The Philippine 1987 Constitution And Filipinos With Disabilities
The 1987 Philippine Constitution6 categorically states that all international treaties, agreements and understandings entered into by government, its agents and legal entities become binding as parts of the Laws of the Land. Significantly, the Constitution also clearly acknowledges the sector of persons with disabilities. It has five provisions that explicitly refer to Filipinos with disabilities. The Section 13 of Article 13 foremost mandate is the creation of specific agency and policies for the sector. Being the heart and soul of the constitution, the Bill of Rights, also acknowledges that all human rights instruments ratified by the country benefit Filipinos with disabilities. It is understood that unless a clearly expressed limitation is stated, all rights in the Constitution apply to everyone, including Filipinos with disabilities.
The Constitutional provisions forbidding discrimination on the bases of belief, gender, physical conditions and others7 apply to persons with disabilities. Section 1 and Section 2 of Article 13 stated that 1.The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good. To this end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, and disposition of property and its increments; and 2.The promotion of social justice shall include the commitment to create economic opportunities based on freedom of initiative and self-reliance.
These provisions for persons with disabilities are looked at as allowances for affirmative discrimination aimed to level the playing fields for the sector. It comes short however to the explicit provision of the CRPD which mentions not only the enjoyment of the sector of all human rights but Enjoyment on an equal basis with the rest
of the population.
The Social Justice Article XII8 provides the areas where affirmative actions on discrimination may be allowed. To date, there is no specific jurisprudence relative to issues on Constitutional guarantee on equality of persons with disabilities in the country. Only 57 complaints on disability-related cases have been filed with the Commission on Human Rights (CHR). None of these cases have reached the Supreme Court. The CHR is only a fact-finding body. It has authority to summon all involved individual and agencies. However, it can only recommend for the prosecution of cases that are filed with the probable cause and strong evidence.
On access to justice, there remain policy barriers in realizing the objectives of Articles 12 and 13 of the CRPD. With certain persons with disabilities still tagged as Legally Incompetent
by the justice system, substantial efforts are needed to attain equality before the law. The Civil and Family Codes9 are contributing to these barriers due to the identification of certain disability groups as not able to independently manage themselves and their properties and relations.
The University if the Philippines (UP) Institute of Human Rights (IHR) Policy Review 200710 document states: when individuals lack the legal capacity to act, they are not only robbed of their rights to equal recognition before the law, they are robbed of their ability to defend and enjoy other rights. Guardians and tutors acting on behalf of persons with disabilities sometimes fail to act in the interest of the individual they are representing; worse, they sometime abuse their positions of authority, violating the rights of others.
- Note #10
- Handout given by NCDA
- Return
RA 7277 Section 4 stated that Disabled persons are those suffering from restriction or different abilities, as a result of a mental, physical or sensory impairment, to perform an activity in the manner or within the range considered normal for a human being
.11 The definition of persons with disabilities
though encompassing and inclusive, yet the term suffering from
in RA 7277 relates closely disability concerns to the medical model which is not in line to the Human Diversity principle of CRPD. It implies that persons with disabilities are constantly sick.
Findings from the UP IHR Policy Review 2007 stated that Despite efforts to equalize opportunities and improvement their lot, persons with disabilities in the country continue to suffer exclusion from social and economic opportunities due to systematic barriers to their participation, such as their exclusion from decision-making process, negative attitudes about disability that perpetuate marginalization and discriminatory legislative framework that have not only excluded the disabled but have also contributed to the creation of barriers to their participation
.
The Constitutional statement of equality of citizens before the law may be impaired significantly by the definitional statements of persons with disabilities in RA 7277.
Furthermore, the term Independent Living
in RA 7277 is understood differently from the Independent Living concept in CRPD The former is understood merely as the ability of persons with disabilities to perform activities on their own. However, the CRPD. goes deeper than mere actual and physical performance. It points to the respect for the preference, autonomy and decision-making of a person with a disability. In the CRPD, persons with severe disabilities are acknowledged to continually possess legal capacity both inherently and actually. Through the Independent Living Paradigm of the CRPD, one's choices and decisions must be respected and practiced on an equal basis with the rest of society.
The 22 year-old Constitution is continually subjected to efforts for revisions. Possible future amendments include the issue of Legal Capacity focusing on the shift from the former substitute-decision making policy to the supported-decision making policy as enshrined in Article 12 of the CRPD