7th Meeting, 1st session of the Intergovernmental Working Group on Older Persons (IGWG)

Good afternoon, Excellencies, distinguished participants. I declare open the 7th meeting of the Intergovernmental Working Group on the Human Rights of Older Persons. We will now resume our plenary discussions under agenda item 4, with a dialogue with UN Human Rights Council mechanisms, to be followed by interactive exchange. Earlier today, we engaged in a preliminary discussion on treaty monitoring arrangements drawing on inputs received and reflecting on possible procedural approaches within the context of our mandate. This afternoon, we take a complementary step by broadening our perspective on drawing on the experience of practice of existing UN— United Nations mechanisms and other international organizations. This exchange is intended to provide an opportunity to benefit from their insights on how human rights standards are monitored implemented, and translated into practical impact. Such engagement can help inform our reflections as we move forward, while remaining without prejudice to future discussions on both procedural and substantive aspects of the instrument. To help introduce and frame this segment of our discussion, I am pleased to give the floor to Ms. Polona Malbintenk, Head of the Human Rights Department, Director for Multilateral Cooperation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and European Affairs of Slovenia. Madam, you have the floor.

Thank you very much. At first, I would like to welcome the panellists, the colleagues who will present their work further on, also to the audience in the room and online for taking part in this discussion. Very important, we deem it very important. So, it's my honour to moderate today. As my Argentinian colleague already pointed out, we will try to talk a bit more about how the rights of older persons, aging, and older persons are already being— and their needs, how they are already being addressed through the UN system. I believe that we are all aware of the following numbers. In 2019, 1 billion people were aged 60 years or older. But this number will rise by 1.4 billion in 10 years, by 2030, and to 2.1 billion by 2050. So this historically significant change in the global population requires adaptations in the way our societies are structured across all sectors, from health and social care to transportation, housing, and urban planning. Working to make the world more age-friendly is an essential and urgent part of responding to our changing demographics. Our discussion today offers an opportunity to engage with the mechanisms of the UN Human Rights Council and other UN, United Nations entities, and hear from those working on the human rights of older persons from different perspectives and mandates, and to benefit from their experience and expertise. Our exchange is intended to facilitate the sharing of experiences and practices relating to the promotion and protection of human rights carried out across the UN system, and beyond in response to aging. I would therefore encourage you all to also give your insights, maybe some questions and comments to the panelists today who are bringing a plethora of their expertise to the table. So, the entire system has, over the years, incorporated aspects of aging into the work and contributed contributed significantly to mainstreaming aging and the situation of older persons into the wider work of the organization. In the Human Rights Council, several special procedures mandate holders have taken up aging and older persons within their work, not only the independent expert on the rights of older persons, but also, for instance, the special rapporteurs on the right to health, on extreme poverty, on adequate housing, on violence against women and girls, and on the rights of persons with disabilities. Furthermore, we know that in the UN system there is also work being done, for instance, by the World Health Organization that has been leading the implementation of the UN Decade on Healthy Aging and has issued several reports and promoted work on healthy aging. There has also been important work carried out by others across the systems, and we will also hear today more from the International Labour Organization, the International Telecommunications Union, and the UN High Commissioner on Refugees. So with that in mind, I will now give the floor to my panelists. As our first speaker is Professor Dr. Zvezdan Pirtosek. He is the independent expert on the enjoyment of all human rights by older persons. He is a professor of neurology at the University of Ljubljana and a senior clinical neurologist. He brings more than 4 decades of experience in his work, especially in neurodegenerative diseases, cognitive disorders, and dementia. And his work spans from neurology, neuroethics, and cognitive neuroscience. Integrating the medical, psychological, and social dimensions. So, I think we can say confidently that he has been witnessing the lived experiences of older persons throughout his work. He will present the mandate of the independent expert and how he sees cooperation between our work in this Intergovernmental Working Group and the independent expert. And I'm happy to give you the floor, Zvi Zdan.

Mr. President, Madam Chair, Excellencies and distinguished colleagues, thank you for the opportunity to participate in this dialogue at an important moment for the human rights of older persons. Having only recently assumed the mandate of Independent Expert on the Enjoyment of All Human Rights by Older Persons, I'm particularly grateful for the opportunity to engage with this Working Group as it begins its substantive work. This session invites us to draw upon the experience of Human Rights Council mechanisms and other United Nations bodies, to reflect on lessons learned, and to consider how those experiences may inform the work ahead. Allow me, therefore, to share Several observations emerging from the work of this mandate, present and past, from the broader experience of the United Nations human rights system, and from the voices of older persons themselves. These observations are offered in a spirit of complementarity and respect for the intergovernmental nature of this process. The working group. Has its own distinct mandate. States have been entrusted with the responsibility of elaborating and submitting to the Human Rights Council a draft internationally legally binding instrument aimed at promoting, protecting, and ensuring the full enjoyment of human rights by older persons. The role of An independent mandate is different. My responsibility is to listen to different experiences, assess evidence, provide impartial human rights analysis, identify progress where progress is being made, and also identify gaps, inconsistencies, and failures where they persist. And importantly, The Independent Expert is mandated to report annually to the Council and to engage United Nations Member States in constructive discourse in order to advance the full enjoyment of all human rights by older persons, in coordination with the broader human rights ecosystem. My predecessors in this role have, through their work, already provided many, many insights and recommendations that are valuable to the work of IGWG. The mandate has accumulated substantial knowledge on ageism and age discrimination, autonomy, legal capacity, social protection, violence and abuse, care and support, health, housing, participation, situations of risk, and many other areas. In that spirit, let me highlight 5 lessons that I believe are particularly relevant. First, the protection gap is real, and it is ultimately a gap between recognition and enjoyment. One of the clearest lessons emerging from years of engagement across countries and regions is that the central question is not merely whether rights are recognized in constitutions, legislation or policy frameworks. The question is whether an older person can actually exercise those rights in everyday life. Can an older person decide where and with whom to live? Can she obtain healthcare without being dismissed because of assumptions associated with age? Can he continue working if he wishes? Participate in public affairs, access justice, receive information in accessible forms, and live free from violence, abuse, and neglect. Can older persons continue to exercise legal capacity and autonomy when they require support? The distance between formal recognition and lived realities remains one of the most persistent findings of the mandate's work. It is reflected in reports concerning ageism and age discrimination, legal capacity and informed consent, violence and abuse, housing, social protection, situations of risk, climate-related disasters, and armed conflicts. Second, older persons are entitled to all human rights, yet those rights are frequently fragmented in practice. So another recurring lesson is that older persons do not possess a separate or reduced category of rights. They are entitled to the full range of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, which must be enjoyed holistically throughout the course of one's life. Yet too often, the realization of human rights becomes fragmented across different sectors and services. Issues are being discussed as matters of healthcare, social protection, housing, family responsibility, disability or long-term care, without being fully recognized as human rights questions. The experience of United Nations mechanisms increasingly points in a different direction. Treaty bodies, special procedures, the Universal Periodic Review, Regional human rights systems and UN agencies have gradually developed a substantial body of guidance addressing equality and non-discrimination, autonomy, participation, care and support, social protection, access to justice, protection from violence, and inclusion in situations of risk. One lesson from this accumulated experience is that responses to aging are most effective when they are framed not simply as social policy questions, but as matters of human rights. Third, autonomy, participation and legal capacity are central. The mandate's thematic work has repeatedly demonstrated that older persons are often viewed primarily through the lens of vulnerability or needs for care and support. Those realities should not be ignored. But neither should they obscure agency. Older persons consistently emphasize the importance of choice, self-determination, and meaningful participation in decisions affecting their lives. Recent work on legal capacity and informed consent reinforces the importance of ensuring that support never, never becomes a justification for denying a person's will, preferences, or legal agency. If there is one lesson that emerges across almost every thematic area, it is that older persons should be recognized not as passive recipients of care, charity, or protection, but as full rights holders. Fourth, Diversity and intersectionality must remain at the centre. There is no single experience of older age. Older persons differ in health, income, gender, disability, ethnicity, migration status, family circumstances, place of residence, and many other characteristics. Some experience multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination, and all old persons experience also cumulative forms of disabilities. Others remain largely invisible in data, policymaking, and public debate. Country visits and thematic reports have repeatedly drawn attention to older women, Older persons with disabilities, people living in institutions, older persons in rural areas, indigenous communities, older persons deprived of liberty, those living with dementia, and those affected by conflict, displacement, disasters, and humanitarian emergencies. The work of this working group, like the work of the mandate of the independent expert, must therefore be grounded in diversity, intersectionality, and the direct participation of older persons. As it was heard many times these days, nothing about older persons should be developed without older persons. Participation must go beyond physical presence. It requires accessibility, information, time, support, and genuine opportunities to influence outcomes. Fifth, the United Nations system offers a substantial body of experience that can inform this process. The mandate, present and past, has accumulated knowledge through country visits, communications, consultations and thematic work. This experience provides evidence from lived realities. It helps reveal how legal concepts operate in practice and whether proposed solutions respond to the actual barriers faced by older persons. The mandate has also accumulated extensive thematic and normative analyses concerning ageism, discrimination, autonomy, legal capacity, social protection, care and support, health, housing, participation, violence, abuse and situations of risk. This body of work can help identify where existing international law already provides guidance, where implementation remains weak and where gaps in protection continue to persist. Equally important, the future instrument can benefit from the experience of treaty bodies, other UN special procedures, the Universal Periodic Review regional human rights systems, UN agencies, and the considerable work undertaken over many years by the Open-Ended Working Group on Ageing. Madam Chair, I see the relationship between the mandate and the Intergovernmental Working Group not as one of direction, but of complementarity. States negotiate. Older persons and civil society brings lived experience and legitimate expectations. United Nations bodies and mechanisms contribute specialized expertise. And the Independent Expert can help connect evidence, human rights standards and realities on the ground. The mandate can help identify where existing international law provides clear protection, where interpretation remains inconsistent, and where normative gaps continue to leave older persons insufficiently protected. We have entered a new phase. For many years, the international community examined whether stronger international protection was necessary. The Human Rights Council has now entrusted this Working Group with the task of elaborating a legally binding instrument. The question before us is no longer whether older persons have human rights. They clearly do. The question is twofold: How do we ensure that those that those rights remain visible, enforceable, and effective throughout the whole course of life? And what must the legally binding instrument provide for in terms of substantive rights, monitoring, and reporting in order to deliver on the vital mandate of this working group? In this regard. I would therefore encourage that the cumulative experience of the independent expert mandate be actively and systematically integrated into the work of the Intergovernmental Working Group, including through the contributions of both the present and previous mandate holders. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Dr. Piotrowszek, for this overview of your mandate's work that can support the substantial elaboration of the LBI. And I would now turn to Dr. Maurice Tindbal-Bintz, who is currently Special Rapporteur on the extrajudicial, summary, and/or arbitrary execution. He is a specialist in forensic medicine. Applied to human rights and humanitarian action. He co-founded the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team and later established and directed the Forensic Unit of the International Committee of the Red Cross. He has worked in over 80 countries and contributed to the development of key international forensic standards, including the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death. He holds academic appointments at several universities across the globe. And his forthcoming thematic report for the General Assembly examines the protections of the right to life of older persons, whose unlawful deaths too often go unreported and uninvestigated, and speaks directly to our process, including a recommendation that the future instrument contain an article on the right to life. Dr. Tindall-Bintz, we look forward to your intervention on how how we can better include or how we can best include the right to life also in the LBI.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and also Mr. Rapporteur, for the kind words and for the invitation to speak today. It is my honor. Thank you, thank you very much. As the population of older people around the world grows, so too the gaps in the realization of their right to life. States too often fail to exercise due diligence in enacting protective measures, allocate adequate resources, or establish accountability mechanisms for investigating and preventing unlawful deaths of older persons. The direct consequence is that, the world over, unlawful deaths of older persons are underreported, underinvestigated, and under-researched. In addition, States' failures to reliably investigate these unlawful deaths may themselves constitute violations of the right to life. My forthcoming report to the UN General Assembly in October is titled Documenting, Investigating, and Preventing Arbitrary deprivation of life of older persons. It examines these issues and the measures required to respect, protect and fulfill the right to life of older persons. Based on extensive research, submissions from States, civil society, academia and experts, including the former and current Independent Experts on the Enjoyment of Human Rights of Older Persons, Claudia Mahler and her son present here today, and a review of comparative legal forensic standards, I find that 2 structural factors— ageism and other forms of discrimination, number one, and invisibilization, number two, of older persons— serve to obscure abuse, neglect, and other causes of potentially unlawful death. Thank you. I also identify key contexts in which older persons face heightened risks. Finally, my report offers practical recommendations and measures to strengthen investigative and medico-legal processes, data collection, institutional oversight, and preventive frameworks. There are robust general protections for the right to life in international law, which require States to refrain from arbitrarily depriving persons of life. To take positive measures to exercise due diligence and safeguard from all reasonably foreseeable threats, to investigate and prosecute all potentially unlawful deaths, and provide an effective remedy where violations have occurred. These protections must be applied without distinction, including to older persons. Yet, in reality, Older persons experience substantial barriers in realizing and fulfilling their rights. Unlawful deaths of older persons are an underreported and underrecognized worldwide tragedy obscured by age-based misconceptions and generalizations about health and natural causes, which, with rare exceptions, rule out suspicions of homicides, as the true manner of death when the victim is an older person. Harmful age-based stereotypes depicting older persons as inevitably frail, sick, and near death can normalize and depersonalize their deaths, causing unnatural or preventable deaths to be falsely understood as merely the expected incidence of aging. Discrimination can also be deeply entrenched in administrative policy and practices. This can be compounded by social exclusion and in contexts where older persons is dependent on others by deference to their caretakers. These risks may intensify for older individuals who may experience the accumulated effects of lifelong discrimination and inequality across multiple dimensions of identity. which you mentioned before. For example, a recent review of forensic literature worldwide found that up to 70% of victims of documented cases of unlawful death of older persons were women, and that these killings were often the fatal result of gender-based violence combined with abuse and neglect. Similarly, Older persons with disabilities, racial and ethnic minorities, Indigenous older persons, and older migrants each experience ageism, face risk of violence and neglect layered upon other systemic inequalities. Even when the death of an older person is identified as potentially unlawful, States frequently fail to investigate in line with the Minnesota Protocol. Which serves as a gold standard for suspicious death investigations today. The threshold judgment triggering the duty to investigate is routinely missed for older persons, leaving suspicious death not merely insufficiently investigated, but not investigated at all. When investigations are initiated, medico-legal offices may not have the capacity or expertise to respond to the specific challenges inherent in cases of suspicious death of older persons. These include identifying and documenting evidence of neglect and abuse, past and present, that may have culminated in death attributed otherwise to natural causes. For example, sepsis can cause a natural death, but it may be the result of cumulative abuse and neglect. Unless properly investigated, such death can be misclassified as natural, as it is often the case. In addition to the broader challenges of upholding the right to life, I found violations of older persons' rights especially acute in 4 thematic contexts. First, deprivation of liberty, including prisons, care facilities, immigration detention, where oversight mechanisms routinely fail to detect abuse, neglect, and risks to death. Second, in healthcare settings where ageist assumptions, denial or inadequate medication, isolation and abandonment increase mortality risks. Third, in humanitarian emergencies and climate disasters, as we've seen in the last weeks in Europe, for example, where older persons die at disproportionate rates as response to frameworks that fail to account for age-related needs. And in armed conflict, where older persons are victims of targeted killings and left out of civilian protection efforts too often. Each of these contexts merits further examination and tailored responses to ensure adequate protections. Madam Chair, this open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group on the Human Rights of Older Persons is a welcome initiative and a unique opportunity for improving the protection of the right to life of older persons globally. In my report, I therefore recommend that the future binding instrument include one or more articles on the right to life with dignity of older persons, including the obligation to prevent and investigate potentially unlawful deaths of older persons across all settings. This would be vital for closing the normative gap in international law and ensuring comprehensive and consistent protections of the right to life with dignity of older persons globally. The report also calls, among other practical recommendations, on the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to develop, with the assistance of my mandate and of the Independent Expert on Human Rights of Older Persons, a specialized addendum to the Minnesota Protocol, a complementary guidance which would help ensure that unnatural deaths of older persons are reliably recognized, investigated, and prevented everywhere. Madam Chair, my mandate stands ready to support the group, including in my capacity as a forensic doctor, through technical assistance, expert consultation, or in any other form. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Dr. Tin Balbint, for your, on some parts, very chilling presentation, I must say, and also for the recommendations and possibilities that we can include in our further work. So, thank you very much. But from the special procedures of the Human Rights Council, we are now turning to the world of work. And I am pleased to introduce Mr. Horacio Guido, Chief of the Application of Standards Branch in the International Labor Organization's International Labor Standards Department. A lawyer by training, he joined the ILO in 1991 and has served as all of the ILO supervisory bodies with particular expertise in freedom of association and collective bargaining. He will present the international labour standards that protect older workers, the ILO supervisory system that ensures their implementation, and how together they help ensure that longer lives are accompanied by enduring dignity, economic security, and the full enjoyment of human rights also in the world of work. So, Mr. Guido, please.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Distinguished Madam Chair, distinguished panel members, distinguished delegates and participants, it is an honour to address this Intergovernmental Working Group in my capacity as an official of the International Labour Office. We are grateful for this invitation to collaborate in the conversation of an extremely important issue. The elaboration of a legally binding instrument on human rights of older persons. The ILO firmly believes that human rights and labour rights are indivisible, and we welcome the opportunity to share our experiences to inform your important work. It is important to recall that since 1919, the ILO has adopted international labour standards covering a broad range of issues related to the world of work. If international protection of the rights of older persons is to be strengthened, international labour standards provide a robust, rights-based foundation that translates the abstract concept of human dignity into concrete, enforceable legal entitlements, especially for older people. Undoubtedly, any new international instrument adopted can complement existing treaties. Allow me to highlight a few key ILO instruments that may be considered in the course of these deliberations and taken into account as complementary to any new instrument that might be adopted. First of all, the Social Security Minimum Standards Convention, Number 102, and the Invalidity, Old Age and Survivors' Benefits Convention from 1967, Convention 128, are foundational. They establish the fundamental right to income security in old age, ensuring that older persons can maintain a decent standard of living free from the threat of poverty. Please note that these legal instruments, which set out basic principles and become legally binding upon ratification, have received the following number of ratifications: Convention 102 has been ratified by 68 Member States, and Convention 128 has been ratified by only 17 Member States. The ILO has 187 member states, and as you can see, these conventions have not yet achieved a high level of ratification. Furthermore, the Older Workers Recommendation No. 162 specifically addresses the unique vulnerabilities individuals face in the labour market as they age. It promotes equality of opportunity and treatment. Protecting older workers against age-based discrimination, while also providing measures for a dignified, flexible transition to retirement. It is important to recall also that recommendations serve as non-binding guidelines and in many cases supplement the conventions. They can also be autonomous. We must also recognize that the rights of older persons are deeply intertwined with the care economy. The Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention No. 156 and the Domestic Workers Convention No. 189 establish essential protections for caregivers. These standards remind us that ensuring the human rights of older persons who require care is inextricably linked to protecting the labor rights of those who provide that care. Finally, it is essential to take into account the Social Protection Floors Recommendation No. 202, the more modern instrument in this regard, that embodies a modern international consensus. It calls for basic income security and essential healthcare for all throughout the life cycle. It underscores that living with dignity in older age is a universal human right, irrespective, irrespective of one's past participation in the formal labor market. To prevent these rights from remaining merely aspirational, the ILO relies on a robust supervisory system. The system is based on 2 complementary mechanisms: a regular system for monitoring compliance and special procedures for examining representations and complaints. At the core of the regular system is the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations. Governments are required to submit reports on how they give effect in law and in practice to the conventions they have ratified. Established in 1926, this Committee of Experts is composed of 20 independent legal experts from diverse geographic and legal backgrounds. The Committee of Experts provides an impartial technical evaluation of how Member States apply ILO standards in law and in practice. Throughout its comments, the Committee of Experts engages in a continuous and constructive dialogue with Governments. Experience has shown that reporting should be efficient and should not place an undue burden on labour administrations. The ILO is continuously improving its reporting procedures and is currently modernizing its reporting system to enable Governments to report on the implementation of ratified Conventions through a dedicated online application. The Conference Committee on the Application of Standards, also established in 1926, forms part of the regular supervisory system. This tripartite body composed of governments, employers, and workers' representatives holds its annual sitting in Geneva in the framework of the International Labour Conference. Both bodies were designed to work in close complementarity. The Committee of Experts provides a technical, impartial, and independent analysis on how the ratified conventions are applied in law and practice by member states, and the Committee— and the CAS, the Commission of Application of Standards, carries forward the dialogue with governments within its tripartite setting. Over time, the double examination became a defining feature of the regular supervisory system. This tripartite approach ensures a comprehensive view of the reality on the ground. This Working Group may wish to consider that the effective implementation of a new human rights instrument would require a monitoring monitoring mechanism which, as is the case of the ILO, is designed to accompany and guide Member States in aligning their national laws and practice with the international commitments. I would reiterate that such a mechanism should be streamlined, accessible and user-friendly, and should not discourage States from ratifying the new instrument. It is also interesting for this Working Group to recall that beyond regular supervision, the ILO conducts comprehensive general surveys examining the law and practice of all Member States on specific subjects, regardless of whether they have ratified the relevant conventions. You might wish to look at the more recent general surveys on the subject, that are highly relevant to this Working Group: the 2019 General Survey on Universal Social Protection and the 2023 General Survey on Achieving Gender Equality at Work. Concluding, distinguished delegates, as you consider the architecture of a new legally binding instrument, the ILO's normative and supervisory experience offers a practical blueprint We have learned that protecting older persons requires recognizing them as active rights holders embedded in the socioeconomic fabric as workers, as retirees, and as integral members of our communities. It also requires a monitoring mechanism anchored in dialogue, capable of turning legal texts into lived realities. The principles embedded in our Conventions, the technical rigour of the Committee of Experts and the systemic insights from our General Surveys are at your full disposal. The ILO stands ready to continue supporting Member States in this noble endeavour, ensuring that longer lives are accompanied by enduring dignity, economic security and the full enjoyment of human rights. Thank you, Chair. I look forward

Mr. Guido, thank you very much for the presentation. You have shown how much ILO is already supporting states and, of course, older persons as well through your work and also through your reporting systems. You also show a possibility how we can think creatively also in the field of human rights or in elaboration of our LBI. I will now turn our discussion to the digital sphere and crucially important work of the ITU to make information and communication technologies accessible, inclusive, and beneficial for older persons. As the world experiences 2 transformative megatrends, rapid digital transformation accelerated by AI and global population aging, digital inclusion has become essential for the full enjoyment of human rights by older persons. as well as their meaningful participation in the digital age. Our speaker, Ms. Roxana Vidmerilescu, heads the Digital Inclusion Service at the ITU's Development Bureau, where she has spent over 28 years advancing digital inclusion and advising ITU members on policies that enable everyone's participation in the digital society, regardless of their personal circumstance, be it either age, gender, ability, location, or any other. So, uh, Ms. Vildemar Ilescu, the floor is yours.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, colleagues. It is a pleasure to contribute to this important dialogue on behalf of the ITU. I'm working in the development sector, and I'm very passionate about digital inclusion And I concentrate my work in people's center, and I believe that whatever is said today, it's for all of us. So we are witnessing the convergence of the 2 profound global megatrends: the rapid digital transformation accelerated by artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies, and the unprecedented population aging. But together, these trends are reshaping how people live, how people communicate, access services, participate in society, and last but not least, exercise their human rights. Today, many human rights, including those linked to access to healthcare, education, employment, public services, justice, civil participation have an increasingly important digital dimension. And as society becomes digital by default, digital inclusion is no longer simply a technology issue. It has become a prerequisite for equal enjoyment of human rights by everyone, regardless of age, gender, ability, or geographical location. I have to say that digital technologies, yes, indeed, offer unprecedented opportunities to improve healthcare, lifelong learning, employment, financial inclusion, social participation, and independent living of older persons and of all of us. However, these opportunities can only be realized if digital technologies are accessible and inclusive by design. Otherwise, digital transformation risks creating new forms of exclusion and discrimination, particularly for older persons experiencing changes in vision, hearing, mobility, dexterity, or cognition. ICT products and services— I particularly want to refer to digital public services applications and AI systems— should be therefore developed in accordance with what we call internationally recognized digital accessibility standards, accessibility requirements, and universal design principles, ensuring that everyone can access and use digital technology independently, safely, and with dignity. Accessibility features such as captioning, speech recognition, screen readers, voice interaction, and accessible authentication are not merely technical functionality. They are essential enablers of autonomy, participation, and effective exercise of human rights. And I want to pause a little bit here just to ensure that we are all speaking the same language. From the ITU perspective, the digital inclusion consists in 3 main building blocks, to not be confused, the 3 A's, what we call. First is access, but access is connectivity, is broadband. We cannot put people's fingers in a plug and say, I'm connected. Then it's affordability. And affordability means that people have the, let's say, financial means to pay both internet access and the device that they need to use. And the third one is accessibility. And please, let's try to not confuse or use accessibility thinking to affordability or to access. Because accessibility is the whole, let's say, landscape of universal design of digital technology. Digital accessibility or ICT accessibility encompasses everything that we are doing in technological policies and strategies to ensure that everyone can use it, everything that we have in our device, all the standards that make this to be a smart device, so to have embedded accessibility features from the design, and we are all using it. Even if we don't know that these are accessible features, they are. Everybody is using text messages. Even if we are not deaf or have problems hearing or visual disabilities, we are using, let's say, voice messages. Text-to-speech, speak-to-text, we are all using it based on our context of use. These are accessibility features. So let's please call for a universal design of technology with accessibility. And finally is digital skills and even more appropriation. And this should be tailored for every target group in this life, because we cannot teach in the same way young people in using technology, or person with disability, or illiterate person even, or older person. So, recognizing these challenges, the International Telecommunication Union, and particularly the Development Bureau, supports member states through technical assistance, policy advice, capacity development, and I have the pleasure to say that we have made available nearly 100 practical tools and resources, all available free in our website. So, please take a look and share and use it. Among them are the report Living in the Digital World: From Vulnerable to Valuable, the online training course ICT for Better Aging and Livelihood in the Digital Landscape, and launched just last week in the AI for Good Global Summit with our partners Ernst Young and KAIST University in Korea, the new guidelines on AI for older persons. Together, these resources actually build digital accessibility and inclusive societies where older persons can participate fully, safely, confidently, and independently. Ladies and gentlemen, achieving this vision requires coordinated action by all of us, by all stakeholders. Governments should integrate digital inclusion and digital accessibility into their legislation, regulatory frameworks, national ageing strategies, digital transformation policies, and public services. The ICT industry should embed internationally recognised accessibility standards, accessibility requirements, and universal design principles through the technology lifecycle, including AI systems. Organizations of older persons should be actively involved in designing, testing, and evaluating digital technology and digital solutions which are developed for them. Finally, the United Nations system and development partners should continue supporting countries in building inclusive digital ecosystems so that no older person is left behind. At ITU, we believe that meaningful connectivity goes far beyond internet access. As said, it means ensuring that everyone can access and afford internet services and digital devices, that technologies are digitally accessible, safe, and inclusive by design, and that every person has the skills and opportunities to use them confidently and benefit from them through their lives. As member states shape this international international legally binding instrument. We call for the systemic integration of digital inclusion and digital accessibility as cross-cutting enablers for the realization of the human rights of all people, ensuring that no one, including older persons, is left behind in the digital transformation. The choices we make today will determine whether digital transformation becomes a force for inclusion, empowerment, and equal opportunities, or one of exclusion and inequality. Therefore, ITU stands ready to contribute through substantive content, expertise, and experience to support the development of the text, implementation, and monitoring of the treaty from the digital perspective. Distinguished delegates, let's recognize that aging is a privilege of the human journey, and aging in the digital age is a privilege and should also be a gateway to opportunities. Therefore, we should ensure that every older person can access, use, and benefit from digital technologies, because in today's world meaningful participation, independent living, and the full enjoyment of human rights increasingly depend on digital inclusion and digital accessibility. Let me conclude with one simple but fundamental message. In the 21st century, protecting the human rights of people, including older persons, also means protecting their digital rights. Let us work together to ensure that people of all ages can participate, contribute, and thrive in the digital world equally, safely, and with dignity, and that older persons are fully empowered to enjoy their human rights and seize the opportunities of the digital age. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Vidmeri-Lescu, for highlighting the work of ITU and also for highlighting why accessible information and communication technologies are essential to autonomy, to independent living and participation. And of course, especially thank you for very concrete recommendations and ideas how not only the work on the LBI, but in general through governments, through regulators, also through businesses, can lead to a more inclusive world also in the digital age. Thank you. And now we are turning to the last representative from the international organizations. Our next speaker brings the perspective of older persons in situations of displacement. And I am pleased to welcome Ms. Tomoko Ishihara. Protection Officer at the Division of International Protection and Solutions, and in UN High Commissioner for Refugees' Office. She has over 14 years of experience in humanitarian and human rights organizations, and her field expertise spans challenging contexts, including Kenya, Syria, Greece, and Ukraine, where she worked directly with affected persons to strengthen participation and inclusive protection systems. Her intervention will focus on older persons being forcibly displaced and stateless persons as rights holders, community leaders, and contributors to resilience, not only persons with specific needs. So, Ms. Ishihara, the world is yours.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair and distinguished panelists and Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. President. Delegates, imagine fleeing your home after a lifetime of work, family responsibilities, and community leadership, separated from family, without documentation or pension access, with limited mobility or chronic health needs, and with little information on where to seek protection and assistance. For many older forcibly displaced and stateless persons, This is the reality of displacement, and this is the reality that confronts us. Older refugees make up approximately 5% of all forcibly displaced and stateless persons and remain one of the most at-risk populations. And protecting the rights of older persons is not a marginal concern, it is a core protection concern. At the same time, older persons must not be seen only through a lens of vulnerability or dependency. They're resourceful persons engaged in work, family, and community life, often looking after others. Their voices, opinions, and leadership are pivotal in shaping social cultural norms and sustaining more equitable and health— healthy attitudes and behaviors. Older persons' leadership is particularly needed in times of crisis. Families and communities often rely on elders for guidance, mediation, continuity, care, and the transmission of knowledge, culture, and values. If we are not deliberate about ensuring their presence, health, inclusion, and participation, we risk missing voices that are essential to community resilience and recovery. UNHCR also recognizes that we are still learning and our practice is not perfect, and we need to continue improving with states, partners, civil society, and older persons themselves to better identify and listen to and support older persons. And despite their contributions. Older persons in displacement face specific human rights challenges, and UNHCR identifies 3 recurrent risks: lack of social integration, negative social selection, and chronic dependency. And these risks arise when conflict and flight erode family and community support networks, when camps or collective centers empty over time, leaving behind those facing their greatest barriers, and when older persons cannot regularize their status, obtain documentation, access pensions, social protection, healthcare, and care services. In practice, these challenges are often compounded by barriers to registration, documentation, information, cash assistance, assistive devices, rehabilitation, mental health and psychosocial support, safer shelter, accessible transport, and meaningful participation. And UNHCR's response is grounded in its mandate to provide international protection and pursue solutions, as well as in international human rights law. Human rights instruments affirm equality, dignity, autonomy, participation, access to justice, health, social protection, and adequate standard of living. And these standards are further articulated in the United Nations Principles for Older Persons, which set out principles of independence, participation, care, self-fulfillment, and dignity. And UNHCR's policy on older refugees translates this normative grounding into protection and solutions work. It affirms that older refugees and other older forcibly displaced and stateless people should live in dignity and security, contribute actively to their families and communities for as long as possible, and receive care and support when they become physically or mentally frail. UNHCR's Age, Gender and Diversity policy complements this by requiring age, gender and diversity considerations to be systematically integrated across protection, assistance and solutions, with meaningful participation and accountability to affected people at the center. UNHCR applies age, gender and diversity inclusive approach recognizing that older persons are not a homogeneous group. Their needs, risks, capacities, and coping mechanisms vary significantly and are shaped by intersecting factors such as gender, disability, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, and gender identity. These intersections can compound exclusion, discrimination, and protection risks in displacement, which is why disaggregated data and analysis are essential to ensure that responses identify and reach older persons facing multiple intersecting forms of marginalization. In practice, this means pursuing 2 complementary approaches that reinforce one another. First, mainstreaming and inclusion of older persons across protection assistance and solutions can help ensure that older persons are identified early, counted in disaggregated data, and able to access information, feedback mechanisms, assistance, and national systems on equal basis with others. And second, where older persons face additional barriers or heightened risks, targeted support can complement mainstream services and help safeguard dignity, autonomy, and well-being. And this may include case management, cash and material assistance, home-based rehabilitation, psychosocial support, assistive devices, community-based care, and referrals to specialized services. UNHCR's operational experience illustrates how these approaches can work well in different contexts. At the global level, it shows the importance of combining targeted support with broader inclusion efforts. In 2024, targeted interventions for older persons were part of UNHCR's strategy in at least 40 countries. And according to reporting from 15 operations that disaggregated information on targeted activities for older persons, UNHCR facilitated access to dedicated services for more than 52,000 older persons including case management, psychosocial support, rehabilitation, shelter assistance, and cash assistance. In Ukraine and neighboring countries, return and protection monitoring shows how evidence from affected communities can strengthen advocacy. By better understanding why vulnerable households return, UNHCR supported advocacy for stronger social services and more dignified returns for older persons, persons with disabilities, and those with chronic illnesses. In Costa Rica, cooperation with national institutions illustrates the value of connecting refugees to existing social protection systems, including pensions, disability benefits, and other essential services. In Syria, the Inclusive Care Program demonstrates how targeted community-based support can promote dignity. Access to services, social inclusion, and psychosocial well-being. In 2024, UNHCR reached over 7,000 older persons through this program, while community centers, older persons clubs, and home-based rehabilitation help sustain inclusion and care. In Ethiopia, support to associations of persons with disabilities and older persons through leadership training and income-generating activities illustrates the importance of recognizing older persons not only as recipients of assistance, but also as community actors and contributors. These examples show that older persons are rights holders, caregivers, leaders, workers, cultural transmitters, and agents of change. When their experience and leadership are recognized, humanitarian response becomes more inclusive, accountable, and effective. Despite progress, older persons in displacement remain too often underidentified, underconsulted, and underprioritized. We need stronger age-disaggregated data and analysis, early identification and referrals, accessible information and feedback mechanisms, access to documentation, inclusion in national systems, meaningful participation in community leadership and decision-making, and support for livelihood skills and intergenerational knowledge sharing. A legally binding text could help clarify obligations, strengthen accountability, and support more consistent implementation across national systems and humanitarian responses. For UNHCR, such an instrument would complement existing human rights standards and reinforce the commitments already embedded in UNHCR's HCR gender and diversity policy, and policy on older refugees. It will provide a stronger basis for advocacy, resource allocation, data collection, and inclusive implementation in displacement and statelessness contexts. Finally, UNHCR stands ready to work with states, UN systems, civil society, and older persons themselves to ensure that they are protected included and able to exercise their rights on equal basis with others. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Ms. Ishihara, for bringing the situation of older displaced and stateless persons so clearly before us, as well as for showing how the High Commissioner for Refugees is already doing a lot on the ground helping older people who face additional vulnerabilities in times of crisis. Thank you very much. As our last speaker, I am pleased to introduce Dr. Rossy Perea, a representative of older persons. Dr. Perea is a geriatrician from the Dominican Republic, President of the International Longevity Center Dominican Republic, Vice President of the International Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse and author of the Code of Rights of Older Dominicans. Formerly Director General of Services for the Elderly at the Ministry of Health, she serves on the Steering Committee of the Global Alliance for the Rights of Older People. She will address us and she will present her views on how the UN mechanisms can support our work as well as older persons in general. Dr. Pereira, the word is yours.

Thank you. Madam Chair, thanks for the opportunity to contribute to this discussion. Ladies and gentlemen, dignitaries, and representative of all different organizations. Today, I'm not speaking as a geriatrician, but as an older advocate for the rights of older persons, someone who has engaged with the independent experts on the rights of older persons, WHO, and other UN bodies over time. My perspective is grounded less in the technical design of monitoring systems and more in advocacy, lived experience, and concern for how human rights are actually experienced by older persons in everyday life. From my experience as an older advocate, engagement with existing UN and human rights mechanisms has been important. But older persons often remain insufficiently visible within those mechanisms. Their rights may be assumed to be covered in general terms, yet in practice, the specific realities of older age are too often overlooked or not addressed explicitly enough to ensure sustained attention, accountability, or effective remedy. In practice, this means that many violations affecting older persons continue to be overlooked or minimized. Ageism is still widespread. Paternalistic attitudes still undermine autonomy and decision-making. Elder abuse and neglect remain underreported and insufficiently addressed. Many older persons face isolation. Exclusion from services, limited access to justice, and barriers in health and long-term care systems. These are not marginal concerns; they are core human rights concerns. A second important lesson is that monitoring must be grounded in lived reality. It is not enough to rely only on formal state reporting or broad legal guarantees. Monitoring must ask what older persons are actually experiencing in their daily lives, in their homes, in institutions, in care settings, in health systems, and in their communities. As someone with knowledge of aging and elder abuse, I would particularly stress that many violations remain hidden. Abuse, neglect, coercion, and loss of dignity are often not visible in official accounts. They may be normalized, unreported, or dismissed. If monitoring doesn't reach these realities, then it risks failing those who most need protection. Another key lesson is that implementation and follow-up are stronger when older persons themselves are meaningfully included. Without their participation, monitoring remains incomplete. Older persons and their representative organizations can identify barriers that might otherwise go unrecognized. They can also help shape practical, realistic solutions Nothing about older persons should be discussed without older persons, including those facing multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination. This participation must be broad and inclusive. It should include older women, older persons with disabilities, those living in poverty, those in institutional care, and others who face multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination. Their experiences are essential to understanding where protection succeeds and where it fails. The work of the Working Group can benefit from the experience of existing mechanisms by ensuring that a future Convention not only affirms the rights of all persons, but also helps ensure that those rights are monitored implemented, and made real in practice. It should help make violations visible, strengthen accountability, and ensure that older persons themselves are part of implementation and follow-up. These lessons are highly relevant to the discussion of a future Convention. The value of a Convention should not be only symbolic. It should be practical. It should make the rights of older persons explicit and visible. It could strengthen understanding of age discrimination and ageism as human rights issues. It could help ensure better monitoring, more consistent implementation, and stronger accountability. And it could create a clearer framework for participation by older persons themselves. Most importantly, it could help close the gap between rights on paper and rights in practice. The experience of existing mechanisms shows both their virtues and their limitations. We should build on what has been learned while also recognizing what is still missing. This working group has an important opportunity to help create a stronger framework, one that ensures older persons are fully seen, fully heard, and fully protected as holders of human rights. Thank you.

Thank you, Dr. Pereira, for your recommendations and your presentation. And now I return the word back to Mr. Rosales, a representative of the Chair, to guide the discussion with the delegations and stakeholders.

Thank you, Madam Moderator, and thank you to all panelists for your valuable contributions. Before opening the floor, I would like to remind delegations to deliver— that will deliver statements to send the speeches beforehand, if possible, to help interpreters to speeches@un.org and oichr-igwg-hrop@un.org. We have announcements on all doors with these email addresses for guidance. Thank you. I will now open the floor for interactive discussion. And the floor is open first for member states, and I see Austria. Austria has the floor.

Thank you, Chair. Austria welcomes this discussion in the role of Human Rights Council mechanisms and other United Nations bodies, and I want to thank all the panelists for their informative presentations. As outlined just right now in the presentations, existing human rights mechanisms have an important role to play in strengthening the protection of the rights of older persons. The work of special procedures, treaty bodies, and the Universal Periodic Review, United Nations agencies, and the former independent expert has contributed to increasing awareness of the specific human rights challenges faced by older persons. At the same time, this engagement has not yet been sufficiently systematic, coherent, or sustained. The rights of older persons are still often addressed only indirect, occasionally, or through the lenses of other groups or policy areas. This confirms the need for a dedicated legally binding instrument. Austria would like to underline that the new legally binding instrument should not replace existing human rights mechanisms. On the contrary, it should strengthen them. It should provide clearer normative guidance and help existing mechanisms to address the human rights of older persons more consistently. In this sense, a legally binding instrument could serve both as a common denominator, bringing together and clarifying existing standards, and as a light tower, guiding and inspiring more coherent and visible actions across the human rights System. However, these examples also demonstrate that the current approach remains fragmented. The treaty bodies have also addressed some aspects of older age. For example, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women has adopted guidance on older women, and the economic— and the Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights has addressed the economic, social, and cultural social and cultural rights of older persons. Yet these issues are not treated systematically across all treaty bodies and all states' reviews. In some areas, existing guidance is also outdated and does not fully reflect contemporary understandings of autonomy, equality, ageism, intersectionality, and participation. The Universal Periodic Review has the potential to strengthen attention to to these rights of older persons, especially where states and groups of friends raise targeted questions and recommendations. However, here too, attention remains uneven. Austria believes that this precisely— this is precisely why a dedicated legally binding instrument is needed. It would clarify the applicable standards, make the rights of older persons more visible, and provide a reference point for all existing mechanisms. The experience of the Convention on the Rights of Older Persons with Disabilities is instructive. A dedicated convention did not isolate disability rights from the wider human rights system. Rather, it helped mainstream disability rights across other mechanisms and strengthened the quality and frequency of recommendations. A future legally binding instrument on the rights of older persons could have similar effects. It could support existing mechanisms, improve coherence, and ensure that human rights law remains responsive to the realities of longer and more diverse lives. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished delegate from Austria, and I give the floor now to Egypt.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Equal thanks to the distinguished panelists for their valued presentations. We reiterate that older persons are fundamentally right holders and entitled to the full spectrum of human rights codified in the core human rights treaties and conventions. Despite the comprehensive body of treaties already in place, there are indeed instances when lived realities and experiences of many older persons continues to reflect gaps in protection, uneven implementation, and discrimination. Our discussions often refer to normative shortcomings. However, it's equally important to recognize that the existing human rights architecture, when effectively implemented, already provides robust avenues to enhance the enjoyment of human rights by older persons, as reflected by the other 10 recommendations included in Decision 14/1 of the Open-Ended Working Group on Aging. Right to life, equality, non-discrimination, participation, social support are firmly embedded across the core human rights conventions. What's needed might not be new commitments, but a decisive effort to translate current obligations into concrete policies on the ground. Adequate implementation means integrating the specific circumstances or shortcomings hindering the full enjoyment of human rights by older persons into national strategies, ensuring accessible healthcare services and social protection, addressing violence, neglect, age-related stereotypes, and guaranteeing continued meaningful participation in public life. It also requires strengthening data collection, monitoring, and accountability mechanisms so that the enjoyment of human rights by older persons is visible, measurable, and enforceable. We therefore encourage States to fully utilize the existing treaties framework, including through constructive engagement with the treaty bodies and national human rights institutions, the UPR mechanism. By doing so, States can significantly elevate the degree to which older persons enjoy their rights in practice without delay and without waiting for additional normative developments. Until the desired legally binding instrument comes to life, advancing the enjoyment of human rights by older persons should not be a future aspiration, rather a present obligation. Effective implementation of our current commitments can and must deliver tangible improvements in the daily lives of older persons in our respective societies. Older persons are our roots and the builders of our prosperous present. Thank you.

I would like to thank the distinguished delegate of Egypt for that statement. I would now like to give the floor to the Dominican Republic.

Thank you, Chair. The Dominican Republic would like to thank the Office for convening this debate. We also would like to thank all the panelists. We're taking part as a member of the group of friends and co-sponsors of the resolution that gave rise to this mechanism. We believe that the international system must provide an effective response to the challenges of aging. As we have heard, the main reason for negotiating a convention is because the current legal framework has shown its shortcomings. Instruments such as the Madrid Plan of Action on Aging has made considerable progress and guided public policies, for example, in my own country. Nevertheless, since it is not binding in nature, its scope is limited. So it relies on the political will of states finding effective mechanisms, but that hasn't necessarily been the case. As a result, millions of people continue to face age-based discrimination, violence, abuse, neglect, exploitation, social exclusion, and barriers to accessing health, justice, social protection, and the new artificial intelligence instruments and other means of communication. So it's now time to transform political will into legally binding obligations at international level. A convention would enable us to strengthen the rights of older persons, establish universal standards, and create effective follow-up and accountability mechanisms. Dominican Republic has its commitment grounded in historical reasons, such as supporting the General Assembly resolution on commemorating the International Day on Older Persons every day— every year on the 1st of October. October, and we've also supported a number of other UN resolutions in this area. So the Dominican Republic stands ready to work constructively in order to build a robust, inclusive, and effective convention which will ensure that all persons have the right to age with dignity, autonomy, and full participation in society. Thank you very much.

I'd like to thank the distinguished delegate of the Dominican Republic. And then I'd like to call on Peru.

Thank you very much, Chair. Please allow me at the outset to echo the previous speaker in thanking the panelists for their excellent contributions. Obviously, we need holistic view and intersecting view to protect the rights of older persons who are not a homogeneous group. We have seen that the challenges they face are not restricted to one field. They also encompass protection from violence, neglect, abuse, ensuring access to justice, social protection, decent work, health, and digital accessibility, amongst others. My country particularly appreciates the opportunity here to address situations of extreme vulnerability, such as older persons in detention, those living in isolated or remote areas, older persons with disabilities, refugees, or stateless persons, or those who are excluded, don't have digital accessibility or access to care. We also appreciate the fact that the presentations mentioned the added vulnerability faced by older persons because of climate change. We believe that this process should take advantage of existing legal frameworks and experience of other entities, particularly the which have been developed by council mechanisms and other specialized entities. Similarly, we believe that we must take into consideration progress made at regional level. And lastly, we think it's worth having the opinions of various mechanisms and organizations from across the UN system on a regular basis so that we can together consolidate standards, prevent backsliding, and ensure greater consistency consistency across the UN human rights system. There should also be active and constant participation of other entities in order to avoid overlapping with other mechanisms. Instead, it would accurately define persistent gaps. Thank you.

Thank you very much. That's an excellent proposal. In fact, it is aligned with what has happened in many other Working groups which have drafted international human rights instruments. The idea is to bring together all the international agencies which are linked in some way to the subject, as well as other stakeholders. So thank you very much. I cannot see any other member states for the time being wishing to take the floor. So. If there are no other states now, we'll move on to the national human rights institutions and to the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea.

Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. The National Human Rights Commission of Korea welcomes today's discussion on the dialogue with other UN mechanisms. The NHRCK believes that a legally binding instrument should not replace replace or compete with existing mechanisms, but complement and strengthen them by providing a stronger normative framework for the promotion and protection of the human rights of older persons. Special procedures, treaty bodies, and the UPR each play distinct yet complementary roles in promoting and protecting the human rights of older persons. The OHCHR and national human rights institutions further reinforce this effort through their respective mandates. The experience of the Republic of Korea demonstrates both the contributions and limitations of the existing framework. The Republic of Korea has received recommendations on the human rights of older persons from different UN human rights mechanisms. These recommendations have made important contributions, but older persons have too often been treated as one of several vulnerable groups, rather than as rights holders facing distinct human rights challenges. As noted in the High Commissioner's report, existing UN human rights mechanisms have not always adequately addressed the specific situations, the risks faced by older persons. This highlights the value of a dedicated instrument that brings greater visibility and coherence to the human rights of older persons across the UN human rights system. At the same time, the Republic of Korea's 4th UPR cycle demonstrates that more focused engagement is possible. 12 recommendations specifically addressed the human rights of older persons, including pensions, poverty, social protection, participation, protection from violence, disability, and dignity. The NHRC-K hopes that this working group will strengthen the normative basis for the promotion and protection of human rights of older persons across existing UN mechanisms, and encourage States to make more concrete recommendations on the human rights of older persons during the upcoming 5th UPR cycle. Ultimately, the effectiveness of a legally binding instrument will depend on the implementation at the national level. This requires coordinated implementation, reporting, and follow-up across relevant government ministries. We therefore encourage states to establish or strengthen national mechanisms for implementation, reporting, and follow-up, ensuring that recommendations from different UN mechanisms are implemented in a coordinated manner and translated into meaningful improvements in the lives of older persons. As an independent NHRI, we remain committed to bridging international standards and domestic implementation and stand ready to ensure a legally binding instrument translates into meaningful improvements in the lives of older persons. Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

I thank the representative of the National Human Rights Commission of the Republic of Korea, and I give the floor to the German Institute for Human Rights.

Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor, and I would also like to thank the panelists for their terrific inputs. As NHRI, we try to engage with treaty bodies and special procedures. As for the treaty bodies, it should be noted that most of the current treaty bodies are not in the position to monitor the situation of older persons in a comprehensive manner. Very often, the state reports and alternative reports are already outdated by the time they are discussed at the session, which also leads to additional workload and uncertainty. Furthermore, I must add that even when issues affect older persons are addressed in alternative reports, they are usually not reflected in the recommendations. To this day, human rights violations against older persons are addressed only in a fragmented way. We heard this very often today and in the days before. Experts serving on the treaty bodies are not selected based on their expertise regarding older persons. The scope of the reports does not allow for the inclusion of new topics. For example, the Human Rights Committee has no recommendations regarding older persons, as a human rights expert of the Human Rights Committee emphasized last week in Amsterdam. In their recommendations, they take into account people with disabilities and women, but not older persons. The number of recommendations regarding people with disabilities has doubled since the adoption of the Convention. Therefore, I also think what Catalina Devandas said, the convention would be mainstreaming. Due to the word limits, it is not possible to include new topics in most reports. For this reason, older persons are almost never mentioned outside the usual subject areas. I would like to point out that older persons do not have time for lengthy procedures. They need effective, swift, and appropriate oversight as well as timely adjustments. to ensure that their rights are effectively protected. I would also like to add that in many reports of special procedures, special rapporteurs, independent experts, older persons are missing. I recall that the first report which was not the report of the UN Independent Expert on the Enjoyment of All Human Rights by Older Persons was on older persons with disabilities. The special rapporteur, Catalina de Bernal, pointed out that the intersection has many risks. There are many overlaps, but also there are many protection gaps which must be closed, especially in regard of the intersection on ageism and ableism. I'm glad to announce that more mandate holders of special procedures get involved. We also must encourage to strengthen the focal points in the different UN agencies to be more listened by the overall agency. I also want to highlight that the Interagency Group on Aging has raised its voice in several meetings since their establishment, but they are still not loud enough. We still need to support them to get their voices heard. I thank you for giving me the floor to add my voice to this discussion. Thank you.

I thank the representative of the German Institute for Human Rights and former independent expert on human rights of older persons. I now give the floor to the National Association of Community Legal Centres, INC.

Thank the Chair. We also thank the panel for their presentations. We wish to reiterate the comments made earlier this week about the importance of engaging relevant experts in Indigenous rights. Both the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous peoples have much to offer this process. In our input statement to this first session, we submitted that the overarching framework must recognise the specific context of indigeneity and Indigenous elderhood. And I'll speak as loud as I can to get over the rain outside. We note that Indigenous elderhood is not defined by age alone, but rather by an older person's commitment to preserving and transmitting Indigenous culture, continuing to contribute to family and community, and providing a vision for future based on tradition. We note that older Indigenous people are central in family and community life, holding important roles and responsibilities that support social and emotional well-being of families and community. These roles must be cherished and, by extension, promoted, protected, and fulfilled by human rights treaties, particularly this one. Older First Nations people have unique human rights needs that reflect their distinctive and diverse spiritual, material, and economic relationship with lands and waters and other resources which they have a connection with under tradition and custom. In recognizing this context, the instrument must ensure that the framework acknowledges that rights will only flourish under structures that privilege partnerships with older and Indigenous people, that recognize and combat intersectional discrimination, and that are co-designed, culturally safe, trauma-informed, and self-determined. The instrument must also recognize the distinctive models of philosophy of care, including intergenerational reciprocal care and cultural governance structures that are known to Indigenous societies. Older Indigenous people's participation is critical to ensure the inputs address the intersectional barriers to their self-determination in the context of their older age. I thank the Chair.

Thank you. I give the floor to the International Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse.

Thank you, Chair. INPEA welcomes this dialogue with Human Rights Council mechanism and other United Nations Its value is not merely procedural. It is essential to ensuring that the new convention is legally coherent, responsive to existing protection gaps, and realistic in its implementation. First, dialogue with treaty bodies and special procedures can ensure that the convention complements rather than fragments the existing existing human rights framework. It can help address intersecting discrimination, including the specific experience of older women, older persons with disability, and older migrants, while recognizing that older age must not automatically be equated with disability or dependency. Second, this dialogue can help make visible the areas in which existing standards remain incomplete or inconsistently applied. This includes protection from violence, abuse, neglect, and exploitation, and also autonomy, access to long-term care, digital inclusion, and protection from emerging forms of age discrimination. Third, specialized agencies bring essential operational knowledge. Their experience can help translate legal obligations into practical standards for employment, social protection, health and care systems, digital accessibility, and protection in humanitarian emergencies. And they should ensure that all policies are human rights-based. This cooperation is also important for designing effective future monitoring mechanisms. The new system should learn from existing treaty bodies and support timely coordinating and meaningful implementation at national level. Most importantly, older persons and their representative organizations must be part of this Their lived experience is essential to understanding where existing mechanisms fail and what effective protection must look like. A convention should bring coherence where there is fragmentation, accountability, and clear shift from viewing older persons as mere recipients of services to recognizing them as rights holders. stakeholders with agency and equal dignity. Thank you.

I thank the delegate of INPEA. I now give the floor to the International Federation on Aging.

Thank you, Chair. Excellencies, colleagues, dear panelists, the International Federation on Aging welcomes the discussion on the relationship between the future legally binding instrument and the broader United Nations human rights system. This legally binding instrument should not be viewed as a standalone instrument. Rather, it should become an integral part of the international human rights architecture, reinforcing and complementing the important work already undertaken by existing United Nations and regional human rights mechanisms. Its success will therefore depend not only on the quality of its own provisions, but also on the quality of its dialogue with the wider human rights system. A future Committee on the Rights of Older Persons would benefit from the extensive experience of existing treaty bodies, while contributing its own expertise to the interpretation and application of human rights throughout older age. Likewise, continued cooperation with the Human Rights Council the Universal Periodic Review, the Special Procedures, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, National Human Rights Institutions, and relevant United Nations specialized agencies will strengthen coherence, promote mutual learning, and reinforce implementation at the national level. This spirit of complementarity extends across the wider United Nations normative system, as was eloquently highlighted by the distinguished panelists from the ILO, international standards are designed to reinforce one another, building a coherent and mutually supportive normative framework. We also hope that the future legally binding instrument on the rights of other persons will bring renewed visibility to the pertinence and implementation of ILO standards, including Convention 102, Convention 111, Convention 122, Convention 128, Convention 155, Convention 158, Convention 162, Convention 188, and Recommendation 202, all of which are particularly relevant to older persons by further strengthening their visibility, implementation, and practice. One of the greatest opportunities before the Working Group is not simply to draft a new convention, it's to strengthen and further connect the international human rights system while reinforcing the broader United Nations normative framework. IFAW looks forward to contributing constructively to that shared endeavor. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, sir, for your contribution. Edgeworth Foundation has the floor.

Mr. Chair, delegates, and friends, AgeWell Foundation welcomes the discussion on dialogue with other UN mechanisms. Coherence and synergy across UN system are essential for a meaningful legally binding instrument on the rights of older people. We particularly value stronger coordination with the Open-Ended Working Group on aging, MIPA review process, the UN Decade of Healthy Aging, and regional bodies. In this regard, we are proud to contribute as an organization holding special consultative status with ECOSOC since 2011 and as a member of the Stakeholders Advisory Group, SAG, of UNSCAP for Asia-Pacific review of MIPA. From our experience bridging global policy and grassroots realities in India and the Global South, we recommend the following: establish formal channels for regular dialogue and joint work between this IGWG and regional commissions, especially ESCAP, to ensure regional priorities and best practices from Global South to inform the treaty. Create structured opportunities for civil society, including older persons organizations and youth groups, to feed ground-level evidence into both global and regional processes. Develop joint indicators and data initiatives that link the future treaty with MEPA reviews and 2030 Agenda, avoiding duplication while strengthening accountability. Ensure meaningful Global South representation in all the interagency and intergovernmental dialogue on aging. Mr. Chair, let the dialogue with the UN mechanisms become a true two-way bridge, bringing regional and national realities into this treaty. And taking the treaty standards back to national and community levels where they matter the most. We remain committed to supporting this coherent and inclusive approach. Nothing about us without us. Thank you.

Muchas gracias. Le doy ahora la palabra a la Confederación.

Thank you. I give the floor to the Italian General Labour Confederation. This section is extremely valuable, and on behalf of my organization, I would like to express great appreciation for the punctual suggestion coming from Mr. Piotrsek and Mr. Tidball-Bins, already providing a practical set of actions that can move our agenda forward using the present mechanism. We also appreciate the rich discussion across agencies to define substantive rights and meaningful follow-up. Last week, thanks to the facilitation of AARP, I had the honor to participate in a panel organized by the government of Latvia at the 2026 World Summit on Information Society, where Ms. Widmer-Iliescu clearly stated principle to provide older persons with human rights in the domain of artificial intelligence. Her bold intervention today confirmed that this is a topic that for the first time will need to be fully addressed in the legally binding instrument in several domains, from access to infrastructure and facilities, to communication and information, affordability, availability of internet, including in rural areas, right to education and lifelong learning. To limit artificial intelligence to be a helper to human decisions, the human decision-making and not to take over control. The ageist bias is very much part of the industry right now. And only through the collaboration among researchers, consumers' organizations, equality bodies, and older persons' organizations, we can identify and regulate the ethical challenges. Collaboration with ITU is therefore fundamental in shaping language about Rights and follow-up. Following the excellent intervention from Horacio Guido, I want also to concur about the central role of the ILO in addressing the rights of older workers. I would like to add Recommendation 195 on human resource development, which establishes the right to lifelong learning and the right to non-discrimination through fundamental rights enshrined in Convention I found interesting, Horacio, that you spoke about Recommendation 162. I think that the status is interim, maybe, and you will respond, but maybe this joint work can lead to relaunch this instrument. Older persons must indeed access the right to social security for all, as per Convention 102. in particular, Part V on old-age benefit, Part IX on invalidity benefits, and Part X on survivors' benefits. Future UN conventions can certainly help also further ratification, as we said, of this important instrument. Equally important is Recommendation 202 of 2012 on social protection floors, demanding to ensure adequate and dignified living for all through universality of protection based on social solidarities, as written in this principle, and of course the fundamental rights. These instruments, together with the jurisprudence of the Committee of Experts, can certainly offer valuable guidance. Thanking also Ms. Ishihara and Ms. Pereira, there are of course a lot of other links that we need to continue to strengthen. I remember fondly the intervention of the WHO representative last February, but now we can work also with UNESCO about cultural access and protection, and World Meteorological Organization on climate change, and so on. There is plenty of work to do. Thank you very much for this rich discussion. Thank you.

I give the floor to the International Association for Hospice and Palliative Care.

The IHPC welcomes the dialogue with other human rights mechanisms. Palliative care is part of the right to health, yet only 14% of people in the world who need it can access it. An LBI should enshrine the dignity of the human person as its central principle. It must explicitly name palliative care as a component of the right to health. This will provide UN member states with the normative framework to develop the necessary necessary policies and standards. Older people need these policies and standards frameworks to access the care they need to relieve severe pain and health-related suffering. Dialogue with HRC mechanisms and under other UN bodies is essential for national oversight because cancer and dementia will increase most rapidly among people aged 70 and older. By 2060, both will affect 3 times the number of people they do now. Without access to palliative care at home and in the community, patients and families will undergo unthinkable suffering. Older persons' health-related suffering is further exacerbated in humanitarian emergencies, conflict situations, and in detention. meaning that palliative care needs to be explicitly extended to older migrants, refugees, and prisoners. The International Association for Hospice and Palliative Care has already engaged for decades with the Special Procedures on Health, Torture, and the Human Rights of Older Persons, requesting that they draw member state attention to the need to create services where they're absent and to improve them where they A series of these special procedures has issued statements over the past 2 decades stipulating that the denial of palliative care and pain relief violates the right to health and may amount to torture. 2 independent experts on the enjoyment of human rights by older persons have stressed that the failure to ensure access to palliative care and controlled medicines for the relief of pain and suffering violate both the rights to health and the right to be free from cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. Our association will mentor our global membership to conduct dialogues with human rights mechanisms to meet the escalating need for normative frameworks. We'll encourage our global membership to engage with OPCAT national prevention preventive mechanisms, where their mandate extends to residential care institutions, to monitor the quality and availability of palliative care in nursing homes and prisons. One successful example comes from Ukraine, where the OPCAT was particularly instrumental more than 10 years ago in constructively exposing violations in what passed for a nursing home. Palliative care is now an integral pillar of Ukraine's health system and has remained functional, with services caring for people of all ages, even under the trauma of war it's currently undergoing. The IHPC looks forward to continuing this dialogue at the October meeting. I thank you.

Thank you. I remind delegations that the time limit for interventions is 3 minutes. I give now the floor to National Older Women's Network.

Thank you. Ngoan would once again like to thank the Chair for the opportunity to participate in this debate and discussion. Ngoan appreciates the commitment to the inclusion of civil society in all aspects of the development of this long-awaited and, as has been exposed by today's panel, much-needed treaty. Noen would like to see the participation continue, not just during the developmental stages, but after finalisation and adoption and ratification. Noen looks to other treaty provisions that recognise and embrace the continued participation of civil society and that of individuals and other organisations. Noen believes that the dialogue with other UN mechanisms on these issues would create a stronger and more empowering treaty. Gnome believes that the mechanisms must ensure a formal channel for civil society and older persons organisations to submit parallel reports, something explicitly flagged in multiple submissions during the OIJ process on essential— as essential, and including civil society's reporting on treaties compliance. We believe that there must be a requirement to collect and report age-disaggregated data, since lack of such data is one of the most commonly cited gaps in current ageing policy. NOONE would like to see an individual/group complaint mechanism, possibly via optional protocols modelled on current best practice, similar to CRDP's— PD's, sorry, or CDOR's optional protocols, protocols which would allow individuals or groups to bring complaints directly once domestic remedies are exhausted. The treaty should also include an inquiry procedure for grave or systematic— I'm sorry, for grave or systematic violations, as CEDAW Protocols do, which would be invaluable in situations of systemic or institutionalised elder abuse. or neglect, enforced disappearance, or unlawful deaths. Nothing about us without us. Thank you.

Thank you. I give the floor now to Japan Support Center for Activity and Research for Old People.

Chair, thank you. We kind of registered the name for speaking about yesterday's paper when there is a time. Is it okay to take the floor now, or should we wait?

I would say to wait until the end of our participants. We are very close to the end of the list. Thank you. Now I give the floor to you, I think, madam, because you are on the list as Professor Fusako Seki.

So same, please put me for the end.

Okay, thank you. So now I give the word to Professor Fusako Seki.

Thank you, Chairperson. I have to express my full support to what has been said regarding a healthy environment and climate for older persons. And regarding palliative care, this is a right. There ought to be a right to palliative care which is different to long-term care. Secondly, I would like to know whether I can ask a question of the panelists.

Yes, of course. Of course, says the chair.

First of all, thank you all for your statements. Now, addressing the independent expert on older persons, there was a reference to dementia and I would like to know— Regarding the medical definition of dementia, how does that align with dementia in its broader sense, including under the CRPD General Observation 1, which speaks of legal capacity of all persons without exclusion? And secondly, On the enforced disappearance, the gentleman who referred to that, and I don't know whether this is something that falls under your mandate, but in the case of older persons who have been found guilty of crimes against humanity or genocide, And if they're over age 75 or 80, what's your position on that? And then there was a lady who spoke about digital accessibility. What I wanted to say was that up to 2 weeks ago, there was a group of persons in Bolivia fighting for the rights of older persons. Thank you. And in addition to access digitalization literacy, there's also a right not to participate in the digital environment. There are older persons who do not want the digitalization; they don't want to participate. Is then there needs to be an obligation on states to keep. some procedures open in a non-digital way? These are my questions. Thank you.

Thank you. The last speaker on my list is Global Initiative on Aging and Longevity.

Distinguished panel members, I'm going to make my statement in English— in Spanish, I should say. Thank you very much for your statements. Uh, our members, the 193, are members of the organization of the United Nations and its different agencies. Once the— once you count most of them, you will have around 40. The representatives here today from the ILO, the ITU, the Refugee Agency are represented by members of the same governments that are sitting in this room today. I'd like to underline this because in many of the cases, the governments that are represented in these organizations are represented by other ministries. And sometimes it is necessary for our required coordination in order to have the ample need that we have in coordinating the work of this human rights working group. The state parties to the organizations have a particular importance when they, when they look into human rights. So I will try to, to explain that the Human Rights Council, which is only 47 members, although most of the other countries assist, has 87 special rapporteurs and independent experts. Both men, they have mandates, mandates by thematic issues and by countries. They have a UPR which we created. I was Vice President of the Human Rights Commission and Human Rights Council that we created as an overview for the compliance with human rights for every one of the 193 states. You also have 10 human rights conventions which have been mentioned yesterday in this realm. The human rights conventions that we are talking about have committees of experts that monitor the compliance of the states that have signed and ratified those conventions. Again, as I said in one of my interventions, not all members of the United States— of the United Nations are members of the conventions. To be a member of the conventions, you have to sign the convention, ratify the convention, and therefore make it part of your internal internal legislation. Besides this, you have in the human rights structure the General Assembly with the Third Committee, with ECOSOC who has an NGO Committee, and the Fifth Committee who is the allocator of the funds. With all this being said, we have to reiterate that the convention we are trying to negotiate will have an overlapping capability of all these organizations. When we talk about the CRPD, which I had the honor of chairing the negotiations, we are celebrating the 20th anniversary. The 20th anniversary of CRPD is a great success. There's a long road ahead, but the United Nations had to approve a disability inclusion strategy for the United Nations on the basis of the Convention on Disability. So we are talking about the compliance of all the United Nations with the Convention. And that, I think, is extremely important because we are talking about 1.3 billion people who are protected by the CRPD and we are talking about 1 billion people who are aging. Understanding this context, the negotiation we are carrying, we are responsible for in this working group, has an extreme importance to protect the lives of persons who are aging. And I have to underline something that has been said various times: we do not have time. We who are aging are closer to death. Than most of the negotiators here. So we have to ask those negotiators to understand the plight of aging, the need for dignity, and the need for the protection of the rights of the aging. And I think with all this magnificent panel, we have learned that the rest of the agencies of the United Nations will accompany us in this process to fortify the relation of the protection of the 1 billion people who are aging. Thank you very much, Ambassador Gallegos, for that contribution, your commitment to this process for such a long time.

Moderator, let me clarify that we will have some space for those NGOs that didn't have the chance to speak yesterday in a spillover list that will be after the end of the panel. Having said this, Please, Madam Moderator, you have the floor.

Thank you very much. So, in light to be— to allow room to the colleagues that haven't been able to speak yesterday, I am asking my panellists to each have a short 2-minute reflection on what has been said, and we will take the same list as previously. So, I would start with Mr. Piotr Szczek. You have your 2 minutes for conclusion.

So I thank you very much and I'll touch only on 2 specific questions which I have been actually asked. The first one is the palliative care. Madam, I'm very grateful that you touched upon this issue. I think it's extremely, extremely important and that it should be focused This said, I would say that we are having quite good examples, let's say, either in the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the rights of older persons in Africa, Article 11, line 3, ensure that older persons in palliative care receive adequate care and pain management medication, and then also perhaps even more sort of focused in Inter-American Convention on Protecting the Human Rights of Older Persons, Article 6, right to life and dignity in old age. States parties shall adopt all measures necessary to ensure older persons' effective enjoyment of the right of life and dignity in old age until the end of their life, and they shall take steps to ensure that public and private institutions offer older persons access with comprehensive care including palliative care. So that is important and I think people do realize that this is important. As far as the question about dementia was concerned, I'm also very grateful, Madam, to touch upon this. I would just like to say That from a human rights vision, it's important to understand that, of course, dementia is not a none-or-all condition. It is a sort of evolutionary condition which starts with mild cognitive impairment and then finishes with global dementia, and we should really distinguish mental or decision-making capacity, the actual ability to decide. And then understanding the capacity is not all or nothing. We should—

Dr. Pirtosek, I'm sorry, but I will have to skip in here to give time to colleagues. So perhaps just from substitute to supported decision-making, that's the magical word. Thank you.

Thank you, Dr. Pirtosek. And now to Dr. Tindall-Bintz.

Thank you, Madam Chair. If you allow me, I will say a few words in my language, which is Spanish, in castellano, si puede ser. If you'll allow me. Thank you very much. I don't have an awful lot to add to what I already presented when it comes to a situation which we already knew was very serious And which affects the entire world. And that situation is the deaths which could be equated to murder of older persons. They are murders which are concealed. This is because there are a lot of shortcomings and failure to comply with due diligence requirements by states and to investigate these deaths appropriately. Nevertheless, when we conducted a study for the report that I'm drafting— and I'd like to thank all the member states who answered my call for inputs, as well as the NGOs and academia who responded responded, and other directly involved stakeholders who provided me with some very elaborate answers to the call at times. So, as I was saying, when I was compiling that study, I was constantly shocked by the magnitude of this problem. The number and the frequency of unlawful deaths which go completely unpunished, the lack of mechanisms, structures, and knowledge among states and institutions, and furthermore among international organizations and even NGOs, they were unable to investigate these deaths. Now, that is very surprising. There is not a single guide or instrument or protocol at an international level for investigating these deaths. So that's why I think that this group and the future legally binding instrument provide us with a unique opportunity which we cannot discard. It's an opportunity to plug this gap. One of the resolutions which addresses the way to tackle unlawful In fact, the Inter-American Convention on the Protection of Older Persons throws some light, gives us some clues to this, as you already mentioned, my dear colleague. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Dr. Tidball-Bint. I give the floor to Mr. Guido for his concluding remarks.

Thank you very much. Much, Madam Chair, and I will also take the advantage of the use of Spanish in this panel and will reply to some questions in that language. Muchísimas gracias. So thank you very much for having invited the ILO to take part in these very interesting discussions. The task before the Working Group is of the utmost importance: adopting an instrument to complement the existing web of instruments is not an easy task. As many of our participants have already pointed out, the aim here is to complement without reiterating or overlapping. I think that the specific situation in which We are able to monitor instruments at the ILO could be very useful for you when you adopt this instrument. My colleague made a very interesting comment about Convention 162 of the ILO. It's not an obsolete instrument; it's one which is catalogued for additional measures to reiterate its relevance because it dates back to '98. 1980. But this is the case for many other instruments, and the ILO stands ready to support you in all the forthcoming stages. Thank you very much.

Mr. Guido, thank you very much, also for sticking to the time limit. I turn to Ms. Vidmeriulescu.

Thank you very much. I will also share some of the things that I really appreciate in this discussion. First of all, the fact that rights of older discrimination must be addressed through a holistic and intersectional lens, recognizing the multiple and overlapping forms of discrimination that many older persons face, including on the basis of disability, gender, displacement, indigenous status, rural and remote poverty, and illiteracy. Also, it stressed the importance of effective national implementation, which I found that's very important, supported by dedicated follow-up mechanisms and coordinated engagement and across governments. I would also like to thank and highlight the broad support expressed for the development of the Convention, and highlight the significant opportunity that digital technology and ICT offer to support its effective realization at every stage, including from collection and analysis of data at national, regional, and global levels, providing valuable evidence to inform policymakers, support implementation, and monitor Progress over time. I want to to stress that from everything we talk here, I would just say from my side that by placing older person's own voices at the center of these efforts, digital technology can help ensure that the convention is not only adopted but translated into measurable improvements in the life and well-being of older person. Y para unirme a mis And I will join the previous speakers in speaking Spanish. I'm Romanian, but I'll try and answer a question which was addressed to me in Spanish. In fact, the right of older persons not to take part in digital environments is absolutely legitimate and must be respected. As a result, states must provide non-digital alternatives for access to services and information and exercising rights. Nevertheless, in a society in which technical— technological solutions are increasingly present in all walks of life, one has to recognize that the lack of access or lack of participation in digital environments may lead to a loss of opportunities. So in the digital society, from my point of view, Thank you. From my point of view, we have to try to understand why these people do not wish to participate in digital environments. This could be a personal choice, but one which we need to identify. What is important is that any decision is an informed decision so that people know exactly what can be done with technology and what cannot. not be done with technology, but they should be given the necessary opportunity and accessibility so that they can do whatever they wish to do online. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. I turn to Ms. Ishihara.

Yes, thank you very much for really rich and thoughtful discussions. I think today's also discussions highlighted the strong convergence around several key priorities and also the need to address persistent protection gaps, ensure that older persons are recognized as rights holders, and then to move beyond fragmented approaches towards more coherent and rights-based and inclusive implementation. So, from UNHCR perspectives, this message really is relevant for forcibly displaced and stateless people. We therefore welcome really the emphasis that today are made on meaningful participation, autonomy, intersectionality, accessibility, and also disaggregated data. These are not really technical considerations alone. And then they are essential safeguards to ensure that the older person's voices, priorities, capacities, these shape decisions that affect them. And this is particularly important for older women, older persons with disabilities, and also older forcibly displaced and stateless persons, so who may face overlapping forms of discrimination and exclusion. So, yes, as I earlier mentioned, that UNHCR is committed to really work with every stakeholder, and then organizations of older persons, and then humanitarian-development partners, and make the protection and also assistance solutions more inclusive. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mrs. Ishihara. And last but not least, Dr. Pereira.

My final remarks, short and sweet, state the lessons from existing mechanisms are clear. While they have value, they have not been sufficient to ensure that older persons are consistently visible, protected, and heard as rights holders. A future convention should help close the gap between principle and practice by making the rights of older persons explicit, strengthening monitoring and accountability, and supporting implementation in everyday life. And finally, above all, Any stronger framework must be shaped with the meaningful participation of older persons themselves, whose experience and voice are essential to ensuring that rights are real in practice. Thank you.

Dr. Pereira, thank you very much. And if I can— if I may shortly conclude the panel to summarize our discussions, we have We have seen from presentations of our panelists that across UN system, work on aging, human rights of older persons has been taking place. We have heard encouraging examples of how different entities within the UN system are addressing the needs of older persons, and also how there still are some shortcomings. That needs to be addressed. We have also heard that Human Rights Council special procedures have been identifying gaps and giving recommendations, which can also serve in our work in developing the LBI. From the room, we have also heard the recognition of fragmentation of work, appreciation for the work being done, also the need to consolidate those efforts which also leads to support to the LBI. And we have also heard several thematic proposals for the LBI substance, for the mechanisms that LBI should include, as well as how it should and could cooperate with other mechanisms. And with this, I think I can bring our panel discussion to the end. Thank you, all the panelists, all the delegations, all the stakeholders that took the debate further, and I give the floor back to my colleague from Argentina here to lead the discussion in the remaining time of today's session.

Thank you very much. of this session and future sessions. So it's very important for us to hear your valuable contributions. So we'll be sending out invitations so that you can take part because I'm sure you'll be able to enrich the process and also the text that we're going to negotiate. It's very important for us to be able to count on your experience and knowledge. Thank you very much. Continue with the spillover list with a discussion on the Chair's food for thought paper. The first one on

my list is the International Longevity Centre Canada. Thank you, Chair. I'm here today representing Canada's National Institute on Aging, and I'm also speaking on behalf of International Longevity Centre Canada, HelpAge Canada, and Elder Abuse Prevention Ontario. As was mentioned by many member states and civil society organizations here yesterday, Under international human rights law, the state is the primary duty bearer to respect, protect, and fulfill human rights. This is not a matter of charity, capacity, or political convenience. It is a legal and moral obligation states have already accepted through the UN Charter and the core human rights treaties they have ratified. That obligation is not transferred to families simply because families happen to provide care. We would not accept this argument for children's rights, where the Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes the family's role in caring for children while still holding states squarely accountable for ensuring their rights. The same logic must apply here. When states describe care of older persons as a private family matter, they are often describing a gap they themselves have not filled, leaving that labor disproportionately to unpaid caregivers most of whom, as many others pointed out yesterday, are women and girls. And this framing offers no protection whatsoever to the older person who has no family, whose family is itself the source of abuse, or whose family lacks the means to provide adequate care. Those are the common realities for many older adults throughout the world. Support provided to older persons by their families and the legal responsibilities of states under international human rights law are not competing claims. States are obligated to support families in caregiving and to guarantee the rights of older persons directly, especially where family care is absent, inadequate, or unsafe. This legally binding instrument does not diminish the role of the family, rather ensures that no older person's rights depend on the family they happen to have. We ask member states, therefore, to affirm unambiguously through this process that this most fundamental and basic of human rights principles, that the state is the primary duty bearer, applies fully and equally to older persons. This Convention must also oblige States Parties to eliminate all forms of ageism, as it is the root cause of so many of the human rights violations experienced by older persons. It must include a guarantee of equality and non-discrimination with respect to age, recognizing intersectional and cumulative discrimination. It should build on, strengthen, and expand existing international human rights law guarantees that are consistent with older persons' human rights. It must oblige States Parties to take all necessary measures to ensure private actors do not violate older persons' rights, and it must guarantee access to justice, including the right to a remedy for violations of rights. And finally, this process must allow for full and meaningful participation of older persons. older persons, civil society, and national human rights institutions at all stages of the process of developing and monitoring

this legally binding instrument. Thank you. Thank you. I give the floor to the

Federal Council of Senior Organizations. Thank you for providing the opportunity to get back to the Food for Thought paper. BAKSO expressly welcomes the Chair's reflections on the guiding principles and the structure of the legally binding instrument, which has to be drafted over the coming months and, I'm afraid, years. On some points, however, we believe further clarification is needed. Here, I shall focus on just one aspect, namely the importance attached to the family. With my remarks, I would like to add a societal perspective to the aspects Mr. Burns mentioned yesterday and ILC Canada just mentioned a few minutes ago. Because for many years now, we have observed significant changes in family composition all over the world, Due to low birth rates, it is becoming increasingly rare for several children to be born within a marriage. Many couples remain childless. Young people in rural areas increasingly leave their small towns, even their countries, to get better education and find jobs elsewhere. Adult children are setting up their own households, often far away from their family of origin due to global changes, and many young adults remain without any stable relationship at all. The family in its traditional form is therefore increasingly being supplemented by other forms of social community. These changes in social structure also directly impact on the living conditions of older people, their rights to social and community participation, to healthcare and palliative care, as well as on their autonomy and dignity. These global changes must be reflected in a forward-looking Convention that encompasses the diverse social lifestyles of all generations. The new instrument must take full account of the realities of older persons who live without family support or without other forms of community and assistance. At the same time, by definition, it should not impose obligations on individuals and families. Under human rights law, The treaty binds states. They therefore must take appropriate action to support all persons whose rights in the areas just mentioned are at risk. We would be grateful if

you could take this into account. Thank you. Thank you, madam. The next one on my

list is the National Older Women's Network. The Food for Thought document offers a starting point for the discussion by highlighting issues that could be included in LBI. While not wishing to disregard the points at the preamble, known as disappointed that the issues of ageism, sexism, intersectionality, and the ongoing impact of climate change and isolation, together with the full enjoyment of rights, are not mentioned. The way the preamble talks about personality may deny the basic human right of a person to their own personality and could water down the responsibility of States to ensure that human rights of older people are intrinsic and are not dependent on the older person being acceptable. We are very concerned that the preamble could be used to remove the responsibilities of States to ensure the rights older people are accessible and enforceable, and seems to place a duty on the individual to the family, the community and to other persons to access those rights. Older persons in this Convention must be identified as rights holders in and of themselves, not obedient subjects whose rights are dependent on their mutual obligation to others. Abuse of older people can and does occur in families. And many communities turn a blind eye as it is viewed as a domestic matter and not a matter of state intervention. The definition section still seems to view older people as welfare recipients needing care and protection rather than autonomous individuals with inalienable rights, whilst we believe that the treaty should set a high standard for rights. There appears to be no worldwide community and family support system, and this treaty is an opportunity to establish expectations that there should be. This opportunity should not be missed. In our view, the— it is not a balanced approach under 5.2. Supported decision-making and respect for will and preferences appear to be end-of-life issues not independent ageing issues. NOHN values families, but care systems that place any responsibilities on families to deliver state responsibilities, in our view, sets a far weaker approach to human rights than

are offered in other treaties. Thank

you. Thank you. I now give the floor to OCRA. Thank you, Chair. OCRA is a senior-based organization in Belgium. Well, thanks to reopen the debate on the Food for Thought paper of yesterday. This paper opens, in the wording of the Chair yesterday, some interesting doors. Chair, your compatriot Lionel Messi I would say it provided some good assists, but an assist is not a goal. For a goal, more is needed. We saw that yesterday too. Just to mention some of them. One, the right to care, including palliative care. Excellent, that is in the paper, but then first and foremost has a primary role primary duty for the states. Secondly, the importance of supportive decision-making is in the paper, yes, but not without effective remedies against substitution of older persons by administrations, a huge problem in my country, Belgium. The right to personal development is in the paper. Excellent. But what does that mean if this is not translated into— based on ILO prescriptions, based in an enforceable right to lifelong learning and access to education also after retirement? 5. The paper takes into account the divide between rural and urban areas. Excellent. But this needs also special recognition of the vulnerability of older people in rural areas. All over the world, we see urbanization increasing, fueled by migration and climate change. We see rural areas emptying out. And where older people are left behind without the services, without the care. And finally, digital inclusion, yes, but also inclusion of the digital excluded and those— this was said earlier— those who want to stay out. We have also that We all— we as OCRA were also a little bit surprised by the strong emphasis throughout the paper on the role of the family and the community. For sure, family and local community is important, and I agree, in some countries more than in others. We heard this in former days, but as the representation of Zambia As I said earlier, family can't be a substitute for the role of the state. Or, as a recent landmark opinion of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights declared, states must adapt measures to guarantee access to and permanence in quality services for the elderly, which include— For them, the Court, Also equal rights for individuals who perform paid care work and progressive improvement of minimum social protection for informal care workers. And then there is a second problematic wording paper— wording in the paper: taking in account the national circumstances. We heard this also from some countries. Too frequently this seems code language for— or euphemism for a liberty for states to escape from universal standards. Thanks for opening the doors, Chair, but we hope that the door

is also open for civil society. Thank you. Thank

you, and the door is totally open for civil society, and that's why we are having this end of the discussion today. The next one on my list is Helpe Deutschland. Thank you, Chair, distinguished delegates. We welcome the Food for Thought paper as a constructive document to frame the structure and guiding principles of a future legally binding instrument on the human rights of older persons. In this paper, almost all stumbling blocks on our route to a convention have been mentioned by the participants here and in the last past days and don't need further repetition, but please allow me that we still see areas where further clarification and refinement will be crucial. It has been raised several times over the past few days and again, inter alia, by Andrew Burns when he was on the panel, or the representative from Austria, among others. We need a framework that reflects the realities of life whilst allowing us to adapt to changing times without having to alter its fundamental principles. As an example, family. What is a family? The traditional image of the family may be a romantic ideal and perhaps even a desirable one. But the reality is different all over the world, even in the Global South. Older persons are no longer necessarily looked after and adequately cared for within the family unit. This is a reality that we, at HelpAge Network experience day in, day out through our practical work in over 100 countries. Therefore, references to duties of older persons towards family and community, and to family and community duties, must not be interpreted in a way that weakens state obligations or justifies gaps in public social protection. Nobody from us here knows how family will look like in 20, 30 years. How people in general want to live in the future. While intergenerational solidarity and community support are important, the Convention must remain firmly grounded in individual rights and state responsibility under international law. We appreciate in this paper the attention to care, digital inclusion, access to justice, and we encourage a stronger and more explicit treatment of emerging issues such as artificial intelligence, algorithmic decision-making, and their compatibility with human dignity. These questions were not

fully addressed either in earlier treaties and should be considered explicitly in this instrument

to be developed. Thank you for giving me the floor. Thank you for your contribution. Now I give the floor to H. Noble Consulting by video message. Chair, the Food for Thought paper highlights the importance of guiding principles in the Convention. H-Noble sees the next steps as not only to identify the guiding principles, but also how they can best support the interpretation, development, and implementation of the Convention. We have identified 4 essential features that enable guiding principles to perform these functions. These emerged through iterative development and applications of the Age-Noble Human Rights Principles framework through submissions to the Working Group and the Independent Expert. First, guiding principles should be grounded in the lived realities of older persons. Second, they should be clearly defined to support consistent interpretation and application. Third, they should form a coherent architecture. Our framework organizes 8 principles into 3 dimensions: the older person, the environment where rights are realized, and the systems that enable and sustain rights. Finally, guiding principles should be capable of practical application. Our framework adopts a definitional approach where each principle is clearly defined and applied through 3 complementary lenses. Everyday rights realization, convention and state application, and systems transformation. Our framework and submissions are available on our website. Guiding Principles are more than statements of values. They are the interpretive foundation

that will shape how human rights are understood, implemented, and applied in the context of older age for decades

to come. Thank you. Thank you. I give the floor to Professor Israel Doron. I see that he's not in the room. Then I turn to Silvernetz E.V. Thank you, Chair, also for giving us the opportunity to speak today. Silbernetz welcomes the Chair's Food for Thought paper. It's a useful paper, both in structure and content. One issue, however, should be made more visible. That is the situation of older persons in severe loneliness and social isolation. They are often invisible. They are rarely present in public debate. This is why the Convention should mention them expressively. Older persons in severe social isolation should be included in the scope of the Convention. The Food for Thought paper rightly speaks about dignity, equality, non-discrimination, participation, care, including long-term care, and digital inclusion. We welcome this. But we suggest three three additions. First, and most importantly, participation is a core principle to ensure effective human rights protection. This must also be reflected in the work to elaborate the convention. Full, meaningful, and effective participation and engagement in the drafting process by older persons and their represent organizations is an essential element to ensure the instrument's legitimacy and effectiveness. Second, the Convention should include the right to live and age with dignity at home and in the community. Home-based care should not only be a service issue, it should be understood as part of dignity, autonomy, and participation. Third, digital inclusion must be complemented by analogue participation. Digital access is important, but there must be a right to non-digital access to essential services. I am grateful to Ms. Widma Iliescu that you just reaffirmed this expressly. The most isolated

older persons are not subjects of care. They are rights holders. They must be

seen, heard, and protected. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for your contribution. I now give the floor to Age International. Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to contribute our thoughts on the Food for Thought paper. Age International will not comment comprehensively but offers the following specific reflections Thank you, Mr. President. I have 3 points to add to the robust discussion that took place yesterday. First, while population aging is a demographic trend that forms the backdrop to the creation of this legally binding instrument, we must be clear that we are discussing a human rights treaty that will apply to clarifying and guiding the protection of the rights of all older persons, regardless of their proportion of the population. Therefore, we need to be careful not to ground the justification of this treaty in population trends. Thank you, Mr. President. Second, we must not associate population aging as a de facto policy challenge. According to the choices that states and other stakeholders make, aging can be an opportunity or present policy challenges. In drafting this human rights treaty, we urge states to not qualify aging and older persons with negative characteristics, as this would go against the very principle of affirming the inherent dignity and equality of older persons that should be the driving force behind this legally binding instrument. Third, we would also like to draw member states' attention to the importance of distinguishing between legal obligations of states and the roles of individuals and families. This human rights treaty must make clear that states are the duty bearers of international law and and not delegate these responsibilities to other stakeholders. Furthermore, while it is important to recognize the role of families in the care and support for older persons, in particular the role of women, including older women, it is also necessary to recognize that families can be the source of the most grievous forms of human rights abuses against older persons. The focus of this treaty, therefore, must be firmly on protecting the rights of older persons first and foremost,

and any consideration of the role of the family and other carers must

be viewed solely through this lens. Thank you. Thank you. Now I give the floor to Seniors First BC by video message. My name is Marie-Noëlle Campbell, and I'm the Executive Director of Seniors First BC and a staff lawyer. Seniors First BC is a nonprofit organization serving older adults throughout British Columbia with a mission to promote the dignity of older adults free from abuse of any kind. Each year, it assists over 10,000 individuals through the Seniors Abuse and Information Line, Victim Services, public education and outreach, and legal programs. A fundamental principle of the Convention should be the right of older persons to remain as independent as possible and to receive the supports and accommodations necessary to exercise their legal capacity and make decisions about their lives. Older adults should be at the center of decisions affecting their healthcare, personal care, finances, and housing. Importantly, cognitive impairment should never diminish a person's human rights. Older adults have the right to stay informed of decisions affecting their rights, finances, healthcare in a manner that is accessible, respectful, including where their physical and mental health deteriorates. When decision-making capabilities diminish, consideration should be given to the person's values and previously expressed wishes made while competent. The Convention should affirm the right of all older persons, including Indigenous elders and elders with disabilities, to effectively appoint trusted substitute decision-makers

and support persons For finances, health, and personal care with safeguards against abuse. Thank you very much. Muchas gracias. Veo en la lista. Thank you. Maria Salida Soler Reyes is on the list,

but I believe you've already spoken on this last. this section. Can you confirm that? Is she in the room? Microphone, please. I would like to point to a couple of things that I didn't say, if I may. Part of the message of the chair speaks of the resilience of older persons and the balance with the family and community care. If we look at the definition of resilience in dictionaries, it's a personal ability to overcome problems and difficulties and move forward. And an international treaty can't speak of the resilience of older persons. That's not the idea. We speak a lot about the role of the family. That could be an article for consensus, something that brings together society, that we should all be aware of the value of the human rights-based approach for older persons. But in addition to speaking of community services, we We need to put these in an article that refers to the right to independent living and being included in the community because that is the right to organize one's life plan and keep control of one's life, that right of every elder person who is a rights holder, and the right to have access to community services which are accessible and of quality. And open to all, including to older persons. And residence-based or home-based services to avoid isolation and solitude for older persons. So that right can speak of community-based services, but— That doesn't exonerate the state from its own obligations which fall to it in relation to older persons. And another aspect, the document spoke of a cross-cutting approach. Now, cross-cutting approaches are a good thing, but often in an international convention they are lost or mentioned in one or other article only. So we should have this in the principles, I believe. The principle of intergenerational solidarity, for example. The principle of intersectionality. And finally, I was surprised that we don't have a section on the general obligations of states because that— and I mentioned this this morning— non-regression on social rights for older persons is hugely important as is that the interpretative norms, the obligation of states to take— adopt measures, the issue of federal states and the consultation of older persons and organizations

representing them in everything that refers to them And advocacy for organizations of older persons. Thank you. Thank you, Professor. I have 3 speakers left. I will ask you please to keep to the available time. So that's 3 minutes for each

speaker. If they can keep to that, then we can accommodate everybody. And the next speaker is Professor Fusako Seki. Thank you, Chair, for making sure that every voice, including those of NGOs and academics, could be heard. A Working Group that leaves no one behind, that is a helpful sign for the road ahead. Thank you so much. I'm Fusako Seki, Professor of Kanagawa University, Japan. I pay respect to the Chair for the food for thought paper and offer 3 points. First, I agree with the paper's inclusion within nondiscrimination of protective measures that allow older persons equal standing. However, the paper calls for balance throughout. Being Japanese, I do love balance, but balance without criteria becomes another name for broad discretion of the state and risks hollowing out the instrument. The instrument should squarely recognize the tension between the prohibition of age discrimination and protection, and provide a framework for distinguishing the two. Does the measure remove social barriers? Are its means proportionate to its aims? And do all the persons affected participate? Second, I welcome the reaffirmation of inherent dignity and the life course perspective. Perspective. But reaffirmation with qualifiers such as subject to national legislation would leave the instrument declaratory. Only by articulating considerations specific to older age, the time lived, the continuity of life and relationships, and the recognition of the life lived Can the instrument give the life course perspective normative content? Third, the paper refers to intergenerational solidarity and to duties of individuals to family and community. Professor Takada, who's sitting next to me, from Center in Japan, will speak on this later, and I support what she will say. For my part, the roles of family and society were The theme of my master's thesis when I was young. This has long been a vital question in Japan. Solidarity and duties must never be invoked to justify lowering the protection of older persons or the restrict of state obligations.

I propose framing this principle as intergenerational justice. With an explicit safeguard. Thank

you. Thank you, Professor. La próxima oradora. The next speaker on my list is the Latin American Committee. Gracias, señor Presidente. Thank you, Chairperson. On behalf of the Latin American Commission and the Organization of Colombia, we. I welcome the statements by the panel which recognizes the crucial role of international cooperation in many of our countries. This has been an essential ally to support rights and communities. On many occasions, it's reached rural areas where for various circumstances the state response was limited. Rebuilding the social fabric and improving the lives of older persons, 3 priorities which are crucial for future international instrument on the rights of older persons, mental health, long-term care, and the right to maintain a purpose in life. People don't choose loneliness. When we see poverty, the digital gap, the lack of accessibility, social inclusion, and the loss of links that lead to well-being. So we have to ask how to ensure that all people can keep their life project to the very last day within a human rights-based approach. We need to create the conditions to exercise rights. If a person wishes to continue working and supporting the community in decent conditions by choice and not by necessity, they should do that. Rights do not retire and nor should life a project and every person's sense of Our commitment is to ensure that all persons may maintain their

life project and live in dignity, autonomy, and with rights to the last day of their lives. I thank you. Thank you. The last one

on my list is Japan Support Center for Activity and Research for Older People. You have the floor. Thank you, Chair. I am Kiyoe Takata of Japan Support Center for Activity and Research for Older People. I speak on one point, family responsibility and state obligation. The Chair's paper praises interdependence among the principles and calls care a duty within family and society, but obligation to guarantee human rights lies with the state. Human rights do not impose self-help or mutual help on people. Japan is the most aged society in the world. For a long time, families here have carried most of the care. This did have good aspects for the older person, but the number of children is falling and more and more older persons live alone. Systems that assume family care are breaking down. Inadequate public care places a crushing burden on families. It has led to murders and murder-suicides against older persons. These are the ultimate violation of human rights. Family care is not a beautiful way in which society thrives. It must never be left to goodwill. The order is reversed. The state has obligation to guarantee the right to receive care. Only then can families put their energy into the emotional support, that only family can offer, talking with them, telephone them, being beside them, that's better for older persons themselves. Family carers are themselves human rights holders, including the right to receive support. Those made to carry care are in most cases women. Therefore, it is not appropriate to limit State Parties' obligations by subject to national legislation and within existing resources. The Convention should state the obligation to use the maximum of available resources and the principle of non-retrogression. I speak from the country at the forefront of population aging. Japan's experience, good or bad, is the future of many countries. We ask that the Convention states the primary obligation of the

state for care and that family and community support complement it, never replace it. Thank you. Thank you. Excellencies, distinguished participants, this brings us to the end of this meeting. Tomorrow we will resume our session at 10 AM for the consideration of the timeline and future