Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

ANED 2013 Task 3 and 4 – Country reports on citizenship and political participation

Country: Austria

Author(s): Dr. Ursula Naue, Department of Political Science, University of Vienna, Dr. Angela Wegscheider, Department of Social Policy and Politics, University of Linz

The Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED) was established by the European Commission in 2008 to provide scientific support and advice for its disability policy Unit. In particular, the activities of the Network will support the future development of the EU Disability Action Plan and practical implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Disabled People. This country report has been prepared as input for the Thematic reports on Citizenship and Political Participation in European Countries. The purpose of the report is to examine the legal framework for citizenship in EU/EEA countries, access to, and accessibility of voting in elections for disabled people.

1

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Part A: Legal context of citizenship and public participation

1. National disability strategy/action plan includes the right to civil and political participation of persons with disabilities

Austria currently does not have a national disability strategy, but a National Action Plan on disability (NAP). In July 2012, the NAP was passed by the federal government (for the period 2012 to 2020). It has to be mentioned that the federal states (Laender) withdrew their participation; therefore the NAP mainly deals with federal (Bund) responsibilities. This, in turn, limits the impact of nationwide coverage and implementation. The NAP inter alia aims to improve political participation (BMASK 2012, 1). However, effective participation of Disabled People’s Organisations (DPOs) was not part of the national strategy while preparing the NAP1 neither could it be observed in the content. DPOs had a right to be heard, but they were only superficially involved in the decision-making process.

In the NAP, one page (of 106) is explicitly dedicated to the topic of ‘participation in political and public life’ (BMASK 2012, 73). The federal government recognises that people with disabilities are discriminated against in public and political life in certain ways and cites some examples: It is stated that people with intellectual disabilities and people with sensory disabilities often have difficulties receiving the necessary education and information for successful participation in political and public life. The Action Plan also recognises that all people with disabilities frequently have difficulties participating in the information society. However, it seems that the one concrete example which is explicitly mentioned was chosen by chance or because a law amendment seemed to be possible to the authors: According to Austrian law on jurors and members of a jury 1990 (Geschworenen- und Schöffengesetz) people are excluded from being jurors or members of a jury if their physical or intellectual state prevents them from executing the duties of the function. The NAP indicates that this statement could possibly discriminate against people with disabilities.

In the next paragraph of the NAP four objectives are mentioned, including access to political education of adults for people with intellectual disabilities and people with sensory disabilities, official documents in plain language and integration in the information society. In detail, the NAP indicates that an amendment of the Austrian law on jurors and members of a jury should make clear that people with disabilities are not excluded from the role of juror or member of a jury. Finally, three specific measures are listed, which include information on the time frame and responsibility.

Content Time Responsibility

1 Some interest and self-advocacy groups of people with disabilities complained that they had not been involved adequately in the report writing and criticised the report as well as the suggestions, e.g. collection of non-binding promises (see BIZEPS 2012, online/ÖAR 2012, online).

2

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Accessible adult education on political and public life, and information about this in plain language

2012-2020 All federal Ministries and all Laender

Supply of accessible information and information in plain language, in printed and digital form, to facilitate participation in political voting

2012-2020 Federal Ministry of the Interior

Possible amendment of Austrian law on jurors and members of a jury in order to avoid excluding people with disabilities from becoming jurors or members of a jury

Federal Ministry of Justice

(BMASK 2012, 73, translated by Angela Wegscheider).

The federal government put forward two less specific general and one detailed measure to improve the inclusion of people with disabilities in political and public life. It could be assumed that the detailed measure was imposed because putting it in action seems to be easy. However, many barriers and problems that hinder the political participation of persons with disabilities are not mentioned, and therefore numerous measures which could have improved political and public participation for people with disabilities are missing. One central problem is Austrian federalism with its different regulations on regional levels and among the Laender. In the NAP, a strategy to foster empowerment in order to strengthen people with disabilities is neither consistent nor comprehensive.

2. Citizenship education includes disability issues and is equally available to persons with disabilities

In Austria, citizenship education (Politische Bildung) is a compulsory part of the school curriculum, but in different ways (in some schools as a separate taught subject; in other schools as part of various teaching subjects such as History and Social Studies (Geschichte und Sozialkunde). Referring to a chart and list compiled by the Federal Ministry for Education, Arts and Culture and the Zentrum polis (2013),2 citizenship education is also compulsory for children with disabilities in all types of schools, including special schools.

Disability awareness or disability equality is – in theory – included as a dimension of the curriculum in citizenship education for all children.3 But whether this is taught in practice cannot be definitively affirmed for (all) Austrian schools and/or school types.

2 As per June 20, 2013; available via http://www.politik-lernen.at/pb_lehrplaene, retrieved September 10, 2013.3 Available via http://www.schule.at/portale/politische-bildung/themen.html, retrieved September 10, 2013; under the header of disabled persons and inclusion, the CRPD, the National Action Plan Disability 2012-2020, several aspects of disability awareness and disability equality are mentioned and discussed.

3

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

3. The acquisition of citizenship of EU Member States and EU citizenship does not discriminate against persons with disabilities

The requirements that must be met for an adult to acquire the Austrian nationality are regulated in the Austrian Citizenship Act (Staatsbürgerschaftsgesetz) 1985 (latest amendment 2013) – especially in Paragraph 10 (Verleihung, conferral).

The requirements are the following: “Minimum of 10 years legal and nonstop residence in Austria, therefrom

minimum of 5 years with a settlement permit; there are derogations from this requirement in the case of an award due to legal claim

Integrityo No judicial condemnationo No pending criminal action (both in Austria and abroad)o No severe administrative offences with special degree of unlawfulness

Sufficiently secured maintenance Proof of one's own fix and regular earnings out of acquisition, income,

judicial claim to maintenance or insurance benefits on the basis of the average of the last three years up to the point of decision

German language skills and basic knowledge of the democratic system, the history of Austria and of each province Proof of a written exam unless there are any exceptional regulations (e.g.

German as mother tongue, minority, attendence of school with a positive grade in the subject “German”)

Positive attitude towards the Republic of Austria and warranty that there is no danger for the public peace, order and security

No current prohibition of residence and no pending process concerning the end of the residence

No return decision [Rückkehrentscheidung] No expulsion decision [Rückführungsentscheidung] issued by another EEA

state or by Switzerland No eviction order within the last 18 months No close relationship to any extremist or terrorist group Principally loss of previous citizenship Due to the acquisition of the citizenshipThe international relations to the Republic of Austria must not be significantly affected and the interests of the Republic of Austria must not be harmed.”4

Disability is not directly addressed as such in the Austrian Citizenship Act, but constitutes an important indirect aspect of requirements that were recently suspended by a decision of The Constitutional Court of Austria.5 In accordance with article 7, paragraph 1 sentence 3 (non-discrimination of a persons based upon her/his disability) The Constitutional Court of Austria decided to amend 4 Available online via https://www.help.gv.at/Portal.Node/hlpd/public/content/136/Seite.1360000.html, retrieved September 10, 2013.5 Decision G106/12-7, G17/13-6 from March 1, 2013, becoming effective by July 1, 2014.

4

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

article 10 paragraph 1 sentence 7 of the Austrian Citizenship Act 1985. Article 10 (1) 7 regulated the above mentioned ’sufficiently secured maintenance’ (Änderung des Staatsbürgerschaftsgesetzes 2013/Amendment of the Austrian Citizenship Act 2013) in the following way: A foreigner does not have to prove his/her suffiently secured maintenance in the context of a disability or a permanent severe illness.

Besides this important amendment of Austrian citizenship law, nevertheless several barriers exist, which frame the acquisition of Austrian citizenship as not inclusive and accessible (as – inter alia – mentioned in two statements by the Independent Austrian Monitoring Committee on the CRPD).6 Neither in the law, nor in the respective decree (Verordnung) are accessible framework conditions mentioned with regard to the test a foreigner has to pass to acquire Austrian citizenship. The tests, which are not accessible to some persons with disabilities, refer to the above mentioned basic knowledge of the democratic system, the history of Austria and of each province. For example, no easy-to-read version of this tests exist, neither do alternative formats of testing exist (for example for persons with learning disabilities and/or persons with trauma). In addition, it has to be mentioned that the ceremony of acquiring the Austrian citizenship involves the singing of the national anthem which may represent a barrier for persons with disabilities.

4. Persons with disabilities have an equal right to stand for political and public office

To stand for a political or public office a person has to be elected or nominated. Political parties or individuals have the right to fill a post.

All persons with disabilities, without exception, including people with psychosocial disabilities, are granted the right to vote and be elected for political and public offices. No restrictions for people with disabilities to stand for an office could be found in the legal regulations. All people with disabilities are by law/legally allowed to vote and to be elected like all other citizens (Monitoring Committee 2013c, 1/FRA 2010, 18).7

In political and other elections of chambers and lobbies,8 no hard data could be found that demonstrates the exclusion from the right to stand for an office of people with disabilities. This includes elections of the Austrian Student Union (Österreichische Hochschülerschaft), of the Chamber of Labour (Arbeiterkammer), of the Worker’s Council (Betriebsrat) and of the Chamber of Commerce (Wirtschaftskammer). 6 Available online via http://www.monitoringausschuss.at/sym/monitoringausschuss/Stellungnahmen, retrieved September 10, 2013, 1) Stellungnahme Entwurf eines Bundesgesetzes, mit dem das Staatsbürgerschaftsgesetz 1985 geändert wird, March 5, 2013, 2) Stellungnahme Entwurf einer Änderung der Staatsbürgerschaftsprüfungs-Verordnung, July 31, 2013 (Monitoring Committee 2013a and 2013b).7 A person may only be deprived of his or her right to vote and to be elected in case of a criminal conviction for at least more than one year prison sentence and when a court decided that he/she is suspended from the right to vote (Election Law Act for the National Council 1992 article 22/Amendment to the Right to Vote 2011).8 In Austria for chambers and lobbies like Austrian Student Union (Österreichische Hochschülerschaft) usually the membership is mandatory.

5

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

No statistical data on numbers of people with disabilities holding a post in public office, including positions in the Government, Judiciary or Parliament at various levels or including persons who are active members in political parties could be found. It may be assumed that the number is very small. The National Disability Council (Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Rehabilitation - ÖAR)9 states that persons with disabilities are extremely underrepresented in political and public offices. For the legislative period 2008-2013 only three (out of 183) Members of Parliament at the National Council had physical or sensory impairments and even disability spokesmen of the individual political parties are not always people with disabilities (e.g. the disability spokesperson of the Social Democratic Party of Austria) (ÖAR 2013, 74).

In 1986, Manfred Srb, a member of the Green Party [die Grünen], who uses a wheelchair became a member of the National Council (from 1986 to 1994) and in 1997, wheelchair-user Gunther Trübswasser, who was member of the Green Party too, became member of the Upper Austrian provincial parliament (Landtag). The parliament general administration of both the National Council and the Landtag, improvised to make at least the rostrum and some parts of the premises of the parliament accessible to them. However, to this day the building of the National Council, where the Federal Council is situated too, is not entirely accessible for persons using a wheelchair. Only temporary adaptions for visitors with disabilities and members of the parliament with disabilities have been made. This is due to change after comprehensive reconstructions, which are expected to start at the end of 2013. According to the house rules, wheelchair users have to be accompanied by a third person due to fire safety regulations (Monitoring committee 2013c, 5-6; Parlamentsdirektion 2011, 21-22 and 28-29).

Since an amendment in 1997, discrimination against people with disabilities has been prohibited in Austria and equality is guaranteed by the constitution (Bundesverfassungsgesetz 1930, article 7 paragraph 1). To be effective this principle of equality has to be introduced into the legislation/legal framework.

Accessibility to federal buildings is regulated by the Federal Disability Equality Act (Bundesbehindertengleichstellungsgesetz 2005), which establishes the duty of reasonable accommodation for individuals in services, in access to goods and services, as well as public spaces and infrastructure. Article 6 paragraph 5 defines accessibility as being suitable for use by persons with disabilities in the usual manner, without any particular obstacles; places may generally be accessed and used without help from others. According to the law, accessibility of buildings has to be improved step by step (restricted and with exceptions till December 31, 2019) with adopted step-by-step plans (article 8, paragraph 2). However, these rules are only applied in limited ways at a federal level: comprehensive accessibility (physical,

9 The Austrian Council for Rehabilitation (German: Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Rehabilitation - ÖAR) is an umbrella organisation represents 78 member associations with over 400.000 individual members which plays an important role in the forming and realising of laws on all levels of the political system.

6

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

social, communicative, intellectual) cannot be fully guaranteed. At the level of the Laender, no uniform rule has been adopted; each has their own individual building and accessibility regulations.

In relation to the employment of people with disabilities, the Austrian Regulation on Workplaces (Arbeitsstättenverordnung 1998) has to be applied. In article 15 (and concerning safety article 16) it requires that work places should be accessible. This legal provision applies to all employees and includes holders of political and public offices if they are employed.

At regional and local levels other regulations concerning the definition and requirements for accessibility exist. Each provincial state applies its own regulations concerning accessibility and anti-discrimination which are found in different laws e.g. in anti-discrimination or in building laws at regional level.10 The Viennese Anti-discrimination Act (Wiener Antidiskriminierungsgesetz 2004) aims to ensure accessibility in all buildings by the year 2042 (Srb 2013, online). Even the relatively recently (1997) built regional parliament of Lower Austria is not fully accessible. Provincial parliaments and town halls are also not entirely accessible. No evidence could be found for the premises in which regional and local level political or public office holders work. The same is true for chambers and lobbies. Reflecting the Austrian situation, the authors presume that if there is individual need, the authorities make efforts to adapt plenary, working and meeting rooms. The same is also true for the provision of interpretation services. Since there has been a deaf member of the National Council, plenary sessions are translated into Austrian Sign Language (ASL), however this work is limited till 7pm. However, there is no legal instrument that ensures effectively comprehensive accessible environment and communication.

In 2010 the National Council passed an amendment of the Federal Compensation Act (Bundesbezügegesetz 1997), in which they reviewed the regulations on the budget for representatives with disabilities of the National and Federal Council and the European Parliament. The latter was increased to fund additional costs on a flat-rate basis. The compensation is linked to the officially confirmed degree of disability, not to the individual need. Although there have been political representatives with disabilities on regional, local or other public bodies, no similar regulations for additional funding of holders of political or public offices on regional or local level as well as for other public offices could be found.

The position of people with disabilities in political parties is often not secured due to a lack of grassroots support. Their reappointment to parliament is thus not assured, even if they are well known within electorates with and without disabilities (Wegscheider 2013, 225-226). Self-advocates repeatedly stress that they are still being seen as incapable of adopting a political function (Monitoring committee 2013c, 3). To this day, only one person with learning disabilities has appeared on the list of candidates. This was a candidate for the Social Democratic Party of Austria in the

10 The different legal provisions are accumulated available via http://www.klagsverband.at/gesetze/laender, retrieved September 29, 2013.

7

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

General Election of the National Council in 2008. However, this person had no realistic chances of obtaining a position as a member of parliament due to being placed 379 on the list (ÖAR 2013, 74).

5. Political parties are under a legal duty not to discriminate against persons with disabilities

In Austria, no explicit legal obligations exist that require political parties to not discriminate against disabled persons with regard to membership, participation in party events, communication, and access to information, etc. However, the Federal Disability Equality Act, which aims to ban discrimination, applies. Article 8 applies to federal authorities and to the access to goods and services available to the public under federal competence. Services and organisations funded by federal authorities, (this includes political parties because they are mainly funded by the federal state), have to be accessible and non-discriminatory for people with disabilities. The law establishes the obligation to include these individuals in services and ensure access to goods and services as well as public spaces and infrastructure.

However, in Austria, direct and indirect discrimination, harassment or instruction given by others to discriminate against individuals, is forbidden. The Federal Disability Equality Act introduced compulsory mediation before the Federal Social Welfare Board prior to litigation, which examines whether public funds may be used to challenge cases of systematic discrimination or promote out-of-court settlement. The latter instance does not guarantee that the cause of discrimination is necessarily removed. To date no legal proceedings under article 8 have been recorded. Austria is very generous in funding political parties, party academies and their associated organisations, but unfortunately, article 8 of the Act has not shown positive effects in the legislative funding regulations for the promotion of political parties so far (Monitoring Committee 2013c, 4-5).

6. All persons with disabilities have the right to vote on an equal basis with others

In its Federal Disability Report, the government states that the Austrian election legislation provides a wide range of different voting channels for people with disabilities and that there is no need for improvements (BMASK 2009, 103). People with disabilities may vote as follows: (1) by postal vote (with a voting card) (2) with a voting card at a polling station of choice (3) at special polling stations such as, for instance, at electoral authorities which have been set up at institutions for persons with disabilities, (4) with an absentee ballot (voting card) at a mobile (flying) electoral commission or (5) if the voter has a physical or sensory impairment, with assistance of her/his choice (BMASK 2009, 102; ÖAR 2013, 74-75).

In Austria, elections are regulated by the constitutionally enshrined principles of electoral law. This electoral principle of homogeneity for representative bodies envisions general, equal, private, free, and direct elections and requires that these

8

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

basic and democratic principles must be the same in all regulations. These include conditions such as the right to vote and eligibility for elections, e.g. voting age or reasons for being excluded from voting (Mayrhofer 2012, 161-167). The legal provisions for federal elections, elections for the European Parliament and for referenda (Volksabstimmung und Volksbegehren) are rather uniformly regulated. However, the electoral laws for all other political and public offices which in fact differ, should (in accordance with the electoral principle of homogeneity for representative bodies) provide the same regulations. The basic and democratic principles must be guaranteed through all electoral regulations, but the regulations to support accessibility or assistance for people with disabilities differ: The Chamber of Commerce Act 1998 (Wirtschaftskammergesetz) as well as the Chamber of Labour Act 1992 (Arbeiterkammergesetz) recognise that physically and visually impaired persons are allowed assistance by a person of their choice, but the Acts do not include the need for accessible polling stations or ballot paper templates.

For all elections, people with disabilities without exception (including persons with psychosocial disabilities) are granted the right to vote and to be elected for political and public offices. Since 1987 persons under guardianship have had their full right to vote (BMASK 2010, 48). Persons are suspended from their electoral right for a limited period after having been institutionalised to serve a long-term prison sentence (more than 1 year) because of certain crimes and if thus decided by a court (Election Act for the Federal Council 1992, article 22/Amendment to the Right to Vote 2011). These crimes could be in connection with, for example, punishable acts under the law banning National Socialist activities. However, persons who live in institutions under medical supervision in the federal states of Burgenland and Lower Austria could be suspended from their right to vote because of significant medical causes (Mayrhofer 2012, 26). These regulations are not in accordance with the electoral principle of homogeneity for representative bodies but they still exist in the legal text.

The principle of homogeneity is not entirely comprehensive and so regional and local electoral regulations vary from region to region; the same holds true for the electoral law for the Laender parliament (Landtag) and for major cities and municipalities (e.g. in Lower Austria). The electoral regulations for chambers and lobbies differ, too. A comparison of the different electoral laws for political votes shows differences in terms of legal regulations to support accessibility.

The latest amendment (2013) of the regulation to make preferential voting arrangements (Vorzugsstimme) accessible does not apply to all electoral laws (especially at regional and local level) and it is not regulated homogenously in the Laender. In addition, it is feared that the period to produce ballot paper templates for the Worker’s Council election is too short (Monitoring Committee 2013c, 4).

No detailed legal definition of ‘accessibility’ could be found in the electoral laws. Standards or regulations according to local regulations like the provision of accessible polling stations, voting booths or ballot paper templates are not explicitly included in the principle of homogeneity, which is derived from the Federal

9

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Constitutional Act (articles 26, 95 and 117). The legislative authorities are required to provide suitable arrangements to allow for a general, direct, equal, secret and free right to vote for every eligible voter (Mayrhofer 2012, 162-166). The legislative authorities could show more effort in making the general voting channels accessible to disabled voters; furthermore, they could include more special regulations for disabled voters if they wanted to.

7. People living in institutions are able to register and to vote

Persons in institutions – whether short- or long-term – may vote at polling stations or through an alternative voting channel: with a voting card at regular polling stations or at special polling stations in institutions or at mobile electoral commissions, by sending the voting card in advance by mail. Special polling stations could be set up in caring and nursing homes – this is what the law indicates. In fact, the local election authority decides if it wants to set up a special polling station at homes for people with disabilities.

If the main place of residence is not at the institution, people could apply in advance - in writing or personally - for a voting card at the municipal office where their principal place of residence is. With the Amendment to the Right to Vote 2010, people with disabilities have the possibility to apply for a voting card subscription (Abonnement) for federal elections. They will automatically get a voting card for every vote at federal and European level. The voting card must be posted in advance or used at a polling station of their choice on election day or could be used at mobile electoral stations on election day. Persons who are home-bound or bed-bound may apply for the mobile electoral commission, which has to be ordered in advance in combination with the voting card.

The right to be voted on to chambers and lobbies in elections is tied to membership. People who are in vocational therapy do not have the status of an employee and thus have no right to vote or stand for these kinds of representative bodies (Chamber of Labour or Worker’s Council).

10

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Part B: Access to and accessibility of voting and elections

1. Election authorities have guidelines in place on access and accessibility for people with disabilities

For each election, internal electoral authorities have to be appointed. In general, this body consists of a chairperson, deputies and representatives. Electoral witnesses do not belong to the electoral authority, but they are present at the polling station and have control powers. The composition of the electoral authority depends on the current strength of the political parties in the respective political institution, and thus on the results of the previous election. Therefore, the persons responsible and the composition of the electoral authority vary. However, the administrative authority, which organises and manages the election, normally does not change.

The electoral authorities are organised hierarchically and consist of bodies at federal, regional, constituency, district, municipal, and local level at the polling station and, finally, the mobile electoral commission. Electoral authorities are collective special bodies, which are responsible for the implementation of the electoral procedures according to the legal provisions and the reciprocal controlling and supervision of the election and voting. They should detect all cases of irregularities in advance or during the election (Mayrhofer 2012, 178-179). However, the legal provisions generally lack regulations to provide comprehensive accessibility (physical, social, communicative, intellectual), and the few existing provisions are not always clear in terms of ensuring accessibility.

Accessibility in general has not been included as such in the electoral regulations and thus, it has not been implemented comprehensively across Austria so far. From the administrative perspective, authorities of the municipality organise and carry out the election as well as the casting of the votes locally. They provide information to voters and organise the different channels for casting votes, e.g. polling stations, special polling stations, mobile voting commissions and postal voting. They are responsible for conducting elections in such a way that the basic and democratic principles of general, equal, private, free, and direct elections enshrined in the Constitutional Act are ensured for all voters. They send voting cards to voters or set up mobile electoral commissions. Concerning accessibility, the minimum is to carry out what the law prescribes.

Enquiries among some electoral authorities at a regional level showed that no explicit regulations, guidelines or codes of practice such as the regulations prescribed by electoral laws on access, reasonable accommodation or accessibility of elections and voting exist for political elections or elections of other representative bodies (personal communication with Land Kärnten 2013/Land Oberösterreich 2013/Land Tirol 2013). As the electoral authorities are organised hierarchically, the higher-level authority assumes that the next level will be responsible for written instructions or guidelines for this practice (Land Oberösterreich 2013, personal communication).

11

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

The Ministry of the Interior publishes guidelines (in a broader sense). If a new regulation concerning people with disabilities is imposed, the Ministry will publish this regulation per decree (Erlass) (Ministry of the Interior 2013, personal communication). The federal state of Vienna highlighted that they have internal guidelines where accessibility plays a role.

It depends on local initiatives if electoral authorities offer more detailed information other than just using or citing the legal text. The municipality of Vienna offers an extensive range of additional information for voters with disabilities and electoral authorities (Stadt Wien 2013, personal communication).

The Viennese administrative authority for elections sends out written instructions to electoral chairpersons. These instructions are adjusted for each election. The document aims to instruct the electoral authorities at polling stations and contains information on, for example, physical accessibility of the premises and voting stations or special arrangements and rights of persons with disabilities. To give some examples: after having voted with the help of a voting card template, the voter could take the template with him/her (to ensure the principle of privacy); or therapy- and assistance dogs are allowed in the voting stations and voting booth. Additionally, all persons with disabilities who need assistance in the voting booth could be allowed assistance by a person of their choice. The instructions should give guidance to the electoral authorities where the law does not provide clear instructions.

Together with the Austrian Disability Council (Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Rehabilitation – ÖAR), the Vienna electoral authority has created a catalogue of criteria that is distributed to the local electoral authorities and at the municipality’s website11 in order to secure access for all people to polling stations. This catalogue describes criteria for accessibility and how they could be granted and ensured. Furthermore, accessible polling stations of the municipality of Vienna provide accessible voting booths, which are not stated to be required in the legal provisions. These voting booths are wider than a standard one and are equipped with a table that is well accessible for persons in a wheelchair. According to the law, only 23 polling stations in Vienna have to be accessible. For the time being, the municipality of Vienna claims that 600 polling stations (of 1.615) are accessible and they are trying to increase the number (Stadt Wien 2013, personal communication).

On their website, the responsible administrative electoral authority in Vienna provides not only detailed information about the accessibility criteria of and at the voting station, they also include an address list with accessible voting stations in each district. The website provides information for different ‘groups’ of people with disabilities, e.g. for physically impaired, blind or visually impaired people, people with intellectual disabilities, and people using Austrian Sign Language (ASL). Information on the voting process is available for download, in the form of videos with plain language, as well as in Austrian Sign Language (ASL). A written information guide for voters called a ‘Little Viennese voting guide’ (‘Kleine Wiener Wahlhilfe’) has been

11 See: http://www.wien.gv.at/rk/msg/2013/09/01003.html (as of Oct. 21. 2013).

12

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

made available in addition to a general version in plain language and a video in Austrian Sign Language (ASL). An additional video on the website shows how to use the postal vote. This video is also available in ASL-translation.12

2. Training is provided to election authorities and election officials on non-discrimination, reasonable accommodation and accessibility?

Training or briefings of the electoral authorities are not mandatory and are therefore carried out individually. Following enquiries to regional electoral authorities, no relevant Austrian training measures could be found that focus on non-discrimination, reasonable accommodation and accessibility for political elections or elections of other representative bodies (personal communication with Land Kärnten 2013/Land Oberösterreich 2013/Land Tirol 2013).

Most of the administrative electoral authorities reported that rights and needs of people with disabilities are only met with side remarks in meetings. If a discussion on accessibility emerges (e.g. in particular after the Amendment to the Right to Vote 1998), or when there is an individual need, or problem in meetings of electoral officers, regulations promoting accessibility are discussed (Land Kärnten 2013, personal communication). One electoral officer said that they hardly ever deal with problems concerning accessibility and participation of people with disabilities. Such examples of problems include: what could be done if the elevator is broken at the polling station or the declaration of support could not be signed personally (Land Tirol 2013, personal communication). It seems that accessibility and non-discrimination are only issues for a problem-oriented approach and not an integral part of training. However, written documents or evidence on the content of such training could not be found.

Only Vienna seems to be making intensive efforts on this issue and elaborating guidelines for the physical accessibility of voting stations. In accordance with the written instructions and to clarify the instructions to provide a non-discriminatory approach as well as promoting accessibility, training and workshops are organised with electoral chairpersons (Stadt Wien 2013, personal communication). In these training events it is reported that, criteria for accessibility as well as special voting rights of persons with disability are discussed without being regarded as minor issues.

Municipalities or local electoral authorities decide if they want to set up special voting stations at institutions for persons with disabilities. Two interviewed electoral officers of municipalities in Upper Austria where big homes for people with intellectual disabilities are situated did not set up special polling stations for the last presidency poll (2010) in these homes. Both officers admitted that the participation rate of inhabitants of both homes is always minor and it has not been promoted (Municipality

12 This service was available via http://www.wien.gv.at/politik/wahlen/nr/2013/, retrieved September 11, 2013. After the Election Day, the link does not work anymore; this service will be available in good time and in a revised form for the next election (election for the European Parliament in May 2014).

13

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Alkoven 2012 and Gallneukirchen 2012, personal communication). It was assumed that people with intellectual disabilities would be easy to influence and that their care workers would select in advance who is “eligible” to vote. These assumptions included the view that voting by people with intellectual disabilities is inadequate, because it could be a “wrong decision”. This highly problematic assumption is also mentioned in a comment of the Monitoring Committee (2013, 2-3).

3. Polling stations are accessible for persons with disabilities

The legal provisions require that for political elections every municipality - and in Vienna each district - has to set up at least one accessible polling station. At least one should be equipped with guidance systems for visually impaired or blind people; however this rule is not mandatory and depends on technical capacities (article 52, paragraph 5 of Election Act for the Federal Council/ Amendment to the Right to Vote 1998). Furthermore, the term accessibility has not been included as such in all electoral regulations and has thus not been implemented adequately across Austria so far (ÖAR 2013, 75). Criteria for accessibility for guidance systems are not defined either in the legal provisions for elections. The monitoring committee itself is not sure if this limited provision of accessible voting stations is in accordance with article 9 CRPD (Monitoring committee 2013c, 6).

The law determines that for blind and visually impaired persons ballot papers have to be accessible via templates. The regional electoral authority is responsible for producing ballot papers and ballot paper templates. In the legal provisions, design and content of the ballot paper is described, but it is not indicated what has to be done to make them comprehensively accessible. Recently, new regulations concerning the casting of preferential votes (Vorzugsstimmen) for candidates in ballots have been introduced. Instead of the name of the candidate, voters can write down a number or use a ballot paper template to write down the number. However, the new regulation does not apply to all political and public elections and for some elections (professional representation) the time allocated to produce the ballot paper template may be too short (Monitoring Committee 2013c, 4). Local electoral authorities are in charge of providing the ballot paper templates at the polling station. There are no reports of consequences in instances where they are missing.

As mentioned above, accessibility is not sufficiently defined in the legal electoral provisions to provide guidance for local electoral authorities. Cases are reported where the entry point of the building is accessible but several polling stations dispersed on various floors were not. Another example was that the ballot paper templates were not available at the polling stations. Two cases of compulsory conciliation under the Federal Disability Equality Act are documented because the voting station was not accessible in Graz (Styria) and in Vienna. However, as mentioned above, conciliation does not necessarily lead to the removal barriers. Furthermore, it may be assumed that a lot of cases are not reported and most people resign themselves after having encountered several discriminatory situations (Wegscheider 2013, 223-224).

14

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Since an amendment of the electoral right (2010), people with disabilities have been able to register in order to automatically receive a voting card for each political election.

In practice, election authorities do not receive precise instructions to guarantee at least the degree of accessibility indicated in the law. However, if a problem emerges and the local electoral authority is aware of it, the parties involved are, so it is reported, motivated to find a solution (personal communication with Land Kärnten 2013/Land Oberösterreich 2013/Land Tirol 2013). If the electoral authority is, on the other hand, not cooperative, no effective remedy is provided.

Not having maintained the right to vote for people with disabilities because of a lack of accessibility is not automatically a ground for contesting the outcome of an election. An election could only be contested if a participating political party could provide evidence that the voting procedure was invalid or illegal and therefore the non-counted votes have major effects on the redistribution of the mandates (Mayrhofer 2013, 204-205). In practice, however, this happens rarely and only if the vote(s) in question would have changed the election results. No cases could be found in which an election was contested because people with disabilities suffered from restrictions of their right to vote.

There is no regulation on accessible voting booths. No regulation puts an emphasis on removing social or communication barriers. Voting information is not available in plain language or in Braille. Providing hearing loops is not mandated in the law. The law does not explicitly state that people with intellectual disabilities have the right to receive assistance for the voting process. It depends on the good will of the local voting commissions if they receive assistance of their choice.

4. Disabled people can access assistance during voting

Legal regulations indicate that people with physical and sensory disabilities could get assistance from a person of their choice for their casting of the vote in the voting booth. The regulation gives the local electoral authority the power to decide who is expected to be unable to fill in the voting papers themselves. In case of doubt, the local electoral authority grants or refuses permission. This regulation does not automatically apply to all people with disabilities. The legislative text limits the opportunity for assistance to two groups: physically and visually impaired persons; it does not include people with intellectual or other disabilities.

An NGO service provider for people with intellectual disabilities recently criticised the law in that it does not recognise the needs of persons with intellectual disabilities and that assistance depends on the prior approval of the local electoral authority (Lebenshilfe 2013).5. Alternatives to voting at Polling Stations are available

15

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Since the Amendment to the Right to Vote (2007) it has been possible for all voters (not only Austrians who live abroad) to apply for a voting card and cast a postal vote when having good reason. Good reasons include absence, being abroad or health issues. The voting card has to be ordered – in written form (per mail or online) or personally – in advance. It has to be posted and received by the local electoral authority before the voting day or on the voting day at a polling station. For the postal vote, a voter has to have sophisticated reading competence to understand the instructions and has to be able to sign personally. It must be considered that the basic principle of secret votes cannot be entirely secured by casting a postal vote.

For home-bound persons who are not able to read and understand the instructions and who cannot sign personally, it is possible to vote by voting card at mobile electoral commissions on Election Day. These voters have the right to receive assistance from a person of their choice for the vote. The mobile electoral commission has to be ordered in advance, along with the voting card. Since the Amendment to the Right to Vote (2010), in addition to Austrians abroad, people with disabilities have been able to register in order to automatically get a postal voting card for political elections.

For elections to chambers or lobbies, which constitute a politically important and strong representation in Austria (due to the usual mandatory membership), the introduction of new types of voting alternatives has been discussed. The Austrian Students Union, for example, conducted an e-voting project in 2009. The e-voting project proved to be contradictory according to the basic principles in the voting laws and all efforts to implement e-voting were cancelled (Österreichische HochschülerInnenschaft 2013, personal communication).

6. Political parties are implementing accessibility in their election activities and communications

In Austria, no explicit legal obligation could be found for the non-discrimination of people with disabilities in the legal regulations for political parties. Political parties do not seem to be aware of any regulations that their election activities and their communications have to be accessible, or that they have to organise accessible events or offices.

In spite of higher subsidies for political parties, accessibility is not a priority issue in their election activities and their communication. Political party activities are partly funded by the federal state and therefore the Federal Disability Equality Act could be applied. As mentioned above, the Act requires that services and provision funded by the federal state have to be accessible and non-discriminatory for people with disabilities. It describes the duty of reasonably arranged premises, access to goods and services, as well as access to information and communication. However, these legal provisions have not become fully effective until now. Political parties do not have to fear consequences if they ignore basic principles of accessibility or non-discrimination in their activities or communication (Monitoring Committee 2013c, 5).

16

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Since 2013, the web portal RECHTleicht.at has been online. This webpage, which is funded by the Federal Ministry of Education, the Arts and Culture and supported by DPOs, provides the party manifestos of six political parties and explains politics in Austria. The web portal offers a wider range of political and democratic information as well as news in easy to understand language and videos in Austrian Sign Language.

For the General Election of the National Council in September 2013, the Greens and the Austrian People’s Party aimed at making their electoral activities and communication more accessible. The Green Party has shown the highest level of effort among the Austrian political parties. They explicitly address people with disabilities in their electoral activities and communications and provide their current manifesto for the election of the National Council 2013 in plain language. For the election of the National Council 2013, they developed a special manifesto on accessibility. This document is also available in plain language. To organise party or electoral events accessible for persons with disabilities, the Greens developed detailed and practicable guidelines. Within these guidelines, they try to cover the needs of different groups of people with disabilities. The Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) offers their current manifesto for the General Election of the National Council 2013 in plain language on their website. The other political parties do not show, apart from participating on the website RECHTleicht.at, any effort in addressing people with disabilities through accessible and non-discriminatory election activities or communication.

Austria currently does not provide an explicit legal basis for party funding with regard to anti-discrimination and accessibility. However, a few politicians have shown efforts to address persons with disabilities on disability issues and some have tried to not to not discriminate against persons with disabilities in individual initiatives.

7. The broadcasting of election communications and debates is made accessible

According to article 4, paragraph 1 ORF-Act (ORF-Gesetz), the functional responsibilities and programme mission of the ORF mentions the concerns of people with disabilities. Since 2001, the ORF has been obliged – insofar as this is financially reasonable – to produce information programmes on television in such a way that they are accessible for deaf and hearing-impaired persons (article 5, paragraph 2 ORF-Act).

The Austrian Broadcasting Corporation (ORF – Oeffentlich-Rechtlicher Rundfunk) is partly funded by the federal state, which means the basic principle of articles 6 and 8 of the Federal Disability Equality Act applies; this Act requires that services funded by the federal state have to be accessible and non-discriminatory for people with disabilities (ÖAR 2013, 47). Due to a lack of accessibility, media reporting on politics is not equally informative for people with disabilities (Feuerstein et al. 2013, 15).

17

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

The ORF channels ORF 1, ORF 2, ORF 2-Europe and ORF III offer a limited range of accessible broadcasts by using subtitles, Austrian Sign Language (ASL) and audio description. Audio transcription is only used in movies, TV films or series. The ORF has already established its 3rd step-by-step plan (2012-2014), which aims at increasing accessibility (Ladstätter 2013, online).

From January to May 2013, the ORF broadcasted 1.138,3 hours of political information material. This included daily news formats and regular programme formats with everyday or weekly political issues. Of this material, 717.2 hours (63.01%) had subtitles. Subtitles assist deaf persons only to a limited extent because German is a foreign language to them. Election debates and subsequent debate analysis as sources for formation of public opinion were not subtitled.

Only the main daily news broadcast “Zeit im Bild” at 7.30pm is translated in ASL on the channel ORF 2-Europe. Broadcasts of debates in the National Council, which are broadcasted via ORF III are broadcast in ASL. Of 817 hours of actual news coverage, 8.38% was translated in ASL (ORF 2013). Since July 2009, some time after the inauguration of the first deaf Member of the Austrian Parliament, its sessions are being broadcast in ASL (ÖAR 2013, 47). The live full-length coverage of parliament debates is broadcast in ASL and partly subtitled. Since October 2012 the documentary programme “heute konkret” (Mon – Fri, daily at 6.30pm) has been broadcast in ASL on ORF 2-Europe.

There is no ORF programme that is designed or moderated by people with disabilities. Furthermore, no person with disabilities is represented on the Audience Council of the ORF (ÖAR 2013, 47 and 78). ORF has been criticised for exaggerating its statistics on barrier-free broadcasts (Ladstätter 2013, online). Additionally, private TV stations are not legally obliged and therefore do not provide any subtitles or translations in ASL (ÖAR 2013, 47).

8. The business of those holding political and public office is accessible to disabled constituents

The general rule to eliminate disadvantages in all matters related to the government and/or public offices, and to create basic conditions for comprehensive equality before the law by people with disabilities is based on the Principle of Equality of article 7, paragraph 1 Federal Constitutional Act and was introduced by the Amendment of the Federal Constitutional Act 1997. The Federal Disability Equality Act and a few other specific rules and measures specify how accessibility should be established. However, the regulations are incomplete and there is no standardised nationwide concept aiming at achieving comprehensive accessibility (ÖAR 2013, 24).

The Federal Disability Equality Act applies to federal authorities as well as to the access to goods and services available to the public under federal competence. Article 8 of the Federal Disability Equality Act establishes the duty of reasonable accommodation for individuals in services, the access to goods and services, as well

18

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

as public spaces and infrastructures. Article 6, paragraph 5 defines accessibility as bring suitable for the use by persons with disabilities in the usual manner, without any particular obstacles; places may generally be accessed and used without help from others. According to the Act, federal buildings should be accessible (article 8, paragraph 2) by December 31, 2019 (with restrictions according to adopted step-by-step plans). DPOs criticise the transitional periods of up to thirty years for the creation of barrier-free access as being are far too long (ÖAR 2013, 25; Srb 2013, online).

However, a violation of these rules merely results in the entitlement to compensation for the concerned person but not in the obligation to eliminate the barriers. There are no effective measures or incentives to provide information, services or other provision in accessible formats.

Only single cases are described: E.g.: In 2007, a wheelchair user wanted to attend a public meeting of a local district government in Vienna. However, the meeting was held in a non-accessible room in the first floor of a building. He was offered to be carried upstairs which he refused. When he asked for a change of the meeting room to an accessible place he was told that he should have asked for this at least two days before the meeting. Thus, the wheelchair user felt discriminated against on the grounds of his disability and initiated a conciliation. There it was agreed that in the future all meetings of the district council will take place in accessible places. This agreement in only valid for this single district council it does not apply to the other 22 district councils in Vienna13 (BIZEPS 2007, online). Since 1990 hour-long question sessions (Fragestunde) and topical debate slots (Aktuelle Stunde) of the Viennese Landtag (and municipality council) have been translated in Austrian Sign Language and this is broadcasted live at the website of the city of Vienna.14 The same institution installed in 2002 a hearing loop (Rathauskorrespondenz 2002, online). However, information via alternative communication channels such as Braille, sign language, and the Lorm alphabet are still insufficient in many aspects, especially in rural areas.

The implementation and application of accessibility in the Austrian federal states (Laender) has not been harmonised so far, and is therefore not regulated uniformly across Austria. Some Austrian federal states have imposed anti-discrimination laws to ensure accessibility of public buildings and access to goods and services available to the public under regional competence. Federal states have individually adopted different acts or legal regulations, including building regulations and building technology regulations. Step-by-step plans that concern the buildings of the regional governments (Landtage) have only been adopted in Tyrol and Vienna, but have not been finalised yet. Furthermore, unsolved areas of responsibility form an obstacle to the adaptation of accessibility of public buildings, especially in cases where the Federal Real Estate Company acts as landlord, because it is not bound by the Federal Disability Equality Act. The DPOs have stated that only the barriers described in the step-by-step plans “constitute discrimination in buildings used by the

13 See: http://www.bizeps.or.at/gleichstellung/schlichtungen/index.php?nr=24. 14 Available via http://www.wien.gv.at/gr-ltg-tv/, retrieved October 29, 2013.

19

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

federation. Construction-related barriers which are not listed here are not to be considered discriminatory barriers as defined by the Disability Equality Act, although people with disabilities are indeed discriminated against by these barriers” (ÖAR 2013, 27).

To date, many public buildings where political and public offices are located are not accessible. People with disabilities have to deal with the fact that meetings of municipal and local councils and the provincial parliaments are often not accessible and/or do not fulfil the requirements for accessible buildings (Feuerstein et al 2013, 15). Additionally, political and public offices in the Laender often lack adequate knowledge about the regulations and criteria of accessibility. There is a lack of awareness about discrimination on the grounds of disabilities. It may be assumed that currently political and public offices are not aware of regulations stating that their businesses have to be accessible and that they have to ensure accessible services, premises or offices to people with disabilities.

9. The business of political and public office is accessible to disabled holders of those offices

No explicit rules for this could be found.

If holders of political or public offices are employed and receive payment for their functions, the Austrian regulation on workplaces (Arbeitsstättenverordnung 1998) applies. Especially article 15 indicates that work places have to be accessible. However, accessibility is not defined in the law. On regional and local levels many holders of political or local office (e.g. municipal councillors) are volunteers and do not get a regular salary for their activities. Therefore, regulations on workplaces are not applicable. Problems and challenges may occur when the political and public offices are located in historical buildings where compliance with protection of historical buildings does not allow adaptions for accessibility or if the accessible reconstructions have not been seen as reasonable.

Since 2010, members of the National Council, the Federal Council and the European Parliament who have a disability have been able to receive an extra budget on a flat-rate basis to finance additional costs due to disability. The compensation is linked to the officially confirmed degree of disability, not to individual need. There are no similar regulations for holders of political offices at regional and local levels as well as other public offices, who have a disability.

In the legislation period 2008-2013 all plenary sessions have been translated into Austrian Sign Language, as a deaf person is a member of the National Council.

10. European elections

The Federal Law on the Election of the Members of the European Parliament (Europawahlordnung) corresponds with the Federal Law on the Election of the

20

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Members of the National Council (Nationalratswahlordnung). It imposes regulations on the accessibility of polling stations, on support services during voting for persons with disabilities and offers the same range for different means of voting. In 2010 the Amendment of the Federal Compensation Act introduced an extra budget for Members of the European Parliament (MEP) on a flat-rate basis to finance additional costs due to the disability. In addition, it could be assumed that MEP and their political offices are not aware of regulations that their businesses have to be accessible and that they have to ensure accessible services, premises or offices to people with disabilities. The information above also applies to European elections and Members of the European Parliament.

11. Points of concern

Regarding the accessibility of elections, political parties and the business of political and public office, several points of concern may be mentioned:

There are no explicit legal obligations requiring political parties not to discriminate against people with disabilities in connection with membership, participation in party events, communication and access to information etc. This means that it depends on the political parties’ will and view on disability related issues or provision of (social) accessibility, whether they organise themselves in an inclusive and non-discriminatory way or not.

Comprehensive accessibility (physical, social, communicative, intellectual) is not enshrined in the different levels of electoral legislation or for other public offices. Descriptions of criteria for comprehensive accessibility or guidelines for electoral bodies are rarely or not available. Electoral authorities still consider providing accessibility for people with disabilities to be a side issue. The limited provision for accessible voting stations in election laws may violate article 9 of the UN CRPD.

Proactive and nationwide measures that foster the abilities and possibilities of persons with disabilities to get actively involved in political parties and to engage in public offices are not to be found. The same can be said for nationwide permanent provision of political education programmes for people with disabilities. With regard to the accessibility of elections, see below (point 12) with regard to the Democracy Workshop (Demokratiewebstatt15 or Demokratiewerkstatt), which is an education tool. It was primarily designed for children aged 8 to 15, and information for adult persons with intellectual disabilities can be found on the Demokratiewebstatt children’s website, which is inappropriate. The specific Demokratiewerkstatt for people with disabilities only took place before the General Election for the National Council in 2008 and in 2013. These workshops are not regularly offered.

With regard to physical accessibility, a quite large gap still exists between cities (especially Vienna) and the countryside. Whereas the city of Vienna, for example, provides website information with regard to the General Election for the National

15 Available via http://www.demokratiewebstatt.at/, retrieved September 12, 2013.

21

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Council (September 2013)16 (see below point 12) polling stations and information about the election process in rural areas is not as comprehensive as in Vienna.

Accessibility is not defined in electoral regulations across Austria. In addition, there are no regulations about accessible ballot paper templates, voting booths, hearing loops or voting information in plain language. More specifically, examples are that no electoral law ensures that people with learning disabilities may have assistance from persons of their choice. The postal vote channel is not entirely accessible for people with intellectual disabilities or visually impaired persons, because instructions in plain language and Braille are not available.

Since 2010, people with disabilities have been able to apply to get their voting card for postal voting automatically for each political election. Having this automatically processed distribution of voting cards to people with disabilities is a service, but it also may lead to a risk that expansion of comprehensive accessibility of other voting channels is not driven forward, stagnates or even decreases. In addition, postal voting could violate the principle of secret voting.

People with disabilities do not have adequate access to political information through public television programmes. Broadcasts of political information that are accessible via Austrian Sign Language or subtitles are still too few to ensure comprehensive political information to persons with disabilities. Private TV stations are not legally obliged to provide accessible broadcasts.

At national and EU-level representatives with disabilities receive an extra budget to fund additional costs. However, representatives at regional and local level as well as holders other public offices do not benefit from similar regulations. There is no uniform rule that in general accommodation or the business of political and public offices have to be accessible to people with disabilities or disabled holders of those offices.

12. Good practice

Regarding the accessibility of elections, several points of good practice can be mentioned as well:

In 2008 and also in 2013, the so called Demokratiewebstatt or Demokratiewerkstatt, which was originally designed for children aged 8 to 15, took place in the context of the General Election of the National Council (Nationalratswahl), actively involving and also informing people with intellectual disabilities about political parties in Austria. This is an important way of facilitating decisions to vote for persons with disabilities as the information is provided in plain language.

16 Available via http://www.wien.gv.at/politik/wahlen/nr/2013/, retrieved September 12, 2013.. After the election on September 29, this information is archived and available via http://www.wien.gv.at/rk/msg/2013/09/01003.html, retrieved October 21, 2013.

22

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

The city of Vienna, for example, provides information with regard to the General Election of the National Council (Nationalratswahl) on a website, including a list of accessible poll sites and also special information for persons with disabilities for example regarding voting devices for persons with visual impairments, the so-called Rollstuhl-Wahlzelle (wheelchair-voting booth) and voting cards. Information is also available in plain language (named ‘Kleine Wiener Wahlhilfe’).17

RECHTleicht.at is a quite recent initiative with the aim of delivering political information in an accessible way. Supported by the Federal Ministry for Education, the Arts, and Culture, the website provides information with regard to persons with disabilities, and is also available in Austrian Sign Language.

Diverse NGOs (such as the Lebenshilfe Österreich)18 in the field of disability provide accessible information with regard to elections, but these initiatives are based upon the NGOs’ efforts to empower persons, especially with disabilities to vote, and are not part of official Austrian policies and practices.

In the context of the General Election 2013, several discussions took place (e.g. in Vienna and Graz) where persons with (intellectual) disabilities and politicians talked about the elections and information about the party programmes etc. These events were organised by NGOs (such as Lebenshilfe and Caritas) and were not part of official Austrian policies and practices.

Even though the situation is changing for the better (at least in some areas of Austria), and also, even though Austria, “is one of the states in which persons with mental health problems and persons with intellectual disabilities are allowed to vote and to be elected like all other citizens” (FRA 2010, 18) it has to be mentioned that full and comprehensive implementation of Art 29 of the CRPD is still quite far out of reach (Monitoring Committee 2013c).

17 Available on the website http://www.wien.gv.at/politik/wahlen/nr/2013/behinderung.html, retrieved September 12, 2013. After the Election Day, this information is archived and available via http://www.wien.gv.at/rk/msg/2013/09/01003.html, retrieved October 21, 2013.But most of the information provided under the first link mentioned in this footnote will be available in good time and in a revised form for the next election (election for the European Parliament in May 2014).18 Available via www.lebenshilfe.at, retrieved September 12, 2013.

23

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

References

BIZEPS (2012): Gibt der Aktionsplan für Menschen mit Behinderung Anlass zur Hoffnung. Vienna. http://www.bizeps.or.at/news.php?nr=13360 (01.09.2013).

BIZEPS (2007): Kein Zugang zu Bezirksvertretungssitzung. Vienna. http://www.bizeps.or.at/gleichstellung/schlichtungen/index.php?nr=24 (29.09.2013).

Demokratiewebstatt (2013) Demokratiewebstatt (Democracy Workshop). Vienna. http://www.demokratiewebstatt.at (12.09.2013).

Federal Chancellery – HELP Editorial Staff (2013): Citizenship. https://www.help.gv.at/Portal.Node/hlpd/public/content/136/Seite.1360000.html. (10.09.2013).

Federal Ministry for Education, Arts and Culture/Zentrum polis (2013): Politische Bildung in den Schulen – tabellarische Übersicht. Vienna. June 20, 2013. http://www.politik-lernen.at/pb_lehrplaene (10.09.2013).

Federal Ministry for Education, Arts and Culture (2013): Behinderte Menschen. Vienna. http://www.schule.at/portale/politische-bildung/themen.html http://www.schule.at/portale/politische-bildung/themen/detail/behinderte-menschen.html (10.09.2013).

Federal Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Consumer Protection (2012): Nationaler Aktionsplan Behinderung. Vienna. https://www.bmask.gv.at/cms/site/attachments/1/1/5/CH2081/CMS1343116498970/120725_nap_web.pdf (22.08.2013).

Feuerstein, Bernadette et al (2013): Responses of Austrian Civil Society Representatives with regard to the List of Issues of the UN-Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 19 April 2013. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CRPD/Pages/Session10.aspx (18.09.2013).

FRA (2010): The right to political participation of persons with mental health problems and persons with intellectual disabilities. Vienna. http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/1216-Report-vote-disability_EN.pdf (23.08.2013).

Lebenshilfe (2013): Lebenshilfe: Inklusion in der Wahlzelle. Press release on 28.02.2013.

Ladstätter, Martin (2012): Etappenplan: „Wir machen fernsehen möglich. Wir sind barrierefrei. ORF“. Bizeps. http://www.bizeps.or.at/news.php?nr=13486 (10.09.2013).

24

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Mayrhofer, Michael (2012): Landtagswahlen und Direkte Demokratie. In: Pürgy, Erich (ed.): Das Recht der Länder. Vienna pp 153-212.

Monitoring Committee (2013a): Stellungnahme Entwurf eines Bundesgesetzes, mit dem das Staatsbürgerschaftsgesetz 1985 geändert wird. Vienna. http://www.monitoringausschuss.at/sym/monitoringausschuss/Stellungnahmen (30.9.2013).

Monitoring Committee (2013b): Stellungnahme Entwurf einer Änderung der Staatsbürgerschaftsprüfungs-Verordnung. Vienna. http://www.monitoringausschuss.at/sym/monitoringausschuss/Stellungnahmen (30.9.2013).

Monitoring Committee (2013c): Stellungnahme Verwirklichung barrierefreien Wahlrechts. Vienna. http://www.monitoringausschuss.at/sym/monitoringausschuss/Stellungnahmen (23.08.2013).

ÖAR – Austrian National Council of Persons with Disabilities (2012): NAP Behinderung: Politik der vagen Zugeständnisse und Versprechungen. Vienna. http://www.bizeps.or.at/news.php?nr=13405 (01.09.2013).

ÖAR (2013): Alternative Report on the implementation of the UN Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities in Austria on the occasion of the first State Report Review before the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Vienna. http://www.oear.or.at/ihr-recht/un-behindertenrechtskonvention/zivilgesellschaftsbericht/1-osterreichischer-zivilgesellschaftsbericht/Austria_CRPD_AlternativeReport_final_2608.doc (21.10.2013).

Parlamentsdirektion (ed.)(2011): Hausordnung für die Parlamentsgebäude. Wien. http://www.parlament.gv.at/ZUSD/PDF/Hausordnung_2006-1.Novelle_DIN-A5_GESAMT.pdf (27.09.2013).

Rathauskorrespondenz (2002): 2. Landtagspräsidentin erfreut Induktionsanlage für Hörbehinderte. Vienna. 22.03.2002. http://www.bizeps.or.at/news.php?nr=3035 (29.09.2013).

RECHTleicht.at (2013): Politik verständlich machen. Online. http://rechtleicht.at/ (17.09.2013).

Srb, Manfred (2013): Wien: 2042 barrierefrei? Wiener Etappenplan: “Die Hoffnung stirbt zuletzt” – Ein Kommentar. Bizeps. http://www.bizeps.or.at/news.php?nr=13834 (10.09.2013).

Wegscheider, Angela (2013): Politische Partizipation von Menschen mit Behinderungen. SWS-Rundschau 2/2013. Vienna.

25

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

Legal regulations, retrieved from the website Bundeskanzleramt Rechtsinformation, http://www.ris.bka.gv.at/

Austrian Citizenship Act 1985 (Staatsbürgerschaftsgesetz), Federal Law Gazette No. 311/1985.

Amendment of the Austrian Citizenship Act (Änderung des Staatsbürgerschaftsgesetzes), Federal Law Gazette I No. 136/2013.

Federal Constitutional Act (Bundes-Verfassungsgesetz), Federal Law Gazette No. 1/1930.

Amendement to the Federal Constitutional Act (Bundesverfassungsgesetz, mit dem das Bundes-Verfassungsgesetz geändert wird), Federal Law Gazette I No 87/1997/BGBl. I Nr. 87/1997.

Election Act for the Federal Council (Nationalrats-Wahlordnung), Federal Law Gazette I No 471/1992.

Amendment to the Right to Vote 1997 (Wahlrechtsänderungsgesetz), Federal Law Gazette I No. 28/2007.

Amendment to the Right to Vote 1998, Federal Law Gazette I No. 161/1998.

Amendment to the Right to Vote 2010, Federal Law Gazette I No. 13/2010.

Amendment to the Right to Vote 2011, Federal Law Gazette I No. 43/2011.

Federal Disability Equality Act (Bundesbehindertengleichstellungsgesetz), Federal Law Gazette I No 82/2005.

Federal Law on the Election of the Members of the European Parliament (Europawahlordnung), Federal Law Gazette No. 177/1996.

Federal Compensation Act (Bundesbezügegesetz), Federal Law Gazette I No 64/1977.

Amendment of the Federal Compensation Act (Änderung des Parlamentsmitarbeitergesetzes sowie des Bundesbezügegesetzes), Federal Law Gazette I No 113/2010.

Chamber of Commerce Act (Wirtschaftskammergesetz), Federal Law Gazette I No 103/1998.Chamber of Labour Act (Arbeiterkammergesetz), Federal Law Gazette I No 626/1991, coming into effect 1992.

26

Academic Network of European Disability experts (ANED)

ORF-Act (ORF-Gesetz), Federal Law Gazette I No. 379/1984.

The Constitutional Court of Austria (Verfassungsgerichtshof Österreich) (2013): von Amts wegen eingeleiteten Verfahren zur Prüfung der Verfassungsmäßigkeit des § 10 Abs. 1 Z 7 des Bundesgesetzes über die österreichische Staatsbürgerschaft (Staatsbürgerschaftsgesetz 1985 – StbG 1985). Decision G106/12-7, G17/13-6 from March 1, 2013, becoming effective by July 1, 2014.

Workplace regulation (Arbeitsstättenverordnung), Federal Law Gazette II No. 368/1998.

Ad hoc personal communication for this report

Municipality Alkoven/Gallneukirchen (2013): Personal communication (telephone interview) of Angela Wegscheider with electoral chairmen from the Upper Austrian Municipalities Alkoven (9.8.2012) and Gallneukirchen (7.11.2012).

Land Kärnten (2013): Personal communication (email and telephone interview) of Angela Wegscheider with electoral authority (Stephanie Eder) of Carinthia (10.09.2013).

Land Oberösterreich (2013): Personal communication (email and telephone interview) of Angela Wegscheider with electoral authority (Josef Gruber) of Upper Austria (04.09.2013).

Land Tirol (2013); Personal communication (email and telephone interview) of Angela Wegscheider with electoral authority (Walter Hacksteiner) of Tyrol (11.09.2013).

ORF (2013): Personal communication (email) on accessibility within the ORF programmes (Christine Kaiser, Humanitarian Broadcasting ORF), 03.09.2013.

Österreichische HochschülerInnenschaft (2013): Personal communication (email) of Angela Wegscheider with the Federal Austrian Student Union (Florian Kraushofer) (16.09.2013).

Stadt Wien (2013): Personal communication (email and telephone interview) of Angela Wegscheider with electoral authority (Gregor Nedbal) of Vienna, MA 62 (16.09.2013).

27