During the 70's, there came a new conception regarding disability. In the United States, the political activism provided the bases for the movement of independent life (Dejong, 1979; Shapiro, 1994). In the United Kingdom, from a sociological perspective, they created some theoretical bases which would at the time be known as the social barrier model and would later be known as the social model of disability (Barnes, Oliver & Barton, 2002).

Both processes were absolutely necessary and concurrent, as they brought a new perspective focusing on the social barriers as a cause or origin of the disability, and no longer characterized as a person's physical, mental, intellectual or sensorial limitation to become a social limitation. The disability as a result of a person's condition who interacting with different barriers became a disability situation and perspective (Brogna, 2006).

Such disability barriers were limited to the role of health professionals who analyzed and classified them through a medical diagnosis. The Disability Rights Movement besides introducing the social perspective on their rights, it worked under the slogan "nothing about us without us" (García Alonso, 2003) emphasizing the need or a real and effective participation in public policies dealing with disability issues as well as making their own decisions over their lives (Barton, 1998).

The International law of human rights has not refrained from this new conception and shift in paradigm. At the beginning, the Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities (United Nations, 1994) established a new way of doing things, leaving aside the medical superiority perspective to move on to a more horizontal and holistic one based on the International Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities.²

This is the first Treaty of the Human Rights of the XXI Century and it has many benefits, as the capacity to bring the issue of disability into the international human rights agenda (Palacios, 2008). Understanding and thinking of disability as a matter of human rights needs a philosophical and sociological framework, which analyzes the issue at hand from a perspective of values and principles of such rights (Palacios, 204, pp. 700 and ss). Accepting and comprehending that disability is a matter of human rights has brought on a shift in paradigm which established the fact that considering the problems that peoples with disability face as human rights and based on previously mentioned situation that the answers to such situation ought to be also well thought out planned based on and focusing on the respect of the values that uphold such rights (Asís Roig, 2014).

The Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities reflects on and requires that each perspective be based on the conceptualization of disability as a result of the interaction with the condition and the barriers (social disability model), as well as the imperious necessity to interpret and apply the instrument based on certain general principles, without a doubt, they meet the values that uphold human rights. Article 3 reads as follows:

(a) Respect for inherent dignity, individual autonomy including the freedom to make one's own choices, and independence of persons; (b) Non-discrimination; (c) Full and effective participation and inclusion in society; (d) Respect for difference and acceptance of persons with disabilities as part of human diversity and humanity; (e) Equality of opportunity; (f) Accessibility; (g) Equality between men and women; (h) Respect for the evolving capacities of children with disabilities and respect for the right of children with disabilities to preserve their identities. (United Nations, 2006, art.3)

The convention is a beacon of light in matters related to public policies, however, it has the legitimacy of having been included people with disabilities throughout the process. It is an international treaty and within the local rights framework, it holds a supra-legal or even constitutional hierarchy (depending on the internal procedures of the countries that have ratified it)³. This means that it holds a "super law" status within the legal systems. It, therefore, requires the modification and adaptation of local legislation and practices.

The contexts of influence are horizontal and spread out to all aspects of life. So far, the committee has had the role of overseeing its implementation and to provide the basis for interpretation. They have been working on four aspects that have been considered as requiring an urgent revision.

The first one deals with the concept of "the right to have rights" as Hannah Arendt puts it (2013). Through Observation Number 1, about legal capacity, Committee establishes the obligation of States to overcome the model known as "the substitute decision making" and guaranteeing a "decisions support system" (United Nations, 2013). It not only supposes an acknowledgement of the legal capacity but also the providing a support system for those that require it, along with protection system that guarantee that a person can make decisions according to the new standards of the international law, which among other things uphold the respect for their will and preferences (United Nations, 2007, § III).

The second general observation the committee has is regarding Article 9: Accessibility (United Nations, 2014). The paper deals with the concept and implications of one of the main tools to guarantee that that people with disability can enjoy and exercise all their rights in equal conditions and no discrimination because of their disability. Likewise, the article is analyzed from a systematic perspective in relation to other dispositions of the Convention and develops some concepts that are part of the same essential content of the right to accessibility, such as the universal design as well as the adoption of reasonable adjustments (United Nations, 2007, § IV).

Recently, the general Observation Number 3 of the Committee deals with the situation of women and young girls with disability (United Nations, 2016a). The document describes the evidence that women and young girls with disability face barriers in most areas of their lives, and such limits create multiple and intersectional discrimination (United Nations, 2016a, par. 2). There is also the description of homogenous condition in situation within the collective of women and young girls with disability (par. 5). It establishes the equality of gender as a fundamental element within the human rights (par. 8).

Finally, general Observation Number 4 deals with article 24 in relation to inclusive education (United Nations, 2016b). The committee understands that the Participant State Reports show deep challenges in the integral implementation of the equality right to education of people with disability. It is important to highlight that the document does not only refer to the right to education but also to an "inclusive" education which among other things requires "an education with no discrimination and based on equal opportunities" (United Nations, 2016b, par.1).

These four aspects are horizontal and show the interdependence of human rights. The obligations established by the Convention and the Committee reinforce not only focused on the states but on society in general. The Convention is a necessary and fundamental elemental to modify social reality. It is, however, not enough. In order to achieve its goals, it is necessary to have the commitment of all the powers of the State: the legislative power (to abolish laws that are in conflict with the principles of the treaty and also allow the design and implementation of the public policy related to the human rights perspective; the executive power (as executor) and the judicial power (based on its role to guarantee and interpret law, reestablishing and stipulating the way repair in case of vulnerability existence.)

Last but not least, the academy has an outstanding role in this social and political process. According to Robert Garland (1995) the disability depends on the "eye of the beholder". We could always paraphrase it and establish that currently there is no holistic perspective than that of the principles and value that uphold human rights.