art. 4(1)(a).
35. Id. art. 4(l)(c).
36. Id. art. 4(l)(d).
37. Id. art. 4(l)(e).
38. The method of translating international legal obligations into national law depends upon the nature of the domestic legal system. For a straightforward account of this process, see UNITED NATIONS, REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONSULTATIVE EXPERT GROUP MEETING ON INTERNATIONAL NORMS AND STANDARDS RELATING TO DISABILITY 10-20 (Dec. 8-12,1998).
39. See CRPD, supra note 1, arts. 4(1)(f) & (g).
40. Id. art. 4(1)(h).
41. Id. art. 4(1)0).
42. Id. art. 4(3).
43. Convention on the Rights of the Child, G.A. Res. 44/25, U.N. Doc. A/44/49 (Nov. 20, 1989) (entered into force Sept. 2, 1990) [hereinafter CRC], Notably, however, the structure of the CRPD clarifies the relationship between non-discrimination and equality and economic, social, and cultural rights insofar as Article 5 (Non-Discrimination and Equality) and Article 3 (General Principles) are not stand-alone articles. Rather, they are articles of general application to be applied horizontally across the CRPD rights spectrum.
44. See CRPD, supra note 1, art. 4(2).
45. U.N. Comm. on Econ., Soc. & Cultural Rights, Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, General Comment 3, 20, HRI/GEN/l/Rev.5 (Apr. 26, 2001).
46. Budget analysis refers to a process by which state allocation of resources are scrutinized and assessed, for example, to identify sufficiency of resource allocation in the attempt to secure the rights of a particularly disadvantaged group. See MARIA DIOKNO, A RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH TO BUDGET ANALYSIS 8 (1999), available at http://www.iie.org/Website/ CustomPages/ACFE8.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law. washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n46a.pdf; FUNDAR, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INTERNSHIP PROGRAM, INTERNATIONAL BUDGET PROJECT, DIGNITY COUNTS: A GUIDE TO USING BUDGET ANALYSIS TO ADVANCE HUMAN RIGHTS 1 (2004), available at http://www.iie.org/IHRIP/Dignity- Counts.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/ wlr/notes/83washlrev449n46b.pdf. For the role of budget analysis in the realm of women's rights, see Debbie Budlender & Rhonda Sharp, How To Do a Gender-Sensitive Budget Analysis: Contemporary Research and Practice (1998), available at http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/Public/PubDocs/docs/360141/ AusAIDTr.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/ wlr/notes/83washlrev449n46c.pdf. Budget analysis has also been stressed in the context of State reporting obligations on the implementation of economic, social, and cultural rights. See U.N. Econ. & Soc. Council, Limburg Principles on the Implementation of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, ¶ 79, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1987/17 (Jan. 8, 1987) ("Quantitative information should be included in the reports of States parties in order to indicate the extent to which the rights are protected in fact. Statistical information and information on budgetary allocations and expenditures should be presented in such a way as to facilitate the assessment of the compliance with Covenant obligations. States parties should, where possible, adopt clearly defined targets and indicators in implementing the Covenant.").
47. See CRPD, supra note 1, art. 1. Because these conceptual norms are set forth in the Article of Purpose, it follows that States cannot enter permissible reservations to the normative contents of this Article. See Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties art. 19, G.A. Res. 2166 (XXI) (Dec. 5 1966), G.A. Res. 2287 (XXII) (Dec. 6, 1967), 1150 U.N.T.S. 331 (prohibiting a state from entering a reservation to a treaty, inter alia, where the "reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty").
48. See CRPD, supra note 1, art. 3 (a); id. art. 3(d); id. art. 3(b); id. art. 3(e); id. art. 3(c); id. art. 3(f); id. art. 3(g); id. art. 3(h).
49. Id. art. 6.
50. Id. art. 7.
51. quot;Concerned about the difficult conditions faced by persons with disabilities who are subject to multiple or aggravated forms of discrimination on the basis of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic, indigenous or social origin, property, birth, age or other status .. . ." Id. pmbl. (p).
52. Mart. 8(1).
53. Id. art. 9.
54. Id. art. 9(1).
55. This dynamic is taken expressly from the CRC. See CRC, supra note 43.
56. CRPD, supra note l.art. 10.
57. Id. art. 15.
58. Id. art. 24.
59. Id. art. 27.
60. Id. art. 29.
61. Id. art. 12.
62. Id. art. 13.
63. Id. art. 21.
64. Id. art. 22.
65. Id. art. 30.
66. Id. art. 23.
67. Id. art. 17.
68. Id. art. 18.
69. Id. art. 14.
70. Id. art. 28.
71. SEE U.N. DEP'T OF ECON. & SOC. AFFAIRS, CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES: WHY A CONVENTION? 1 (2006), http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/pdfs/qna.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n71 .pdf.
72. CRPD, supra note 1, art. 19.
73. Id. art. 20.
74. Id. 26.
75. See generally Stein & Stein, supra note 7.
76. See, e.g., International Convention to Combat Desertification in Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, especially in Africa art. 3(a), 14 Sept. 1994 33 I.L.M. 1332 (1994); U.N. Framework on Convention Climate Change art. 10, 14(2), May 9, 1992, 31 I.L.M. 849 (1992) (entered into force Mar. 21, 1994); World Health Organization, Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, art. 21, (June 16, 2003), available at htrp://www.who.int/fctc/text-download/erι/index.html, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n76a.pdf; Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction art. 9, 2056 U.N.T.S. 241, 36 I.L.M 1507 (1997) (Sep. 18, 1997) [hereinafter Mine Ban Treaty], available at http://www.unog.ch/80256EDD006B8954/(httpAssets)/- 8DF9CC31A4CA8B32C12571C7002E3F3E/$file/APLC+English.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n76b. pdf.
77. The dialogue on national-level monitoring during the course of the Ad Hoc Committee negotiations was enhanced and significantly influenced by the participation of NHRIs in all sessions of the process. This included the representation of NHRIs on the Working Group of the Ad Hoc Committee.
78. CRPD, supra note 1, art. 33(1).
79. As such, it is similar to the dual system adopted in the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The CAT Optional Protocol incorporates a national component in Article 3 requiring State Parties to "set up, designate or maintain at the domestic level one or several visiting bodies for the prevention of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. . . ." Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment art. 3, G.A. Res. 57/199, U.N. Doc. A/RES/57/199 (Dec. 18, 2002).
80. CRPD, supra note 1, art. 33(1).
81. Id. art. 33(2).
82. Id. art. 33(3).
83. Id. art. 33(2).
84. A proposal in the original draft considered by the Working Group made explicit reference to establishing national mechanisms consistent with the Paris Principles, but it was rejected. The Paris Principles are standards of independence and accountability for National Human Rights Institutions established by the United Nations and enforced through accreditation by the International Coordinating Committee of National Human Rights. Principles Relating to the Status of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 48/134, U.N. Doc. A/RES/48/134 (Dec. 20, 1993) [hereinafter Paris Principles]. The Office of the High Council for Human Rights (OHCHR), among others, proposed that explicit mention be made of the Paris Principles. See OHCHR, Expert Paper on Existing Monitoring Mechanisms, Possible Relevant Improvements and Possible Innovations in Monitoring Mechanisms, (submission to the 7th Session of the Ad Hoc Committee), U.N. Doc. A/AC.265/2006/CRP.4, at 20, ¶ 77, available at http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/rights/ahc7docs/ahc7unedchrmonitor.doc, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449n84.pdf. Consequently, it provides substantially less guidance for States in terms of national-level implementation of disability rights.
85. Paris Principles, supra note 84.
86. Global meetings include those convened at Harvard Law School to work out details of the monitoring proposal submitted to the Sixth Ad Hoc Committee session, see Harvard Law School Hosts Planning Session on International Disability Rights, http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/2005/12/02- dίsabίlitίes.php (post date Dec. 2, 2005), permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449n86a.pdf, and to discuss implementation more generally. See Webcast: Planning Session on International Disability Rights Public Statements, held by Harvard Law School, http://www.law.harvard.edu/media/2007/02/16/ hrpdisabilityconv.rm. Regional meetings include a September 27, 2007 convening by the Asia Pacific Forum on National Rights Institutions to discuss national-level monitoring and implementation, see Asia Pacific Forum, Now the Real Work Starts: Implementing the UN Disability Convention (2008), available at http://www.asiapacificforum.net/news/now-the-real- work-starts-implementing-the-un-disabiIity-convention.html, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n86b.pdf, and a historic public forum held on September 5, 2007 in Seoul, Korea at which Asia Pacific NHRIs discussed monitoring and implementation with representatives of worldwide DPOs. See http://www.asiapacificforum.net/about/annual- meetings/12th-australia-2007/downloads/disability-issues/APF%20Report%20- %20DPI%20Conference.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law. washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n86c.pdf.
87. CRPD, supra note 1, art. 31(1) ("States Parties undertake to collect appropriate information, including statistical and research data, to enable them to formulate and implement policies to give effect to the present Convention.").
88. Kenya, for example, reports less than one percent of its population as having a disability, compared to twenty percent in New Zealand. Daniel Mont, World Bank, Measuring Disability Prevalence, SP Discussion Paper No. 0706 (March 2007), available at http://siteresources.worldbank.org/ DISABILITY/Resources/Data/MontPrevalence.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n88.pdf.
89. For example, the lack of such empirical data in the United States has been deleterious to reliable conclusions regarding the efficacy of the ADA. See Richard V. Burkhauser & David C. Stapleton, Introduction to THE DECLINE IN EMPLOYMENT OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES: A POLICY PUZZLE 2 (David C. Stapleton & Richard V. Burkhauser eds., 2003); NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY, THE IMPACT OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT: ASSESSING THE PROGRESS TOWARD ACHIEVING THE GOALS OF THE ADA 23 (2007), available at http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/ 2007/pdf/ada-impact-07-26-07.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n89.pdf.
90. The Washington Group has responded to the failure of national census bureaus across the world to include disability questions in national census exercises by formulating questions designed to address this gap. See National Center for Health Statistics, Washington Group on Disability Statistics, REVISED Census Questions on Disability Endorsed by the Washington Group, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/otheract/citygroup/products/meeting6/ REVISED%20WG%20Short %20Measure%20on%20Disability.doc, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449n90.pdf.
91. CRPD, supra note 1, art. 32(1) ("States Parties recognize the importance of international cooperation and its promotion, in support of national efforts for the realization of the purpose and objectives of the present Convention, and will undertake appropriate and effective measures in this regard, between and among States and, as appropriate, in partnership with relevant international and regional organizations and civil society, in particular organizations of persons with disabilities.").
92. Id. art. 32(1).
93. Id. art. 32(l)(b).
94. Id. art. 32(1)(c).
95. Id. art. 32(1)(d).
96. Id. art. 32.
97. Id.
98. This has proved a useful practice in the Mine Ban Treaty implementation process. Regular meetings of States Parties have provided an important forum for reporting and sharing best practices in Mine Ban Treaty implementation, including, for example, expenditures on victim-assistance programming. For more on Mine Ban Treaty implementation and meetings of States Parties, see the International Campaign to Ban Landmines Treaty Meetings website, available at http://www.icbl.org/treaty/meetings (last visited Nov. 16, 2008), permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449n98.pdf. See also Mine Ban Treaty, supra note 76.
99. This may be achieved through various mechanisms, including through the explicit recognition of disability as a prohibited ground of discrimination in a non-discrimination clause or through the incorporation of international human rights standards into the constitutional framework.
100. For an excellent treatment of human rights and constitutions, see Thomas Buergenthal, Modern Constitutions and Human Rights Treaties, 36 COLUM. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 211 (1997).
101. Jeff Radebe, Keynote Address at the Disabled People South Africa Conference: Ten Years of Democracy-The Current and Future Status and Role of People with Disabilities, (Mar. 12, 2004), available at http://www.polity.org.za/article.php?a-id=48262, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl01a.pdf; Maria Kangere, Disability in Development: The Uganda Experience, (Conference Paper: Inclusion of Disability in Dutch Development Cooperation Policy and Practice, 2003), available at http://www.dcdd.nl/data/1067944239230- Development%20in%20Disability%20paper%20(Maria% 20Kangere).pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449nl01b.pdf.
102. See, e.g., NepalNews.com, NFDN Demands Equal Opportunity for Persons with Disabilities (June 7, 2006), available at http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2006/jun/jun07/newsl0.php, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl02.pdf; International Labour Organization, Employment of Persons with Disabilities: The Impact of Legislation, Report of a Technical Consultation, THE GLADNET COLLECTION 12 (2002) ("In Zambia, the Persons with Disabilities Act No. 33 of November 1996 is a good example of anti-discrimination law[.]").
103. The inability of the International Disability Alliance to build a strong, sustained, and well-resourced coalition is replicated at the domestic level where impairment-specific organizations traditionally provide services in isolation from each other and rarely if ever engage in effective coalition work. Cf. Janet E. Lord, Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Voice Accountability and NGOs in Human Rights Standard Setting, 5 SETON HALL J. DIPL. & INT'L REL. 93 (2004).
104. The authors, for example, have worked on law reform in several countries that have yet to ratify the CRPD, including Korea, Laos, Russia, and Vietnam.
105. As noted by the President of the General Assembly on the day of the CRPD's adoption, the treaty's consensus acceptance "is a great opportunity to celebrate the emergence of comprehensive guidelines the world so urgently needs." President of the United Nations General Assembly, Statement at the Adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Dec. 13, 2006), available at http://www.un.org/ga/president/61/ statements/statement20061213.shtml, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl05.pdf.
106. To illustrate, Morocco has no comprehensive disability law. Legislation dating to 1982 applies to only a few limited rights with respect to persons with visual impairments, but not to persons with other types of disabilities. The Convention process, in which the Moroccan government and NGOs played major roles, has promoted national-level planning and prompted national-level legislative reform to remedy major gaps. See Secrétariat a'Etat Chargé de la Famille, de I'Enfance et des Personnes Handicapées, Programme National de Réadaptation a Base Communitaire au Profit des Personnes Handicapées 2006-2008 (2006).
107. See CRPD, supra note 1, art. 33(1) (obligating States Parties to "designate one or more focal points within government for matters relating to the implementation of the present Convention"); art. 33(2) (requiring States Parties to "maintain, strengthen, designate or establish ... one or more independent mechanisms ... to promote, protect and monitor implementation" of the CRPD); and art. 33(1) (further requiring States to "give due consideration to the establishment or designation of a coordination mechanism within government to facilitate related action in different sectors and at different levels").
108. For example, Jamaica, the first State to ratify the Convention, has not acted to align its domestic legal framework with the Convention and remains a disability rights violator in a number of other areas. See generally U.S. Dep't of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Jamaica (2007), available at http://www.state.gOv/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2006/78897.htm, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449nl08.pdf.
109. New Zealand, a leading country in the treaty negotiations, has some notably progressive domestic disability practices, but its legal framework remains underdeveloped in the comprehensive sense mandated by the Convention. See Anne-Marie Mooney Cotter, THIS ABILITY: AN INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ANALYSIS OF DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION 100-20 (2007).
110. Mexico's Senate, for example, ratified the CRPD but made a declaration that it would not apply Article 12 because its domestic law on legal capacity exceeded the Convention's requirements. After well-publicized statements by two experts, the Senate acquiesced to reconsider its position. See Katia D'Artigues, Mexico, Farol de la Calle, ¿Oscuridad en Casa?, EL UNIVERSAL, Oct. 26, 2007, at A19 (describing the critiques offered by Professors Gerard Quinn and Michael Stein to the General Assembly of Human Rights Institutions of the Americas).
111. Take, for example, the E.U. Framework Directive, prohibiting discrimination in employment on the basis of disability. See Council Directive 2000/78/EC, art. 12, 2000 O.J. (L 303) 17 (EU). The Directive requires individual employers to take "appropriate measures" to provide reasonable accommodations. It is neutral, however, as to whether Member States may support disabled employment through "specific measures" (i.e., equity modifiers). Id. art. 7. An undetermined issue is how Member States with pre-existing programs-such as the employment quota system operated in Germany-will respond to the Directive's purely antidiscrimination mandate. The same dynamic is at play in Japan, where the government is under pressure by disability rights groups to supplement or supplant the existing quota system with anti-discrimination laws.
112. See generally Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509 (2004) (holding that one particular individual had a right to physically access one particular court, but leaving open the question of whether any other persons with disabilities could gain relief when denied access to other justice elements, for example, as witnesses or jurors).
113. CRPD, supra note 1, art. 20 ("States Parties shall take effective measures to ensure personal mobility with the greatest possible independence for persons with disabilities ... .").
114. Id. art. 33.
115. Id. art. 4.
116. Id. art. 4(3) ("In the development and implementation of legislation and policies to implement the present Convention, and in other decision-making processes concerning issues relating to persons with disabilities, States Parties shall closely consult with and actively involve persons with disabilities, including children with disabilities, through their representative organizations.").
117. Id. art. 29.
118. See Int'l Found, for Electoral Sys., http://www.electionaccess.org (last visited Sept. 24, 2008), permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl 18.pdf.
119. CRPD, supra note 1, art. 25.
120. NORA GROCE ET AL., GUIDELINES FOR INCLUSION OF INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITY IN HIV/AIDS OUTREACH EFFORTS (2006), http://siteresources.worldbank.org/-DISABILITY/Resources/ 2806581161026944612/HIVGuidelinesENG.doc, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl20.pdf.
121. Id.
122. See Harold Hongju Koh, The 1998 Frankel Lecture: Bringing International Law Home, 35 Hous. L. REV. 623 (1998); Ralph G. Steinhardt, The Role of International Law as a Canon of Statutory Construction, 43 VAND. L. REV. 1103 (1990); Melissa A. Waters, Creeping Monism: The Judicial Trend Toward Interpretative Incorporation of Human Rights Treaties, 107 COLUM. L. REV. 628 (2007).
123. This term was coined by Waters to characterize a judicial trend in some common-law systems to take human rights norms into account notwithstanding the absence of implementing domestic legislation. See Waters, supra note 122, at 628.
124. This trend contrasts markedly with the traditional approach taken by courts in other common-law jurisdictions, and British Commonwealth countries in particular, that declines to give effect to treaties absent express implementing legislation. This approach is consistent with a dualist, as opposed to monist orientation. Id. at 628 (noting the historic entrenchment of dualism in British Commonwealth jurisdictions).
125. According to Waters' theory, international human rights standards provide additional support for a court's reasoning regarding the interpretation of a domestic law. Waters, supra note 122, at 654; see also Steinhardt, supra note 122, at 1110; Melissa A. Waters, Mediating Norms and Identity: The Role of Transnational Judicial Dialogue in Creating and Enforcing International Law, 93 GEO. L.J. 487 (2005).
126. Waters, Mediating Norms, supra note 125, at 569-70 (referencing the U.S. Supreme Court's willingness to use international law to confirm the reasonableness of decisions based in domestic law).
127. Id. at 509 ("But through judicial interpretation by both national and supranational tribunals over the past two decades, the prohibition on cruel or inhuman punishment has evolved to encompass real limitations on the death penalty. Using comparative analysis, courts have interpreted this norm to progressively limit or even to abolish domestic statutes permitting the use of the death penalty."); see also WILLIAM A. SCHABAS, THE DEATH PENALTY AS CRUEL TREATMENT AND TORTURE 13-56 (1996).
128. Waters, Mediating Norms, supra note 125, at 502 ("The co-constitutive process is an iterative one in which various Ίaw-declaring fora'-domestic courts, legislatures, foreign ministries, and the like-articulate and champion domestic norms at the transnational level. Domestic norms thus become part of the international legal discourse, and are translated, modified, diffused and dispersed through various kinds of transnational and transgovernmental channels. These norms, modified to a greater or lesser extent by the international legal discourse, return to the domestic fora to be internalized into domestic law and to further shape and re-shape domestic societal and cultural norms."); see also Curtis A. Bradley & Jack L. Goldsmith, Customary International Law as Federal Common Law: A Critique of the Modern Position, 110 HARV. L. REV. 815,838-42(1997).
129. Waters, Mediating Norms, supra note 125, at 509.
130. See, e.g., Rodriquez-Fernandez v. Wilkinson, 654 F.2d 1382, 1388 (10th Cir. 1981) (citing both the American Convention on Human Rights (American Convention) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) as evidence of the customary-law prohibition of prolonged arbitrary detention); Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F.2d 876, 883-85 (2d Cir. 1980) (taking account of the American Convention and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), inter alia, to determine the customary prohibition against torture); Forti v. Suarez-Mason, 672 F. Supp. 1531, 1542 (N.D. Cal. 1987) (citing the UDHR, American Convention, and ICCPR to assert the existence of a customary rule prohibiting summary execution), reh 'g granted in part and denied in part, 694 F. Supp. 707 (N.D. Cal 1988); Laureau v. Manson, 507 F. Supp. 1177, 1187-89 & n.9 (D. Conn. 1980) (citing the U.N. Minimum Standard Rules Governing the Treatment of Prisoners), modified, 651 F.2d 96 (2d Cir. 1981), aff'd in part and modified in part, 651 F.2d 96 (2d Cir. 1981). For collections of American case law citing to international human rights standards, see RICHARD LILLICH, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTRUMENTS 440 (1986); JORDAN J. PAUST, INTERNATIONAL LAW AS LAW OF THE UNITED STATES (1996).
131. Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities, G.A. Res. 48/96, U.N. GAOR, 48th Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 202, U.N. Doc. A/48/49 (Mar. 4, 1994).
132. See generally Ryan Goodman, Human Rights Treaties, Invalid Reservations, and State Consent, 96 AM. J. INT'L. L. 531 (2002).
133. Koh, supra note 17, at 2612.
134. KECK & SIKKINK, supra note 21, at 30 (providing case studies of human rights campaigns that worked social change through transnational advocacy networks, or communicative structures whose members are primarily motivated "by shared principled ideas or values") (italics in original). For a rare account by an international legal scholar of the importance of social process to work change well beyond the narrow rule of law realm, see Narula, supra note 20, at 257. Narula provocatively poses the question "whether the law can be a vehicle for social change, or does it simply divert attention away from the social condition it masks and act as a safety-valve to diffuse pressure for real reform...." Id. at 335. In the context of caste-based discrimination, she calls for a "dismantling of the caste-based hierarchical mindset[,]" which cannot be achieved through law-reform efforts alone. Id. at 258. Both of these insights resonate as the process of domestic change gains momentum following the CRPD's entry into force as well as its on-going, widespread ratification.
135. For an account of the expressive-law value of human rights treaties, see Alex Geisinger & Michael Ashley Stein, A Theory of Expressive International Law, 60 VAND. L. REV. 77 (2007), and Alex Geisinger & Michael Ashley Stein, Rational Choice, Reputation, and Human Rights Treaties, 106 U. MICH. L. REV. 1129 (2008). For the application of these ideas to the process by which the CRPD was negotiated, see Janet E. Lord, Normative Landscaping: Power and Norms within Human Rights Law-Making Processes (Feb. 2005) (unpublished manuscript) available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl35.pdf.
136. On the understanding of international law as a process, see generally ROSALYN HIGGINS, PROBLEMS AND PROCESS: INTERNATIONAL LAW AND HOW WE USE IT (1994).
137. See Christian Reus-Smit, Constructivism, in THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 218 v2001) (noting that "[i]nstitutionalized norms and ideas" can "condition what actors' [sic] consider necessary and possible, both in practical and ethical terms"); Alexander Wendt, Constructing International Politics, 20 INT'L SEC. 73 (1995) (positing that systems of shared ideas, beliefs and values work to influence social and political action within and across multilateral law-making processes).
138. See, e.g., CRPD, supra note 1, art. 8 (requiring States Parties "to adopt immediate, effective and appropriate measures .... [t]o raise awareness throughout society, including at the family level, regarding persons with disabilities, and to foster respect for the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities ... .")· For a practical application of human rights education and awareness raising, see JANET E. LORD ET AL., HUMAN RIGHTS. YES! (2007), available at http://wwwl.umn.edu/humanrts/edumat/hreduseries/TB6/ pdfs/Manuals/final-pdf-default-withcover.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl 38.pdf.
139. Oral Intervention to the Ad Hoc Committee by Representative from Nigeria to the Ad Hoc Committee, Disability Negotiations Daily Summary Vol. 1, #7 (Aug. 6, 2002), http://www.worldenable.net/rights/adhocmeetsumm07.htm, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl39. pdf.
140. Oral Intervention to the Ad Hoc Committee by Representative from South Africa to the Ad Hoc Committee, Disability Negotiations Daily Summary, Vol. 1, #4 (Aug. 1, 2002), http://www.worldenable.net/rights/adhocmeetsumm04.htm, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449nl40.pdf.
141. Expressive law explores the process whereby legal instruments affect preferences and behavior by altering social perceptions and conventions. See generally Alex Geisinger, A Belief Change Theory of Expressive Law, 88 IOWA L. REV. 35 (2002). For a literature review of expressive law, see Michael Ashley Stein, Under the Empirical Radar: An Initial Expressive Law Analysis of the ADA, 90 VA. L. . REV. 1151(2004).
142. For an account of the expressive-law value of human rights treaties, see Geisinger & Stein, supra note 135.
143. See, e.g., CRPD, supra note 1, art. 8 (requiring States Parties "to adopt immediate, effective and appropriate measures ... [t]o raise awareness throughout society, including at the family level, regarding persons with disabilities, and to foster respect for the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities ...."). In this regard, the tools of human rights education may assume an important role in fostering the expressive value of the CRPD. See, e.g., LORD ET AL., supra note 138.
144. CRPD, supra note 1, pmbl. (k) (expressing concern that "persons with disabilities continue to face barriers in their participation as equal members of society and violations of their human rights in all parts of the world").
145. The literature on human rights and foreign policy generally is voluminous. See BUERGENTHAL, SHELTON & STEWART, supra note 13, at 347-401; JULIE A. MERTUS, BAIT AND SWITCH: HUMAN RIGHTS AND U.S. FOREIGN POLICY (2d ed. 2008); Mark L. Schneider, A New Administration's New Policy: The Rise to Power of Human Rights, in HUMAN RIGHTS AND U.S. FOREIGN POLICY, PRINCIPLES AND APPLICATIONS 3 (Peter G. Brown & Douglas MacLean eds., 1979); David Weissbrodt, Human Rights Legislation and U.S. Foreign Policy, 7 GA. J. INT'L & COMP.L. 231(1977).
146. See CRPD, supra note 1, art. 32.
147. Id. art. 32(l)(a) (requiring States Parties to "undertake appropriate and effective measures" in making sure that "international cooperation, including international development programmes, is inclusive of and accessible to persons with disabilities").
148. See BILL ALBERT, IS DISABILITY REALLY ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGENDA?: A REVIEW OF OFFICIAL DISABILITY POLICIES OF THE MAJOR GOVERNMENTAL AND INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES 7 (Sept. 2004), http://www.disabilitykar. net/pdfs/disability-on-the-agenda.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl48.pdf (detailing the historical disregard of inclusive development practice among donor governments in their development assistance programming); see also Amy T. Wilson, The Effectiveness of International Development Assistance from American Organizations to Deaf Communities in Jamaica, 150 AM. ANNALS OF THE DEAF 292, 298 (2005) (describing how USAID, in working "on behalf of deaf-based development, did not work in conjunction with the local deaf community).
149. See generally BRITISH COUNCIL OF DISABLED PEOPLE'S INT'L COMM., IMPROVING DFID'S ENGAGEMENT WITH THE UK DISABILITY MOVEMENT 4 (2005), http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/ files/bcodp-dfid-disability.pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/83washlrev449nl49.pdf.
150. See QUINN & DEGENER, supra note 23, at 23 ("People with disabilities were often virtually invisible citizens of many societies," and "have been marginalized in nearly all cultures throughout history."); see also MARK C. WEBER, DISABILITY HARASSMENT 6 (2007) ("Lack of daily contact at a level of true equality with persons with disabilities promotes and constantly reinforces stereotypes.").
151. NAT'L COUNCIL ON DISABILITY, THE IMPACT OF THE AMERICANS WITH D ISABILITIES ACT: ASSESSING THE PROGRESS TOWARD ACHIEVING THE GOALS OF THE ADA (July 26, 2007), http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2007/pdf/ada-impact-07-26-07. pdf, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449nl 51 .pdf.
152. This is a standard sociological argument. The classic treatment is ERVING GOFFMAN, STIGMA: NOTES ON THE MANAGEMENT OF SPOILED IDENTITY 5 (1963) (asserting that stigma manifests when "we believe the person with a stigma is not quite human").
153. For an argument on this ground in favor of employing greater numbers of persons with psycho-social disabilities, see Michael E. Waterstone & Michael Ashley Stein, Disabling Prejudice, 102 NW. U. L. REV. 1352 (2008).
154. World Conference on Human Rights, June 14-25, 1993, Vienna Declaration and Program of Action, ¶ 63 (July 12, 1993), available at http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/A.CONF. 157.23.En, permanent copy available at http://www.law.washington.edu/wlr/notes/ 83washlrev449nl 54.pdf.