Laws, Volume 6, Issue 4 (December 2017) – 18 articles

This paper examines the process under way in Iceland to align national law with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, focusing on the Convention’s call for the active involvement of disabled people and their representative organizations in policy and decision making on matters that affect them. The paper draws on comments submitted by Icelandic DPOs on draft legislation intended to replace the existing law on services for disabled people, focusing on comments relating to their ability to participate in and affect the policymaking process. Furthermore, it draws on interviews with leaders of representative organizations of disabled people that solicited their views on the issue. The findings indicate that there is a reluctance on behalf of Icelandic authorities to make changes to the established process, which limits the active participation of disabled people and their representative organizations. The draft legislation has neither been revised to include provisions for expanding the participation of DPOs in policy and decision making, nor to ensure that disabled people themselves participate in the process. Full article

This paper focuses on settled migrants and calls for the construction of the right to respect for private life as an autonomous source of protection against expulsion under Article 8 ECHR. I contend that, as a core part of human existence, private life warrants meaningful protection. I posit that the fact that all settled migrants have established private life in the host State brings it to the fore of Article 8 expulsion cases. This argument finds strong support in the concept of belonging and transnational migration theory; both tell us that settled migrants’ host State has become their ‘own country’. Drawing on earlier work, I reclaim vulnerability as a foundation and tool of International Human Rights Law with a view to recognising migrants within the jurisdiction of ECHR States as fully-fledged ECHR subjects and making the European Court of Human Rights responsive to their vulnerability. I make the case for absolute protection against expulsion for second (and subsequent)-generation migrants and settled migrants who have spent most of their adult life in the host State. In respect of other settled migrants, I argue that the minimum protection standard should be that expulsion is only justifiable in exceptional circumstances. Full article

This article argues for civil rights for dying people. The creation of such rights should be understood as complementary to, but distinct from, existing initiatives to provide dying people with social benefits. A basis for rights for terminally ill people can be found in the disability rights movement. Through an ethnographic case study of two dying individuals, I argue that terminally ill people can be subjected to disability discrimination as it is understood within the dominant theoretical framework of disability rights: the social model of disability. Nevertheless, while disability rights provides a theoretical basis for understanding discrimination against people who are dying, existing U.S. disability rights legislation largely does not recognize, nor address this discrimination. For this reason, it is necessary to develop a separate set of rights of the dying. I conclude by arguing that such “dying rights” are a logical extension of disability rights, and will bring ancillary benefits to both disabled people and the disability rights movement itself. There is thus a strong foundation for a legal and political alliance between disability rights advocates and advocates for people who are dying. Full article

The unprecedented current “refugee crisis,” with its 65 million plus uprooted people, demands a new protection orientation and framework for refugees and other forced migrants that are focused on the “root causes” of refugeehood, non-international protracted armed conflict or civil war. It is argued that four essential reforms are required to the international refugee protection system to respond to the “root causes” of refugees in the world today. The first calls for broadening the definition of who is a refugee to include “war refugees” as found in the 1984 Cartagena Declaration and the 1969 Organization of African Unity (OAU) Convention. The 1984 Cartagena Declaration is preferred because it has the most progressive and broadest legal definition of who is a refugee and, therefore, should be emulated by all regions and the UNHCR internationally. The second reform would be the adoption of the Cartagena Declaration decennial consultation process and its comprehensive Plan of Action by the UNHCR on a global basis. This process has proven to be a success in Latin America and ought to be adopted internationally to develop and to realize the progressive advancement of international protection for all persons who are fleeing persecution and armed conflict. The third major reform is to develop the capacity of the UN to be able to operate in the midst of an armed conflict situation in order to broker a ceasefire and, then, negotiate a peace agreement, particularly, in those situations where massed forced displacement has taken place or potentially could take place. The fourth reform calls for the UN to expand the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine to incorporate massed forced displacement, in addition to, war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and, genocide. This further implies that mass forced displacement ought to be criminalized and made a serious international crime, not simply in the international humanitarian law and international criminal law sense of forced deportation, transfers, and expulsions, by opposing military forces, but in situations of armed conflict when people flee of their own volition in order to save their lives. These four reforms do not require a reformulation or reconceptualization of the international refugee protection system but a reform of a number of key elements that would simultaneously address the “root causes” of refugees and, especially, mass forced displacement that is due principally to non-international protracted armed conflict or seemingly endless civil wars. Full article

The literature on comparative law has a long and robust tradition, but studies comparing courts and judicial systems are scarce. Comparative studies in the Global South, following Shapiro’s institutional approach, have aimed to measure the involvement of courts in politics by assessing the power of the judiciary in society, the level of judicial independence, and their role in the context of the judicialization of politics. The focus was on the high courts, including either Constitutional or Supreme Courts. Criminal courts have not received similar attention despite the influence of their everyday decisions on people’s lives and their perception of the judicial system. This article argues that developing a comparative approach for criminal courts in the Global South is needed to help understand the role they play in the development of the rule of law and democratic life. This comparative study helps understand the impact of judicial reform programmes in the Global South. These reforms, inspired by a neoliberal paradigm, have focused on improving the efficiency of the courts. The reforms have promoted managerial techniques detrimental to the standards of due process. Any assessment of the impact of the reforms on the courts in the Global South should start by recognising the widely differing settings under which they operate. This context is characterised by serious economic constraints, such as a lack of material and human resources, and a democratic deficit legacy from the past authoritarian regimes, including widespread police abuse and corruption. Given this context, the role of the courts in ensuring due process and the legality of police procedures is crucial. The impact of the judicial reforms promoting managerial rationality in recent decades must be analysed. To examine the role courts are playing in criminal matters, two cases were explored where courts have undergone extensive judicial reforms, Argentina and the Philippines. Full article

The influx of women into the legal profession has significantly changed the landscape of legal practice. Women lawyers today no longer face the challenges to entering the legal profession they encountered thirty years ago. However, despite these advancements, research continues to demonstrate that there are still gender-based issues women have to face in the legal workplace. Among these issues to date are the difficulties in combining responsibilities of work with responsibilities of families and children that underpin women’s employment and earning disadvantages. Using survey data from a national representative U.S. panel study of lawyers, we examine how work schedules, comparing full-time to part-time work, vary by personal disposition and workplace characteristics. Drawing from prominent explanations of gender inequality in the legal profession, we focus on inquiries of commitment to work, performance, ideal worker expectations, practice settings, and job satisfaction among dimensions of workplace characteristics and examine their effects on women and men lawyers’ work schedules. Logistic regression results show that work schedules significantly vary by gender, parental role, and experience of workplace discrimination. We find that, although all parents experience types of discrimination, there are still major differences in work schedules between mothers and fathers. Our study adds to the gender debate of employment and organizations by examining quantitatively experiences of workplace discrimination. Full article

Parenting and procreation have long been contested legal terrain in the United States as exemplified by a history of abuses against marginalized populations including people with disabilities. While some of the most egregious abuses, such as state sponsored sterilization programs, are relics of the past, it remains true that people with disabilities face distinct and at times insurmountable roadblocks to procreation and parenting. This article details ongoing forms of procreative discrimination against people with disabilities, rejects common justifications for that discrimination, and offers proposals for better protecting the rights to procreate and parent for disabled people. Full article

Background: Since the adoption of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), human rights have become central for disability advocacy. The CRPD requires that disabled people and their representative organisations (DPOs) have a prominent role in the implementation and monitoring of the Convention. However, the representation of people with intellectual disabilities or autistic people is still often indirect, carried out by parents or professionals. Methods: This is a qualitative research which looks at how self-advocates (SAs) with intellectual disabilities or autism participate in DPOs and how they see the role of human rights and laws such as the CRPD in their advocacy. Data was collected in the UK and in Hungary between October 2016 and May 2017. A total of 43 advocates (SAs and other advocates) were interviewed. For the analysis, thematic analysis was used. Results: findings indicate that most participants have limited knowledge of the CRPD and human rights. Human rights are usually seen as vague and distant ideas, less relevant to everyday lives. SAs may not feel competent to talk about the CRPD. The inclusion of SAs in DPOs is mostly tokenistic, lacking real participation. Conclusions: The CRPD can only bring meaningful change to SAs if they get full membership in DPOs. Full article

Despite the importance of access to healthcare for the disabled, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has made little inroads in reducing disability-based discrimination by health insurers in the United States. One reason is undoubtedly the ADA’s insurance safe harbor, which explicitly permits insurers to discriminate on the basis of disability in health insurance so long as the differential treatment is supported by actuarial data and is not just intended to disadvantage the disabled. While the safe harbor’s harms are somewhat limited by the advent of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), they are not entirely neutralized. This article argues that there are both practical and principled reasons for amending the ADA to remove the insurance safe harbor. Practically speaking, the ADA could prove a useful tool to challenge aspects of the ACA that place the disabled at a disadvantage, but the insurance safe harbor limits this reach in meaningful ways. From a more principled or philosophical lens, the insurance safe harbor is a law that perpetuates stigma against the disabled and that no longer reflects the views of American society. For these reasons, and many others, a rethinking of the ADA’s insurance safe harbor is necessary and timely. Full article

Australian citizens or permanent residents can sponsor a spouse or prospective spouse for immigration, and concerns have been raised particularly in regards to serial or repeat sponsorship and the rights to safety for sponsored partners who are victims of domestic violence. There has been little research to date though on this type of family migration. By bringing together immigration statistics and policies from current national and international literature, this paper provides a more nuanced portrayal of patterns of spouse sponsorship and the potential problems of serial sponsorship and protection of those sponsored from intimate partner violence (IPV). We identify the limitation of the existing immigration policy and law for protecting the right of sponsored spouses who are mainly women. Some recommendations to better support these sponsored people are also explored. Full article

Terminally ill people with disabilities face multiple barriers when seeking physician aid in dying (PAD) in the United States. The first is legality. Efforts to legalize the practice have been thwarted in dozens of states in part due to vocal opposition by advocates for people with disabilities who contend that legalized aid in dying discriminates against and harms people with disabilities by leading to their premature and unnecessary deaths. Some disability rights advocates disagree with their colleagues, however, and support legalization on the ground that it promotes autonomy and independence at the end of life. For proponents, legalization in six states is proving to be an illusive victory. Emerging reports from the states where PAD is legal suggest that people with disabilities may face special and impenetrable barriers when seeking legal aid in dying. This article identifies four such barriers: procedural protections embedded in PAD statutes; physician objection; cost; and a rule pertaining to California veterans. The article calls for additional study to determine the extent to which these barriers have a disparate impact on care options available to terminally-ill people with disabilities. Full article

Since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990, states have made significant progress in enabling Americans with disabilities to live in their communities, rather than institutions. That progress reflects the combined effect of the Supreme Court’s holding in Olmstead v. L.C. ex rel. Zimring, that states’ failure to provide services to disabled persons in the community may violate the ADA, and amendments to Medicaid that permit states to devote funding to home and community-based services (HCBS). This article considers whether Olmstead and its progeny could act as a check on a potential retrenchment of states’ support for HCBS in the event that states face severe reductions in federal funding for Medicaid, as was threatened by Republican efforts in 2017 to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act and to restructure Medicaid. The article concludes that Olmstead provides a strong basis for challenging a state’s elimination or severe curtailment of existing HCBS programs, but that the fact-specific nature of a state’s likely “fundamental alteration” defense precludes predicting the outcome of such a challenge. Despite this legal uncertainty, protests mounted by people with disabilities, in which they demanded freedom from institutionalization, may have helped cement the idea that community integration is a civil right in the public’s mind. Full article

This article compares and contrasts public and private health insurance coverage of skilled medical rehabilitation, including cognitive rehabilitation, physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech-language pathology, and skilled nursing services (collectively, skilled care). As background, prior scholars writing in this area have focused on Medicare coverage of skilled care and have challenged coverage determinations limiting Medicare coverage to beneficiaries who are able to demonstrate improvement in their conditions within a specific period of time (the Improvement Standard). By and large, these scholars have applauded the settlement agreement approved on 24 January 2013, by the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont in Jimmo v. Sebelius (Jimmo), as well as related motions, rulings, orders, government fact sheets, and Medicare program manual statements clarifying that Medicare covers skilled care that is necessary to prevent or slow a beneficiary’s deterioration or to maintain a beneficiary at his or her maximum practicable level of function even though no further improvement in the beneficiary’s condition is expected. Scholars who have focused on beneficiaries who have suffered severe brain injuries, in particular, have framed public insurance coverage of skilled brain rehabilitation as an important civil, disability, and educational right. Given that approximately two-thirds of Americans with health insurance are covered by private health insurance and that many private health plans continue to require their insureds to demonstrate improvement within a short period of time to obtain coverage of skilled care, scholarship assessing private health insurance coverage of skilled care is important but noticeably absent from the literature. This article responds to this gap by highlighting state benchmark plans’ and other private health plans’ continued use of the Improvement Standard in skilled care coverage decisions and identifying possible legal approaches for removing the Improvement Standard in private health insurance. This article also calls for scholars in health law, disability law, and insurance law, among other doctrinal areas, to evaluate the ethics and values associated with the continued use of the Improvement Standard in private health insurance. Full article

Although the legal issues related to sexual autonomy and sexual offending are significantly different, the resistance to providing adequate and effective counsel and the employment of the vividness heuristic (to privilege anecdote and reject valid and reliable research) is similar in both cases. The past forty years has seen an explosion of interest in mental disability law, and a significant expansion of rights for the population of persons with mental disabilities, both in institutions and the community, during which the society has witnessed a revolution in American mental disability law. It saw the first broad-based, federal civil rights statutes enacted on behalf of persons with mental disabilities. It witnessed the creation of a “patients’ bar” to provide legal representation to such persons. But this revolution largely bypassed persons seeking to argue for sexual autonomy and seeking to apply procedural and substantive due process to matters involving invocation of the sexually violent predator status. However, at the same time that all this happened, another parallel set of developments has had a profound application on mental disability law—on case law, statutes, administrative regulations and lawyers’ roles. The expansion of the school of legal analysis known as therapeutic jurisprudence has caused scholars to reconsider many of the basic principles of this area of law, and it is critical that any analysis of mental disability law take the insights of this area seriously. The question we address in this paper is this: although there has been a general “revolution” in mental disability law, there are those whom it has not affected. To what extent does the law that governs sexual autonomy and that governs matters involving alleged sexually violent predators comport with these therapeutic jurisprudence principles? This paper considers that question. Full article

Public Prosecutors have not received much attention from international, suprastate, state and/or associative institutions in terms of seeking to influence the adoption of a common organisational model by the most diverse countries. What we have instead is mainly the approval, at different moments, of guiding principles for the exercise of functions—primarily of judges, but also, since the late 1980s, of Public Prosecutors—with special emphasis on issues of autonomy and impartiality regarding their competences and the conditions in which prosecution is carried out. However, in countries such as Portugal, Public Prosecutors exercise a wide range of competences in various legal areas, a fact that turns them into key actors in a context of evaluating the performance of the judicial system and when efforts are being made to improve its functioning, even in the midst of financial constraints. This is the backdrop to the present article, which stems from the need to discuss the functioning of the Public Prosecution Service and its professional practices in order to promote the circulation of ideas and solutions for possible judicial reforms in the model currently in force in Portugal. It is not a question of looking for the “perfect model” or of trying to achieve an “ideal synthesis,” but rather of highlighting the main aspects that can contribute to the defence of legality and the promotion of access to law and justice through the action of Public Prosecutors. In order to achieve such a goal, it is necessary for Public Prosecutors to assume a new paradigm, centred on the defence of citizenship rights. The main objective here is to discuss and reflect on the identity, competences and professional practice of Portugal’s Public Prosecutors in the context of major transformations in the judicial systems and in the legal professions themselves, both as key actors and as promoters of citizens' access to law and justice in the various legal areas in which they are active participants. The aim of this article is thus to analyse the way in which the Public Prosecutors’ exercise of their multiple competences, not only in relation to citizens but also with regard to their intermediary role between the courts and the various entities and professions at play, both public and private, contributes to achieving better justice for all. Full article

Honouring the requirement of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to introduce supported decision-making (SD) has largely been a case of much talk and little real action. As a socio-economic right, actualising support is resource-intensive as well as being fairly uncharted territory in terms of what works, to what degree and for how long benefits last. This paper, drawing lightly on mainly Australian examples, considers unexplored (and sometimes unorthodox) approaches such as the ‘needs-based’ principle for setting social welfare priorities as possible ways of revitalising SD through progressive realisation, whether through civil society programs or under the law. It argues that pure repeal of proxy decision-making on its own is not viable in realpolitik terms so progressive realisation of ‘repeal with adequate support’ must instead be devised for SD implementation to progress. Full article

Whatever happens to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) over the next few years, it is fair to assume that state Medicaid programs will be subjected to cost control measures. Despite the recent deployment of substantial arguments to the contrary, the belief still persists that the Supreme Court’s decision in Alexander v. Choate over thirty years ago stands for the proposition that disability anti-discrimination law does not impose requirements on the structure of Medicaid benefits. This belief is misleading at best. In this article, we challenge the access/content distinction and the straitened interpretation of Alexander v. Choate that has resulted from it. We then use cases drawn from education to point the way to a more robust analysis of meaningful access to health care and the constraints it places on the design of state Medicaid programs. Full article

Tax amnesty programs are often used by governments to improve tax compliance and to increase tax revenue. However, the policy choice to provide a tax amnesty often results in adverse consequences, including the violation of other legal rules. For this reason, the policy choice to offer a tax amnesty (‘tax amnesty policy’) is often controversial. The tax amnesty policy and resulting program offered by the Government of Indonesia has been criticized both because it is considered to be unfair and because it favors the perpetrators of tax evasion. In particular, the tax amnesty law offered special treatment to taxpayers who participated in the program, such as no checking of the source of funds, no checking of the financial statements reported by law enforcers, protection from punishment on the financial reports provided to the Director General of Taxation, and the requirement to pay only a small penalty. Tax amnesty programs also provide the potential for money laundering. This is certainly the case in Indonesia. In addition, tax amnesty programs weaken law enforcement in Indonesia; in particular, in the areas of corruption and money laundering. This is because law enforcement officers cannot investigate the perpetrators of white-collar crime that benefit from the tax amnesty program. Under the terms of the tax amnesty program, the financial data is not accessible by them. Full article