The case is Fiona Given v. Australia. Views of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities dated February 16, 2018. Communication No. 19/2014.
In 2014, the author of the communication was assisted in the preparation of complaints. Subsequently, the complaint was communicated to Australia.
The author suffered from cerebral palsy. During the elections, the author wanted to exercise her right to participate in the secret ballot on an equal basis with other voters. However, due to her limited motor abilities, she could not fill out the ballot, fold it and place it in the ballot box without assistance, which would violate the secrecy of her voting. The author claimed that in order to be able to participate in an independent secret ballot, she had to be given access to an electronic voting system, for example, to a special interface on a computer. The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities found that none of the options available to the author during the 2013 federal elections allowed her to exercise her right to vote as she would like, in particular without having to inform the person accompanying her about her political choice. In the Committee's view, the State party has not fulfilled its obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
As seen from the text of the Considerations, the author suffered from cerebral palsy and, as a result, had poor control of her muscles, had limited motor abilities and could not speak. She moved around in an electric wheelchair, and used an electronic voice-generating device to communicate. During the elections, the author wanted to exercise her right to participate in the secret ballot on an equal basis with other voters. However, due to her limited motor abilities, she could not fill out the ballot, fold it and place it in the ballot box without assistance, which would violate the secrecy of her voting. The author claimed that in order to be able to participate in an independent secret ballot, she had to be given access to an electronic voting system, for example, to a special interface on a computer. She noted that she regularly used adaptive technologies, thanks to which she could use the keyboard and computer screen without assistance. Before the voting day, the author examined the documents of the Election Commission on the available voting options and came to the conclusion that, in accordance with the Election Law, the auxiliary electronic voting system is available only to persons registered as having "visual impairments".
The Committee's assessment of the factual circumstances of the case: the State party's argument that the author had the opportunity to choose a person to assist her in voting has been noted. However, he also noted that none of the options available to the author during the 2013 federal elections would have allowed her to exercise her right to vote in the way she would like, in particular, without having to inform the person accompanying her about her political choice. The Committee drew attention to the fact that gaining access to the electronic voting system would allow the author to participate in an independent secret ballot without disclosing his political choice to anyone and on an equal basis with others (paragraph 8.7 of the Considerations).
The Committee recalled that the electronic voting procedure is widely used for visually impaired people in the State party and that the "iVote" electronic voting procedure has been used during elections in the State of New South Wales since 2011. He noted that the State party had not provided any information that could justify the claim that the use of such an electronic voting procedure would constitute a disproportionate burden, which prevented its use during the 2013 federal elections for the author and for all persons in need of such an adjustment (paragraph 8.9 of the Views).
The Committee's conclusion: The State party has not fulfilled its obligations under article 29, considered separately and in conjunction with articles 4, 5 and 9 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (paragraph 9 of the Views).