36 ĐORĐEVIĆ v. CROATIA JUDGMENT § 3 of the Convention. It further finds that they are not inadmissible on any other grounds. They must therefore be declared admissible. B. Merits 1. The parties’ submissions (a) The applicants’ submissions 114. The applicants firstly addressed the issue of violence against the first applicant as a disability hate crime. Studies relating to that issue showed that the rate of abuse and violence committed against persons with disabilities was considerably higher than the rate for the general population and was widespread. The most common forms of violence against people with intellectual disabilities were kicking, biting, name-calling, teasing, stealing, pushing, threatening, throwing objects at them, telling them to leave a building, hitting, shouting at them, swearing, demanding money, hair-pulling, throwing stones, spitting, poking, punching, beating and banging their head against a wall. People with disabilities frequently experienced violence on an ongoing basis perpetrated by the same people. Abuse was often perpetrated by gangs of youths who targeted the same person systematically, as in the present case. 115. Harassment against disabled persons was usually motivated by a perception of such persons as inferior. Violence and hostility might have wide-ranging consequences, including emotional, physical and sexual implications, or even the death of the victim. People with disabilities might be forced to restructure their daily lives in order to avoid risk. 116. In their submissions, the applicants also relied on the international sources cited above, in particular the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the obligations stemming from it. 117. The applicants submitted that they had been subjected to ongoing harassment and abuse for a period of over five years by a group of mostly unidentified children on account of their Serbian origin and the first applicant’s disability. The harassment had consisted mostly of verbal abuse and other forms of anti-social behaviour such as spitting, making noise, drawing insulting messages on the pavement, and causing damage to the applicants’ place of residence. It had caused the applicants intense suffering. Besides the physical harm resulting from the incidents mentioned above, the ongoing harassment had taken a very significant toll on the first applicant’s mental well-being as documented by his psychotherapist. 118. In addition, the applicants had had to change their daily routines. Daily walks in the park, sitting on a bench in the park and talking to people were crucial for the first applicant to develop an independent lifestyle and a