A/67/278 80. In practice, however, restrictions on legal standing in many States directly and indirectly exclude persons living in poverty from accessing judicial and adjudicatory mechanisms. For example, in some States, legislatures and judicial systems limit standing for certain groups, such as women and children. Discriminatory laws deprive women of legal competency and require that they be under male guardianship before instituting a claim or giving evidence. 81. In addition, narrow rules relating to legal standing prevent civil society organizations from taking a more direct role in litigation, or engaging in judicial proceedings on behalf or in support of persons living in poverty and other vulnerable groups (with their permission), who may lack the resources or capacity to do so themselves. For example, in 10 European Union member States, the domestic rules on legal standing are considered overly restrictive and therefore represent a major obstacle to the right to access justice. In those States, individuals cannot bring a claim to court unless they have full legal capacity (which often excludes those with certain disabilities) and are directly concerned in the matter. 22 82. The presence of civil society in the judicial context can greatly improve the system. The ability of civil society organizations to support victims or bring cases on their behalf can reduce the financial and personal burden of legal action on the individual claimant. State restrictions on public interest litigation or on the filing of amicus briefs by civil society organizations can close off other avenues for access to justice for persons living in poverty. This is especially so in terms of remedy for structural or systemic abuses or discrimination, which affect large numbers of persons living in poverty. Limited impact of litigation 83. In many jurisdictions, the effect of judgements is limited to those who litigate or bring a claim, even in cases that have a much wider significance. This means that only those individuals with the capacity or tenacity to overcome all the barriers to accessing justice will benefit from important judgements. Often, however, those living in poverty are affected by widespread practices or broad Government measures that generate situations where the rights of many individuals are at stake and which would be better addressed by collective remedies. 84. Implementation of a collective litigation mechanism by which findings and benefits are generalized beyond the actual litigants can ensure that human rights become meaningful for large numbers of people, even when those whose rights are being violated are not aware of the violation (or the rights). It can also draw the attention of the authorities to their constitutional and legal obligations regarding human rights. 23 In legal systems where courts have the power of judicial review or of issuing erga omnes judgements, which can declare certain laws or a state of affairs unconstitutional, this can have a positive effect in terms of securing justice for persons living in poverty. __________________ 22 23 18 Access to Justice in Europe: An Overview of Challenges and Opportunities (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2010), p. 40. Programming for Justice: Access for All (see footnote 2 above), p. 88. 12-45806