Persons with disabilities face life-threatening barriers to humanitarian aid during conflicts and disasters, United Nations experts warned the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) today, calling for stronger protection and more inclusive emergency responses.
‘Disability Must Never Be Treated as a Reason to Deny Someone a Voice’
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities must deliver practical change in its third decade, declared Miyeon Kim, Chair of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, calling for inclusive education, decent work, independent living and equal access to justice.
Persons with disabilities must shape these changes as “leaders, experts and co-creators”, she said, underscoring the importance of accessible elections and opportunities to hold public office. “Disability must never be treated as a reason to deny someone a voice.”
Turning to artificial intelligence, she acknowledged its potential to improve accessibility and independent living but warned that technologies developed without the participation of persons with disabilities can “reproduce the discrimination, deny opportunities, and undermine privacy and autonomy”.
States must require accessible design, assess the impact of artificial intelligence on disability rights and ensure human oversight and remedies, she said, noting that inclusive technologies must also be affordable and available in developing countries.
The same principles apply to artificial intelligence used in warfare, she emphasized. “Human control and accountability must be maintained, and the protection of civilians, including persons with disabilities, must guide the decisions.”
Highlighting the grave risks facing persons with disabilities in armed conflict, particularly women, girls and children, she called for accessible warnings, evacuation shelters and continuous support.
“Our responsibility is to turn rights on paper into lived justice”, she stated, urging Governments to ensure that persons with disabilities participate in peace processes, reconstruction and disaster preparedness.
Disability Inclusion ‘Cannot Be Viewed as an Optional Component’ of Humanitarian Action
Heba Hagrass, Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, warned that people with disabilities remain among those most disproportionately affected by armed conflict, forced displacement and climate-related disasters, yet are often overlooked in humanitarian planning.
Despite some progress, inaccessible information, evacuation procedures that disregard disability-related needs and shelters that cannot accommodate affected persons continue to impede access to assistance. “These barriers can have life-threatening consequences during emergencies and increase risks of exclusion, poverty and harm”, she noted.
The absence of disability-disaggregated data makes it difficult to identify those being left behind, she warned. Persons with disabilities are also frequently consulted only after major humanitarian decisions have already been made. Accordingly, she added, the principle of “nothing about us without us” must apply equally in emergency settings.
Persons with disabilities face heightened risks of violence, abuse, exploitation and neglect during displacement, she said. Women and girls encounter intersecting forms of discrimination, children experience disruptions to education and support services, and older persons may be overlooked in recovery efforts.
Against a backdrop of growing humanitarian needs and shrinking resources, she warned against treating inclusion as expendable. Disability inclusion “cannot be viewed as an optional component of humanitarian action or a luxury when resources permit. It is a human rights obligation and a prerequisite for effective humanitarian response”, she declared.
War, Displacement Expose Gaps in Protection
During the ensuing interactive dialogue, Ukraine’s representative warned that “Russia’s war of aggression continues to cause injuries, trauma and disabilities on a massive scale”, reporting that over 3.6 million people in the country now live with disabilities.
He highlighted barriers to evacuation, denial of medical care, forced deportation and sexual violence, adding that Ukrainian prisoners of war returning from Russian captivity require extensive rehabilitation.
“Disability inclusion cannot wait until a conflict ends. It must be integrated into humanitarian response and reconstruction with meaningful participation of persons with disabilities”, he stressed.
Myanmar’s representative described the worsening plight of persons with disabilities since the military coup, adding that some have been “systematically getting killed or burned alive in their own homes”. He called for decisive international action to end military rule and hold perpetrators accountable.
Georgia’s delegate voiced concern over the rights of persons with disabilities in the Russian Federation-occupied region of Abkhazia, while the speaker for the United Arab Emirates highlighted its “Step of Hope” programme, which provides artificial limbs to Palestinian children in Gaza.
Pakistan’s representative asked the Special Rapporteurs how to ensure access to essential assistive technology during humanitarian emergencies, particularly in armed conflict and occupation.
Other speakers highlighted national initiatives. Brazil’s delegate described accessibility measures in low-income housing and justice services, Japan’s representative outlined improvements in inclusive disaster preparedness, and China’s delegate reported that his country — home to over 85 million persons with disabilities — has enacted more than 90 laws related to their protection.
The speaker for Papua New Guinea highlighted improvements in disability data and monitoring, while Australia’s delegate cited development projects benefiting persons with disabilities. The Russian Federation’s representative expressed concern that assistance to persons with disabilities was absent from the humanitarian reform road map.
‘Even the Responsibility to Protect Does Not Allow Unilateral Interventions’
Turning to minority rights, Nicolas Levrat, Special Rapporteur on minority issues, warned against States invoking the protection of ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities to justify interventions beyond their borders.
“For many minority issues, the transnational dimension is structural”, he observed, examining the obligations established under the 1992 Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities.
States should cooperate to protect minorities abroad, rather than “act unilaterally beyond their borders”, he stressed. Citing “passportization” — the granting of citizenship to people abroad who share an ethnicity, language or religion — he described interventions on behalf of such citizens mistreated abroad as “a borderline behaviour” under the Declaration.
“Even the responsibility to protect does not allow unilateral interventions in violation of international law”, he emphasized, recalling the International Court of Justice’s observation: “It is doubtful that the [Genocide] Convention […] authorizes a contracting party’s unilateral use of force in the territory of another State for the purpose of preventing or punishing an alleged genocide.”
“The strict interdiction of unilateral intervention to protect a minority carries with it a corresponding responsibility for collective action by the UN”, he said, stressing the Security Council’s responsibility when threats to minorities endanger international peace and security.
He also criticized the failure to reflect minorities’ legitimate interests in the Sustainable Development Goals, calling for an end to “this shameful disregard” and their integration into the 2030 Agenda.
Warning that advances in AI could threaten minorities’ contribution to social diversity, he proposed a summit on diversity in 2030.
Minority issues must not be confined to Geneva as solely human rights matters, he concluded, emphasizing their links to peace and development. Such an approach, even under the pretext of institutional rationalization, would be “ill-founded and counterproductive”.