about a quarter of cases (26%), the deaf respondents were below 18 years old. Deaf parties who filed cases are primarily female (75%). Deaf minors who file cases are also predominantly female (84% of cases).14  Roughly one quarter each of cases with known data have ongoing trials, have been decided, or dismissed. Of 11 cases with known data, the majority were decided in favor of the complainant.15  The abovementioned data gathered revolves only around persons hard of hearing or who are deaf. There remains to be little information or none at all as regards the other forms of disabilities. Such manifestation depicts a blatant inadequateness in terms of mechanisms for disaggregation of data regarding persons with disabilities in the aspect of access to justice. c. persons with disabilities being convicted, the nature of their sentence, and whether they benefitted from safeguards of the right to fair trial on an equal basis with others; and  From 2008 to mid-2012, 126 cases involving persons with disabilities which have reached the Supreme Court mostly revolve around the following areas: 1. Gender-based violence 2. Labor disputes on disability benefits 3. Cases on psychological incapacity in nullity of marriages  Of these Supreme Court cases, 92 cases (or 73%) were decided in favor of the party who is a person with disability. 16  The legal system is still lacking in terms of providing adequate safeguards on the right to fair trial of persons with disabilities. This is reflected in the failure of courts to provide sensitized court personnel as well as well-trained interpreters to assist the litigants through the process. Consequently, persons with disabilities tend to be discouraged to seek redress and bring proper legal actions. d. the opening and conduct of impartial and independent investigations of human rights violations of persons with disabilities, particularly those relating to the right to life, liberty and security of the person, freedom from violence, abuse and exploitation, and freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.  The Commission on Human Rights has continuously been in the forefront of the conduct of impartial and independent investigations as National Human Rights Institution vested with investigatory functions.  In a working paper developed by the Commission in 2008, it expressed its commitment to continuously develop a disaggregated and comprehensive databank which would reflect the necessary data to improve responsiveness of 14 Idem. Idem. 16 Idem. 15