Human rights-based approaches to development (HRBADs) have been pointed out as the most accomplished form of integration of human rights in development. Despite the growing talks among development practitioners on the need for human rights-based approaches to development policies and practices, it remains unclear what exactly the human right principle of accountability at the heart of these approaches consists of. This article seeks to unravel some of the difficulties. What does the principle of accountability mean? Who is accountable and to whom? What does it mean for current development practice? Reflecting on these questions, this article critically delves into policy, guidance, operational documents, evaluations, and other analyses by a selected number of bilateral development agencies. This desk-based research is in some cases backed by semi-structured interviews designed to provide a review of the current approaches to applying the principle of accountability. The article sheds light on how the principle of accountability is understood and applied by those agencies, and notes challenges and inconsistencies. It argues that the principle of accountability should be made fit for purpose so as not to become mere political rhetoric without practical meaning in development practice. It is thus contended that development agencies and state donors should move beyond understanding the principle of accountability as one that is grounded in internal accountability mechanisms and systems of evaluation and aim for holding all stakeholders, including themselves, accountable to the rights-holders of their development programmes and projects.
{"title":"The Principle of Accountability in Human Rights-Based Approaches to Development: Towards a New Understanding","authors":"Ysaline Reid","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad068","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad068","url":null,"abstract":"Human rights-based approaches to development (HRBADs) have been pointed out as the most accomplished form of integration of human rights in development. Despite the growing talks among development practitioners on the need for human rights-based approaches to development policies and practices, it remains unclear what exactly the human right principle of accountability at the heart of these approaches consists of. This article seeks to unravel some of the difficulties. What does the principle of accountability mean? Who is accountable and to whom? What does it mean for current development practice? Reflecting on these questions, this article critically delves into policy, guidance, operational documents, evaluations, and other analyses by a selected number of bilateral development agencies. This desk-based research is in some cases backed by semi-structured interviews designed to provide a review of the current approaches to applying the principle of accountability. The article sheds light on how the principle of accountability is understood and applied by those agencies, and notes challenges and inconsistencies. It argues that the principle of accountability should be made fit for purpose so as not to become mere political rhetoric without practical meaning in development practice. It is thus contended that development agencies and state donors should move beyond understanding the principle of accountability as one that is grounded in internal accountability mechanisms and systems of evaluation and aim for holding all stakeholders, including themselves, accountable to the rights-holders of their development programmes and projects.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139517474","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The climate crisis will continue to affect human and natural systems across Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Undoubtedly, this jeopardizes entire communities’ enjoyment of human rights. In that context, the Inter-American Human Rights System (IAHRS) is expected to respond, particularly since its organs have jurisdiction to order remedies over most LAC countries, provided they determine a rights violation. Despite the growing number of domestic human rights-based climate cases in the region, the organs of the IAHRS have yet to adjudicate and order remedies in a case concerning the climate crisis. Against this backdrop, this article inquires how to understand climate remedies from a political ecology perspective to capture the LAC climate litigation experience. Additionally, the article asks what the challenges of implementing such remedies may be. To answer these questions, first, it compares the remedial approaches of domestic courts in six finally decided climate-related cases with those of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) in ‘anti-extractivist’ cases. Second, it applies a political ecology lens to understand the elements that might hinder the implementation of the identified remedies. The article argues that the socioeconomic cost for States largely determines remedial compliance in domestic climate litigation and the IACtHR’s anti-extractivist litigation. Ultimately, the aim is to anticipate the future of climate remedies and their effectiveness at the IACtHR based on present climate litigation in LAC.
{"title":"The Political Ecology of Climate Remedies in Latin America and the Caribbean: Comparing Compliance between National and Inter-American Litigation","authors":"Juan Auz","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad057","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad057","url":null,"abstract":"The climate crisis will continue to affect human and natural systems across Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Undoubtedly, this jeopardizes entire communities’ enjoyment of human rights. In that context, the Inter-American Human Rights System (IAHRS) is expected to respond, particularly since its organs have jurisdiction to order remedies over most LAC countries, provided they determine a rights violation. Despite the growing number of domestic human rights-based climate cases in the region, the organs of the IAHRS have yet to adjudicate and order remedies in a case concerning the climate crisis. Against this backdrop, this article inquires how to understand climate remedies from a political ecology perspective to capture the LAC climate litigation experience. Additionally, the article asks what the challenges of implementing such remedies may be. To answer these questions, first, it compares the remedial approaches of domestic courts in six finally decided climate-related cases with those of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) in ‘anti-extractivist’ cases. Second, it applies a political ecology lens to understand the elements that might hinder the implementation of the identified remedies. The article argues that the socioeconomic cost for States largely determines remedial compliance in domestic climate litigation and the IACtHR’s anti-extractivist litigation. Ultimately, the aim is to anticipate the future of climate remedies and their effectiveness at the IACtHR based on present climate litigation in LAC.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"157 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139517746","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Climate litigation in Colombia is increasingly centred on fundamental and/or constitutional human rights. This note evaluates rights-based climate litigation in Colombia through the lens of five cases that protect ecosystems: the Atrato River, the Combeima River, and the Bruno River; the Amazon rainforest; and the Páramos ecosystem. First, the framing of cases is analysed. Second, the judges’ interpretations of the link between constitutional rights and climate change (if any), their reasoning, the scope of the remedies granted, and their intended impact are analysed. Relatedly, the note explores whether decisions that do not explicitly mention climate change can be considered climate cases as their remedies directly or indirectly affect climate change mitigation or adaptation. Finally, the note examines the status of compliance with or implementation of judicial remedies in climate cases.
{"title":"Rights-based Climate Litigation in Colombia: An Assessment of Claims, Remedies, and Implementation","authors":"María Daniela de la Rosa Calderón","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad067","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad067","url":null,"abstract":"Climate litigation in Colombia is increasingly centred on fundamental and/or constitutional human rights. This note evaluates rights-based climate litigation in Colombia through the lens of five cases that protect ecosystems: the Atrato River, the Combeima River, and the Bruno River; the Amazon rainforest; and the Páramos ecosystem. First, the framing of cases is analysed. Second, the judges’ interpretations of the link between constitutional rights and climate change (if any), their reasoning, the scope of the remedies granted, and their intended impact are analysed. Relatedly, the note explores whether decisions that do not explicitly mention climate change can be considered climate cases as their remedies directly or indirectly affect climate change mitigation or adaptation. Finally, the note examines the status of compliance with or implementation of judicial remedies in climate cases.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139464914","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The fast and fragmentedly regulated development of facial recognition technologies and related artificial intelligence poses various challenges to personal privacy, which leads to potential infringements of a wide range of related human rights. This article analyses the threats that the development and use of facial recognition technologies pose to privacy and personal data protection. It discusses the concept of privacy and the protection of personal data, including biometric data, at European Union level, and assesses the proposed new legal framework. It questions whether this is sufficient to protect privacy and ensure personal data protection in the context of the rapid development and increasing usage of facial recognition technologies in public and private sectors.
{"title":"Right to Privacy and Data Protection Concerns Raised by the Development and Usage of Face Recognition Technologies in the European Union","authors":"Eglė Kavoliūnaitė-Ragauskienė","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad065","url":null,"abstract":"The fast and fragmentedly regulated development of facial recognition technologies and related artificial intelligence poses various challenges to personal privacy, which leads to potential infringements of a wide range of related human rights. This article analyses the threats that the development and use of facial recognition technologies pose to privacy and personal data protection. It discusses the concept of privacy and the protection of personal data, including biometric data, at European Union level, and assesses the proposed new legal framework. It questions whether this is sufficient to protect privacy and ensure personal data protection in the context of the rapid development and increasing usage of facial recognition technologies in public and private sectors.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"58 3-4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139464689","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Victoria Angenent-Mari, Viknesh Kasthuri, Hannah Montoya, Elizabeth Toll
The Brown Human Rights Asylum Clinic (BHRAC) is a medical-student-run asylum clinic which provides pro-bono medical and psychological affidavits for people in immigration proceedings. At the time of the evaluations for affidavits, a BHRAC student administers a Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) screener, evaluating clients for access to healthcare and social needs such as assistance with utilities payments and housing. Medical students follow up later and connect clients with trusted resources. This descriptive analysis reviews the population demographics; demonstrates common resource requests within our population before and after the start of COVID-19; and suggests possible improvements to our clinic model. Of clients who completed the SDoH screening, 89 per cent requested at least one form of assistance; their most common request was for mental health services, followed by English classes and medical services. No change to community resource request trends appeared before and after the start of COVID-19. Barriers encountered included delays and difficulty administering the survey to clients who did not speak English or Spanish, the ethical concern of the evaluation team also offering community resources for future care, and the changes resulting from annual rotation in BHRAC student leadership.
{"title":"Descriptive Analysis of Community Based Needs among Asylum Seekers in the Greater Rhode Island Area before and after COVID-19: Evidence from a Student-Run Asylum Clinic","authors":"Victoria Angenent-Mari, Viknesh Kasthuri, Hannah Montoya, Elizabeth Toll","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad062","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The Brown Human Rights Asylum Clinic (BHRAC) is a medical-student-run asylum clinic which provides pro-bono medical and psychological affidavits for people in immigration proceedings. At the time of the evaluations for affidavits, a BHRAC student administers a Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) screener, evaluating clients for access to healthcare and social needs such as assistance with utilities payments and housing. Medical students follow up later and connect clients with trusted resources. This descriptive analysis reviews the population demographics; demonstrates common resource requests within our population before and after the start of COVID-19; and suggests possible improvements to our clinic model. Of clients who completed the SDoH screening, 89 per cent requested at least one form of assistance; their most common request was for mental health services, followed by English classes and medical services. No change to community resource request trends appeared before and after the start of COVID-19. Barriers encountered included delays and difficulty administering the survey to clients who did not speak English or Spanish, the ethical concern of the evaluation team also offering community resources for future care, and the changes resulting from annual rotation in BHRAC student leadership.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"6 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139439678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The term ‘human rights-based approach’ is common in rights and international development literature. Yet there is no single, universally agreed definition of a human rights-based approach, let alone its application to the right to health. This article uses a PRISMA-informed systematic literature review to address the question, ‘What is the current status of the human rights-based approach to health in international law?’ Previous reviews have described how international organizations and development donors have tackled human rights-based approaches to development generally and discussed prominent works on human rights-based approaches to health. However, this is the first review to sample the peer-reviewed literature systematically. The study revealed that authors use the terms ‘human rights’, ‘human rights-based approach’ and ‘right to health’ to import a raft of legal implications, or none at all. Similarly, readers may assign legal meanings to these terms, or none at all. Confusion arises because although these terms often have different meanings for authors and readers from different disciplines, this is not commonly acknowledged, and authors rarely clarify their perspectives. The author concludes that scholars should seek co-authors with human rights law or public health qualifications, as relevant. Most academic institutions research and teach health and law separately; interdisciplinary centres of excellence in health, law and human rights offer an opportunity to overcome these historical obstacles to interdisciplinary dialogue and understanding. The study and its conclusions will be of interest to legal researchers, human rights advocates, public health scholars, and advocates from other disciplines.
{"title":"Human Rights-based Approaches and the Right to Health: A Systematic Literature Review","authors":"David Patterson","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad063","url":null,"abstract":"The term ‘human rights-based approach’ is common in rights and international development literature. Yet there is no single, universally agreed definition of a human rights-based approach, let alone its application to the right to health. This article uses a PRISMA-informed systematic literature review to address the question, ‘What is the current status of the human rights-based approach to health in international law?’ Previous reviews have described how international organizations and development donors have tackled human rights-based approaches to development generally and discussed prominent works on human rights-based approaches to health. However, this is the first review to sample the peer-reviewed literature systematically. The study revealed that authors use the terms ‘human rights’, ‘human rights-based approach’ and ‘right to health’ to import a raft of legal implications, or none at all. Similarly, readers may assign legal meanings to these terms, or none at all. Confusion arises because although these terms often have different meanings for authors and readers from different disciplines, this is not commonly acknowledged, and authors rarely clarify their perspectives. The author concludes that scholars should seek co-authors with human rights law or public health qualifications, as relevant. Most academic institutions research and teach health and law separately; interdisciplinary centres of excellence in health, law and human rights offer an opportunity to overcome these historical obstacles to interdisciplinary dialogue and understanding. The study and its conclusions will be of interest to legal researchers, human rights advocates, public health scholars, and advocates from other disciplines.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"79 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139415355","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Lars Waldorf, Helena-Ulrike Marambio, Hetty Blades
Over several years, the German/Sri Lankan NGO VisAbility has been pioneering a mix of inclusive dance with rights education and advocacy to empower persons with conflict-related, physical impairments, first in Sri Lanka and, more recently, in Nepal. This article captures both the benefits and challenges of using dance for more transformative human rights education in informal settings.
{"title":"Performing/Informing Rights: Mixing Inclusive Dance and Human Rights Education for Disabled People in Sri Lanka and Nepal","authors":"Lars Waldorf, Helena-Ulrike Marambio, Hetty Blades","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad054","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Over several years, the German/Sri Lankan NGO VisAbility has been pioneering a mix of inclusive dance with rights education and advocacy to empower persons with conflict-related, physical impairments, first in Sri Lanka and, more recently, in Nepal. This article captures both the benefits and challenges of using dance for more transformative human rights education in informal settings.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"73 16","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139440552","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Revisiting ‘Human Rights’ and ‘Practice’: Introduction to the Special Collection","authors":"Paul Gready","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad061","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad061","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"55 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139447087","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The priorities reflected in the overarching system that includes the regimes dealing with international human rights law, international humanitarian law, and international criminal law are currently undergoing a gradual but highly significant transformation. The cause is a growing preoccupation with ‘atrocity crimes’ in each of the three fields, along with the imposition of criminal sanctions in response to an ever increasing range of violations, the recasting of other violations as crimes (ecocide), and the urge to describe a great many situations as involving genocide. These developments have diminished the attention given to non-criminal violations and to techniques other than prosecution, and facilitated continuing neglect of the structural dimensions underpinning violations. In the foreign policies of key western states, sanctions against individuals now attract more attention than other human rights responses. The risk is that these trends will entrench an atrocity-centred normative hierarchy, empower judges and criminal lawyers at the expense of social movements, shine a spotlight on individual rather than collective responsibility, reinforce problematic North-South dynamics, and distort resource allocations at the international level.
{"title":"Criminalizing Human Rights","authors":"Philip Alston","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad059","url":null,"abstract":"The priorities reflected in the overarching system that includes the regimes dealing with international human rights law, international humanitarian law, and international criminal law are currently undergoing a gradual but highly significant transformation. The cause is a growing preoccupation with ‘atrocity crimes’ in each of the three fields, along with the imposition of criminal sanctions in response to an ever increasing range of violations, the recasting of other violations as crimes (ecocide), and the urge to describe a great many situations as involving genocide. These developments have diminished the attention given to non-criminal violations and to techniques other than prosecution, and facilitated continuing neglect of the structural dimensions underpinning violations. In the foreign policies of key western states, sanctions against individuals now attract more attention than other human rights responses. The risk is that these trends will entrench an atrocity-centred normative hierarchy, empower judges and criminal lawyers at the expense of social movements, shine a spotlight on individual rather than collective responsibility, reinforce problematic North-South dynamics, and distort resource allocations at the international level.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138503286","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Dorien Claessen, Majda Lamkaddem, Barbara Oomen, Quirine Eijkman
Most European states have ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), but implementation varies at national and local levels with municipalities often playing a key role. Decentralization policies have often led to municipalities providing social support as well, but little attention has been paid to the accessibility of municipal support for persons with disabilities in the light of the CRPD. Therefore, this article presents the Dutch 2015 Social Support Act (SSA) as a case study. The SSA introduces the right to an assessment. This legal evaluation moment has far-reaching consequences for persons with disabilities as it serves as the gateway for access to reasonable accommodations under the CRPD. Dutch municipal councils implement their assessment systems in different ways, but social district teams are usually set up to execute the assessment under the mandate of the municipality. It is often the case that social workers fulfil both counselling and gatekeeping roles, despite the fact that they are not necessarily trained to combine these dual responsibilities. This article identifies impeding factors that influence the gaining of access to municipal social support at the level of the social system, the involved organizations and the individual professionals. It takes a legal-anthropological approach based on in-depth multidisciplinary interviews with experts in the field of disability rights advocacy, social policy and human rights, or with experiential expertise. The results indicate a lack of alignment between the SSA and the CRPD. The discussion gives recommendations for a broader implementation of the CRPD.
{"title":"Bringing Human Rights Home: Access to Justice and the Role of Local Actors Implementing the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities","authors":"Dorien Claessen, Majda Lamkaddem, Barbara Oomen, Quirine Eijkman","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad053","url":null,"abstract":"Most European states have ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), but implementation varies at national and local levels with municipalities often playing a key role. Decentralization policies have often led to municipalities providing social support as well, but little attention has been paid to the accessibility of municipal support for persons with disabilities in the light of the CRPD. Therefore, this article presents the Dutch 2015 Social Support Act (SSA) as a case study. The SSA introduces the right to an assessment. This legal evaluation moment has far-reaching consequences for persons with disabilities as it serves as the gateway for access to reasonable accommodations under the CRPD. Dutch municipal councils implement their assessment systems in different ways, but social district teams are usually set up to execute the assessment under the mandate of the municipality. It is often the case that social workers fulfil both counselling and gatekeeping roles, despite the fact that they are not necessarily trained to combine these dual responsibilities. This article identifies impeding factors that influence the gaining of access to municipal social support at the level of the social system, the involved organizations and the individual professionals. It takes a legal-anthropological approach based on in-depth multidisciplinary interviews with experts in the field of disability rights advocacy, social policy and human rights, or with experiential expertise. The results indicate a lack of alignment between the SSA and the CRPD. The discussion gives recommendations for a broader implementation of the CRPD.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":"43 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138503287","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：