good spirit, habeeb. keep it up. we have to fight our way out.
regards,
rajesh
----- Original Message -----
From: "habeeb. c" <habee...@gmail.com>
To: "sayeverything-request" <sayeverything-requ...@sayeverything.org>
Cc: "kfbyouth" <kfbyo...@googlegroups.com>; "list" <l...@voicevision.in>;
"accessindia" <accessindia@accessindia.org.in>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 10:26 PM
Subject: [AI] are we note human beings? A horrible experience i had.
Hello friends,
Though with a note of pessimism, i think that sharing with you this
particular experience of mine can be a real thought provoking instance
for you. Please give me your feedback on what i had done.
We had the election to our university senate on 15-3-2013 Friday. The
day before the election, when i was just going through the elections
rules, something very striking caught my attention. It was written
that for a candidate with any kind of infirmity such as visual
impairment, The voting shall be done by the presiding officer or a
deputy of him. Can you ever imagine such a close existing any where in
the world. The secrecy of the election is a mandatory condition in any
democratic set up. How can they insist that i shall exercise my right
to vote with the help of a person appointed by them, rather i have the
autonomy to decide my scribe for voting. See that all these are
happening in a country where powerful laws for the preservation and
protection of the differently abled in all walks of their life are
existing.
As i could not tolerate this, Even though at the eleventh hour, i met
the University registrar and explained him the situation. Initially he
was not even ready to listen to me. After a very prolonged debate, He
issued a direction to my principle the presiding officer, That the
registrar in his capacity of the returning officer of the election,
directs the principle to give me absolute freedom to use any person
for voting in the senate election. I'm a very active political worker
in my institution. I met the principle the day before the election
with the order, and he told me that i can do as directed by the
returning officer.
Things are more interesting when i went to vote. The principle told me
that he could not implement the registrar's order as the opposite
political group challenged it saying that it does not agree with the
rules in the statute, Where the close is that the challenged person's
vote can be done either by the returning officer or his deputy that is
the presiding officer. I resisted it by saying that i have the support
of the order of Registrar. ON calling him on the phone, The registrar
told the principle that against what had really happened between us,
he hadn't issued the order on account of my legitimate feelings. He
thought that being a visually challenged i would not be opposed by the
other people, so he had given me the order as a charity. I put three
conditions in front of the principle.
1. He must allow me to use my choice for voting. He told me that being
opposed by the other group, and not being in the statute, he couldn't
do so.
2. I can use the principle's help for voting, provided he gives me in
writing why he doesn't allow me to use my choice. He was not ready to
do so, as the registrar had already instructed him that he should not
do so, as there was some objection. The registrar had not canceled his
order.
3. This being the situation, i'm not voting in the election and i'm
going to give a complaint to the disability commissioner that i'm not
allowed to use my right to enfranchisement in the senate election. At
last he told me that he would try to make negotiations with the rival
groups.
After coming out, i explained the situation to all my colleagues on
both the sides. On realizing that if my right to vote is denied, and
if i approach the disability commissioner, anything is possible
including the canceling of election, some of the opposite group
members have persuaded the others to call of their threat. Probably
being frightened by the possibility of another election and disturbed
by social censorship, they at last told the principle that i could use
anyone of my choice. As the principle told me this, his interpretation
was that they were giving me that on some humanitarian grounds,. Being
compelled by various circumstances, i could not tell him that what he
suggested was wrong.
After all these years, if this is the attitude of an academic
community on the question of dignity of a visually challenged person,
what next.
I have already taken adequate steps to amend the statutes in the near
future.
regards
Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of
mobile phones / Tabs on:
http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in
Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/
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
Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of
mobile phones / Tabs on:
http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in
Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/
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
