-----Original Message-----
From: Asudani, Rajesh
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 10:51 AM
To: 'Bhushan Punani'; Rajesh H. Asudani; Bhushan Punani; anand...@gmail.com;
Jayshree raveendran; sdr...@gmail.com; L Govinda Rao;
srikala.bhar...@gmail.com; Merry Barua; G. Syamala; rajive raturi; Uma Tuli;
malabik...@yahoo.com; mita...@gmail.com; S.Y Kothari; s.khun...@nic.in; K.G
Verma; chandan.mukher...@gmail.com; pi...@nic.in; Poonam Natrajan;
rehab...@ndc.vsnl.net.in; Director IPH; k Ramakrishna; Rajiv Rajan; Bhargavi
Davar; bvda...@gmail.com; torchbearer...@gmail.com; ak...@senseintindia.org;
jpgadk...@gmail.com; Menon; as_naraya...@hotmail.com; Major HPS Ahluwalia;
r.desir...@nic.in Dr Arbind Prasad; Sudha Kaul
Subject: RE: Comments on disability law drafting subcommittee reports
Madam/Sir
Blind graduates Forum of India,AN NGO wishes to submit following memorandum to
the committee drafting the new disability law.
Hope it will be paid the desired attention.
Blind Graduates Forum of India
Memorandum to the Committee drafting new disability legislation
Title
We feel that the title of the act should be simple, meaningful and quotable
easily. So, it is in fitness of things that the new act be called:
"Rights of persons with disabilities act".
Definitions
Reasonable accommodation
While defining reasonable accommodation, the phrase "where in a particular
case" should be omitted. We opine that provision of enabling environment which
reasonable accommodation envisages should be made in the context of possibility
and probability that persons with disabilities would be able to participate
maximally in a given activity. So, even if said reasonable accommodation may be
construed to impose a disproportionate burden in a particular case, it may be
desirable to introduce it in the general context of persons with disabilities
clarified above.
The phrase "on equal basis with others" used at various places is enigmatic.
What is precisely meant by others is left to conjecture. And persons with
disabilities are not only to be placed at par with non disabled as far as
rights and dignity is concerned, but they are to be regarded human beings with
certain impairments who have their own specific rights and needs also which may
not be reflected by prescription of "on equal basis with others". While
defining reasonable accommodation, the phrase "netted in a particular case" is
used. How this netting is to be done is a very vague and contentious issue.
Instead of netting in a particular case, the proposition should be: "ensure
effective participation of persons with disabilities in a particular
institution/establishment". In a particular case, it may be construed to place
a disproportionate burden if expensive assistive technology is demanded by a
blind employee. But if it is perceived as ensuring equality of opportunity to
blind as a whole in an institution if assistive technology is installed there,
it may not be so construed. It may happen that in a particular establishment,
only a handful of persons with disabilities may actually work or study, and so,
reasonable accommodation may be denied to them, as netting in their particular
case may go against it, but not so, if it is thought to afford equality widely
to disabled at large irrespective of actual number present at the time. The act
does not lay down 40% as the minimum extent of disability. So, does it mean
existence of conditions defined as disabilities is sufficient for all purposes
and there is no need of quantifying them into percentages? If it is so, mention
of severe disabilities as person with more than 80% disability clearly
indicates at quantification in percentage form. How this percentage is to be
arrived at medically is vague and subjective proposition. Severe and moderate
and mild disabilities may be laid down clearly in terms of quantities like
visual acuity between x: x and y:y is severe and that between z:z and a:a is
moderate and so on. Benefits/entitlements also should be apportioned based on
the mildness, moderateness or severety of disability, as it is clear that more
often than not, severely disabled are left out of their rightful entitlements
both on paper and in practice. Operational aspects can also be included in
determining the extent of disability. Definition of inclusive environment is
confined to education and does not lay down anything.
Disability
Twin definition generic and enumerative is welcome. However, some operational
aspect also needs to be brought in it. It may be stipulated that:
"when impairments reversible/irreversible in combination with prevalent
infrastructure and/or attitudes, in any situation, lead to making a person more
vulnerable than an average person without such impairment similarly situated,
or invariably require human or mechanical assistance for a person to accomplish
certain task effectively and without undue risk, such impairments may
reasonably be regarded disabling." This does make the definition context
dependent. however, enumeration of general categories also lays down that
certain impairments do have such an impact in general. This operational aspect
would leave the scope open for certain impairments to be defined as
disabilities in particular contexts and take appropriate action of entitlement
or non discrimination for them.
Besides, Exclusion of persons with sexual disorders on grounds of no demand
from them and no explicit entitlements for them in act is utterly unwelcome.
Some entitlements like 1% reservations in jobs would go a long way in uplifting
their standard of living, and no demand on their part may be a result of their
being utterly outside the fold of activities and know of things. A petition was
also filed before supreme court last year but it rejected plea of any
entitlements to them and asked to approach parliament instead.
It is high time that they are put at par with persons with disabilities.
Adoption of purely medical certification for the time being on ground that no
suitable tools exist for socio-medical certification is flawed. An
interdisciplinary board for certification consisting of medical practitioners,
social workers and persons with disabilities themselves may use index of daily
activities and other valid tools to assess actual disability resulting from a
given impairment and barriers. Further, medical monopoly even for certifying a
person fit for a given educational course or job should be negated immediately
through suitable legal provisions.
Stipulation that a certificate once issued should be recognized by all
authorities all over India without any additional formalities should be couched
in a mandatory language and full faith and credit clause envisaged in the
constitution should be applied to such certificates.
Awareness Raising
While providing for various awareness raising measures, it must be born in mind
that UNCRPD includes awareness about persons with disabilities in the human
rights framework. So, it may be stipulated in order to concretize this right
that no negative, exclusionary or harmful presumption be drawn on the basis of
disability to deny persons with disabilities amenities/facilities/services
available to public at large.
Besides, awareness of medical fraternity should be included specifically as
almost always, doctors are the first point of contact between disabled and
system, even they are the bearers of information that a person is finally
disabled. So, they be properly informed and be duty bound to guide disabled
person to proper resources.
Uniform nomenclature recognized by disability legislation be followed while
mentioning/referring to various categories of disabled persons in state
proceedings/transactions/laws etc. The explicit provision is necessary, as
various bodies refer to various categories of disabled persons arbitrarily and
fancifully in the names they deem fit. This causes needless confusion and often
results in undue denials and discriminations. For instance, many a times
advertisements or provisions mention that they are meant for physically
disabled or handicapped persons. This leaves unanswered what categories are
included in them. Often they are aimed only at orthopedically disabled persons
but often Visual and auditory disabilities are also aimed to be included. So,
uniformity in reference in accordance with the disability statute should be
prescribed in the statute.
Accessibility
Normative penalties for non-compliance with accessibility norms are welcome.
However, clear cut legal provisions entailing such penalties are the need of
the hour since trusting discretion of enforcement authorities in such matters
is too much in Indian context. If enforcement authority succeeds in enforcing
clearly laid down norms and time frame for accessibility norms, much would be
achieved. Act should clearly provide for, say, five years, within which
required accessibility would be fully achieved.
Monetary penalty must be retained for cases of willful default. Further,
monetary penalty should be clearly linked with the cost of providing
accessibility measures and a further punitive aspect. Fine so recovered may be
employed preferentially for making good the accessibility default.
Human Resource Development
Right to Life
what has been provided is surely commendable. Apart from it, right to life
must include right to "An unimpaired body and mind." So, the act should
strongly provide for cost of all measures to do away with impairments like
keratoplasty, cochlear implants, prosthetic limbs, etc. to be born by
government. Donation of body parts like cornea and others in case of death at
least in government hospitals be provided for to reduce avoidable lack of
organs. Religious and other objections to such provisions may be suitably
tackled by having recourse to reasonable restriction on fundamental rights to
religious freedom and it is not essential hallmark of any religion not to
donate parts of a dead body. If human welfare is the fundamental tenet of all
religions, then taking parts of a dead body for enhancing life of living ones
cannot be faulted on any ground.
All technological assistive devices including mobility aids, reading devices,
softwares vision or other sensory enhancement devices be blanketly exempted
from import duty and other levies. Government should bear the full cost of such
devices or highly subsidize them as alleviation of disability by improving the
impaired sense, or limb falls under right to life.
Freedom of speech and expression
Suitable accessibility measures be again emphasized in making this freedom
meaningful to sensorily impaired. Human assistance in addition to mechanical
aid be also emphasized. Priority of making materials accessible for disabled
over Intelectual property rights hindering it, be clearly provided for.
Access to Justice
Legal services authority be clearly mandated to provide free legal aid to
clients with disabilities. This free legal aid must be provided at least in
disability related litigation.
All judicial proceedings including documents be made accessible to persons with
sensory disabilities by converting them into accessible formats, or by
providing readers and interpreters at the cost of government.
Authorities
The proposed Disability rights authority or disability commission be vested
with Awareness, sensitization, evolution of policy and law, monitoring
implementation of law and coordination of various activities under the act at
the national level proactively, Chief commissioner being at the helm, with
state units/commission functioning under state commissioners and with even
district committees.
However, adjudication of disability rights disputes should not be entrusted to
this authority or state commissioners or chief commissioners. Implementation
and adjudication should be kept separate.
Disability disputes resolution forums on the lines of consumers forums be
constituted, comprising of a judicial members coupled with persons from other
fields, general public and persons with disabilities, at national state and
district level.
This will ensure effective and prompt and binding adjudication of disability
disputes.
Such disability fora be invested with full powers of civil court including
initiating contempt proceedings for non-compliance of its orders. If suit is
brought in HC for non compliance of disability forum order, the HC should be
bound to issue interim enforcement decree before deciding the petition on
merits. Very non-enforcement of disability forum order should give rise to
negative presumption against the defaulter and the onus to prove that the order
is erroneous should be on the defaulting institution and not upon the disabled
litigant. Aggrieved person with disability should not have to again prove
her/his right in HC.
Further, state commissioners and chief commissioner should be preferentially
persons with disabilities themselves, or should have demonstrated experience in
disability field at any rate, and such appointments should be by way of
independent charge always.
Disability rights commissions may also be assigned the task of ensuring
enforcement of orders of disability disputes redressal fora.
Proposed education authority should not be a transitory body merely, but should
have existence at least in every state on the continuous basis with a mandate
to advice and assist educational institutions about best methods of making all
students with disabilities benefit from education and be active participants in
the process.
Legal capacity
Now, if we say that all persons have capacity to act and take decisions, it
would not be true of moderately and profoundly mentally retarded persons and
persons having extreme mood and thought disorders. The proposition is true
regarding sensory and physically impaired persons and those with specific
learning disabilities only. However, the whole discussion of legal capacity
seems to be based on the premise that legal capacity has to be posited only of
mentally challenged. This view is erroneous and legal capacity has to be
predicated of persons with disabilities as a whole. Legal capacity implies that
a person is regarded as a person in law with all rights and obligations. So,
sensorily and physically impaired persons have to be given their due legal
status with necessary support and modifications wherever called for. For ex.
writing an exam with scribe is an instance of legal capacity being exercised
with adequate support. If scribe is denied, person is thwarted from performing
an action, and so legal capacity is infringed. This is not supportive decision
making, but supportive exercise of legal capacity. Instead of laying supportive
decision making, supportive access to data, information and places has to be
laid down. Decision, if it is to be predicated of a person, must be made by the
person herself/himself after data, information and places are made accessible
in every situation. Otherwise, if a person is not able to appreciate the facts
and reality even after such steps, then no further support is warranted for
making decisions, or else, they would be the decisions of support giving
individual and not of the person herself. Such support may include simplifying
the contents and transforming it into various accessible formats etc for
sensorily disabled.
Saying that transition from guardianship to supportive exercise of legal
capacity can be universally adopted for all disabilities including mentally
challenged, is not justified. However, decisions taken by those with varying
psychological conditions, after due support, may be given priority, and may not
be unnecessarily interfered with, if they do not involve any harm to
themselves, society in general, and do not pose great financial burden on
exchequer. Disability commission only to oversee legal capacity with supportive
decision making is a restrictive proposition. Even though, it is proposed as
constitutional body, no amendments in the constitution are suggested. Further,
persons with mental illness are proposed to be included in it. It would be
worthwhile to understand that mental illness is not, despite suggestions to
that effect, simply cognitive emotional and spiritual variation, but there are
some markers of psychopathology like loss of interest in all activities,
inability to utilize one's potential, destructive behaviour, extreme mood
shifts etc. Normal variation is as a rule well tolerated in society. So, what
is gained by positing legal measures for mentally ill, instead of effective
treatment, is beyond the understanding of this author and he will not further
comment on the issue in his comments. Any specific learning impairments like
dyscalculia, dysgraphia etc. can be regarded educational disabilities and may
be given equalizing measures, but beyond that, no reason is seen in adopting
legal measures for other mental illnesses except laying down that their basic
needs be catered to by society and state and they be given benefit of all
available psychological and psychiatric treatment. Legal capacity is sine qua
non for all other rights, is the right observation.
Liberty and security of person
exploitation violence and abuse: Articles 23 and 24 of the constitution be
suitably amended to prevent exploitation violence and abuse on account of
disability or resulting in disability. The provision is required, as these
things are the norm for persons with disabilities rather than exception in
their daily life. Disability is often the causing factor, or often the direct
result of such practices. So, the concerned articles of the constitution must
include the disability perspective.
freedom from degrading treatment: Statute should provide that: No one shall be
subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
In particular, no one shall be subjected without his or her free consent to
medical or scientific experimentation. The provision is called for the persons
with disabilities are often thought to be less than full human beings and are
subjected to experiments without information and consent.
Liberty: Government should ensure that persons with disabilities Are not
deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily, and that any deprivation
of liberty is in conformity with the law, and that the existence of a
disability shall in no case justify a deprivation of liberty. The provision is
in sync with convention and is required as the existence of a disability more
often than not, becomes a justifying ground for depriving a person essential
liberties like freedom of expression of movement etc. To ensure these and other
freedoms, it is not only required to secure them by adopting general measures,
but some disability specific measures have also to be put in place. For
instance, freedom of speech and expression for blind person looses its meaning,
if she is not provided with information in accessible format and such a freedom
becomes meaningless for a hearing/speech impaired person if he is not provided
the means to express thoughts in the way he can and they be made manifest to
all in format accessible to non-deaf, for instance by interpreting sign
language. So, this subject is as vital as it is vast, and needs an in-depth
elaboration and implementation.
Education
Proposed education reform commission is a welcome development. However, its
mandate must also include putting in place practices and systems to best ensure
inclusiveness of all persons with disabilities in education. It may also
suggest best suitable assistance in various settings. All capablizing measures
called reasonable accommodation including deployment of technology and human
support should be used for the purpose, without essentially altering the nature
of basic process and aims of education and qualities assessed. For instance,
substituting written exam with audio recording for visually challenged is
totally unwelcome, giving human support for writing in form of scribe, or
allowing technology like computers for writing are desired approaches. The
preconditions for any human support including scribes and interpreters should
only be that she/he should not be eligible to appear for the same exam when
she/he is so acting, or should not have been so eligible. This should be
explicitly provided in the statute and should not be left to policy or bylaws.
5% Reservation in educational institutions with 2% for girls with disabilities
and additional 1% for children of parents with disabilities are welcome
provisions. However, following disability provisions including reservation
should be made preconditions for recognition of any educational institutions.
Withdrawing recognition or withholding grants must be posited as normative
penalties for ensuring implementation.
Scholarships on the ground of disability be given in addition to and not in
exclusion to scholarships on other grounds like merit and caste. Fee for higher
education and professional courses for students with disabilities be
reimbursed by state on the lines of similar provisions for SC and ST students.
Work employment occupation
Application of reservation provision to private sector is welcome, but legally,
there are many hurdles to be overcome in giving it statutory sanction.
Following article 12 jurisprudence in defining establishment also will go a
long way but it also cannot assure employment non discrimination in private
sector.
For this, we suggest that private players receiving any sort of aid/concessions
from government like Special economic zones etc. be mandated to follow
disability non discrimination provisions including reservation and
nondispensation. Similarly, private entities providing public utility services
earlier provided by government like telecommunication, ensurance, aviation,
etc. be also similarly mandated. It can be constitutionally and legally
accomplished.
While applying the principle of equal pay for equal work to disabled, provision
should be more specific allowing for reasonable differences in output linked to
disability until disability is suitably and fully compensated in work
environment by reasonable accommodation. Provision for exemtion in existing
section 47 providing for non dispensation on the ground of disability acquired
while in the job and no discrimination in promotion on the ground of
disability, should be deleted. No establishment should be exempted from this
mandatory provision. The phrase in existing section 47 "disability acquired in
the course of employment" be substituted with "if a person acquires disability
while in employment", as the former phrase has given rise to erroneous
interpretation that disability acquired must be linked to performance of work
duties. Reservation in promotion must be provided for, for without it
concretizing the mandate that no discrimination in promotion can be done on the
basis of disability, becomes almost impossible. While making reservation in
promotion, even zone of consideration should be extended for employees with
disabilities on the lines of SC and ST.
We reiterate our following suggestions:
Saying merely that roster system should be followed reflects no thought on the
part of subcommittee. In fact, following roster system for disabled is
self-defeating, confusing it with general roster system. In fine, 5/6% of total
cadre strength in all four classes of jobs should be filled by disabled, this
should be the goal. Recruitment has to be by reserving percentage of vacancies
occurring in all posts at a given time. This recruitment is facilitated by
identification of posts and need not be confined to them only. Nobody should be
refused employment on the ground of disability if it is demonstrated that work
can be performed by suitable technical assistance or alternative methods. For
this, panels at the national and other levels have to be constituted, which
should decide controversial cases. They should be interdisciplinary panels with
representation from persons with disabilities. Burden of such reasonable
accommodation or enabling environment should be born by mainly estate and
grants for it be given to private players. Persons qualifying in vertical lists
including open competition should not be marked against reserved vacancies,
provided they have not taken benefit of any relaxed standards. Reasonable
accommodation like scribes, extra time, concession in fee, be differentiated
from relaxed standards like relaxation in qualifying marks, upper age limit,
etc. Persons wit low vision or mildly visually impaired whatever they called
be deemed to be separate category for reservation and 0.5% reservation be
provided for them. In fact, reservation for each disability be bifurcated into
that for mildly/moderately disabled on one hand, and severely disabled on the
other, as severely disabled have not received any benefit out of present system
of reservation, and are, as a rule not selected for any posts. This is more
apparent in case of blind, where a separate category of low vision exists, but
reservation is for blind/low vision. This is a brief view, subcommittee should
deliberate upon it suitably and come up with workable provisions...
. Carried forward vacancies should form a separate lot and should not be
merged with future vacancies in recruitments. Reservation in promotion should
be provided. If intervening posts are not identified, that's not a problem in
new approach as identification is not the sole basis for recruitment or working
of disabled. But in any case, due reasonable accommodation should be provided
for such unidentified posts, and they be deemed as identified. Medical
standards for any post should take cognizance of disability and whether a
disabled can work by making enabling environment even though not fulfilling
those medical standards on account of disability. Only medical doctors cannot
decide such issues and national level panels as suggested are required. The
fact that environment cannot be made so enabling at present, is not a factor
for denying the job. Efforts be made for making it so, and meanwhile person
should be as productive as she can. Supreme court ruling denying promotion to
disabled on grounds of safety, security of machinery and colleagues, efficiency
etc. needs to be clearly negated, by constitutional amendment, if the need be.
Persons with disabilities should be exempt from routine transfer and their
request for postings to place of choice be given utmost priority.
Health
Medical insurance to persons with disabilities should be provided by state and
should not be linked to their being below or above poverty line. Disability
itself constitutes a valid ground for backwardness and BPL prescription is not
required as disability involves what Prof. Amartya sen has termed "Conversion
costs". It means despite incurring expenses they may not be adequately
transformed into corresponding elevation in living standards of disabled
persons due to various factors. Being Below poverty line is anyway ground for
affording medical insurance and so, existence of disability per se, be regarded
adequate for medical insurance. Insurance should cover disability specific
treatments also in addition to general health needs. Awareness raising is
welcome but it should be equally employed for all disabilities and not confined
to inappropriate depiction of mental illness only.
Menace of fake disability certificates be dealt with sternly by making it penal
offence to issue it and have it issued or be in any way linked with its
issuance and also to use it at any place and avail any benefits/facility on the
basis of such certificate. Disability certificate should serve as proof of
disability for availing all government facilities without undergoing any other
formalities and procedures may be put in place for dealing with situations
where a public servant acting in good faith has suspicion about authenticity of
certificate so produced.
Health rights fall under right to life and it should include all rectification
and alleviation measures for impairment like corneal transplant cochlear
implant etc. to be performed by state.
Culture sports and recreation
Law should clearly mandate that at least 5% funds by all government literary
and art bodies like sahitya academies, etc. be spent on promoting such
activities in disabled and making them equal participants in such activities at
general level. Separate recognition of disability discourse in literature and
other arts be encouraged at par with movements like dalit literature etc.
Recognition and prizes be instituted to encourage and award persons with
disabilities engaged in artistic and literary pursuits. Certain percentage of
Grants be given to artists with disabilities to further their talents.
Women and children with disabilities
Adequate provisions to address double vulnerability of women and children with
disabilities on the lines of UNCRPD articles 6 and 7 be enacted. Example: they
may be given priorities in all schemes meant for disabled. Example: Higher
sentence be prescribed for offences against women with disabilities like rape,
domestic violence, extracting child labour from disabled children etc.
Offences and penalties
fake disability certificates: Issuing fake disability certificates or Making
use of fake disability certificates should be declared a criminal offence
warranting exemplary punishment in addition to forfeiting any benefit like job
etc. obtained by producing such a fake certificate. Mentioning the extent or
percentage of disability well beyond the actual disability should also be
included in the definition of faking a certificate.
no negative presumption: No negative, harmful, exclusionary or discriminatory
presumption be drawn or denial be affected on the basis of disability in
respect of rights, amenities or facilities offered to public at large or
citizens and any exclusion of the disabled there from not duly supported by law
be deemed an penal offence. The provision is required in the statute, as many a
times, persons with disabilities are arbitrarily deprived even the general
amenities offered to public at large or a section thereof, even though their
disability is not a relevant factor in denying such amenities. Such examples
include admission to many courses, unescorted railway tickets, entry to certain
areas, refusing unreserved job posts etc.
Monetary penalty should be retained in cases of willful default and be linked
to the cost of thing not done and some penal measure.
Disability disputes redressal forum or any other adjudicatory bodies
established by the new act should have powers to impose such penalties and
recover them as well, in addition to awarding specific relief or compensation
to disabled litigants.
Penalty on arbitrariness: If it is pronounced by the competent authority that
an official exceeded his jurisdiction which resulted in breach of this law, and
further caused difficulty to the disabled as a result, such official should be
personally penalized and the same should be recorded in his service file.
portrayal of disability and disabled persons: Derogatory or irrelevant negative
portrayal of disability be made ground of censorship and film certification
board should have a disabled member on it.
Abusing in the name of disability should be declared a criminal offence on the
lines of caste abuse.
Miscellaneous
Mainstreaming disability: Implementing bodies be made more representative of
disabled. All constitutional bodies from Parliament to Panchayat to have at
least one disabled representative. Articles 15 & 16 of Constitution be amended
to Prohibit discrimination on basis of disability per se. Disability budgeting
on lines of gender budgeting be implemented. Art. 17 of constitution be amended
to wipe practice of disability exclusion on analogy with prohibition of
untouchability.
Prevention of atrocities act for disabled On the lines of SC atrocity
prevention act, be enacted Abuse, verbal or non-verbal, in the name of
disability be declared an offence.
central and state level monitoring: Apart from changing nomenclature, these
monitoring mechanisms be made accountable for implementation of the act,
collectively. While nominating nine persons with disabilities on Central and
state advisory board as proposed in amendments, phrase, as far as practicable,
be employed only in respect of mentally retarded, and all other disabilities be
represented essentially by persons having that disability. Nine and not five,
persons with disabilities, representing all disabilities in a single nomination
period instead of two, be nominated on central and state coordination and
monitoring committee, and phrase "as far as practicable" be restricted to
mentally retarded.
curbing arbitrariness by state governments: Rationale of Disability legislation
falling under concurrent list, so Central law prevailing unless state law
assented to, or PWD Act enacted Under article 253, be employed to negate varied
state interpretations harmful to disabled and uniformity be brought in
implementation of disability legislation. Any move by state governments to
which takes away from the provisions of the act should be explicitly
prohibited. The provision is necessary in wake of some states like maharashtra
carving out arbitrary additional categories of disabilities like Partially
sighted, in addition to those mentioned in the disabilities act, and even not
identifying posts for totally blind which are explicitly identified for them by
central government.
Government Schemes: Disability be factored in while making any government
scheme. All existing government schemes should be evaluated from disability
perspective continuously. Disability audit of all the schemes irrespective of
the fact whether they are primarily intended for disabled or not, must be made
mandatory. Special schemes for disabled US43 of existing PWD act be framed and
implemented.
national fund for persons with disabilities: Creation of National fund for
persons with disabilities proposed in amendments is welcome. Five members
nominated by central government to represent different disabilities on the
governing body of the fund under section 68D {1(viii)} must be persons with
disabilities themselves. Uses of the fund be prescribed in greater detail. All
additional expenses in securing rights to persons with disabilities under
disability law, like reasonable accommodation, be made legitimate uses of fund.
optional protocol: The committee should recommend that Optional protocol to the
convention be immediately adopted by India. Even small countries like
bangladesh have done so, and we perceive no reason why India should shy away
from signing the optional protocol. The fact that it has not done so for any
other convention, is not a sound ground for refusing to break new grounds and
signing and ratifying the protocol for the convention on the rights of the
disabled, as it would open up direct avenue to approach the committee in cases
of unredressed violation of rights of the disabled. we can perceive in India's
refusal, a US like snobbish mentality that says we would not sign the
convention as our standards are superior to those laid down in it. India is
doing so for protocol.
universal disability audit: Audit of government funds including grants to All
NGOs and all other expenditure should include details of expenditure for
persons with disabilities, as they are one of the weakest classes in society
and every activity touches them.
Putting disabled at par with SC/ST
As a rule, persons with disabilities be given all relaxations and concessions
at par with weakest sections of society like Shceduled castes and tribes. Many
times, relaxed standards in qualifying marks and upper age etc. are prescribed
for SC/ST but not specifically for persons with disabilities. So, it must be
made mandatory for all bodies to offer similar relaxations for PWDs as well. A
recent delhi HC judgment clearly layed down that Disabled cannot be treated at
par with SCs for relaxed qualifying marks in absence of any legal mandate for
the same.
Yours sincerely
(Rajesh Asudani)
National Vice President
BGFI
(Dr. Vinod Asudani)
National Hon. Secretary
BGFI
(Dr. Shirish Deshpande)
Prof. & Head
Post Graduate Department of Law, RTMNU, Nagpur (in personal capacity)
Nagpur
October 18, 2010
-----Original Message-----
From: Bhushan Punani [mailto:blinab...@bsnl.in]
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 3:13 PM
To: Rajesh H. Asudani; Bhushan Punani; anand...@gmail.com; Jayshree raveendran;
sdr...@gmail.com; L Govinda Rao; srikala.bhar...@gmail.com; Merry Barua; G.
Syamala; rajive raturi; Uma Tuli; malabik...@yahoo.com; mita...@gmail.com; S.Y
Kothari; s.khun...@nic.in; K.G Verma; chandan.mukher...@gmail.com;
pi...@nic.in; Poonam Natrajan; rehab...@ndc.vsnl.net.in; Director IPH; k
Ramakrishna; Rajiv Rajan; Bhargavi Davar; bvda...@gmail.com;
torchbearer...@gmail.com; ak...@senseintindia.org; jpgadk...@gmail.com; Menon;
as_naraya...@hotmail.com; Major HPS Ahluwalia; r.desir...@nic.in Dr Arbind
Prasad; Sudha Kaul
Subject: Re: Comments on disability law drafting subcommittee reports
Thanks Mr. Rajesh Asudani for making very valuable comments on different
chapters including chapter on Education. Thanks for confirming most of
provisions which the Sub Committee on Education has included in the chapter.
I am pleased to respond to some of the comments as follow:
1. You idea regarding establishing "Multi-disciplinary Admission Committees"
for deciding controversial cases regarding admission to various courses is
worth appreciating. We expect this part will be convered by "Committee on
Authorities." It is advisable to have single authority under the New Act for
redressal of all the Grievances under the Act. We are confident that commitee
on "Authority" will address this issue regarding authority on deciding the
nature of disability eligible to be admitted to a particular course.
2. We shall include your idea regarding reimbursement of fee in case of
professional courses as is being done in case of SC
3. Your idea about secondary education upto Secondary level is fine and we
shall modify the relevant sections accordingly.
4. Actually developing guidelines in case of amanuensis will be part of "Rule
and Regualtions" under the Act. The large committee is already considering to
make a recommendation that the exising drafting committee should also be
involved while drafting the rules under the Act.
5. "Books in accessible format" is already a part of chapter on education.
I must thank you once again for sparing so much time and making comments on all
the chapters on which presentations have already been made.
With best wishes,
Bhushan Punani
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rajesh H. Asudani" <rasud...@gmail.com>
To: "Bhushan Punani" <blinab...@sancharnet.in>; <anand...@gmail.com>; "Jayshree
raveendran" <j.raveend...@abilityfoundation.org>;
<sdr...@gmail.com>; "L Govinda Rao" <drgovinda...@gmail.com>;
<srikala.bhar...@gmail.com>; "Merry Barua" <actionforaut...@gmail.com>; "G.
Syamala" <syamal...@gmail.com>; "rajive raturi" <rajive.rat...@hrln.org>; "Uma
Tuli" <amarj...@del2.vsnl.net.in>; <malabik...@yahoo.com>; <mita...@gmail.com>;
"S.Y Kothari" <kothari...@yahoo.com>; <s.khun...@nic.in>; "K.G Verma"
<kgverm...@yahoo.co.in>; <chandan.mukher...@gmail.com>; <pi...@nic.in>; "Poonam
Natrajan"
<poonat...@yahoo.com>; <rehab...@ndc.vsnl.net.in>; "Director IPH"
<dir...@nic.in>; "k Ramakrishna" <nabinfocen...@yahoo.co.in>; "Rajiv Rajan"
<dlu.so...@gmail.com>; "Bhargavi Davar" <camhp...@gmail.com>;
<bvda...@gmail.com>; <torchbearer...@gmail.com>; <ak...@senseintindia.org>;
<jpgadk...@gmail.com>; "Menon" <paltime...@yahoo.co.in>;
<as_naraya...@hotmail.com>; "Major HPS Ahluwalia" <chair...@isiconline.org>;
"r.desir...@nic.in Dr Arbind Prasad" <arbindpras...@gmail.com>; "Sudha Kaul"
<sudha.k...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 2:46 PM
Subject: Comments on disability law drafting subcommittee reports
> Madam / Sir
> Hope you would go through the comments and ponder over the points.
> Rajesh Asudani
> Assistant General Manager
> Reserve Bank of India
> Nagpur
>
Notice: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use,
review, distribution, printing or copying of the information contained in this
e-mail message and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If you have
received this email by error, please notify us by return e-mail or telephone
and immediately and permanently delete the message and any attachments. The
recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of
viruses. The Reserve Bank of India accepts no liability for any damage caused
by any virus transmitted by this email.
To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in with
the subject unsubscribe.
To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please
visit the list home page at
http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in
