The situations of exclusion and educational inequity in each territory are related to specific demographic, economic, and social realities. Therefore, the educational policies of each country require an approach relevant to the context and the willingness of governments to promote challenging actions that mobilize the commitment of various sectors and actors in society.
UNESCO commissioned the Costa Rican academic and writer, Vernor Muñoz, the document . Muñoz, who is also the director of policy and advocacy for the Global Campaign for Education and a former UN Special Rapporteur on the right to education, analyses in his report some normative instruments related to the right to education and contrasts them with the norms and concrete realities of the countries in Latin America.
To learn more about the progress and challenges in the region, we spoke with the author about his vision of the human right to education and specifically about the regulations, which in Latin America have at times marked progress and, at other times, have become obstacles.
Thirty years after the Salamanca Statement, what have been the advancements in Latin America and the Caribbean in ensuring the rights of people with disabilities, specifically in education?
The right to education for people with disabilities has evolved conceptually and normatively in a gradual manner, moving from initial perspectives that predominated the use of terms now considered stereotypical and derogatory, to cutting-edge instruments, such as the of 2006 or the Cali Commitment of 2019.
The medical and care-focused approaches characteristic of the first normative instruments on disability, adopted between the fifties and eighties of the last century, addressed issues of exclusion and discrimination without considering the weight of prejudices and stereotypes nor the disabling contexts.
The and its Framework for Action, along with other relevant instruments, marked a transition period in the nineties of the 20th century, when there was a substantive change in the understanding of disability, reinforcing the ideas of inclusion and diversity, which later gained strength with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the development of the Social Model of Disability, which now contemplate the realization of full rights.
What is the importance of having normative instruments to promote and monitor the compliance with human rights?
Legal instruments on human rights in general, and especially those related to the right to education for people with disabilities, contain a series of principles and norms that establish fundamental obligations for States, primarily. These obligations have a universal effect once they are adopted and incorporated into domestic legislation and set the necessary parameters for developing public policies aimed at advancing and ensuring the right to education for all people, with or without disabilities, who should be considered holders of this human right, from birth to death.
Human rights conventions are also important because they have created competent bodies to monitor the compliance with human rights, including those of people with disabilities, so they play a very important role in interpreting and clarifying the contents of international instruments, as well as guiding States in the necessary measures to advance in the respect of the rights of these people and, specifically, their right to education.
What would you recommend to States to make what is in the laws and regulations a reality in the classroom?
There are many recommendations, but I will mention a few that I consider essential. The first recommendation is to ratify international human rights instruments. This first step is fundamental to programmatically incorporate their principles and norms into domestic law. Ratification also implies the obligation to adapt internal norms to the contents of the instruments, from a perspective of intersectoral and intersectional public policy. This allows, in the case of inclusive education, to ensure educational opportunities to everyone, throughout life. Legal, political, and programmatic reform should aim to apply the Universal Design for Learning, remove barriers to the exercise of the right to inclusive quality education, and be useful in preventing and addressing violence and bullying in schools.
Secondly, states must take immediate measures to prohibit all forms of discrimination based on disability and any other condition, including the proscription of the rejection of people with disabilities in regular education systems, or any other measure or economic, social, cultural, linguistic condition that prevents ensuring their continuity in education. These measures obviously imply stimulating the active participation of people with disabilities and their families in educational decision-making.
Thirdly, we must remember that no state action is entirely effective if the necessary educational financing is not guaranteed, so it is necessary to allocate a minimum of 4% to 6% of the gross domestic product and 15% to 20% of the total public expenditure to education, dedicating sufficient resources for the construction of adequate infrastructure, the reduction of class sizes, and the implementation of support resources and reasonable adjustments.
Finally, I would like to remind that ensuring educational access for people with disabilities is not enough to realize their rights. It is essential to implement national intercultural plans for teacher training and education with a perspective of human rights, inclusion, and non-discrimination and, very especially, review the curriculum and evaluation mechanisms to ensure they respond to the enormous social, cultural, and population diversity of our region.
