Source: http://www.thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content <http://www.thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=41 4276:future-law-must-define-disability-better&catid=39:perspective&from_page =search> &view=article&id=414276:future-law-must-define-disability-better&catid=39:pe rspective&from_page=search
'Future law must define disability better' 22 June 2012 THE SATURDAY INTERVIEW Mr Prasanna Kumar Pincha's appointment as the chief commissioner for persons with disabilities (PwDs) on 28 December, 2011 came as a surprise to the world of the disabled. Blind since birth, Mr Pincha is the first visually-impaired person to be appointed to a secretary-level post in the Central government. The post was open to all ~ disabled and non-disabled ~ and he competed for it in an open selection process. At 60, Mr Pincha has experience of working for PwDs in NGOs and in the government. A law graduate holding a Master's degree in English, he is a well-known disability rights activist. He founded the Government Institute for the Blind in Jorhat, Assam, and was also the state government's joint director of social welfare. A Special Rapporteur (PwDs) with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) before taking over his present post, Mr Pincha, in this interview to DEEPAK RAZDAN, explains the mandate of his office, and how he seeks to fulfill the expectations of the country's 22 million PwDs. What is the mandate of your office? Some of the tasks that the chief commissioner is required to perform is to coordinate the work of state commissioners for persons with disabilities, monitor the utilisation of funds disbursed by the Central government, take cognisance of complaints and grievances of deprivation of rights suffered by persons with disabilities, and to safeguard the rights and facilities available to persons with disabilities. The institution of the chief commissioner at the national level or of the state commissioner at the state level are quasi-judicial institutions. They do not actually implement any law. The chief commissioner is like any ombudsperson. He is a kind of a watchdog. What kind of complaints do you receive? On an average every month, we receive 1,000 to 1,200 complaints from all over the country. The content relate to a variety of matters such as discrimination suffered by PwDs, complaints with regard to service matters, grievances regarding education, admissions, compliance with accessibility features. Do they indicate social bias or ambiguity in law? Even the best law can be improved. I will say they reflect both social bias and systemic bias. It is both, though awareness is gradually growing. There is lot of talk of systemic changes and some systemic changes are also being brought about. But the road is bumpy and we have a long way to go. Are you satisfied with the definition of disability? In the existing Act, seven categories of disability are recognised. Now, there is a feeling in many quarters that some very critical disabilities are not included, for example autism. They form part of the National Trust Act but do not form part of the existing Persons with Disabilities Act. But I believe the new legislation, which is on the anvil, will most certainly bring in more categories of impairments and recognise them as disabilities, thereby the number of impairments recognised as disabilities will go up when the proposed legislation gets enacted. Are there differences on the degree of disability for a person to be recognised as disabled? A person is required to have a minimum 40 per cent disability to be eligible to get benefits under the Persons with Disabilities Act. How do you deal with complaints? When we receive a complaint, we send a copy of the complaint to the respondent and ask him to file a rejoinder or a reply. Sometimes after going through the complaint and the response, if we feel there is no need for a hearing, we can dispose of the case without conducting a hearing on the basis of the supporting documents. If we feel it calls for further processing, we seek the respondent's rejoinder and conduct a hearing. When we do so, all parties are to appear either in person or through representatives who may also include lawyers. What kind of punishments are you awarding, in case you are? Under the Persons with Disabilities Act, a commissioner or a chief commissioner cannot impose penalties or inflict punishments. That's why some people sometimes say the Act lacks teeth. But my own feeling, regardless of whether the Act has teeth or not, is that if the commissioner or the chief commissioner has teeth, I think it works. My experience is that due regard is given to orders passed by the chief commissioner, although it is not written in the Act explicitly that the orders passed by the chief commissioner are binding. It is also not written that they are not binding. What difference will the new law make? The new law will elaborate on the rights of persons with disabilities, human rights and the fundamental rights that already exist under our Constitution for all citizens. But I must say the new law will amplify and clarify those rights and contain directions to ensure that persons with disabilities secure their rights on an equal basis with others. Another difference the new law will make will be to the lives of groups that are more vulnerable within the larger groups with several mental and intellectual disabilities. I think the Act will contain many provisions that will benefit them immensely, and rightly so. Will the authorities get teeth under the new law? I feel the new law will be certainly more empowering than the current law. This is not to suggest that the current law does not have any positive or progressive provisions. It does have, although it is a different matter that its implementation throughout the country has been skewed and uneven. But let me tell you, the new law will be more forward looking, even more progressive. Are state commissioners coordinating with you as much as required? We are supposed to have commissioners in every state. In some states we have full-time commissioners, in others there are officers holding the charge as additional responsibility. We do our best to coordinate with them and are scheduled to have meetings with them. Is the three per cent quota for PwDs in government jobs sufficient? Why are they then moving courts for promotions? Section 33 of the existing Disabilities Act does talk about not less than three per cent reservation in appointments against vacancies, and these reservations are to be in favour of persons with blindness and low vision, persons with hearing impairment, and persons with locomotor disability and cerebral palsy ~ one per cent for each category. This Section does not explicitly talk about reservation in promotions. This is the catch. This has given room for divergent and diverse interpretations. In some quarters, people argue that the expression appointment includes promotions because the Section talks about appointments against vacancies. The Central government is allowing reservations in C and D categories but not in the A and B categories. The government says that the promotions in C and D categories are in addition to the benefit of reservation. The view is disputed by many. I hope the new legislation will clarify by explicitly mentioning reservation in promotions. How has your journey to the office you occupy now been? My appointment as chief commissioner has been a humbling moment for me, but for the disability sector, it was a defining moment. It is humbling for me because my appointment has raised huge expectations among the PwDs, and therefore I sometimes tend to feel a little nervous whether I will be able to deliver on the expectations because I am acutely aware of the limitations inherent in the system, having worked in the government as well as outside it. But I will not leave any stone unturned to ensure that I deliver on the expectations to the best of my ability. It is a defining moment for the disability sector because it is for the first time ever in the history of Independent India that a person with disability has been appointed to this post purely on merit after going through a due process of competitive interview. I was the lone PwD ~ the rest of the candidates were non-disabled. What changes have you brought in the working of your office? I have initiated some systemic reforms both with the state and Central governments. One of these is that both must clarify that identification of jobs for the PwDs is relevant only for the purpose of reservation under Section 33. Any PwD should have the right to apply, compete and get recruited to any post ~ regardless of whether it is identified or not for the PwDs ~ and he has a right to get recruited, if he is successful in the selection, purely on merit. The post of the chief commissioner, for example, was not identified with a PwD, but I competed for it, and I got it purely on merit. Another initiative I took was to get the Constitutional right to contest in panchayat elections restored to persons with visual disability and hearing impairment in Odisha. To my shock, I had discovered these people were not allowed to contest the polls in flagrant violation of the Constitution. I have sought similar information from other states as well. Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send a message to [email protected] 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
