The adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) represents an important and (potentially) progressive development in the protection framework under international humanitarian law (IHL). Article 11 of the CRPD specifically obliges States to protect persons with disabilities from harm in situations of risk, including armed conflict, consistent with IHL and human rights law. The CRPD framework signals the need to address the traditional framing of disability under IHL and to draw from human rights concepts in the CRPD in order to inform the protection accorded to persons with disabilities in armed conflict.

This article is divided into four main parts: the first three address three main lines of inquiry, while the fourth is forward-looking. The first part analyzes the framing and construction of disability in IHL and the implications of such framing for the protection of persons with disabilities. The second part analyzes fundamental IHL rules in an effort to demonstrate how the framing of disability and the protection framework of the CRPD can be used in the application of IHL. The third part identifies some specific problem areas ripe for further disability scoping and harmonization of the CRPD and IHL. Looking forward, the fourth part identifies entry points for focused action and research aimed at bringing about the kind of dynamic treaty practice envisioned by Article 11 of the CRPD.

Initial drafts of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) did not include any significant reference to the obligations of States to protect their citizens with disabilities during armed conflict or other emergency situations; international documents dealing with disability up until that point had not considered persons with disabilities as rights holders during armed conflict either. But early in the negotiations for the CRPD, disabled persons’ organizations made it clear that they wanted to see the protections of the Convention extend to times of risk, emergency and armed conflict.

This study focuses on Article 11 of the CRPD. The negotiating history of Article 11 demonstrates that although there were some disagreements over the scope of the article, support for a clear statement of States’ obligations during armed conflict and other emergencies was broad-based and came from all regions.