A/HRC/37/25 citizenship to shape the society in which we live. 80 Consequently, participation in ensuring access to justice is bound to participation in public and political life, as described across articles 4 (3), 29, 33 and 34 of the Convention. 56. Persons with disabilities continue to face restrictions to their participation in various capacities in legal proceedings, for example as judges, prosecutors, witnesses or jurors, both in law and in practice.81 These restrictions are based on stereotypes that discredit the credibility and the capacity of persons with disabilities, particularly women, to effectively contribute to proceedings. 82 An example of a positive development in this context is a ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada in which the Court held that people with intellectual disabilities could testify in criminal cases on the basis of a promise to tell the truth, whereas previously they had to prove their competence to testify by explaining the meanings of the concepts of promise, truth and falsehood.83 57. The Committee has specifically noted that the performance of jury duty is an important aspect of civic life and integral to the judicial system. Being denied appropriate measures to participate on an equal basis with others, such as through the provision of sign language interpretation, has resulted in violations relating to access to justice, nondiscrimination, accessibility, freedom of expression, access to information, and participation in political and public life. 84 The role of procedural accommodations is key to ensuring that rules of procedure can be interpreted with sufficient flexibility for the inclusion and participation of persons with disabilities on juries on an equal basis with others.85 58. To overcome barriers to participation, States are engaging in improving their systems. For example, Chile has repealed the prohibition against blind and deaf persons being eligible to be magistrates. Similarly, in Ethiopia, the House of Federation ruled against a customary practice in the justice sector which prohibited blind persons from acting as judges, and ordered courts to provide the necessary accommodations for them to perform their duties. In Peru, reasonable accommodations are made available for blind candidates taking the entry examination to become a judge or prosecutor. In Germany, nearly 70 blind persons are judges and some have reached the highest judicial offices in the country, including at the Federal Supreme Court. 2. Training in the fields of administration of justice and legal education 59. Attitudinal barriers affect access to justice for persons with disabilities, as they may negatively influence the way in which laws, legal policies, procedures and practices are implemented. Often, these attitudinal barriers stem from lack of awareness of the rights of, and appropriate practices for, persons with disabilities in the justice system on the part of police officers, public defenders and professionals working as public defenders or providing legal aid, legal service providers and others. The provisions of article 13 (2) promote appropriate training as a measure to overcome these barriers. States parties should design and deliver mandatory regular training programmes, which should be properly funded, involving persons with disabilities at all stages of legal proceedings, including in rural areas.86 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 See Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Beasley v. Australia (CRPD/C/15/D/11/2013), para. 8.5; and Lockrey v. Australia (CRPD/C/15/D/13/2013), para. 8.9. See CRPD/C/COL/CO/1, para. 34; CRPD/C/JOR/CO/1, para. 28 (b); CRPD/C/IRN/CO/1, para. 29 (a); and CRPD/C/THA/CO/1, para. 27. See Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, R.P.B. v. Philippines (CEDAW/C/57/D/34/2011); see also general recommendation No. 35 (2017) on gender-based violence against women, updating general recommendation No. 19, para. 31 (c). R. v. D.A.I. (case No. 33657), judgment of 10 February 2012. See Beasley v. Australia, para. 8.5; and Lockrey v. Australia, para. 8.9. Supreme Court of Illinois, People v. Guzman (case No. 118749), decision of 19 November 2015, cited in Eilionóir Flynn, Disabled Justice?: Access to Justice and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Ashgate, 2015), p. 123. See CRPD/C/ETH/CO/1, para. 30; CRPD/C/KOR/CO/1, para. 24; CRPD/C/PRT/CO/1, para. 31; and CRPD/C/UGA/CO/1, para. 25 (c). 15