A/HRC/37/25 “reasonable accommodation”; it was decided to drop the reference to “reasonable”.26 The deliberate decision to drop “reasonable” underscored that, unlike reasonable accommodation, procedural accommodation is not subject to a proportionality test; 27 failure to provide procedural accommodation when required by a particular person with disability thus constitutes a form of discrimination on the basis of disability in connection with the right to access to justice. 26. The Committee has not yet defined what the practical process in providing procedural accommodations would be. Nevertheless, it has consistently indicated that procedural accommodations should be provided on the basis of the “free choice and preference” of the person concerned. Therefore, the judge or the responsible entity should give primary consideration to the request of the individual with disability, as he or she knows best what his or her own accommodation needs are. 28 The determination of the need for procedural accommodations should not necessarily be based on medical information and cannot be subject to any disability assessment, for example those related to the granting of a disability card or certification. If the requirements of the person concerned change over time, procedural accommodations must be modified or replaced, as appropriate. 29 27. Procedural accommodations must be age-appropriate. The Committee has recognized this right for children with disabilities. 30 Additionally, the Committee on the Rights of the Child has highlighted that different accommodations should be made to guarantee the right to access to justice for children, including children with disabilities. 31 For example, age-appropriate procedural accommodations may require modified courtroom procedures and practices, specific settings and age-appropriate assistance, among others. 32 28. The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has consistently recommended to States parties that they review their legislation, including administrative, civil and criminal legislation, in order to explicitly include the duty to provide procedural accommodations in all legal proceedings. 33 National laws and regulations should also define the entity responsible for providing procedural accommodations and should include details on where and how persons with disabilities can request and access them. Procedural accommodations must always be available and provided free of charge. 34 Accommodation request processes should be documented by the obligated entity in order to facilitate accountability and to improve knowledge management. 35 In this last sense, systematization of good practices allows the identification of those accommodations that best serve the purpose of ensuring effective participation to the benefit of future proceedings. It also contributes to building a resource within the institutional memory of the organization, thereby contributing to the goal of making jurisdictional systems more inclusive and accessible. 29. The process of request and provision of procedural accommodations should be carried out confidentially, in line with article 22 of the Convention, and this requirement 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 8 Ad Hoc Committee, seventh session, daily summaries, 18 January 2006. At that session, Israel put forward the view that that “accommodations” in article 13 referred to “process” and not to “reasonable accommodation”; Chile requested the inclusion of the phrase “judicial proceedings should be adjusted as needed”; and Canada suggested “reasonable accommodation”. At the eighth session, on 13 September 2006, the drafting group adopted “procedural and age-appropriate accommodations”). See A/HRC/34/26, para. 35. See CRPD/C/ARM/CO/1, para. 22; CRPD/C/BIH/CO/1, para. 25; and CRPD/C/SRB/CO/1, para. 24. See A/HRC/34/26, para. 46, in which a similar requirement with respect to reasonable accommodation is discussed. See CRPD/C/CAN/CO/1, para. 29 (b); CRPD/C/DEU/CO/1, para. 28 (b); and CRPD/C/MEX/CO/1, para. 26 (c). See general comment No. 10 (2007) on children’s rights in juvenile justice, para. 6; and general comment No. 12 (2009) on the right of the child to be heard, para. 9. See general comment No. 10, paras. 46 and 49. See CRPD/C/KEN/CO/1, para. 26 (b); CRPD/C/ECU/CO/1, para. 27 (c); and CRPD/C/CHN/CO/1, para. 24. See CRPD/C/MUS/CO/1, para. 24; and CRPD/C/CAN/CO/1, para. 30 (b). See A/HRC/34/26, para. 41.