On the opening day of the 9th conference of the European Network of Rehabilitation Centres for Survivors of Torture, Programme Manager and Legal Adviser, Emma Reilly presented some interesting views of how international law may ensure that survivors get access to the specialist rehabilitation that they need.
The right to rehabilitation
The dominant discourse around rehabilitation has traditionally
been one of healthcare rather than rights, and provision of
specialised services is therefore seen more as an ethical
imperative than in terms of a State's international legal
obligations.
For several reasons it is only a very small minority of torture
survivors who can in practice enforce their right to rehabilitation
by legal means today. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (CRPD) may provide a better legal basis for ensuring
the right to rehabilitation for torture survivors than the
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (CAT) can, said Emma Reilly.
The right to rehabilitation is recognized as an independent
human right in the CRPD, rather than a part of more general
measures of reparation or an aspect of the right to health. Unlike
the right to rehabilitation in the Convention against Torture,
which can be enforced only against a State which caused, consented
to or acquiesced in the victim's suffering, the right to
rehabilitation in the CRPD applies to all survivors of torture who
can be categorized as persons with disabilities, without
exception.
Furthermore, the right to rehabilitation is more detailed and
extensive in the CRPD than in previous human rights treaties. It
requires States to organize, strengthen and extend comprehensive
habilitation and rehabilitation services aimed at enabling persons
with disabilities to attain and maintain maximum independence, full
physical, mental, social and vocational ability, and full inclusion
and participation in all aspects of life.
In addition, rehabilitation services must begin at the earliest
possible stage, and be based on the multidisciplinary assessment of
individual needs and strengths, professionals and staff working in
rehabilitation services must receive initial and continuing
training, and States Parties must also provide services designed to
minimize and prevent further disabilities.
Thus, the State obligation to torture survivors who are also
persons with disabilities goes beyond merely funding
rehabilitation. The State has an obligation to ensure the
provision, quality and aims of rehabilitation services, explained
Emma Reilly.
Who are persons with disabilities?
The CRPD is adopted despite a lack of consensus on who exactly
may benefit from its provisions. The definition ´disability` and
´persons with disabilities` proved controversial during the
drafting. Emma Reilly has discussed several possible classification
systems in the paper "Capacities, capabilities and disabilities: A
right to rehabilitation for torture survivors in the UN Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities?"
Whether a survivor of torture can be categorized as a person
with disabilities will be a matter of how treaties are being
interpreted - this in part according to the practice among States
that have ratified them. The conclusions and comments of the
Committee will be vital and it may be influenced by civil society
movements.
In the examination of the potentials of the CRPD, Emma Reilly
has focused on all torture survivors who want
to access rehabilitation services. Classification as a person with
disabilities can still be stigmatising, and it is important to
allow individuals to decide for themselves how they wish to be
labelled. Stigma can itself be dehumanising in that it removes
individuality; the person is seen not as a person but through the
lens of his or her disability and any prevalent associated
stereotypes. Given that destruction of individuality is often an
aim of torture, it is vital that torture survivors in particular
are not given a blanket label as persons with disabilities;
rehabilitation can take many forms, and medicalising the problems
faced by an individual will not always be appropriate.
Once a State, or even the Committee, agrees that torture
survivors can qualify as persons with
disabilities for the purposes of the CRPD, and therefore makes
rehabilitation services available to this group of persons, there
is not necessarily a requirement for each and every torture
survivor to be labelled as a person with disabilities in order to
access the right in practice. Indeed, in some circumstances the
dangers of stigmatisation may mitigate, said Emma Reilly.
Written by Heidi K. Tokle