Connect with us

Opinion

The Oracle: Critiquing Judges and Judgments: The Dividing Line (Pt. 4)

Published

on

By Mike Ozekhome

INTRODUCTION

Last week, we dealt with foreign positions on critiquing Judges (with the USA as a case study) in the previous episode, today’s focus is on instances where lawyers were sanctioned for wrongly critiquing Judges and others where they escaped or were spared from such misbehavior.

CASES IN WHICH LAWYERS ESCAPED SANCTION

Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC, a boutique law firm knowledgeable in Media, Entertainment, Advertising and Intellectual Property law, has, in a brilliant piece titled, “Professional Responsibility Law- Lawyers Beware: Criticising Judges Can be Hazardous to your Professional Health” (Professional responsibility.ffks.com), given several instances when lawyers escaped the noose of Judges after criticising them, while others were caught in the web. They warned that: “For lawyers, the message is inescapable.  Publicly opining on the character, integrity, competence or motivation of a Judge is perilous, and all the more so when a lawyer accuses a Judge of bias, corruption or playing politics.  Although most states hinge discipline on a finding that a lawyer’s comments about a Judge are knowingly false or made with reckless disregard for the truth, many recent decisions seem to focus more on lack of decorum than knowing falsity, and many appear to place the burden on lawyers to prove the truth of their statements. Regrettably, because the line is blurred between when a lawyer can safely criticize a Judge and when that criticism exposes the speaker to professional discipline, lawyers may choose to remain silent even in the face of actual judicial malfeasance or conflict of interest.” They gave instances in some scenarios as follows:

BENJAMIN PAVONE

A California lawyer, Benjamin Pavone, filed an appeal in a client’s case in which he described a judicial hearing officer as “disgraceful”. He referenced her ruling as a “succubustic adoption of the defense position”; and claimed the Judge was determined to evade appellate review.  In 2019, the California Bar charged Pavone with “impugning the honesty, motivation, integrity, or competence” of the judge by accusing her of intentionally refusing to follow the law.  He was also accused of “gender bias” because the dictionary defines “succubus” to mean “a demon assuming female form to have sexual intercourse with men in their sleep” and a “strumpet.” These allegations allegedly violated California Bus & Prof Code § 6068(b), which states that it is an Attorney’s duty to “maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers.”

Challenging the complaint, Pavone claimed he “used a colourful (or caustic, depending on one’s viewpoint) metaphor to criticize a court ruling.” He asserted his First Amendment rights of advocacy and freedom of thought and speech.  He described the “succubus charge” as “textbook hyperbole” and “lusty and imaginative criticism” protected by the First Amendment that could not conceivably have been viewed as a statement of fact.  Pavone also argued that Section 6068(b) is unconstitutional as applied to rhetorical criticism of Judges.  On 19th of November, 2021, the California court declined to use the Bar proceeding to discipline Pavone.  See Pavone v. Cardona, 3:2021 cv 01743 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 19, 2021).

FRESHUB V. AMAZON

On December 17, 2021, a federal Judge in Texas sanctioned three lawyers from the Kramer Levin law firm who represented an Israeli company, Freshub, in an action against Amazon.  After losing at trial, the lawyers filed a motion for judgment N.O.V., asserting that Amazon “played on the stereotype of greedy Jewish executives of an Israeli company allegedly taking advantage of U.S. companies, to trigger religious biases and deepen the ‘us vs. them’ nationalistic divide in the minds of the Jurors.”  They further claimed that Amazon used a “Jewish stereotype dog whistle” to win the case.

Although the attacks were directed against Amazon, the Judge took them as implicit criticism that he had willfully ignored prejudicial statements.  “The court did not turn a blind eye to any racist or anti-Semitic conduct because indeed there was none,” the Judge wrote.  The Judge added that, in the absence of concrete evidence that Amazon intentionally played up its adversary’s Israeli ties or any witness’ race, heritage or religion, “Freshub’s inflammatory allegations are nothing but baseless attacks on the integrity of this Court and the reputation of Defendants’ counsel.”   The Judge ordered the lawyers to complete 30 hours of ethics-related continuing legal education.  Freshub, Inc.  v. Amazon, Inc. No. 6:21-CV-00511-ADA (W.D. Texas, December 17, 2021).

The high-water mark for tolerating lawyer’s criticism of Judges arose probably from the Standing Committee v. Yagman, 55 F.3d 1439 (9th Cir. 1995).  Dissatisfied with his appearance before a Federal Judge, Washington Attorney Stephen Yagman, assailed the Judge as “ignorant,” “a buffoon,” and a “right-wing fanatic.” He added that the Judge “has a penchant for sanctioning Jewish lawyers … I find this to be evidence of anti-semitism.”  Yagman was brought up on disciplinary charges for conduct that “degrades or impugns the integrity of the Court” and interferes with the administration of justice.  Applying the “actual malice” standard from Sullivan, the lower court found that Yagman had made statements with either knowledge of their falsity or reckless disregard for their truth.

The Ninth Circuit reversed the lower court. It stressed that statements impugning the integrity of a Judge “may not be punished unless they are capable of being proved true or false.”  It added that statements of “rhetorical hyperbole” are not sanctionable, nor are statements that use language in a “loose, figurative sense.” The references to ignorance, right-wing fanaticism and similar accusations “all speak to competence and temperament rather than corruption” (or criminal acts such as bribery). Together, they conveyed “nothing more substantive than Yagman’s contempt” for the Judge.  As to the allegation of anti-Semitism, the court found the remark protected opinion under the First Amendment given that Yagman disclosed the factual basis for his views.

The court also rejected the claim that Yagman’s allegations obstructed or prejudiced the administration of justice. It found that Yagman’s statement did not pose a “clear and present danger” or a “substantial likelihood” of disruption. While Yagman’s criticism of the Judge was “harsh and intemperate” and apparently intended to precipitate the Judge’s recusal, the court noted that “a party cannot force a Judge to recuse himself by engaging in personal attacks” – especially given that federal recusal statutes generally require a showing that the Judge “is (or appears to be) biased or prejudiced against a party, not counsel.”  The mere possibility that Judges would remove themselves based on harsh criticism from Attorneys did not rise to the high level required for obstruction of justice.

Yagman applied the Sullivan test based not on the lawyer’s subjective knowledge and belief, but based instead on the viewpoint of a reasonable, objective lawyer. Kurnit Klein & Selz recalls that there are, in the US, many published cases from around the country where courts have not sanctioned lawyers who disparaged Judges. Most of those cases, they note, date back many years. They gave some examples thus:

In re Erdmann, 33 N.Y.2d 559, 347 N.Y.S.2d 441, 441, 301 N.E.2d 426, 427 (1973), an Attorney who criticized trial Judges in a magazine article for not following the law; and appellate Judges for being “the whores who became madams”), had his sanction reversed.

In State Bar v. Semaan, 508 S.W.2d 429, 431-32 (Tex. Civ. App. 1974), it was held that a remark that a Judge was “a midget among giants” was not sanctionable because it could not be proved true or false);

In Oklahoma Bar Ass’n v. Porter, 766 P.2d 958 (Sup. Ct. Oklahoma 1988)(an Attorney’s statement that a Judge “showed all the signs of being a racist” and never gave him “an impartial trial”, were held not sanctionable based on the Attorney’s subjective belief;  while remarks were disrespectful and “extremely bad form,” they were protected).

In re Kuby, (D. Conn. Aug. 18, 1993) it was held that remarks that judicial decision reflected “overt racism” and that defendants had no more chance of a fair hearing before the Judge as before the Ku Klux Klan, though “intemperate, incivil and immature,” did not constitute a basis for disciplining the Attorney.

In re Green, 11 P.3d 1078, 1084 n.4 (Colo. 2000) (en banc) a statement that the trial Judge was a “racist and bigot” with a “bent of mind”, were held to be mere opinions not subject to disciplinary action under the First Amendment.

CASES IN WHICH LAWYERS HAVE BEEN SANCTIONED

However, in Kentucky Bar Ass’n v. Heleringer, 602 S.W.2d 165, 166 (Ky. 1980); 449 U.S. 1101 (1981) an Attorney was reprimanded for calling a Judge “highly unethical and grossly unfair” at a press conference. Similarly, in Matter of Kuntsler, 194 A.D.3d 233 (N.Y. 1st Dep’t 1993), an Attorney in the highly-charged Central Park Jogger case was publicly censured after being held in contempt for calling, a Judge partisan and a “disgrace to the Bench;”. The contempt was upheld because his words disrupted the courtroom and undermined the “dignity and authority of the court”.

In Matter of Atanga, 636 N.E.2d 1253, 1258 (Ind.1994) an Attorney who referred to a Judge as “ignorant, insecure, and a racist,” was held to have violated Rule 8.2(a), because “there was no basis upon which to conclude that those comments were anything else but reckless”.

In Matter of Reed, 716 N.E.2d 426, 427 (Ind. 1999), an Attorney was publicly reprimanded for stating in interview in local press that a trial Judge’s “arrogance is exceeded only by her ignorance”.

Indeed, in Matter of Wisehart, 281 A.D.2d 23 (N.Y. 1st Dep‘t 2001), an Attorney was suspended for seeking Judge’s recusal based on her “draconian and bizarre decision and demeanor”; and alleged political cronyism. The court found that Attorneys who make “false, scandalous or other improper attacks” against Judges are subject to disciplinary measures.

Debra Cassens Weiss, “Lawyer Makes Amends for ‘French Fries’ Remark,” ABA Journal (June 21, 2007), is a case in which a lawyer was ordered to take on-line ethics classes after stating to a Judge, “I suggest with respect, Your Honor, that you’re a few French fries short of a Happy Meal in terms of what’s likely to take place”.

Debra Cassens Weiss “Lawyer Agrees to Reprimand for Blog Tirade About Judge,” (ABA Journal (June 11, 2008), is a case in which a Florida Attorney, Sean Conway was reprimanded for describing a Judge’s “ugly, condescending attitude,” saying further that she was “clearly unfit for her position”; and was an “evil, unfair witch.” The court described the comments as “arrogant, discourteous and impatient speech”. (To be continued).

THOUGHT FOR WEEK

“Criticism, like rain, should be gentle enough to nourish a man’s growth without destroying his roots”. (Frank A. Clark).

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Adding Value

Adding Value: Of Fear and Faith by Henry Ukazu

Published

on

By

Dear Destiny Friends,

Fear and faith are two great rivals in the affairs of man. Where one is found, the other takes a leave. They can either make or mar any progressive being, and anybody who truly wants to succeed must know how to activate and control the inherent powers of these two great forces.

According to Dr. Yomi Garnett, “viewed from a spiritual perspective, fear and faith can be said to be opposites…and what each of them brings to our life is also opposites. Fear can lead to failure, while faith will lead to conquest”.

Question: Do you want to live in fear, or would you like to be associated with a conquered fellow?

One of the major killers of vision is fear,  and one of the enablers of life is faith. When one is possessed with the spirit of fear, it will be difficult for that person to achieve their heart desires, but when one’s spirit is activated with the right amount of faith, even the highest fear will fade out.

One may be wondering, how fear and faith can be positively activated to attract success, ab at the same time be the destruction of man, if not properly managed.

What actually inspires a success-oriented mind? Obviously, several things activate one’s mind. To a lot of people, their greatest fears in life is poverty. These sets of people abhor being poor can mitigate their success in life, and as such they put in all their efforts to succeed.

To some, their greatest fear in life is failure. They can’t imagine the shame and defeat that come with failure, and as such they put in their best in whatever productive work they engage in.

Wen fear becomes extrem, it turns to phobia and dreaded. It’s instructive to note that some people have the phobia of height and flying. Some others have the phobia of pregnancy, traveling on water, approaching, or talking to people due to rejection, making mistakes, threading on new ground, among others.

To conquer this fear however, one needs to activate the inherent power of faith. Faith is the belief in what is not seen but hoped for. Any creative mind that wants to succeed in life must have faith not only in themselves, but in their businesses, academics, personal and professional developmental endeavours.

No great person has ever succeeded in life without faith. They believed in the possibility of their business even when there’s little or no hope of survival. They dared to succeed.

In contrast, fear has been th singular reason for most of the failures men have recorded. Some people even give up before they begin their project because of lack confidence and hope.

In some cases, this fear is projected by friends, family members, mentors or even trusted persons who don’t really know or understand what the person is working on. They just simply believe the project is bound to fail based on the prevailing circumstances or challenges surrounding the person or business.

This is how to activate and stimulate the subconscious and inherent power of faith. Imagine as a young man, you have interest in a lady, but you are wondering how to approach her considering her perceived response. It is not out of place to have a perception of the kind of respinse expected, but then, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

One of the best things the guy can do is to dare to succeed by reaching out to the lady. In the worst-case scenario, the lady might say no. In that case, the man will be satisfied he tried his best because the worst feelings to have in life is the feeling of regret.

Alternatively, the lady might like the guy and just play to the gallery just to gauge the man’s intent and seriousness. If the latter is true, the man is deemed lucky for daring to ask.

As a student, business owner, parent, teacher, government official, or pastor just to name a few; if you have a project or task in mind, don’t allow the fear of failure, disappointment or obstacles to weigh you down, look into the future with bold eyes, and with the mindset of faith in the impossible.

In conclusion, fear and faith are two necessary criteria needed in the journey of life. The ability to nurture both will go a long way in shaping not only our personal lives, but also our professional lives.

Henry Ukazu writes from New York. He works with the New York City Department of Correction as the Legal Coordinator.  He’s the founder of Gloemi. He’s a Transformative Human Capacity and Mindset coach. He is also a public speaker, youth advocate, creative writer and author of Design Your Destiny and Unleash Your Destiny.  He can be reached via info@gloemi.com

Continue Reading

Opinion

Voice of Emancipation: Leadership with Compassion

Published

on

By

By Kayode Emola

One of any government’s key roles is protecting the lives and properties of their electorate – a function which seems to be lacking in Nigeria’s leadership. It would appear that the Nigerian government has been, at best, absent in the large majority of Nigerians’ daily lives. Many were hoping that the election of Bola Tinubu as president would bring about positive change; but there seems to be little evidence of this so far.

The problem with the Nigerian system is caused in part by the lackadaisical attitude held by the people regarding their own welfare and the government’s absenteeism. Since the 1970s, successive leaderships in Nigeria have gradually eroded the welfare subsidy without any outcry from the people.

First, the Nigerian government stopped free food to school children, but no one objected. Then they stopped paying training teachers their monthly stipend, but no one objected. They started introducing school fees in tertiary institutions, and similarly removed many other subsidies, and yet our people remained silent.

The silence of our people permitted successive governments to continue removing any and all forms of welfare in existence. Included among these was the progressive selling of government properties until there was nothing left except the petroleum subsidy. Tinubu removed this last remaining subsidy early in his term, but its removal has not translated into the promised savings for the government, who is set to borrow another ₦2.5 trillion through bonds from the market.

The northern leaders are keenly aware of the dire situation of Nigeria and exploited it to their advantage during their time in government. Manipulating the currency enabled the creation of jobs for their racketeers, hence the need to constantly have a parallel currency market in the country. They have used this system to amass vast wealth both for themselves and their cronies during the decades when they were in power.

The currency market provided a means for them to rapidly generate revenue without having to manufacture anything. Through their access to the Nigerian treasury, they could obtain hard currencies – e.g. dollars – for cheap government prices, which they then sold at a profit to a multitude of buyers who needed these currencies to conduct their international business. This chicanery was enjoyed by many northerners selling currency for a living within the bureau de change industry.

When President Obasanjo came into power in 1999, he stopped this practice and floated the naira. This caused the currency to initially lose value against major currencies, but its value quickly steadied. For example, during the Abacha years the government rate stood at $1 to ₦22 and the parallel market was $1 to ₦88. When Obasanjo became president and the currency was floated, it rapidly rose until it peaked at $1 to ₦135 in 2005, but then remained stable at $1 to ₦120-₦130 until he left power in 2007.

The next president, the late Yar’Adua, reintroduced the parallel market upon taking office. Fast forward to 2023, upon Buhari’s exit the official government rate was $1 to ₦460, whilst the parallel market was exchanging at $1 to ₦763. This caused the currency manipulators, mainly comprising of northern racketeers, to benefit massively.

When Bola Tinubu became President of Nigeria, he announced his intention to create policies that would generate money for the national treasury. The only means of accomplishing this were either to raise taxes or remove subsidy. With nothing else remaining, he decided to remove the petroleum subsidy and float the naira.

Floating the naira was meant to benefit the people but, as it turns out, it has had precisely the opposite effect. The currency is on a free-fall to oblivion, with the current exchange rate at $1 to ₦1,515 and still rising. Aside from Venezuela and Zimbabwe who experienced dramatic declines in their economy due to sanctions imposed by America, never in my lifetime have I seen this degree of economic decline over such a short time.

All this demonstrates the abject lack of compassion in the successive governments’ leadership. They have taken and taken from the people until there is nothing left. It is only their very lives that the people have remaining, and, if care is not taken, the leaders will start taking these next. Already, the economic hardship is causing people to go days without food, as it is impossible to make enough income to meet the high cost of living.

The simultaneous removal of fuel subsidy and floating of the naira has generated sufficiently huge shock waves that even the government is feeling the pinch. The Nigerian Customs Service recently announced that it cannot fix the cost of clearing goods and would instead have to convert their price with the prevailing exchange rate of the day. This shows that even the government is now indentured to currencies like the dollar to set the benchmark value of goods and services in the country. This situation is capable of inflicting untold hardship on the people.

If only the leadership in Nigeria cared about the people that they govern, life would have been very different for both the general populace and those in power. Instead, the absence of compassionate leadership has brought the country to a position where the only viable option is to wind down this country and allow the indigenous nationalities within Nigeria to independently go and develop their lands and people. If the current president truly cares, this would be the best gift that he could give to Nigerians.

Anybody who thinks that Nigeria can be fixed is still living in a fool’s paradise. President Tinubu worked for over 20 years to become President, promising heaven and earth with the hope of changing Nigeria for good but as it stands, he is making Nigeria even worse by the day. Every day that the Nigerian government remains is another day of increasing pain for the people.

The better option is that we hold a sovereign national conference, with no holds barred, on how to effect a peaceful separation. It is clear that Nigeria is living on borrowed time and, if care is not taken, the low-level rumblings of chaos may escalate, with mass protests on the streets and the loss of many lives. We would be better to quickly tackle this situation by dialogue rather than allow a disorderly separation.

I hope those in Aso rock are listening to the cries on the streets, for if trouble were to break out in Nigeria today, there will be no place for them to hide. If they doubt this, they can ask the Rajapaksa family in Sri Lanka who, in 2022 ,when the presidential palace was invaded by angry mobs, could not find a plane to escape from the country. When there is nothing left to take from the people other than their very existence, then those people have nothing holding them back from full scale riot, as they have literally nothing else left to lose. This is a very dangerous position for those in leadership to put themselves into. The bottom line is that Nigeria is beyond repair, and it is time to wind it down peaceably to prevent any further loss of life, should the alternative route be taken.

Continue Reading

Opinion

The Oracle: Harnessing the Potentials of Nigerian Intellectuals with Disability…(Pt.1)

Published

on

By

…for Positive Contributions to the Government

By Mike Ozekhome

INTRODUCTION

There is no doubt that persons with disabilities have often been disadvantaged and have suffered some forms of discrimination at one time, or the other, in the society. Some of the movers and shakers of this world, were disabled intellectuals who made contributions of gargantuan proportion to the advancement of civilisation and yet, have been relegated to the background as if being disabled equates to lack of potentials. In this paper, we shall briefly discuss ways to harness the potentials of persons with disability both at home and abroad for purposes of national development. Before then, it is apposite to examine the meaning of disability.

DEFINITIONAL TERMS

According to Wikipedia, Disability is the consequence of an impairment that may be physical, cognitive, mental, sensory, emotional, developmental, or some combination of these. A disability may be present from birth, or occur during a person’s lifetime. “Disabilities” is an umbrella term, covering impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions (World Health Organisation: Disabilities. Available at: http://www.who.int/topics/disabilities/en/ Accessed 15/12/15). Impairment is a problem in body function or structure; an activity limitation is a difficulty encountered by an individual in executing a task or action; while a participation restriction is a problem experienced by an individual in involvement in life situations. Thus, disability is a complex phenomenon, reflecting an interaction between features of a person’s body and features of the society in which he or she lives.

Individuals may also qualify as disabled if they have had an impairment in the past or are seen as disabled based on a personal or group standard or norm. Such impairments may include physical, sensory, and cognitive or developmental disabilities. Mental disorders (also known as psychiatric or psychosocial disability) and various types of chronic disease may also qualify as disabilities (DisabledWorld. Disability: Benefits, Facts & Resources for Persons with Disabilities. Available at: http://www.disabled-world.com/disability/ Accessed 15/12/15).

According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), one out of every seven people in the world—or some 1 billion people—has a disability. Between 785 and 975 million of them are estimated to be of working age, but most do not work. While many are successfully employed and fully integrated into society, as a group, persons with disabilities often face disproportionate poverty and unemployment (ILO, Inclusion of persons with disabilities. Available at: http://www.ilo.org/skills/areas/inclusion-of-persons-with-disabilities/lang–en/index.htm Accessed 15/12/15). Acknowledging the fact that persons with disabilities are imbued with vast and sometimes untapped) potentials, the World health Organisation made the appeal that governments should step up efforts to enable access to mainstream services and to invest in specialized programmes to unlock the vast potential of people with disabilities. (World Health Organisation: New world report shows more than 1 billion people with disabilities face substantial barriers in their daily lives. Available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2011/disabilities_20110609/en/).
In order to effectively discuss the potentials of disabled intellectuals to nation-building, let us consider the barriers and obstacles which the society has advertently or inadvertently, erected on the paths of disabled persons.

BARRIERS ERECTED ON THE PATH OF DISABLED PERSONS

Societal stereotyping of persons with disabilities is the most egregious barrier suffered daily by disabled persons. They are made the scum of the earth, rejected, overlooked, dejected and relegated by the society of which they are part of. Because of such prevailing societal mindset, it is more difficult to get employed, have a carrier, get married, or even get loved as a person with disability.

Denial of access to equal opportunity, integration and self-representation through the lack of appropriate resources which is the result of bad and uninformed planning. This is also as a result of non-communication – verbal and non-verbal-as well as written, e.g. no effort is made to communicate with people who are blind, or whose hearing or speech is impaired or is severely disabled.

The lack of accessible public transport is perhaps, one highly discriminating barrier persons with disabilities daily confront. Without this resource, they are forced to see the world from their windows or in more fortunate cases, their street. They are restricted, relegated and handicapped in movement. The majority of people with disabilities cannot afford their own transport due to the inadequate social securities and the lack of employment opportunities.

The lack of physical access to the built environment is another hurdle a physically challenged person has to surmount. The way houses, institutions and offices are built with no provision or considerations for disabled persons are alarming. How will disabled persons gain equal opportunity, realize integration and attain self-representation if they cannot get into educational and other institutions, libraries, places of recreation, churches, mosques, malls, in fact most places?

POTENTIALS OF PERSONS LIVING WITH DISABILITIES

People with disabilities have the skills to pursue meaningful careers and play an important role in any country’s educational and economic success. In fact, experience with disability can offer a competitive edge when it comes to work or nation building. Richard Okoro Eweka, properly captured the great potentials of person with disabilities when he wrote thus:
“Despite the cruelty fate has brought their way, people living with disabilities have proven over the years that there is ability in every disability. They are not saying it to keep faith alive or for us to read to be motivated, but have been able to show it in different ways that they can achieve and attain any desired goal in life that they set for themselves irrespective of the state of deformity. They all have several evidence to show for their determination to succeed and have attained greater height than those without disabilities. The evidence of their successes have further convinced us that they are gifted people just like every other able- bodied men and women around. They have shown the world that disability in any form is an open invitation to take the world by surprise and that they are not made to beg. Some physically challenged persons in our society have come out stronger than the able people in their chosen career. Some have become entrepreneurs and employers of labour despite their disabilities. Some others have become preachers of the word of God, given hope to the hopeless in the society and the world at large. Some others have found strength in singing to lift the soul of those that have lost hope in themselves or those who are distressed with the challenges of life”. (Richard Okoro Eweka, ‘Harnessing the Ability in Disability’. The Nigerian Observer of 3rd July, 2014).

The protection guaranteed in Human rights treaties, and grounded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, should apply to all. Persons with disabilities have, however, remained largely ‘invisible’, often side-lined in the rights debate and unable to enjoy the full range of human rights.

CLOSING THE GAP OF DISABILITY

In recent years, there has been a revolutionary change in approach, globally, to close the protection gap and ensure that persons with disabilities enjoy the same standards of equality, rights and dignity as everyone else. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which was adopted in 2006 and entered into force in 2008, signalled a ‘paradigm shift’ from traditional charity-oriented, medical-based approaches to disability to one based on human rights. Former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, said, “The celebration of diversity and the empowerment of the individual are essential human rights messages. The Convention embodies and clearly conveys these messages by envisaging a fully active role in society for person with disabilities.” (Statement by Ms. Louise Arbour UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on the occasion of the 8th Session of the Human Rights Council – Celebration of the entry into force of the Convention on The Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol – See more at: http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=8366&LangID=E#sthash.4m9d82aN.dpuf).

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“Recognizing and respecting differences in others, and treating everyone like you want them to treat you, will help make our world a better place for everyone”. (Kim Peek).

Continue Reading

Trending