Empowering Inclusion: How the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Advances Accessibility Globally

Introduction

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 13, 2006, and entering into force on May 3, 2008, represents a landmark international human rights treaty aimed at promoting, protecting, and ensuring the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by persons with disabilities. As the first comprehensive human rights treaty of the 21st century, the CRPD has shifted global perspectives on disability, moving away from viewing persons with disabilities as objects of charity or medical intervention, and instead recognizing them as active participants in society with inherent dignity and rights. This article explores how the CRPD advances accessibility globally, delving into its legal framework, the mechanisms through which it is implemented at national levels, and the broader implications for treaty-making under international law.

Accessibility, as articulated in the CRPD, is both a principle and a substantive right, essential for enabling persons with disabilities to participate fully in all aspects of life. This paper examines the CRPD’s provisions on accessibility, the legal processes through which states become parties to the convention, and the varying approaches—monist or dualist—that states adopt in integrating treaty obligations into national law. Furthermore, it addresses the relationship between the CRPD and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) of 1969, assessing how this influences global treaty-making practices. The analysis also includes a hypothetical discussion of “this country” (as a placeholder for any state under examination), exploring its capacity to enter treaties, its approach to international law, and the implications for CRPD implementation.

The CRPD and Accessibility: A Global Framework for Inclusion

The CRPD is a transformative instrument that seeks to dismantle barriers—physical, social, and attitudinal—that prevent persons with disabilities from fully participating in society. Accessibility is explicitly recognized as a general principle under Article 3 of the CRPD and is detailed as a substantive obligation in Article 9. Article 9 mandates states parties to take appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities have access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, transportation, information and communications, including information and communications technologies and systems, and other facilities and services open or provided to the public (United Nations, 2006).

Globally, the CRPD’s focus on accessibility has catalyzed policy changes and legislative reforms. For instance, states are required to develop and implement minimum standards and guidelines for accessibility, promote universal design in the creation of products and environments, and ensure that private entities consider accessibility in their offerings (CRPD, Article 9). This has led to significant advancements, such as the adoption of accessible public transportation systems in many countries and the integration of digital accessibility standards for websites and mobile applications to accommodate persons with visual or hearing impairments (Degener, 2016).

Beyond physical and digital access, the CRPD emphasizes accessibility in education, employment, and political participation. Article 24, for example, obliges states to ensure an inclusive education system at all levels, while Article 27 focuses on the right to work and employment, stressing the need for reasonable accommodations in the workplace. These provisions collectively empower persons with disabilities by fostering environments where they can exercise their rights without discrimination (Stein & Lord, 2010). The CRPD’s global impact is evident in its widespread ratification, with over 190 states parties committed to its principles as of recent data (United Nations, 2023).

Legal Capacity of States to Enter Treaties under the CRPD

The ability of a state to enter into treaties like the CRPD is governed by international law, primarily under the framework of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) of 1969, as well as the state’s own constitutional and legal processes. The CRPD itself does not explicitly outline the procedural mechanisms for treaty-making but operates within the general principles of international law that recognize states as sovereign entities with the capacity to enter binding agreements (United Nations, 1969).

For “this country”—a placeholder representing any state under consideration—the legal capacity to enter into treaties such as the CRPD would typically be enshrined in its constitution or governing legal framework. Most national constitutions grant the executive branch, often the head of state or government, the authority to negotiate and sign international treaties, subject to legislative approval or ratification. For instance, under a common constitutional model, the president or prime minister may sign a treaty like the CRPD, but it requires parliamentary consent to become binding domestically. This process ensures that international commitments align with national interests and legal systems (Shaw, 2017).

In the context of the CRPD, states express their consent to be bound by the treaty through signature and ratification, as outlined in Article 42 of the convention, which incorporates standard international law practices. Ratification is the critical step that formalizes a state’s commitment, often preceded by domestic legal or political processes to ensure compliance with treaty obligations (CRPD, Article 42). For “this country,” assuming a typical constitutional structure, the government must assess the implications of CRPD provisions—such as those on accessibility under Article 9 or education under Article 24—against existing national laws and policies before ratifying the treaty. If discrepancies exist, legislative amendments may be required to harmonize domestic law with CRPD standards (Crawford, 2012).

Monist vs. Dualist Approaches to Treaty Incorporation

States adopt different approaches to integrating international treaties into national law, primarily classified as monist or dualist systems. These approaches significantly influence how the CRPD’s provisions, including those on accessibility, are implemented domestically in “this country.”

In a monist system, international law is automatically part of domestic law upon ratification of a treaty. This means that once “this country” ratifies the CRPD, its provisions—such as Article 9 on accessibility—can be directly invoked in national courts without the need for additional legislation. Monist states view international and domestic law as part of a single legal order, often prioritizing international obligations over conflicting national laws (Cassese, 2005). For example, if “this country” operates under a monist system, a court could directly apply CRPD standards to mandate accessible public infrastructure, even if specific domestic legislation on the matter is lacking.

Conversely, in a dualist system, international law and domestic law are considered separate legal orders. Treaties like the CRPD do not automatically become enforceable in “this country” upon ratification; they require specific domestic legislation to translate international obligations into national law. Under this approach, if “this country” has a dualist system, the government must enact laws or amend existing ones to reflect CRPD commitments. For instance, Article 9’s accessibility requirements would only become legally binding domestically after parliament passes corresponding legislation (Dixon, 2013). This process can delay implementation, as seen in several dualist states where CRPD obligations remain partially unfulfilled due to legislative inertia (Kayess & French, 2008).

Determining whether “this country” follows a monist or dualist approach depends on its constitutional framework and legal traditions. Many common law countries, such as the United Kingdom, adopt a dualist approach, requiring explicit incorporation of treaties through acts of parliament (as noted in recent analyses of UK CRPD implementation; House of Commons Library, 2025). Civil law countries, such as France or Germany, often lean toward monism, with ratified treaties holding a status equal to or above national law. If “this country” is dualist, the government must prioritize legislative action to ensure CRPD provisions are enforceable; if monist, immediate judicial application of the treaty is possible, though practical implementation may still require policy and resource allocation (Brownlie, 2008).

Translation of Treaties into National Law in “This Country”

The process of translating the CRPD into national law in “this country” hinges on its monist or dualist orientation and the mechanisms for treaty incorporation. In a dualist framework, the process typically involves several stages: ratification by the executive, parliamentary approval, and enactment of enabling legislation. For instance, after ratifying the CRPD, “this country” would introduce a bill to parliament outlining how provisions like accessibility (Article 9) and inclusive education (Article 24) will be implemented. This might include specific accessibility standards for public buildings or funding allocations for assistive technologies (Aust, 2013).

In a monist system, while the CRPD becomes directly applicable upon ratification, supplementary legislation or administrative measures may still be necessary to operationalize its provisions. For example, even if “this country” recognizes the CRPD as domestic law, the government might need to establish regulatory bodies or guidelines to enforce accessibility standards under Article 9. Judicial interpretation also plays a role, as courts in monist systems often refer to international treaties to resolve legal disputes, potentially shaping national jurisprudence on disability rights (Shelton, 2011).

Regardless of the approach, effective translation of the CRPD into national law requires political will, public awareness, and resource allocation. Challenges in “this country” could include inadequate funding for accessibility infrastructure, resistance from private sectors to adopt universal design, or lack of trained personnel to support implementation. Recent studies highlight that even in states with robust legal frameworks, CRPD compliance often lags due to systemic barriers and competing national priorities (Hagrass, 2025).

The CRPD and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) 1969

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) of 1969 is the foundational international instrument governing the formation, interpretation, and termination of treaties. While the CRPD itself is not a “party” to the VCLT—since only states can be parties to treaties—the VCLT’s principles and rules apply to the CRPD as a treaty under international law. The VCLT provides the legal framework within which the CRPD was negotiated, signed, and ratified by states parties (United Nations, 1969).

The VCLT’s relevance to the CRPD lies in its codification of customary international law on treaty-making. For instance, Article 18 of the VCLT obliges states to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty prior to its entry into force, a principle applicable to states during the interim period between signing and ratifying the CRPD. Similarly, VCLT Article 31 provides rules for treaty interpretation, emphasizing the ordinary meaning of terms in their context and in light of the treaty’s object and purpose—a critical tool for understanding CRPD provisions like accessibility under Article 9 (Villiger, 2009).

For other countries seeking to enter into treaties with the CRPD—that is, to become states parties—the VCLT serves as a guide for proper treaty-making procedures. States must ensure that their representatives have the authority to express consent (VCLT Article 7), that ratification processes are conducted in good faith (VCLT Article 26), and that reservations, if any, comply with the treaty’s object and purpose (VCLT Article 19). In the case of the CRPD, reservations are permitted under Article 46, but they must not undermine the core principles of the treaty, such as non-discrimination and accessibility. The VCLT’s framework thus ensures that states engage with the CRPD in a manner consistent with international legal norms, providing a predictable and standardized approach to treaty accession (Sinclair, 1984).

The interplay between the VCLT and the CRPD also informs broader global treaty-making practices. For instance, the VCLT’s emphasis on pacta sunt servanda (treaties must be performed in good faith) under Article 26 reinforces the obligation of states parties to the CRPD to implement its provisions, including accessibility measures, sincerely and effectively. This principle can guide other countries in crafting domestic policies post-ratification, ensuring that commitments are not merely symbolic but result in tangible outcomes for persons with disabilities (Reuter, 1995).

Global Impact of the CRPD on Accessibility: Case Studies and Challenges

The CRPD’s influence on accessibility is evident across diverse national contexts, though implementation varies widely based on economic capacity, political commitment, and legal systems. In Colombia, for instance, significant legislative progress has been made since ratifying the CRPD, but translating laws into real-world impact remains a challenge due to resource constraints and lack of enforcement mechanisms (Hagrass, 2025). Similarly, in Australia, a dualist state, the government has taken steps to align national policies with CRPD standards, including through Auslan translations of the treaty to enhance accessibility, yet gaps persist in rural and indigenous communities (Australian Government Department of Health, 2025).

In contrast, some states with monist systems, such as certain European Union member states, have directly applied CRPD provisions to mandate accessible infrastructure and inclusive education systems. The European Commission, itself a signatory to the CRPD as a regional integration organization, has spearheaded initiatives to harmonize accessibility standards across member states, demonstrating the treaty’s potential to influence supranational policy (European Commission, 2023).

Despite these advances, global challenges remain. Economic disparities mean that low-income countries often struggle to meet CRPD accessibility standards, lacking funds for infrastructure upgrades or assistive technologies. Attitudinal barriers also persist, with societal stigma hindering the full inclusion of persons with disabilities. Additionally, the CRPD’s monitoring mechanism—the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities—faces limitations due to underfunding and non-binding recommendations, reducing its ability to enforce compliance (OHCHR, 2022).

Lessons for “This Country” and Beyond

For “this country,” adopting the CRPD offers an opportunity to advance accessibility and inclusion, but success depends on aligning international obligations with domestic realities. If a dualist state, it must prioritize enabling legislation post-ratification, ensuring that laws address specific CRPD provisions like accessibility and reasonable accommodation. If monist, it should focus on practical implementation through policies and funding, leveraging the treaty’s direct applicability in national courts.

Other countries can learn from the CRPD’s global implementation under the VCLT framework. States must approach ratification with a clear understanding of their legal obligations, ensuring that domestic systems—whether monist or dualist—are equipped to translate treaty commitments into actionable outcomes. The VCLT’s principles of good faith and consistent interpretation can guide states in avoiding superficial compliance, fostering genuine progress in disability rights.

Conclusion

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities stands as a beacon of hope for millions of persons with disabilities worldwide, advancing accessibility as a cornerstone of inclusion and equality. Through its robust legal framework, particularly Articles 3, 9, 24, and 27, the CRPD redefines disability as a human rights issue, compelling states to dismantle barriers and foster inclusive environments. The treaty’s global impact is undeniable, yet its success hinges on effective national implementation, influenced by whether a state like “this country” adopts a monist or dualist approach to treaty incorporation.

The relationship between the CRPD and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties underscores the importance of standardized, good-faith treaty-making practices, offering a model for other countries to engage with international human rights instruments. While challenges remain—ranging from resource constraints to systemic discrimination—the CRPD’s transformative potential lies in its ability to empower individuals and reshape societal attitudes. By embracing the treaty’s principles, states can build a more inclusive world, ensuring that accessibility is not a privilege but a fundamental right for all.

References

• Aust, A. (2013). Modern Treaty Law and Practice. Cambridge University Press.
• Brownlie, I. (2008). Principles of Public International Law. Oxford University Press.
• Cassese, A. (2005). International Law. Oxford University Press.
• Crawford, J. (2012). Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law. Oxford University Press.
• Degener, T. (2016). Disability in a Human Rights Context. Laws, 5(3), 35.
• Dixon, M. (2013). Textbook on International Law. Oxford University Press.
• European Commission. (2023). United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Retrieved from official web sources.
• Hagrass, H. (2025). UN Expert Calls on Colombia to Turn Disability Rights Laws into Action. Retrieved from archived web sources.
• House of Commons Library. (2025). The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: UK Implementation. Retrieved from official parliamentary sources.
• Kayess, R., & French, P. (2008). Out of Darkness into Light? Introducing the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Human Rights Law Review, 8(1), 1-27.
• OHCHR. (2022). Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Retrieved from official UN sources.
• Reuter, P. (1995). Introduction to the Law of Treaties. Kegan Paul International.
• Shaw, M. N. (2017). International Law. Cambridge University Press.
• Shelton, D. (2011). International Law and Domestic Legal Systems: Incorporation, Transformation, and Persuasion. Oxford University Press.
• Sinclair, I. (1984). The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Manchester University Press.
• Stein, M. A., & Lord, J. E. (2010). Monitoring the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Innovations, Lost Opportunities, and Future Potential. Human Rights Quarterly, 32(3), 689-728.
• United Nations. (1969). Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. United Nations Treaty Series.
• United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. A/RES/61/106.
• United Nations. (2023). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Status of Ratification. Retrieved from official UN sources.
• Villiger, M. E. (2009). Commentary on the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.