Persons with disabilities suffer disproportionately in every armed conflict, and Russia’s war in Ukraine is no exception. The atrocities committed against persons with disabilities in this conflict, however, are in part a consequence of the state’s longstanding policy of institutionalization, which heightens existing vulnerabilities and places persons with disabilities at an unacceptable risk of acute harm. The Independent International Commission of Inquiry for Ukraine must investigate the extensive and varied acts of violence that have been committed against persons with disabilities in Ukraine since the beginning of the Russian invasion, with a focus on persons with disabilities who are institutionalized. In recommending future action, the Commission must be driven by a victim-centred approach to accountability that contributes both to the criminal prosecutions of individual perpetrators, and to systemic reforms that contribute to the project of deinstitutionalization. This article can assist the Commission’s analysis by: (i) canvassing the reports of violence against persons with disabilities during the war in Ukraine, particularly those persons in institutions; (ii) reviewing the Commission for Ukraine’s mandate and explaining its primary purpose – that is, to ascertain the facts of the conflict, through an intersectional lens, with the aim of promoting accountability – with reference to the work done by United Nations commissions of inquiry in the past; and (iii) providing concrete examples on how the Commission’s investigations and report can further both legal accountability and systemic accountability for violence against persons with disabilities in Ukraine.

This case study investigates strategies used by the NGO Leonard Cheshire Disability Zimbabwe (LCDZ) to promote the SRHRs of girls and young women with disabilities in Zimbabwe. The findings show that LCDZ employed a combination of six strategies. These are: (1) building practical knowledge on SRHRs; (2) increasing community awareness and sensitivity; (3) providing SRHRs-related education; (4) enhancing access to justice and related services for survivors of sexual violence; (5) delivering assistive devices; and (6) promoting the livelihoods and economic empowerment. LCDZ made use of multi-stakeholder partnerships to implement these strategies, leveraging complementary skills and experience in the promotion of SRHRs. In each of these strategies, girls and young women with disabilities are the target group, with other stakeholders brought together to support them.

The adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) represents an important and (potentially) progressive development in the protection framework under international humanitarian law (IHL). Article 11 of the CRPD specifically obliges States to protect persons with disabilities from harm in situations of risk, including armed conflict, consistent with IHL and human rights law. The CRPD framework signals the need to address the traditional framing of disability under IHL and to draw from human rights concepts in the CRPD in order to inform the protection accorded to persons with disabilities in armed conflict.

This article is divided into four main parts: the first three address three main lines of inquiry, while the fourth is forward-looking. The first part analyzes the framing and construction of disability in IHL and the implications of such framing for the protection of persons with disabilities. The second part analyzes fundamental IHL rules in an effort to demonstrate how the framing of disability and the protection framework of the CRPD can be used in the application of IHL. The third part identifies some specific problem areas ripe for further disability scoping and harmonization of the CRPD and IHL. Looking forward, the fourth part identifies entry points for focused action and research aimed at bringing about the kind of dynamic treaty practice envisioned by Article 11 of the CRPD.

The United Nations Disability Inclusion Strategy establishes the first-ever framework for the United Nations system to advance disability inclusion across all pillars of the Organization's work, including the peace and security pillar, and to measure the progress made across the system. Evidence reported since the launch of the Strategy in 2019 demonstrates that the Strategy has provided a clear impetus among United Nations entities and peace operations working in the sector to address the rights of persons with disabilities, who are among the most marginalized in any crisis-affected community. However, the evidence also reveals that while humanitarian entities have made progress since the launch of the Strategy, disability inclusion remains an emerging area of work for peace operations in the field. The article argues that the Strategy's accountability framework has provided a much-needed blueprint and ability to monitor progress across the system, yet far more needs to be done to ensure that the United Nations system is equipped to respond to complex situations and reach the furthest behind first.

This article studies the economic and social rights of people with disabilities in times of armed conflict. While hostilities prevent them from accessing the essential goods and services that they rely on to enjoy these rights, the topic has attracted little attention to date. Calling upon international human rights law, the article applies the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, with a view to complementing the provisions of international humanitarian law. It focuses on the requirements above the provision of medical care and examines the legal obligations attached to economic and social rights.

Academics rarely raise the need to consider persons with disabilities when preventing, investigating and prosecuting international humanitarian law (IHL) violations. Worse still, no actual attempts have been made to include a disability perspective into practical guidance and monitoring mechanisms. This article addresses that void by laying out how existing yet unutilized IHL obligations can be leveraged to repress and suppress disability-based IHL violations. In doing so, the article will detail how fact-finding approaches, criminal investigative processes and reporting methods for IHL violations can be inclusive of persons with disabilities and thus more appropriately address the endemic under-representation of a disability perspective in the planning and execution of military operations during armed conflict and the specific crimes they thereby suffer. Additionally, this article will articulate concrete changes that should be made to international criminal law procedures for prosecuting war crimes to provide recognition and accountability for disability-based IHL violations, as has been done for violations against women and children. Finally, this article will diagnose the state of the law to address any legal challenges or hurdles that may hamper the inclusion of a disability perspective in fulfilling the IHL obligation to reduce and address violations of humanitarian law.

This contribution analyses Article 12 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Africa (the Protocol). It examines the purpose, scope and contribution of this Article to the legal protection of persons with disabilities in armed conflict and its implementation. The analysis is divided into four parts. The first part will start by identifying and analysing the background to this provision, which provides specific protection to persons with disabilities in armed conflict. The second part will examine Article 12 in the light of other similar regional instruments and of the protection challenges that persons with disabilities face during conflict. This will highlight the specific nature of the Article's provisions, together with its shortcomings and its progressive aspects. Part three will look at the interaction between Article 12 and equivalent rules of international humanitarian law, and how Article 12 contributes to the development of legal protection for persons with disabilities in armed conflict. Finally, the fourth part will examine the challenges to the implementation of Article 12. It will also propose ways of overcoming those challenges and hence of enabling Article 12 to have its intended effect.

While persons with disabilities are protected under existing international humanitarian law (IHL), the specific risks and barriers to which these persons are exposed during armed conflict must be better factored into the interpretation and implementation of these rules. The complementarity between IHL and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) may make an important contribution towards a more disability-inclusive implementation of IHL. This article focuses on two major areas addressed by IHL – namely, the conduct of hostilities and detention – against the backdrop of the concept of and agency associated with disability enshrined in the CRPD. This analysis is based on the lived experiences shared by persons with disabilities in consultations co-organized in 2022 by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Disability Forum, the European Disability Forum and the Diakonia IHL Centre.

Persons with disabilities are entitled to certain protections under international law, including in the context of armed conflict. These individuals are especially vulnerable in a crisis situation. Too often, when emergency humanitarian relief is provided, these protections are afforded inadequately or not at all, due to personal prejudice, lack of resources or training, or because there is no systemic requirement to do so. This paper uses a narrative-based approach to illustrate typical lived experiences of persons with disabilities both as workers in the area of humanitarian relief, and recipients thereof. It illustrates the challenges and inadequacies of a system that fails to recognize the rights that should be provided to those with physical and/or neurodevelopmental differences. It highlights the discrepancy between legal rights and actual provision of service and the different needs of those with disabilities in the circumstance of armed conflict. The article points to specific areas of failure, and the need for an inclusive approach in programming.

HE Pekka Haavisto is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Finland. He was a Member of Parliament in 1983–95 and was returned to Parliament in 2007. He served as Minister of Development and the Environment in 1995–99, and as Minister for International Development in 2013–14. In 1993–95 and 2018–19, he was Party Leader of the Greens in Finland. He has also served several years as a member of the Helsinki City Council. He stood as a candidate in the presidential election in Finland in 2012 and in 2018.

He has gained wide experience of various areas of foreign policy, for example while chairing the UN Environment Programme Task Forces on environmental impacts of war in the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq, Liberia, the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Sudan. He has also worked as the EU Special Representative for Sudan and Darfur, Special Adviser for the UN (ASG) in the Darfur peace process, and Special Representative to the Minister for Foreign Affairs in African crises. In addition, he has served in several positions of trust, including President of the Board of the European Institute of Peace in 2016–19, Chair of the Board of the Finnish Federation of Settlement Houses in 2014–19, and Chair of WWF Finland's Board of Trustees.

Mr Haavisto has worked as Editor-in-Chief of several publications, including Vihreä Lanka magazine. Additionally, he has authored many books, the most recent one, Eurooppa raiteilla (Europe on Rails), in 2018. He lives in a registered partnership, and his main interests are books, cycling, wooden boats and cultural backyards.

Persons with disabilities are at higher risk of injury or death during an armed conflict, either as specific targets or through inability to protect themselves. Humanitarian responses concentrate on meeting the immediate basic needs of an average population. Yet historically, the situation of persons with disabilities during armed conflict, as well as peacebuilding processes, has been largely absent in the discussion at the Security Council. On 20 June 2019, the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 2475. This groundbreaking text marks the first time the Council has dedicated an entire resolution to the situation of persons with disabilities in situations of armed conflict. The resolution has significantly raised the attention and understanding of the situation of persons with disabilities in the context of the armed conflict in the Security Council and beyond. This article details the process that led to Resolution 2475, as well as what has happened since.

A window into the history of international humanitarian law scholarship, the ICRC Library's collections capture over 150 years of debates and developments related to the branch of international law that protects those who do not, or no longer, take part in hostilities. Yet, among the 41,000 references in the Library's collections, only a handful of recent publications focus on how this protection applies to persons with disabilities. In this article, two ICRC reference librarians take stock of this gap in their collections and consider its implications.

Despite significant progress in business and human rights (BHR) discourse and the practices of multinational corporations (MNCs), persons with disabilities and disability rights are absent from both the key instruments and practice of BHR. This lacuna exists despite the near-universal ratification of the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, as well as the fact that disabled persons constitute over 15 per cent of the global population and MNC operations impact them greatly and disproportionately. We argue that MNCs have a central role, responsibility and opportunity to foment change globally in fulfilling the human rights of persons with disabilities through their employment practices and by leveraging their economic power to fulfil other aspects of disability-based human rights. Doing so requires the development and self-enforcement of disability-specific human rights due diligence (HRDD) processes, and creating a general culture of diversity, equity and inclusion that encompasses disability.

As cash increasingly becomes an essential part of humanitarian assistance, it is critical that practitioners are aware of, and work to mitigate, exposure to protection risks among the most vulnerable recipients. This article presents findings from qualitative research exploring protection risks and barriers that arise in cash programming for internally displaced persons at high risk of violence and exploitation in Cameroon and Afghanistan. The authors conclude with recommendations for mainstreaming global protection principles into cash programmes, as well as key considerations for designing and implementing cash programmes in ways that minimize existing risks of harm and avoid creating new ones.

Research on the employment experiences of persons with disabilities on a global level indicates that this group is faced with the challenge of inclusion in the workplace. While South Africa has a well-defined legislative framework that has been determined in consultation with disabled people’s organisations, compliance with legislation appears to have failed to ensure that employment targets are met. As a response to these challenges, this study explored the early inclusion experiences of persons with disabilities in the workplace via a qualitative, explorative, case study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 people with a range of different disabilities and working for different organisations, in order to provide insight into the initial experiences of inclusion for persons with disabilities in the workplace. Findings showed challenges in induction and orientation practices, struggles with disclosure of disability to coworkers, a desire to strive for ‘normality’, and frustration and vulnerability in the workplace. Taken together, the findings point to the importance of early experiences of inclusion in the workplace – that is, inclusionary practices during the employee induction phase. This study offers insights to organisations and management practitioners for the promotion of better employment experiences. Recommendations include the appointment of a disability champion to account for disability equity within the organisation, the development of more inclusive recruitment and orientation practices, drawing on coworkers for support, and the active involvement of persons with disabilities in shaping onboarding processes. Embarking on these steps may ultimately result in a more diverse workforce within South Africa.

Information and communication technologies (ICTs) have become an element of strategic importance to all countries. Researchers argue that ICTs may open up new avenues for economic growth, competitiveness and human development. It is widely recognised that ICTs have the potential of overcoming many of the barriers faced by people with visual impairment (VI). Based on an interpretive study using the narrative interview method, this article contributes to this literature by presenting perceptions and understandings of how the use of ICTs can be used to promote the ‘development’ of people with VI in Bangladesh. We approached this study through the economist and Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen’s work on ‘development as freedom’ that focuses on, among other themes, five dimensions of freedom — social, economic, protective, political and transparency. We collected stories from 18 people with VI who had received ICTs training and support from resource centres, and from some disability rights activists and leaders who use ICTs. Our findings suggest that ICTs can be used as tools for improving the wellbeing of people with VI by enhancing different aspects of freedom suggested by Sen. ICTs tools assist people with VI by providing them with educational and work opportunities, and thus increase the potential for social inclusion and economic development. We conclude that governments, nongovernment organisations and development partners in countries such as Bangladesh may use ICTs to expand different types of ‘freedom’ for marginalised groups such as people with VI and persons with disabilities in general.