CRPD/C/GC/7 the last few decades, thanks to the emergence of movements of persons with disabilities demanding recognition of their human rights and their role in determining those rights. The motto “nothing about us without us” resonates with the philosophy and history of the disability rights movement, which relies on the principle of meaningful participation. 5. Persons with disabilities still face significant attitudinal, physical, legal, economic, social and communication barriers to participate in public life. Before the entry into force of the Convention, the views of persons with disabilities were dismissed in favour of those of third-party representatives, such as organizations “for” persons with disabilities. 6. The participatory processes and the involvement of persons with disabilities, through their representative organizations, in the negotiation and drafting of the Convention proved to be an excellent example of the principle of full and effective participation, individual autonomy and the freedom to make one’s own decisions. As a result, international human rights law now recognizes unequivocally persons with disabilities as “subjects” of all human rights and fundamental freedoms.4 7. Based on its jurisprudence, the Committee aims to clarify States parties’ obligations under articles 4 (3) and 33 (3) and their implementation in this general comment. The Committee notes the progress made by States parties to implement the provisions under articles 4 (3) and 33 (3) over the past decade, such as granting financial or other assistance to organizations of persons with disabilities, including persons with disabilities in independent monitoring frameworks established pursuant to article 33 (2) of the Convention, and in monitoring processes. Moreover, some States parties have consulted with organizations of persons with disabilities in the preparation of their initial and periodic reports to the Committee in accordance with articles 4 (3) and 35 (4). 8. The Committee, however, continues to observe an important gap between the goals and the spirit of articles 4 (3) and 33 (3) and the degree to which they have been implemented. This is due, among other things, to the absence of meaningful consultation with and involvement of persons with disabilities, through their representative organizations, in the development and implementation of policies and programmes. 9. States parties should acknowledge the positive impact on decision-making processes and the necessity of involving and ensuring the participation of persons with disabilities, through their representative organizations, in such processes, notably because of their lived experiences and knowledge of the rights to be implemented. States parties should also consider the general principles of the Convention in all measures taken for its implementation and monitoring, and in advancing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its goals. II. Normative content of articles 4 (3) and 33 (3) Definition of “representative organizations” A. 10. The involvement and participation of persons with disabilities through “representative organizations”, or organizations of persons with disabilities, is inherent in both articles 4 (3) and 33 (3). For proper implementation, it is important for States parties and the relevant stakeholders to define the scope of organizations of persons with disabilities and recognize the different types that often exist. 11. The Committee considers that organizations of persons with disabilities should be rooted, committed to and fully respect the principles and rights recognized in the Convention. They can only be those that are led, directed and governed by persons with disabilities. A clear majority of their membership should be recruited among persons with disabilities themselves.5 Organizations of women with disabilities, children with disabilities and persons living with HIV/AIDS are organizations of persons with disabilities under the 4 5 2 Ibid., paras. 16–17. CRPD/C/11/2, annex II, para. 3.