The federal government of India has lately proposed amendments to the Rights of Individuals with Disabilities (RPWD) Guidelines, ostensibly to tighten the norms associated to incapacity certification. The timing of this transfer is troublesome to overlook. We’re nonetheless embroiled within the Puja Khedkar controversy because it has reignited the talk over the potential misuse of incapacity to realize untoward benefits. Whereas an allegedly pretend incapacity certificates isn’t the one purpose Khedkar has discovered herself in the midst of scrutiny, the disabled group are having to face the brunt of the backlash that has adopted this incident.
The proposed amendments, whereas well-intentioned, come as a knee-jerk response, that’s unlikely to contribute to fixing the systemic points, at finest; and at worst, will lead to an already cumbersome certification course of for individuals with disabilities changing into much more so. The proposed amendments have the potential to exclude individuals with invisible disabilities, those that have migrated to different cities and states, and those that shouldn’t have entry to the web and cellphones. There are a number of key adjustments which have been proposed.
First, the modification explicitly states that incapacity certificates can solely be issued by competent medical authorities, thereby eliminating the potential of certificates being issued by non-medical personnel, similar to these affiliated with NGOs or principals of particular faculties. This displays a gross disconnect with the bottom realities since district hospitals in our nation are extremely understaffed. The shortage of specialists similar to haematologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, and neurologists can also be a urgent problem which doesn’t discover any consideration within the proposed amendments. Placing additional burden on already overstrained medical officers additionally makes evaluation of non-visible disabilities troublesome, whose evaluation requires a discerning eye.
Second, the amendments improve the necessities for identification verification by mandating using Aadhaar together with further proof of identification and residence. The elimination of the earlier stipulation that no different proof of identification shall be insisted upon appears to be a step in the direction of stricter identification processes. Nevertheless, this additionally opens the door to potential bureaucratic hurdles, notably for these from marginalized backgrounds who might battle to offer a number of types of identification. The issuance of Aadhaar itself is a problematic course of for individuals with disabilities, because it might not be accessible to all. The biometric course of will be inaccessible for these with locomotor disabilities, psychosocial disabilities, and so forth. Moreover, the accessibility of Pragya Centres, the place Aadhaar playing cards are issued must also be assessed earlier than making it a compulsory doc for incapacity evaluation.
Third, the amendments give authorized drive to the Distinctive Incapacity Identification (UDID) playing cards that are to be colour-coded primarily based on the extent of incapacity, with totally different colors getting used to indicate lower than 40% incapacity, 40-80% incapacity and greater than 80% incapacity. This pointless demarcation will additional the reluctance of certifying establishments to evaluate and certify people with lower than 40% incapacity. This downside isn’t merely theoretical; the Karnataka authorities lately issued a round towards such practices and the Delhi Excessive Courtroom needed to intervene in a matter the place the certifying establishment had refused to evaluate a candidate whose incapacity share was ostensibly lower than 40%. But the amendments are silent on this problem. By not protecting this, the principles go away a major loophole unaddressed, which might result in continued discrimination towards these with milder disabilities.
Furthermore, the amendments miss the chance to make sure that UDID playing cards are universally accepted throughout all platforms, together with by authorities who at the moment insist on separate verification processes. With out clear tips, the aim of the UDID card as a uniform proof of incapacity dangers being undermined.
In addressing the Puja Khedkar-type conditions, the proposed amendments seem ineffectual. It is because the Union Public Service Fee (UPSC) insists on conducting its personal impartial incapacity assessments for profitable civil servants, thereby cocking a snook on the self-same UDID playing cards that these guidelines search to formalize. This raises critical questions concerning the utility of the amendments in stopping fraud throughout the civil providers.
One other obtrusive omission within the proposed amendments is the failure to strengthen the enforcement of Part 91 of the RPWD Act, which penalises those that pretend disabilities. The Khedkar incident clearly underscores the necessity for extra sturdy enforcement mechanisms, but the amendments don’t deal with this in any respect. In actual fact, the proposed modification places the onus of proof on the individual with disabilities and solely penalizes them for pretend certificates by making the method extra bureaucratic and complicated.
Lastly, the proposed extension of the time interval for the issuance of incapacity certificates from one month to a few months is troubling. It’s also ambiguous as a result of the modification isn’t clear in stating whether or not this three-month interval begins from the date of making use of for a incapacity certificates or the date when the evaluation is completed. This makes the method opaque and arbitrary. Presently, anecdotal proof means that it typically takes six months to a 12 months for a incapacity certificates or UDID to be issued. By extending the official timeline, the federal government dangers additional delays in an already sluggish course of, exacerbating the difficulties confronted by disabled people in acquiring the mandatory certification.
In conclusion, whereas the intention behind tightening the principles to stop fraud is comprehensible and considerable, the federal government’s proposed amendments to the RPWD Guidelines fall brief in a number of essential respects. By failing to account for the realities of resource-poor settings, neglecting to deal with the reluctance of certifying authorities to acknowledge milder disabilities and never streamlining the acceptance of UDID playing cards throughout the board, these amendments danger putting individuals with disabilities underneath even larger hardship whereas doing valuable little to stop a recurrence of Puja Khedkar kind incidents. To actually defend the integrity of the incapacity reservation system, the federal government should revisit these amendments and deal with these vital gaps. Solely then can the system be each honest and fewer vulnerable to manipulation.
Rahul Bajaj is a training lawyer, co-founder, Mission Accessibility, senior affiliate fellow, Vidhi Centre for Authorized Coverage and adjunct college, BML Munjal College Faculty of Legislation. Vaishnavi Chaudhry is advocacy fellow, Girls of the South Communicate Out. The views expressed are private
