Why are institutes still using the word “handicapped”?

The Hindu, 24 June 2015, New Delhi

A year after an advisory by the Union Ministry of Social Justices and Empowerment stating that various national institutes for persons with disabilities should discard the use of the word “handicapped” in their institute name and rename them — institutes continue to flout the recommendation and stick to “discriminatory names”.

National institutes such as National Institute for the Visually Handicapped, National Institute for the Hearing Handicapped, National Institute of Mentally Handicapped, National Institute of Visually Handicapped and National Institute for Orthopaedically Handicapped were instructed to remove the word “handicapped”, but to no avail.

“The word is simply not going away despite instructions to do away and replace it,” said disability activist Satendra Singh, Assistant Professor at University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur hospitals.

“I wrote to the directors of these national institutes asking why the name hasn’t been changed so far. Nobody replied except the National Institute for the Hearing Handicapped. Even when the consultation and change was done last year, no consultation was done with disabled people organisations,” said Dr. Singh.

He filed an RTI application asking about the ban on the expression of the word “handicapped” and renaming national institutes accordingly.

“The response from the Ministry stated that that the file dealing with this issue was not readily traceable in the division. The information will be provided as and when the file is traced in the division,” said Dr. Singh.

He applied again in May and got a response stating that “a committee was set up under the Union Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment and directors of the national institutes suggested following names in names for the establishments.’’

Boxed image: Name Game

1.      2007: India has ratified UNCRPD which makes it legally binding to harmonise all existing laws and policies in line with UNCRPD. The Convention uses the terminology ‘Persons with Disabilities’.

2012: The Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities  banned the expression “handicapped”. 

1.      2014: Deptt of Disability Affairs was renamed as Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities.

S.No	Name of the Institute	Name suggested by the committee
1.	Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Institute for the Physically Handicapped	Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Institute for the Persons with Physical Disabilities
2.	National Institute for Orthopedically Handicapped	National Institute for Persons with Locomotor Disabilities
3.	Ali Yavar Jung National Institute for the Hearing Handicapped	Ali Yavar Jung National Institute for the Persons with Speech & Hearing Disabilities
4.	National Institute for Mentally Handicapped	National Institute for Persons with Intellectual Developmental Disabilities
5.	National Institute for Visually Handicapped	National Institute for Persons with Visual Disabilities

The RTI added that the committee felt that there was no need to change the names of National Institute for Empowerment of Persons with Multiple Disabilities and Swami Vivekanand National Institute for Rehabilitation, Training and Research as they do not involve the expression handicapped.

“Negative terminology fosters attitudinal barriers. What is also shocking is the fact the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment doesn’t have the facility to provide information (circulars or RTI responses) in Braille. They told me that this information can be formatted only at the National Institute for Visually Handicapped, Dehradun,” said Dr. Singh.

While the directors of the institute refused to comment on the issue saying they were not authorised to speak to the media, a senior ministry official said the change of name was a long drawn process and takes time.


Source: http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/why-are-institutes-still-using-the-word-handicapped/article7348415.ece

NHFDC finally responds on my complaints

 

Please also see related posts based on my complaint letter:

'Communication gap' hits disabled students.

NHFDC's MoU with inaccessible PNB branches to harasses students with disabilities.

'Communication gap' hits disabled students

In my last blog I shared my letter to Secretary, DDA and Chairman NHFDC on the MoU with inaccessible PNB bank. Today's 'The Statesman' has picked up the story:

Delhi

'Communication gap' hits disabled students

• The Statesman
• 28 Jul 2013  

Kinjal Sharma
NEW DELHI, 27 JULY: A memorandum of understanding (MoU) was recently signed between the National Handicapped Finance and Development Corporation (NHFDC), set up by the ministry of social justice & empowerment, and Punjab National Bank (PNB), to help students with disabilities get educational loans. However, bank officials appear to be clueless about the agreement leaving the students at the receiving end.

 As per the terms of the MoU, educational loans will be made available to persons with disability (PWD)s through  particular branches of PNB. The bank has over 275 branches in the NCR but as per the MoU, the PWD students can approach any of the six retail asset branches (RABs) situated at Anand Vihar, Green Park, Gurgoan, Faridabad, Connaught Place and Karol Bagh, to avail educational loans at concessional rates.

 However, officials at the six PNB branches appear to be unaware of the MoU. Neha Chauhan from Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh,  approached one of the six branches to avail the loan, but was shocked to note that access to the bank was not at all disabled-friendly and she had to struggle to enter. There she was even more shocked as the bank officials where unaware about any agreement between PNB and NHFDC. She returned home disappointed.

The manager of PNB's Green Park branch, Mr Vijay kumar Setia, said he has no idea about the MoU.  "I did not receive any formal guidelines in this regard. I will check with the concerned department. Sometimes, banks receive such information in a particular time span. It may not be received within a week. After getting the orders, further formalities would be completed," said Mr Setia. The branch manager of the Connaught Place branch, Mr Naresh Kumar Jain, also said he has not been informed about the MoU. Several PWD students said the six RABs are either inaccessible or the officials were not aware. 

 "As everyone is shirking responsibility, it is the PWD students who are facing problems. The NHFDC didn't bother to see whether the RABs were accessible. PNB has not implemented repeated master circulars from Reserve Bank of India (RBI), to make banks accessible. Moreover, RBI does not maintain any record on the number of inaccessible banks and ATMs in India and simultaneously, Department of Disability Affairs has no monitoring initiatives," said Dr Satendra Singh, a doctor with disability, at University College of Medical Sciences (UCMS), Delhi.

 "Students with disabilities are caught in this mess and are paying a hefty price. It is high time we strive for our dignity. India has ratified the UN convention whose Article 3 and 9 reserves the right for full and effective participation of PWD as well as accessibility of public places," said Dr Singh.

Source: 'The Statesman' dated 28 July 2013

NHFDC’s MoU with inaccessible PNB Branches to harass students with disabilities

University College of Medical Sciences (University of Delhi) & Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital DElhi – 110 095

   

ENABLING UNIT, EQUAL OPPORTUNITY CELL

EU/EOC/UCMS/122                                                                                           Dated: 20 July, 2013

                                                                                                                           

Secretary,                                                      Chairman-cum-Managing Director           

Department of Disability Affairs                                National Handicapped Finance and

Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment,              Development Corporation (NHFDC)
Sixth Floor, Shastri Bhawan,                                      Red Cross Bhawan, Sector-12
New Delhi-110 001                                                     Faridabad-121 007

(Through Principal, UCMS & GTB Hospital)

Subject:           NHFDC MoU with inaccessible PNB branches

Reference:       D.O. No.NHF/1/2(3)/Edu-loan/2013/85095 dated 3 July 2013 from CMD, NHFDC

Dear Madam,

Let me first put on record the laudable initiative of NHFDC regarding concessional educational loan facility through Punjab National Bank (PNB) for students with disabilities. However, despite the best possible intention the MoU has a serious flaw that it is made with branches which are inaccessible to persons with disabilities.

Your urgent attention is drawn to following fallacies:

1. Inaccessible Retail Asset Branches (RABs): The referenced D.O (Copy attached) has the list of six RABs in Delhi. I contacted these branches yesterday over phone and as per their information Faridabad and CP, RAB are on second floor without provision of lift, hence inaccessible. Gurgaon RAB has 3-4 steps at the entrance but the bank official said it won’t be a problem to disabled person as their own Senior Manager is a wheelchair user & he is ‘lifted’ by guards to accommodate inside. Karol Bag RAB also has few steps at the entrance.

2. Incorrect information: The contact details mentioned at Green Park RAB are not of a bank rather it’s a residential number of a lady residing in Central Delhi. They have been getting numerous calls regarding loan and rightly upset because of the whole mess. Also, the phone number provided at the Anand Vihar RAB is a fax number only.

3. Unaware Officials: Most of the officials like at Karol Bag RAB are unaware of any MoU with NHFDC and they need to be sensitized regarding the whole procedure of availing loan.

Against the above backdrop, I would request you to urgently intervene on the following:

A)    Issue directives to NHFDC to include only ‘accessible’ PNB RABs under the MoU and ask PNB to comply at the earliest.

B)    Issue directives to NHFDC & PNB to include correct information and numbers.

C)    Ask PNB to make all their branches and ATMs accessible to persons with disabilities including the Gurgaon RAB where a wheelchair employee is treated with indignity.

D)    Ask RBI to have a data of all the accessible and inaccessible Banks/ATMs in India. Despite various master circulars from RBI, a large number of Banks are inaccessible. My RTI revealed that RBI had no record of number of inaccessible bank/ATMs as on 3 Dec 2012. Please find attached the Times of India article covering this story.

I request your goodself to kindly intervene at the earliest. Any intimation of action taken in this matter will be highly appreciated.

Thanking you,

Sincerely,

Enclosure: As above

 Sd/-

Dr Satendra Singh, M.D.

Coordinator, Enabling Unit

Equal Opportunity Cell

Comparisons of the two 'Rights of PwD Bill'

Recently MSJE put upon it's website the modified 'Rights of PwD Bill 2011'. It is bit different from the one proposed by Sudha Kaul Commitee in last year. A Kumaresan compares both the bill to give readers a glance of salient differences between these two. 

Prepared by A. KUMARESAN,Chennai.

Issue 1- Transfer

Disability Bill 2011 as recommended by Sudha Kaul Committee	Disability Bill 2012 as published by M/o Social Justice and Empowerment
Section 56(6) An establishment shall not ordinarily post and transfer a person with disability in a place other than his or her native place or within the vicinity of such place unless such transfer becomes necessary due to exigencies of the job and expertise possessed by the person with disabilities.	No provisions found.

Remarks- Statutory provision for posting / transfer of disabled employees to or near their native places are required as DOPT OM issued on the subject are not implemented by Government in earnest spirit.

Issue 2- Reservation in government jobs

57. Reservations All establishments shall reserve not less than seven percent of all posts and in promotions for persons with disabilities

Section 39(1) Every appropriate government shall reserve, in every establishment under them, not less than 5% of the vacancies meant to be filled by direct recruitment, for persons or class of persons with benchmark disability.

Remarks-Several Hon’ble `High Courts have given favourable judgement to provide reservation in direct recruitment as well as in promotion. For providing stable economic condition, improving the quality of life style and bring up the children of disabled employees on par with other people of the society, reservation in promotion is a must.  Further, restricting reservation only at induction level will lead the disabled towards starvation and unemployment.

While the government of India have gone to the extend of amending the Constitution of India in favour of SCs/STs, the same benefit is denied to disabled whose conditions are worst than the SCs/STs in the society who require the benefits and schemes on par with SCs/STs if not provided more than SCs/STs.

Further, Sudha Kaual Committee recommended 7% of all posts.  But the ministry recommended 5% of vacancies.  From the above one can easily judge the intention of the ministry as to whether the ministry, who is supposed to be the nodal ministry for the welfare of the disabled, is for the welfare of the disabled or they want to wipe out the disabled community who want to be always under somebody’s mercy without dignity.

Issue 3-Lapse of reserved posts

Section 57(3) If sufficient number of qualified persons with disabilities are not available in a particular year, then the reservation may be carried forward to the subsequent year, and if in the subsequent recruitment year also a suitable person with disability is not available, then the post may be first filled by interchange among the categories, and if the vacancy is still not filled then the establishment shall identify, train and then induct persons with disabilities on the post. In no case shall a post to which a person with disability is entitled to be appointed be allowed to lapse.

Section 39(2) If sufficient number of qualified persons with benchmark disabilities are not available in a particular year, then the reservation may be carried forward for up to the next three recruitment years, and if in such succeeding recruitment years also a suitable person with benchmark disability is not available, then the post in the fourth year may be first filled by interchange among the categories of disabilities; and only when there is no person with any benchmark disability available for the post in that year, the vacancy may be filled by appointment of a person, other than a person with benchmark disability.

Remarks- The Sudha Kaul Committee’s recommendations in this regard should be implemented in total.  Providing reservation for a post and allowing the reservation to lapse for want of candidates, makes the reservation a meaningless exercise.  Even the concept of ‘zone of consideration’ and ‘extended zone of consideration’ in case of promotion should go away and posts in question should be filled on the basis of available disabled man power.

Issue 4- Relaxed standard

Section 49(2) All appropriate governments and educational authorities may if they deem fit to promote equality of opportunity relax according to prescribed procedure the minimum qualification criteria required to be obtained by persons with disabilities who seek admission to a higher education institution.

No provisions found.

Remarks- Relaxation of qualifying marks has been allowed to SC/ST candidates in Departmental Promotion Examinations.  While the physically challenged employees of the SC/ST communities enjoy this benefit, the same is denied to other physically challenged employees.  The following cases where the relaxation of standard has been extended to physically challenged employees on par with SCs/STs candidates are furnished.

(1)         DOPT vide OM dated 04.09.1985 issued instructions on relaxation of standards to physically challenged employees on par with SCs/STs

(2)         The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India pronounced a ruling on 19.03.2002 on the W.P.No.115/1998 allowing all physically challenged candidates to treat them on par with SCs/STs in the matter of providing 5% relaxation in qualifying marks.

(3)         The Hon’ble Delhi High Court pronounced a similar ruling on 06.09.2012 on W.P.(C) No.4853 of 2012 in favour of a disabled student who sought admission Delhi Technological university.

(4)         The Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities of India has also pronounced a similar ruling on the above matter in favour of disabled candidates of (i) IIT aspirants (Case No: 1/1011-5471/2008 dated 07.08.2008) and (ii) Postal Department (Case No. 3810/07 dated 17.08.2007).

(5)         BSNL, vide their letters dated 12.10.2004 and 20.01.2005, has provided relaxation in qualifying marks on par with SCs/STs in the departmental promotion examinations for JAOs.

Despite existence of all the above justifications, relaxation in qualifying standard is not provided to disabled employees in Departmental Promotion Examination while extending the same in Direct Recruitment.  The only way to protect the interest of the disabled is to provide statutory provisions.

Issue 5-Provision against retrenchment of a disabled employee.

Section 56 (2) No establishment shall dispense with, or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires a disability during service, such employee may if required by the nature of disability, be shifted to another post with the same pay scale and service benefits. Provided further that if it is not possible to adjust the employee against any post, then such employee may be kept on a supernumerary post until a suitable post is available or the age of superannuation whichever is earlier (3) The protection accorded in sub section (2) shall also be extended to persons employed with the defense forces; Provided that this sub section in no way precludes the defense establishment to formulate a more beneficial employment retention and rehabilitation scheme for persons employed with the defense forces.

Section 25(3) (3) No establishment shall dispense with, or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires a disability during service, Provided that such employee may, if required by the nature of disability, be shifted to another post with the same pay scale and service benefits; Provided further that if it is not possible to adjust the employee against any post, he may be kept on a supernumerary post until a suitable post is available or he attains the age of superannuation, whichever is earlier; Provided that the appropriate Government may, having regard to the type of work carried on in any establishment, by notification and subject to such conditions, if any, as may be specified in such notification, exempt any establishment from the provisions of this section.

Remarks- Using the safely clause provided in the Bill 2012, Government may exempt any establishment from the provisions of this section defeating the purpose of the Section.  Hence, the Sudha Kaul Committee’s recommendations in this regard should be implemented in total.

Issue 6- Tax

Section 131 Notwithstanding anything contained in the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957), the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), or any other enactment for the time being in force relating to tax on wealth, income, profits or gains, the National Disability Rights Authority and State Disability Rights Authority shall not be liable to pay wealth-tax, income-tax, or any other tax in respect of their wealth, income, profits or gains derived.

Section 122 Notwithstanding anything contained in the Income-tax Act, 1961, or any other law for the time being in force relating to tax on income, profits or gains, the Trust shall not be liable to pay income-tax or any other tax in respect of its income, and profits or gains derived therefrom.

Remarks- The Bills 2011 and 2012 have not recommended any tax benefits to the individual disabled persons.  Notwithstanding anything contained in the Income-tax Act, 1961, or any other law for the time being in force, all disabled persons should also be exempted from paying of all kinds of taxes including income tax.

Issue7- Political participation

Section 32. Right to Political Participation (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Representation of the People Act (No. 43 of 1950), the Representation of the People Act (No. 43 of 1951) or any other law for the time being in force, every person with disability who fulfills all the eligibility requirements shall be entitled to be registered as a voter and shall not be held disqualified to exercise his or her right to vote on the ground of disability irrespective of any stipulation to the contrary in any law for the time being in force18; (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in the law for the time being in force, any person with disability who is unable to cast vote in person due to his or her disability or because of admission in any establishment maintained wholly or mainly for the reception and treatment of persons with disabilities at the time the poll is taken shall be entitled to vote by postal ballot and provisions shall be made, by rules made under the Representation of the People Act (No. 43 of 1951) to enable such voting; The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill, 2011 (3) The Election Commission shall ensure that all polling stations are accessible to persons with disabilities and that all materials related to the electoral process are easily understandable by and accessible to persons with disabilities; (4) Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions contained in sub–section (3), the measures undertaken by the Election Commission in pursuance of that sub–section shall include: a. the construction and availability of ramps at all polling booths; b. separate queues for persons with disabilities at all polling booths with clear pictorial signs; c. the availability of ballot papers and/ or electronic voting machines with candidates’ information available in Braille and other accessible formats; d. the fitting of audio devices to electronic voting machines; e. training programs to sensitise polling officers about the special requirements of persons with disabilities. (5) If the presiding officer is satisfied that, due to disability, a person with disability is unable to recognise the symbols or to record vote without assistance, the presiding officer shall permit the elector to take a companion of not less than eighteen years of age to the voting compartment for recording/ casting the vote; (6) Every person with disability is entitled to form and be a member of any organization or association in accordance to choice.

Section 19. Right to Political Participation (1) The Election Commission of India and the State Election Commissions shall ensure that all polling stations are accessible to persons with disabilities and that all materials related to the electoral process are easily understandable by and accessible to persons with disabilities. (2) Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions contained in sub–section (1), the measures undertaken by an Election Commission in pursuance of that sub–section shall include: a. the construction and availability of ramps at all polling booths; b. separate queues for persons with disabilities at all polling booths with clear pictorial signs; c. the availability of ballot papers and/ or electronic voting machines with candidates’ information available in Braille and other accessible formats; d. the fitting of audio devices to electronic voting machines; e. training programs to sensitise polling officers about the special requirements of persons with disabilities. (3) If the Presiding Officer of a polling booth is satisfied that, due to disability, a person with disability is unable to recognise the symbols or to record vote without assistance, the presiding officer shall permit the elector to take a companion of not less than eighteen years of age to the voting compartment for recording / casting the vote.

Remarks-

1)   The Village Local Bodies, State Legislative Councils, Rajya Sabha etc. should have an appropriate number of nominated members from disabled community so that they can put forward their suggestions / demands and fight for their rights.

2)   Reservation should also be provided at Village Local Bodies, State Legislative Assemblies, Lokh Sabha etc. so that they can put forward their suggestions / demands and fight for their rights.

Protest against MoHFW on World Mental Health Day

Disabled Rights Group (DRG) & National Alliance on Access to Justice for People Living with Mental Illness (NAAJMI) is organizing a protest (Dharna; sit in) outside the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) to demand an immediate stop to the process of bringing in the draconian Mental Health ‘Care’ Act!

The day is specifically chosen as World Mental Healthcare Day, i.e. Wednesday, 10th October and the venue will be Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road at 10:00 am onwards.

Background

India is home to 30-40 million people living with psychosocial disabilities or what we refer to as ‘mental illness’.

The archaic Mental Health Act of 1987, an offshoot of the colonial Lunacy Acts, makes people with ‘unsound’ mind non-human! They are not considered to have opinions, wishes or feelings. They are meant to be locked away, drugged and given electric shock treatments!

The Disability Act of 1995 defines ‘mental illness’ as a disability. India has also ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) that talks about India’s obligation to respect, protect and fulfill the human rights of ALL persons with disabilities. However, the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare seems to be knowingly or unknowingly ‘unaware’ of this. Nothing explains why then has it come out with a Mental Health Care (MHC) Bill, while completely failing to include mental health & well being into the Right to Health Act!

The draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill 2012 recently unveiled by the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment (MSJE) guarantees ‘legal capacity’ and the ‘right to choice’ of all persons with disabilities, including those with psychosocial disabilities. The Ministry of Health has gone drastically against CRPD and the draft Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill and has advocated for involuntary incarceration and continuing with electric shock treatments and even lobotomies! Talk about the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing!

Questions:

The rights of people with psychosocial disabilities must be governed by the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment. Why is the Health Ministry then overstepping its turf? What is the Health Ministry’s motivation?

While the draft Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill of MSJE talks about ‘full legal capacity’, MHC Bill talks about ‘involuntary incarceration’? What is the Government of India’s stand on the issue if two of its Ministries are talking diametrically opposite on this?

Involuntary incarceration, over drugging, mental asylums, electric shock treatment and the rampant abuse & exploitation that goes on in the name of psychiatry and mental health goes against the letter of CRPD that India has ratified. What is India’s answer to the international community?

WE DEMAND AN IMMEDIATE STOP TO THE PROCESS OF BRINGING A DRACONIAN MENTAL HEALTH CARE ACT!

About Disabled Rights Group (DRG):

Disabled Rights Group (DRG) is a national, non-political, cross-disability coalition of people with disabilities and their organisations, NGOs working in the disability sector and parents. It was formed in 1993 with the objective of the drafting and passage of the Disability Act of 1995, India’s first ever disability rights law. Ever since, DRG has been able to successfully advocate for several path breaking policy and legislative changes on disability issues.

About NAAJMI:

The National Alliance on Access to Justice for People Living with a Mental Illness (NAAJMI) is a coalition of people and organisations active since the year 2005 to consolidate a philosophy on the human rights of persons living with psychosocial disabilities with a vision to assure “A Life of Dignity for Every Person Living with Mental Illness”. NAAJMI has been continually advocating for free and voluntary mental health care services, questioning various involuntary commitment provisions of the Mental Health Act, 1987 and is concerned about the 150 or so legal provisions disempowering people with disabilities of their various civil, political, social, and economic rights.

Still no disability policy in the capital of India

In the wake of India ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) in October, 2007, it has become incumbent on India’s part, under the established and recognized international human right norms, to harmonise all its relevant domestic laws and policies with this international treaty.

Even 17 years after enactment of ‘PwD’ Act 1995, only a very few States/UTs do have some kind of a policy on disability in place, most others have none. Secondly even those very few States/UTs who have a State level policy on disability in place, it is not at all in line with the UNCRPD.

In this connection, Mr Prasanna Kumar Pincha, Chief Commissioner For Persons with Disabilities wrote to Chief Secretary of all the States / UTs, Secretary MSJE and Commissioners for Persons with Disabilities of all the States/UTs vide Ref.No.9-1(UNCRPD)/ CCD/2009 dated 15th February, 2012.

The letter states that “all the States and UTs of India must have a progressive and forward looking policy on persons with disabilities which is compatible with the UNCRPD. In the context of a State/UT, such a policy should be called the State/UT Policy on Persons with Disabilities and not State/UT Policy on Disability. In this view of the matter, may I request you to kindly put in place a progressive and forward looking policy on PwDs which is compatible with UNCRPD. Such a policy should be put together with the active involvement of, and in close consultation with PwDs through their representative organizations. The very few States/UTs who already have some kind of policy on disability are also accordingly requested to revise the existing policy and replace the same by State/UT policy on PwDs which is in harmony with the UNCRPD. Action taken in respect of the matter may kindly be intimated to this Commissionerate.”

This was in February 2012. Being a person with locomotor disability, I am aggrieved by the lack of sensitivity of the government towards PwD. I therefore filed an RTI to know how progressive is disability policy of Indian capital, our Delhi. I was shocked to see that even after ratification of UNCRPD, NCT of Delhi does not have a disability policy. Moreover in response to Chief Commissioner’s letter above, nothing was done for full 2 months. Finally, the Social Welfare department of NCT Delhi convened a meeting in which one of the agenda was ‘disability policy’. The disability movement worldwide has a matra- Nothing for us, without us. It pained me to see that this particular meeting had only a handful of representation from PwD. What will happen in the whole country when the national capital is so insensitive?

Chhattisgarh became the first ever state to have a disability policy in 2006. The Comprehensive Disability Policy Framework for Chhattisgarh (C.D.P.F.C.) is in keeping with the international conventions and frameworks on disability, like the Biwako Millennium Framework and United Nations Standard Rules, and has been drafted in consultation with key stakeholders. This is in stark contrast to the short cuts taken by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment while framing the National Policy.

Source: Infinite Ability; Millennium Post