Disability Inclusion and Equity
Introduction
Disability, as both an identity and entity, is intricately linked to a myriad of vulnerabilities encompassing social, economic, and gender dimensions. This note delves into the global landscape of disability, emphasizing the prevalence of exclusionary systems that perpetuate poverty, limited access to education, and economic discrimination, especially in developing countries.
Global Disability Landscape
- Magnitude of Disability: With a staggering 1.3 billion people globally living with disabilities, the majority residing in developing countries, the scale of the issue is comparable to the entire population of India. Moreover, a significant 70% of this population resides in rural areas, exacerbating challenges.
- Exclusionary Systems: Existing systems are tailored for persons without disabilities, inadvertently deepening the socio-economic disparities for people with disabilities. This exclusion results in heightened instances of poverty, educational limitations, and limited access to opportunities.
Dissecting Language for Inclusion
- “For” versus “By” Approach: The note underscores the importance of distinguishing between an approach “for” persons with disabilities versus one “by” them. Inclusion becomes more meaningful when individuals with disabilities actively participate in processes rather than being passive recipients.
A Case for Inclusion
- Economic Impact: Highlighting a study by the International Labour Organization (ILO), the note argues that the inclusion of persons with disabilities in the economy could boost global GDP by 3% to 7%. It stresses the economic benefits and the imperative to view disability inclusion as a right, aligning with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
- Employment Challenges: Despite the belief in equal opportunities, the employment scenario for persons with disabilities is constrained, reinforcing stereotypes and contravening international conventions. The note emphasizes the need for a paradigm shift in attitudes and perceptions, acknowledging the economic advantages of inclusion.
Greater Challenges in Rural Areas
- Policy Initiatives in India: Acknowledging India’s initiatives, including the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (2016) and the UDID card, the note underscores the necessity of raising awareness and building capacity at the grassroots level, particularly in rural areas. It highlights the unique challenges faced by rural populations, such as limited access to education and employment.
- Climate and Developmental Challenges: Rural areas face heightened risks from climate calamities, and persons with disabilities are often excluded from developmental schemes. The note emphasizes a bottom-up approach to disability inclusion, aligning with sustainable development goals and rural resilience.
Role of the Private Sector
- Private Sector Engagement: Recognizing the key role of the private sector, the note advocates for collaboration with companies, employers’ federations, and trade unions. It emphasizes the importance of a robust legal framework and building confidence in companies to hire and retain workers with disabilities.
The SPARK Project
Inclusive Rural Transformation: The note highlights the SPARK project by the ILO and IFAD, illustrating the success of putting persons with disabilities in leadership roles. Through Disability Inclusion Facilitators, the project creates awareness, identifies opportunities, and mainstreams individuals with disabilities into economic development activities.
Conclusion:
The editorial concludes by emphasizing the bidirectional link between disability inclusion, poverty, nutrition, and hunger.
It underscores the need for a fundamental shift in commitment, solidarity, financing, and action to prioritize the voices and needs of persons with disabilities at the forefront of the global development agenda.
Achieving social justice necessitates comprehensive inclusion across all spheres, particularly in rural areas.
Supreme Court Ruling on Governor's Role in Bill Ratification
Background and Context
The recent judgment in the State of Punjab v Principal Secretary to the Governor of Punjab and Anr by the Supreme Court of India addresses the issue of governors unreasonably delaying or refusing to ratify bills passed by state legislatures. This ruling brings to light the implications of such actions on the legitimacy of elected officials and the legislative process.
Governor’s Symbolic Role and Constitutional Duty
- The judgment clarifies the governor’s role as a symbolic head chosen by the President, emphasizing that the governor cannot indefinitely withhold action on bills.
- If a governor chooses not to sign a bill, they are obligated to send it back to the legislature with a statement outlining the reasons for non-acceptance.
- These ruling gains significance amidst disputes between governors and elected governments in states like Telangana, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Punjab.
Clarification of Constitutional Article 200
- The case’s focal point was the detention of four bills by the Punjab governor, leading to a definitive clarification of Article 200 of the Constitution, which deals with “Assent to Bills” in the states.
- The judgment highlights the governor’s limited choices when presented with a bill and underscores the imperative nature of declaring assent, withholding assent, or reserving the bill for the President’s consideration.
Key Takeaways
- Protection of Democratic Principles
- The ruling asserts that governors, as unelected constitutional authorities, cannot virtually veto the functioning of an elected legislature.
The governor’s powers must align with the normal course of lawmaking, and indefinitely withholding assent violates fundamental principles of constitutional democracy.
- The Court takes a democratic stance, emphasizing the supremacy of elected members of legislatures over the powers of unelected constitutional authorities.
- Federalism and Constitutional Structure
- The judgment cites S R Bommai v Union of India to highlight that the constitutional powers of governors must respect the principles of federalism, a basic structure of the Constitution.
- Instances of past misuse of the governor’s position to favor the union government over state governments are acknowledged, signaling the dangers posed to the constitutional cause of federalism.
- Political Disputes and Partisanship
- The ruling acknowledges that disputes between governors and state governments go beyond legal matters and often involve political contestation between ruling and opposition parties.
- The judgment warns against the dangers of partisan misuse of the governor’s position, emphasizing the need for governors to maintain a non-partisan stance in fulfilling their constitutional obligations.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s ruling serves to reaffirm the democratic principles and federal structure embedded in the Indian Constitution.
It cautions against the partisan misuse of the governor’s position, emphasizing the need for a balanced approach to preserve the dignity and composure required for fulfilling constitutional obligations.
This judgment carries broader implications for the relationship between governors and state legislatures, contributing to the ongoing discourse on the role of unelected constitutional authorities in a democratic system.