The disabled want 'rights', not 'welfare'
From: The Kathmandu Post - 12/02/2002
By: Bikash Sangraula

After two decades since the United Nations celebrated International Disabled
Year in 1981, and declared December 3rd as International Disabled Day, Nepal
hasn't come far in terms of guaranteeing or even assuring discrimination-free
life for the disabled. 

Munishwor Pandey, president, National Federation of the Disabled (NFD) -
Nepal, told The Kathmandu Post, "The UN disabled decade of 1983-93 is over,
Asia Pacific disabled decade of 1992-2002 has also concluded. However, we
haven`t made any headway progress."  

Realising that some regions of the Asia Pacific had lagged behind, the Japan
summit on the disabled convened on October 2002 declared the period 2003 -
2012 as the Post Decade. 

According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), the disabled in Nepal
constitute about 10 per cent of the total population. That is around 2.4
million. 

In response to the call of the UN, Nepal passed the 'Disabled Protection and
Welfare Act' in 1983 that defines disability and lists provisions for
ensuring equality, education, health, training, employment, and other support
to the disabled in Nepal "Surprisingly, nothing except the passing of the Act
happened during the 1983-93 period," added Pandey. 

Experts opine that in spite of visible efforts in Nepal to ensure disabled
welfare, the disabled have continued to suffer, as able people cannot
empathise on their everyday hardships. "And there is no representation from
the disabled at the policy level," said Minraj Panthi, ex-general secretary
of the NFD, and added, "Frequent changes of government is also posing serious
problems to our cause."  

In 1994, a law was passed in Nepal to enforce the Act. The law suffers from
ambiguity as it lists down everything that should he done to protect a
disabled person's rights but fails to mention who is responsible in ensuring
this. 

"In order to rectify the ambiguity of the Act, we formed an advisory
committee in 1999. The rectified draft was submitted to the govern nient in
2000. The draft is still pending," said Pandey. 

Discrimination of the disabled begins right from the family in Nepal.
Disabled children are often regarded as a family 'disgrace'. They are
discouraged from participating in social activities, says Kiran Shilpakar of
NFD.  

Development activities in Nepal overlook the needs of the disabled. Public
libraries have shelves and chairs that are not compatible to the needs of the
disabled. Similarly, the overhead bridges are far from benefiting the
disabled. 

"The needs of disabled have not been sufficiently incorporated in our
development efforts. The present infrastructure excludes the disabled. How
can a vertically challenged or a mobility challenged reach a water tap or the
light switches that are at around 5 odd feet on the wall," said Pandey,
citing examples of infrastructure based discrimination. 

The UN Standard Rule of 1994 makes equal opportunity and participation of the
disabled mandatory. Similarly the Economic and Social Commission of Asia
Pacific and the Constitution of the country have provisions to secure
employment opportunities for the disabled. However, the qualifications to be
met for joining civil service in Nepal are prohibitive for the disabled. 

According to Kamal Lamichhane, president, National Society of the Disabled,
social discrimination against the disabled is a far greater problem than the
disability itself. "Disability and inability are two different things. We
might be disabled but we can make fine civil servants. People need to be
sufficiently educated on this."  

Experts say that unless there is a shift from 'welfare concept' to 'rights
concept' on disabled related legislation, the efforts to ensure rights for
the disabled are not going to be fruitful. Also, the lack of public awareness
of politically correct terms has been seen as a major impediment in educating
people toward respecting disabled rights. 

"There are no blind people anymore. Yes, there are visually challenged
people. It is unfair to nickname anyone on the basis of a disability," said
Lamichhane. 

