Droits des handicapés

Onglets principaux

Caselaw

El 17 de julio de 2014, el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH) concluyó que el gobierno de Rumania era responsable de violar los derechos humanos de Valentin Câmpeanu, un joven fallecido en 2004 que padecía de serias discapacidades mentales y era VIH positivo. Abandonado al nacer, Câmpeanu vivió en instituciones públicas toda su vida. Cuando cumplió dieciocho años fue transferido a un hogar de asistencia social para adultos y, posteriormente, a un hospital psiquiátrico.

On 17th July, 2014, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) held the Romanian government accountable for violating the human rights of Valentin Câmpeanu, a youth with severe mental disabilities and HIV positive, who died in 2004. Abandoned at birth, he lived in public institutions all his life. When he turned eighteen, he was shifted to a social care home for adults, and afterwards, to a mental hospital. Here, left in isolation, and in the cold, without necessary health care and treatment, and deprived also of food and proper clothing, he died within seven days.

The Mental Disability Advocacy Center brought a complaint before the European Committee of Social Rights (which judges compliance of State parties with the European Social Charter) alleging that children living in homes for mentally disabled children (HMDCs) in Bulgaria received little to no education.

The applicant Phakamile Ranelo brought a complaint before the Eastern Cape High Court against the South African Social Security Agency alleging that the State had unlawfully terminated his disability grant. South African regulations oblige the Social Security Agency to have informed Ranelo, in writing, of his approval for a disability grant, its temporary nature, and his right to appeal its temporary status. Ranelo argued he received no such prior notice, so his belief in his grant’s permanent nature was valid.

A mentally disabled woman with three children sought to set aside an eviction order from the family home obtained by her former husband. In making the eviction order, the magistrate found that the man was the registered owner of the property and the former wife and the children occupied the home after he had withdrawn his consent. The magistrate acknowledged the woman’s disability, but found that the former wife had suitable alternative accommodation available because she could move back in with her relatives (which she denied).

This case concerns a claim for damages by a woman with severe disabilities, Mrs. Bernard and her husband, Mr. Bernard, her sole caregiver, alleging that the local Housing Department did not provide them with accommodations suitably adapted for her disability. This failure, it was contended, constituted a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Damages were sought under the Human Rights Act (HRA), which is the implementing legislation for the ECHR in the UK.

Liliane Gröninger presentó esta Comunicación ante el Comité sobre los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad en nombre propio, el de su marido y su hijo, Erhard Gröninger, quien tiene discapacidades.

Liliane Gröninger presented the communication before the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on behalf of herself, her husband and her son, Erhard Gröninger, a person with disabilities.   Mrs. Gröninger argues Germany violated Article 3 (General principles), Article 4 (General obligations), Article 8 (Awareness –raising) and Article 27 (Work and employment) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (The Convention), through legislation that failed to promote Mr. Gröninger participation in the labor marker.

Ninety-year-old Eduardo Navia brought this tutela action seeking to receive disability payments from the State. He had undergone heart surgery in May 1998 and January 2008, with both surgeries limiting his ability to work. Relying on a certification of disability issued by the Social Security Agency (ISS) Section of Bolivar on September 14, 2007, he applied for disability benefits to the ISS on October 5, 2007. The ISS determined his date of disability to be March 6, 2007, but denied his application claiming that he had failed to comply with the requirements of Art.

Eduardo Navia, de noventa años de edad, presentó la acción de tutela buscando que el Estado le otorgue una pensión por invalidez. Como consecuencia de procedimientos quirúrgicos cardíacos a los que había sido sometido en mayo de 1998 y enero de 2008, tenía limitada su capacidad para trabajar. Basándose en un certificado de invalidez expedido por el Instituto de Seguridad Social (ISS) Seccional Bolívar el 14 de septiembre de 2007, solicitó ante el ISS la pensión por invalidez el 5 de octubre de 2007.