the terms of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,243 can only be triggered when the Committee receives "reliable information indicating grave or systematic violations by a State Party of rights set forth in the Convention"244 --, it found in October 2016 that this high threshold had indeed been reached.245 The conclusions included a broad, but vague, recommendation that the UK "[e]nsure that public budgets take into account the rights of persons with disabilities, that sufficient budget allocations are made available to cover extra costs associated with living with a disability and that appropriate mitigation measures, with appropriate budget allocations, are in place for persons with disabilities affected by austerity measures".246 But the procedural recommendations are the more precise and, perhaps, the most actionable. They include a requirement that the United Kingdom "[c]onduct a cumulative impact assessment of the measures adopted since 2010 [...] on the rights to independent living and to be included in the community, social protection and employment of persons with disabilities", which should be "rights-based and meaningfully [involve] persons with disabilities and their representative organizations"247 ; that the government "[a]ctively consult and engage with persons with disabilities through their representative organizations and give due consideration to their views in the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of any legislation, policy or programme action related to the rights addressed in the present report"248; and that it "[s]et up a mechanism and a system of human rights-based indicators to permanently monitor the impact of the different policies and programmes relating to the access and enjoyment by persons with disabilities of the right to social protection and an adequate standard of living, the right to live independently and be included in the community and the right to work, in close consultation with persons with disabilities and their representative organizations".249 Such procedural mechanisms go beyond ensuring democratic decision-making, based on the regular holding of elections : they involve the search for a deeper and more inclusive type of democracy, in which affirmative measures are taken to ensure that the poorest and most marginalized groups of the population have their views taken into account, and in which democratic politics is not just about institutions and procedures, but also about concrete outcomes. To borrow from a distinction of Sanskrit jurisprudence revived by Amartya Sen, this involves moving from electoral niti, in which attention is paid only to institutional fitness, to democratic nyaya, which involves critically examining the implications in terms of substantive justice of particular arrangements.250 It is not any kind of democracy, but a form of democracy informed by human rights, and because it is inclusive, forced to pay attention to the outcomes on the most marginalized groups. VII. Conclusion This inquiry started as an attempt to clarify the meaning of the duty of States parties to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to dedicate the 'maximum available resources' to the progressive realization of economic, social and cultural rights. It closes with a plea for budgetary decision-making procedures that are based on participation, accountability and transparency, involving in particular the poorest groups of the population in setting priorities. The substantive and the procedural dimensions of the inquiry are mutually supportive. In 2004, the International Human Rights Internship Program and other organizations published Dignity Counts, intended as a guide to use budget analysis to advance human rights, using the analysis of health243 Opened for signature in New York on 13 December 2006 by GA Resolution 61/206, in force since 3 May 2008 (2518 UNTS 283). 244 Article 6 of the Optional Protocol. 245 Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Inquiry concerning the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland carried out by the Committee under article 6 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention. Report of the Committee, UN doc. CRPD/C/15/R/2/Rev.1 (6 October 2016), para. 113 ("there is reliable evidence that the threshold of grave or systematic violations of the rights of persons with disabilities has been met in the State party"). 246 Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Inquiry, cited above, para. 114, d). 247 Id., para. 114, a). 248 Id., para. 114, g). 249 Id., para. 114, j). 250 Amartya K. Sen, The Idea of Justice, cited above note 156, 20-21 and 348-350. 53