J.H. v Australia (35/2016) Views of 31 August 2018
Human Rights Communications
35/2016 concerning the ability to perform jury duty
The author alleged that Australia had violated articles 5, 12 and 21 of the CRPD because he was unable to serve as a juror owing to the unavailability of an Auslan interpreter. The Committee found the author’s claims in respect of article 12 inadmissible, however issued adverse views in relation to articles 5 and 21.