Cited by 32Disability Rights and RepresentationDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesDisability Education and Employment

Facilitating an Equal Right to Vote for Persons with Disabilities

Lord, J. E., Stein, M. A., Fiala-Butora, J.·2014·Journal of Human Rights Practice

Abstract

Historically and contemporaneously, persons with disabilities have been excluded from exercising their human rights, including the right to political participation. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities responds to this circumstance and provides a holistic solution. Article 29 addresses the design and implementation of an electoral process that is non-discriminatory, while also requiring states to provide voters with disability-related accommodations and other facilitative measures to enable their equal right to vote. Yet to date, what little attention has been paid to the voting rights of disabled persons has focused on the validity and scope of exclusions, and neither courts nor legislators have turned to the positive side of the ledger, namely, how to enable individuals with disabilities to exercise their franchise. Emerging practices around the globe nonetheless bear out that persons with disabilities can be successfully incorporated in all phases of an electoral process. Further, they can perform a variety of roles beyond exercising the franchise—as voter educators, election commissioners, observers, monitors and committee members, and as candidates. The article reflects evolving state policies and practices by disabled people's organizations, and draws on our experience working in this field to provide guidance for disability inclusion throughout the ongoing process of pre-electoral, electoral and post-electoral phases that comprise the electoral…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jhuman/hut034

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Una situación similar de preterición puede observarse a propósito del derecho a sufragio, el acceso a cargos públicos, del derecho al trabajo y de la puesta en práctica del principio de accesibilidad en espacios públicos.

    “Sin duda este no es el único caso; una situación similar puede observarse a propósito del derecho a sufragio 82 , el acceso a cargos públicos 83 , del derecho al trabajo 84 y de la puesta en práctica del principio de accesibilidad en espacios públicos 85 .”

    From El derecho a la vivienda adecuada de las personas con discapacidad mental en Chile (2023) · cites this paper as Lord et al. (2014), pp.115-139.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lord, J. E., Stein, M. A., & Fiala-Butora, J.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Fiala-Butora, J.
Venue
Journal of Human Rights Practice
Published
2014-03-01
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
115-139
ISSN
  • 1757-9619 (ISSN-L)
  • 1757-9627
OpenAlex
W2163772351
Cited by
32
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 2
FWCI
1.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Human Rights Practice (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Justice
  • United States Agency for International Development
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
Keywords
voting rights, people with disabilities, right to political participation, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, electoral process, disability accommodation, disability inclusion, electoral access, voter education, election monitoring

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review