Reserving seats for the disabled, whether in public transport or jobs, is meaningless until we remove structural obstacles that prevent them for participating, says Shampa Sen Gupta.
You do not have to take bus rides every day to know that occupying seats reserved for the “handicapped” is a safe bet. Any regular commuter of Kolkata buses and minibuses would vouch that there is a rare chance that a disabled person will get on the bus, requiring them to vacate the seat midway. This is not the case, usually, where seats are reserved for “ladies” or even for “senior citizens”. Metro stations of Kolkata also have seats where “women, disabled and elderly” are supposed to sit but similarly, how many of us have seen a disabled person occupying those chairs?
Obviously it is not the fault of the disabled commuter if they cannot avail of this magnanimous gesture that is offered to them. Neither the roads of Kolkata nor the Metro stations are disabled-friendly, and though there is a plethora of air-conditioned buses ploughing through the city these days with some of them even having low-floors, how a wheelchair user can get into these buses remains a big question.
Orders issued by the West Bengal government specify that buses must have reserved seats, but disabled commuters are often denied bus rides because conductors are afraid that they will not buy tickets and demand a free ride. (In fact, disabled people are entitled to free rides on government buses but not on private buses.) This rejection is a routine affair and there have been innumerable court cases and PILs filed on this issue, but inaccessibility has become such a low-priority topic that it fails to draw the attention of the mainstream media and the issue, therefore, remains invisible.
Orders issued by the West Bengal government specify that buses must have reserved seats, but disabled commuters are often denied bus rides because conductors are afraid that they will not buy tickets and demand a free ride.
The disabled have long demanded barrier-free and accessible buildings and public spaces. There is a long history of various disability groups engaging in meeting authorities of the much beloved Indian Railways, for example, asking for disabled-friendly trains and platforms. The authorities, in response however, thought it prudent to have a separate “Reserved for Disabled” coach on trains instead of making the whole train accessible.
How the disabled will be able to enter that specific coach remains an unresolved problem, as it is not clear whether or how many escorts are allowed per disabled passenger in this coach. Non-disabled people occupying this coach is a common occurrence and calling for help becomes another big challenge. Recently, it was reported that disabled commuters were asking for the installation of CCTV within the coach so that they could be protected from harassment from non-disabled passengers and, ironically, from the police.
We are not trying to argue here that any form of reservation is appalling, but one needs to understand why we “reserve” seats, whether it is on a bus or in government jobs and the means of ensuring social justice other than reservation. Here, we will try to concentrate on reservations for the physically disabled.
We are not trying to argue here that any form of reservation is appalling, but one needs to understand why we “reserve” seats, whether it is on a bus or in government jobs and the means of ensuring social justice other than reservation.
At the onset, one can say that the Persons with Disabilities Act was passed in 1995 and we are expected to “celebrate” 20 years of passing this historic law this year. Yet if you ask any lay person, even a law graduate or anyone who is not directly working on disability rights issues, about what they know about this Act, you are bound to hear that this laws makes three percent jobs reserved for the disabled. That there are other chapters and issues addressed by the law remains in oblivion.
Incidentally, if one inspects the records, one can see that amongst the cases filed, either in different courts of India or in the disability commissioner’s offices, the maximum number of cases are regarding the non-implementation of job reservations and other forms of discrimination faced within employment. It is difficult to find much legal advocacy on other forms of affirmative action which are required to bring disabled people on a par with their able bodied counterparts.
The draft Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill (RPD Bill), which was placed in Rajya Sabha in 2013 (popularly known as the New Law as it is supposed to replace the 1995 Act), states that reservation will increase from three to five percent (though the civil society draft asked for six percent). A highly contested debate followed this within the disabled community, as it was desirous that there should be more reserved seats, and moreover, now that there is an increase of categories of the forms of disabilities recognised within ambit of the New Law, contenders for these seats are increasing manifold.
Concerns that divided disability groups into different categories make one wonder whether this is a planned position taken by the state so that a strong united voice cannot be formed—a fragmented disability movement is a gain for state power.
One could envisage multiple discussions on whether a totally blind person and visually impaired person with limited sight could remain in the same category or needed separate berths in reservation; one could hear comments like there should be separate berths for those with mental illness and intellectual disabilities, as those with mental illness have more chances to obtaining a better quality of education and procuring better jobs. Concerns that divided disability groups into different categories make one wonder whether this is a planned position taken by the state so that a strong united voice cannot be formed—a fragmented disability movement is a gain for state power.
Another concern has been about why there should not be reservations in promotions for the disabled category. The logic has always been that if there is reservation in promotion for SC/ST category, the same should be applicable to the disabled as well. But equating the two categories as the same is definitely a problematic position—when one is making positive discrimination measures for an individual under the SC/ST category, one is trying to help a community to whom historically provisions are denied, however the identity of his/her clan remains same.
In case of persons with disabilities, the reality is slightly different. The disability sector has now accepted that disability is an evolving concept, a long-term impairment when coming across societal barriers leads to disability. Therefore, disability does not lie within an individual; it is a societal problem. As per the United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) definition, “Persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.”
Disability is an evolving concept, a long-term impairment when coming across societal barriers leads to disability. Therefore, disability does not lie within an individual; it is a societal problem.
The new legislation of India also follows this concept and every activist worth his/her salt will be ready to swear by this definition. Naturally, it becomes imperative that we should focus more on changing the societal barrier than bringing affirmative action to a disabled individual. But such logic does not work here. So, while formulating a law based on principles of the UNCRPD, the focus of discussions was not on permanent ways of removing barriers, but on short-term measures like job and education reservations, however contradictory that sounds.
The policy makers must be feeling happy in this situation. They can dole out a little reservation here and there, thus dividing the heterogeneous disability community more decisively, and feel good that they have done enough for the disabled. These small acts of benefits can placate a few people temporarily, but ignores the bigger picture. The challenge to make our whole country disabled-friendly is enormous, so giving out small titbits of apparent goodwill is the only solution that the Indian government has found.
Unfortunately, when it comes to asserting their rights, the disabled also showed more concern when asking for reservations and not demanding systematic change. One needs to understand that if we could break the barriers that hinder full participation for a disabled person from an early age, the person would not have needed reservation policy for him/her, in the first place. It is obvious that at the given point of time, disability activists do not have much option other than demanding reservations, but it is lamentable that the long-term goal is taking a backseat in pursuit of the same.
One needs to understand that if we could break the barriers that hinder full participation for a disabled person from an early age, the person would not have needed reservation policy for him/her, in the first place.
Another glaring example of current state of affairs is when the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment launched its Accessible India Campaign (Sugamya Bharat Abhiyan) as a nationwide flagship campaign, true to the Modi government’s form, the ministry wanted NGOs and activists to identify the “100 most important buildings” from seven selected cities, of which they have promised to carry out an access audit by July 2016. Although the campaign states that other cities will be targeted in the second phase, nowhere is it mentioned in their website when rural or semi-urban areas will be made accessible. Keeping disability groups busy in selecting 100 buildings, the BJP government may project itself as committed to the cause. However, the exclusion of rural and semi-urban areas for such flagship campaigns speaks volumes about their intentions.
Walking towards the goal of a barrier-free society is a distant dream, since the systematic changes that can actually bring the disabled to the same level as others is not anywhere on the horizon. So, let us, the able-bodied people, sit tight in the seats reserved for the “handicapped”, and if, by crossing all barriers, one or two of them get on the bus, we can curse our bad luck whilst giving up our seats and secretly hope that the next time the conductor will not let them on. After all, we have always believed in survival of the fittest, haven’t we?
