1 Introduction
We have chosen these two statements above as an introduction to this chapter because they articulate the key issue which is the focus of this book: how the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilitiesā (Convention/CRPD 2006) interacts with cultural contexts during its ratification, implementation and monitoring processes. The CRPD (2006) was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2006. By January 2020, 14 years after its adoption, 181 States had ratified it, with 96 States Parties also having ratified its Optional Protocol (OP-CRPD 2006). This is an impressive record, but it also raises the issue of how an international human rights treaty interacts with, influences and is influenced by the specific cultural contexts in which it must be implemented. The CRPD (2006) has been seen as a āparadigm shiftā in relation to how persons with disabilities are constituted in their societies and as potentially transformative in changing their lives for the better (Quinn 2009; Kayess and French 2008; Scully 2012). However, its success also depends on how States Parties to the CRPD actually interpret it within their particular historical, social, economic and political contexts, and how its provisions are reflected in their domestic laws, policies and practices, in relation to persons with disabilities. The transition from the CRPD at the international level to specific action within States Partiesā domestic contexts is not a simple legal process but a complex cultural one (Kakoullis 2015). It is affected by the unique nature of the CRPD that has sought to not only promote the human rights of persons with disabilities in their societies through its content, but also include them as active agents in its ratification, implementation and monitoring processes. While States Parties are responsible for the interpretation and translation of International Human Rights Law into domestic law and policy, how individuals and groups are constituted by those around them may impact on the ways in which the CRPD is interpreted and may lead to challenges and change in cultural contexts.
This bookās development has been informed by a number of questions which arose from our engagement with the human rights of persons with disabilities within our own States Parties and internationally. These questions are as follows: what is meant by the concept of ācultureā in relation to the human rights of persons with disabilities set out in the CRPD? How important are cultural contexts in shaping how the CRPDās provisions are interpreted and implemented by particular States Parties? What cultural factors facilitate or challenge the process of interpreting and translating the provisions of the CRPD into action for change during the processes of ratification, implementation and monitoring? How far is the CRPD recognised as an instrument for social change in particular cultures? In this book we have sought to deepen our understanding of these questions through engaging with contributors who provide a range of perspectives to the interaction between cultural contexts and the CRPD.
In this chapter, we begin by providing a statement of our positions as editors. We then provide a rationale for the specific focus and development of this book. Finally, we describe the structure of the book.
2 The Editorsā Positions
Our decision to develop an edited book that focuses on the ways in which the CRPD and cultural contexts interact originally arose from our individual experiences in working with persons with disabilities in different States and cultures. Our separate interests in the issue of cultural contexts and International Human Rights Law became a shared one as we worked together at the University of Bristol, UK. We met in 2009 when Kelley was a Professor of Disability and Policy at the Norah Fry Centre for Disability Studies, School for Policy Studies, and Emily was a doctoral researcher between the Law School and the Norah Fry Centre for Disability Studies.
Kelley is Australian, and Emily is half-English and half-Cypriot. We initially worked together in an English university context. Sometimes we found it challenging to reconcile or to make clear to each other the issues arising from our particular cultural contexts. This was of particular importance to Emily whose doctoral research at the time focused on the ratification process for the CRPD in Cyprus. During Emilyās doctoral journey, we worked together to develop a shared understanding of the particular socio-historical-cultural context of Cyprus in relation to persons with disabilities and of how particular English language concepts, such as the āsocial model of disabilityā and āimpairmentā, were understood and/or did not have an equivalent meaning in the Cypriot context, including in the Greek language. Kelley came from Australia, where the social model of disability was known and used by disabled peoplesā organisations (DPOs) and where the CRPD approach to human rights was familiar. In contrast, in Cyprus, the history and culture were less focused on human rights in relation to persons with disabilities, and the social model of disability underpinning the CRPD was little known or used by DPOs. From our work came an understanding of the importance of particular norms, history, language and tradition, in shaping and influencing the ways in which our cultural contexts engaged with the CRPD. Furthermore, another cultural context arose from our disciplinary backgrounds. Kelley is a social science researcher, whereas Emily is a socio-legal researcher. We had to navigate the very different disciplinary discourses, including language and terminology and the theoretical and epistemological perspectives in which we operated. From these interactions of perspectives came new learning for both of us.
That journey has largely informed this edited book as we became increasingly aware of the complexity of interpreting and translating the CRPDās provisions into States Partiesā cultural contexts and saw the need for interdisciplinary approaches to exploring this.
3 A Note on Language
The CRPD recognises that the concept of ādisabilityā is not static but is an evolving concept (CRPD 2006, Preamble), and it employs a description of disability that although grounded in the social model of disability is also influenced by a āminority rights approachā1 to disability, āperson first languageā (PFL) and a āhuman rights approachā to disability (CRPD 2006, Art. 1; Lawson 2007; Kanter 2007; Kayess and French 2008; Kakoullis and Ikehara 2018). The language used in this book predominantly adopts the language used in the CRPD, that of āpersons with disabilitiesā, although the phrase ādisabled personsā is also sometimes used. Language used in relation to disability also varies depending on the cultural context.
4 Culture and the CRPD
Since the adoption of the CRPD in 2006, its importance has been recognised in the development of a large and growing body of literature largely based within a legal discourse. This has provided theoretical analyses of the CRPD itself as a whole or has focused on particular provisions and/or their domestic implementation in particular States Parties (ArnardĆ³ttir and Quinn 2009; de Beco 2013, Blanck and Flynn 2017; Fina et al. 2017; OāMahony and Quinn 2017; Bantekas et al. 2018) including how they have been affected and interpreted by their courts (Waddington and Lawson 2018). Some of the literature combines the two approaches with an account of the CRPD and its significance, together with a focus on particular provisions (Kanter 2015). Some authors have focused on a particular aspect of the journey of the CRPD at the international level, for example, Sabatello and Schulze (2014) in their edited book are concerned with the drafting of the CRPD from the perspectives of persons with disabilities, while Flynn (2011) focuses on international responses to the implementation of the CRPD, and Rioux et al. (2015) concentrate on the issue of monitoring of the CRPD and its implications for social change. This literature is significant in providi...