CYIL Vol. 7, 2016

VERONIKA BÍLKOVÁ CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ important symbolic, educational and political value and help define and enforce human rights applicable to vulnerable groups. 80 The arguments for a new convention are summed up in the 2009 report of the UN Secretary General. Describing the conclusions of an expert meeting (rather than presenting his own view on the topic), the UN Secretary General stated, in quite a lengthy passage, which is nonetheless worth quoting as a whole: “A convention would clearly define the obligations of Member States with regard to the rights of older persons, and it would strengthen and complement existing international policy documents on ageing and provide redress for the violation of human rights of older persons. A convention would clarify and consolidate existing international norms with respect to the rights of older persons, and it would encourage a more equitable allocation of needed resources for older persons. A convention would clarify the specific obligations of States in order to ensure the full enjoyment of recognized human rights of older persons. It would also empower older persons and provide the framework for national legislation. Moreover, it would provide older persons greater visibility and recognition nationally and internationally as well as the basis for advocacy, public awareness and education on the rights of older persons.” 81 With so many positive aspects to materialize with a new convention, what is it that stands in the way of its adoption (and, indeed, elaboration)? What are the arguments against? Those sceptical about the prospects of new instruments mostly invoke the comprehensive nature of the human rights framework. According to the EU or USA, a new convention is simply not needed, because the existing instruments apply to older persons and address their needs in a sufficient way. This position is well formulate in the EU letter to the chair of the UN Open-End Working Group on Ageing dated 16 June 2015. 82 The EU explains that while the situation of older persons is very high on its agenda and while it is aware of the serious challenges that older persons face, the “EU is skeptical that the gaps are of a normative nature” . 83 It is of the view that “more can be done through the implementation of the existing Human Rights framework”. 84 This is certainly true. Yet, as we saw in the previous section, although the major human rights instruments apply to older persons as to anyone else, they fail to treat these persons as a particularly vulnerable group. Older persons are in the system but remain rather invisible. That also means that the special needs they might have and the special forms of human rights violations 80 DORON, Israel, APTER, Itai, The Debate, supra note 3; DORON, Israel, APTER, Itai, International Rights of Older Persons, supra note 3. See also DORON, Israel, From National to International Elder Law, Journal of International Aging Law and Policy, Vol. 1, 2005, pp. 45-72. 81 UN Doc. A/64/127, supra note 23, par. 61-62. 82 European Union, EU contribution in response to the letters from the chair of the OEWG on Ageing of 6 March and 19 May 2015, 15 June 2015.

83 Ibid. 84 Ibid.

192