Disability: Human Rights and Social Responsibility: By Dr Shanker
Disability: Human Rights and Social Responsibility: By Dr. Shanker Adawal
India is not far behind, as statistics show that it has more than 90 million disabled people, of which only a few of them are employed.
The debate about disability rights is not so much about the enjoyment of specific rights when it comes to the equally effective enjoyment of all human rights, without discrimination, by people with disabilities. The principle of non-discrimination helps to make human rights in general relevant in the specific context of disability. Non-discrimination, and the equally effective enjoyment of all human rights by people with disabilities, is a long-term reform in terms of disability and disability worldwide. The process of ensuring that people with disabilities enjoy their human rights are slow and unequal. But the good thing is that it has begun, in all economic and social systems. It is inspired by the values that support human rights: the invaluable dignity of every human being, the concept of autonomy or self-determination which requires the person to place the inherent equality in the middle of all the decisions that affect him / her regardless of the difference and the solidarity that society requires to maintain the freedom of the person with appropriate social support.
Over the last two decades, a dramatic shift in perspective has taken place from an approach based on rights based on charity towards the disabled. In essence, the human rights perspective on disability means that people with disabilities are regarded as subjects and not as objects. This involves the shift of people with disabilities as problems to regard them as right-holders. It is important to identify problems outside the disabled and the way in which different economic and social processes accommodate disability – or not, as appropriate. The debate on the rights of the disabled is thus linked to a broader debate about the place of difference in society.
The shift to the human rights perspective is also reflected in the fact that national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights around the world have been actively interested in disability issues. This is important as these institutions help to provide a bridge between international human rights legislation and household debates on disability law and policy reform. National institutions are strategic partners in the process of change, and their increasing involvement in the issue of human rights for people with disabilities is a highly encouraging sign for the future.
People with disabilities themselves form their long sense of grief and injustice in the language of justice. Isolated injustices no longer have to experience isolation. NGOs who work with disability issues, such as the joint project, Disability Awareness in Action, also start themselves as NGOs of human rights. They start collecting and processing hard information about alleged human rights violations of people with disabilities. While relatively limited, their human rights abilities are growing. A similar process of self-transformation is underway in traditional human rights NGOs, which is an increasing approach to disability as a mainstream human rights issue. This is important because these NGOs have highly developed structures, and the development of a healthy synergy between disability NGOs and traditional human rights NGOs is not just long but inevitable. State parties seem to move clearly towards the human rights perspective on disability. Recent research shows that 39 countries in all parts of the world have adopted non-discrimination or equal opportunities legislation in the context of disability. State parties dialogue with the human rights treaty bodies is constructive in the context of
their efforts to ensure the reform of disabilities; There are currently a considerable amount of good practices on a global basis, which can be useful through the human rights treaty system.
The human rights movement in India has shifted the attention of policy makers bravely and categorically from the mere provision of charity services to protect their basic right to dignity and self-esteem. In the new scenario, people with disabilities are regarded as individuals with a wide range of abilities, each of whom is willing and able to utilize his / her potential and talents. On the other hand, society is considered to be the real cause of the disabled of the disabled, as it still has many barriers to education, employment, architecture, transport, health and dozens of other activities.
In a country like India, the number of people with disabilities is so high, their problems so complex, available resources so scarce and social attitudes so harmful. It is only legislation that ultimately can cause a material change in a uniform manner. Although legislation can not change alone, the structure of a society can change in a short space of time, but it can facilitate accessibility of disabled people to education and work, public buildings and shopping centers for transportation and communication. The impact of well-directed legislation in the long term will be profound and liberating. One in ten people in India suffers from one form of disability or the other who possesses physical or mental disabilities, significantly limits one or more important life activities. In other words, 90 million of our countrymen live and learn to overcome their own individual ways, problems that can not be understood by infirmities. The law should not only allow one in ten people, but also nine out of every ten people to lead their lives to their full potential. The law states that disability should not be an insurmountable shortcoming as long as it is properly understood and provided. The law seeks to eliminate factors that cause low self-esteem in disabled people and empower them to confront the insensitivity and ignorance of others.
The legal framework A
comprehensive law of 1995 (Act 1 of 1996) entitled “Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation” of 1995 (Act 1 of 1996) was unanimously approved by all Parliament’s houses on December 22, 1995, which agreed the President on January 1, 1996. The law has 14 chapters and aims at:
a) spelling out the responsibility of states to prevent disability and the protection of people’s rights in health, education, training, employment and rehabilitation;
b) Work to create a barrier-free environment for disabled people
c) Work to remove discrimination in the sharing of development benefits
d) To prevent any abuse or exploitation of the disabled
e) Strategies for comprehensive development of programs and services and for equalization of opportunities for the disabled; and
f) provide for the integration of disabled persons into the social mainstream.
The Act is effective from 7 February 1996.
One of the weaknesses of many of the legislation is that the enforcement of their provisions has been left to the courts without giving summary procedures to be followed in case of proceedings under the respective law. This makes it difficult for people with disabilities who usually have limited resources and legal knowledge to participate in a complicated, long and expensive legal process.
At the same time, the definition of disability given in 1995 must be extended to protect the rights of people suffering from HIV, leprosy and internal organ failure. Currently, the Act provides protection to those who suffer from blindness, low vision, leprosy, hearing impairment, mental disability, mental illness and locomotor disability. There are 600 million people in the world, almost 10 percent of the world’s population, suffering from a disability or the other. Of these, 90 million are from India. But even the total percentage of disabled people in India is only six percent of its population, while in the developed country like the USA, the percentage of people with disabilities is nine percent.
This is not because there are more disabled people in the US, but because the definition of disability is wider in the USA. Besides limited scope, there are other shortcomings in the act. There are no guidelines and no deadlines for non compliance. Most government and semi-government organizations do not strictly follow the guidelines to maintain three per cent disabled people’s employment, yet they will be unpunished. According to the Act, the compensation must also be granted to a disabled person according to the employer’s financial ability. The employers often use this clause. In addition, provision must be made for temporary relief, until the matter is decided, to be taken to the affected (disabled) employee. In the era of growing consumers and shine, this is how we see it. Customs duties on semi-precious stones and raw farmed pearls are 5 percent, while the duty on hearing aids is 15 percent. If cordless phones are entered only 15 per cent, the disabled will drop 25 per cent as surcharge for jars and artificial limbs.
The act has come a long way since its inception, and the real danger now is that those who claim its action will be self-sufficient and think that the work has been done. The Act must be implemented in schools and colleges, in factories and workplaces, in transport and shopping centers. People with disabilities, and those who care about them, must ensure that discrimination is prohibited and barriers are removed as much from the physical environment as from the attitude of ordinary people. The real battle for the right to full citizenship and active participation of disabled people is in place. The law is comprehensive but must be enforced with sincerity and determination. What is disability Your state of mind is the actual disability. Let’s change our attitudes and help change others. Make a commitment to end unfair and unfounded prejudice. Open minds and doors for people with disabilities. Repeat in speeches, writings and movies three words: Disability, Equality, Liberty. Listen to the disabled. Serving disabled people. Work with the disabled. Travel with disabled people. Shop with disabled people. Do they have friends? Changing the laws and legislating will not help. The need is to change the attitude of society.