As a person with visual impairment, the experience of disability has been a routine one for me, and disability studies constitutes a significant part of my academic engagement as well. I have also been involved with the activities of the disability rights movement. Your editorial “Disabled by Lack of Political Will” (EPW, 11 January 2014) was a timely intervention in the evolving debates on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill that was cleared by the cabinet in December 2013.

The scenario has changed from the initial euphoria following the cabinet decision to one of serious concern. Since the cabinet-approved draft was never put up on the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MSJE) website at the time of the announcement of the decision of the cabinet to clear the bill, much of the disability sector expected the bill to be structured more or less on the lines of the 2012 draft that evolved out of a long consultative process. However, when the approved draft eventually became available in the public domain, the disability sector realised that not only were the concerns emerging out of the 2012 draft not addressed in the new bill, but also that we have gone back a long way. Although India ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) way back in 2007 and the new bill was proposed to give effect to its provisions, many clauses in the new draft are against the letter and spirit of the UNCRPD.

It starts from the very definition of disability. The new draft does not factor in environmental barriers in the creation of disability. Like in the old welfarist Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, an exclusively medical understanding of disability is retained without any reference to environmental factors. Regressive provisions such as identification of posts for reservation that the Supreme Court struck down in a recent judgment are brought back. The definition of certain categories of impairment in the bill may result in further disadvantage to sections that are already disadvantaged. Legal capacity of disabled individuals, representation in coordination and watchdog mechanisms are all problematic areas.

The disability sector would need more support from concerned quarters like the EPW. There is a serious possibility that the present bill might get passed in the Parliament session that is about to restart without the concerns of the disabled groups being taken into consideration. The 1995 law was passed by both houses of Parliament on the same day with no discussion whatsoever.

What we need is not any bill, but a solid legislation that can bring about a paradigm shift. The MSJE can still accommodate the major concerns before the bill is tabled in Parliament.

Mahesh S Panicker
Lady Shri Ram College for Women
Delhi University

SOURCE: Economic and Political Weekly