Centre for Internet and Society

Enabling Access to Education through ICT - Conference Report

praskrishna — 2013-01-28T10:14:03Z

The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Bangalore in cooperation G3ict, UNESCO, ITU, WIPO, The Deafway Foundation, DEF and SPACE with the gracious support of The Hans Foundation and the Department of Information Technology, MICT, New Delhi organized an international conference "Enabling Access to Education through ICT" in New Delhi from 27 to 29 October 2010. The event was sponsored by Hans Foundation.

Background

Persons with disabilities in India are often left out of mainstream schools and universities due to a variety of reasons, primarily the lack of awareness amongst educational organizations and teachers, near absence of infrastructural resources and lack of training in this regard. It is believed that barely two per cent of the 70 million disabled persons have access to education in India. Unless we take special efforts to remedy this situation by equipping teachers, educational institutions and the entire social infrastructure to adopt innovative, cost effective and technology based resources such as assistive technologies, ubiquitous Web, multiple platforms, social networks, online libraries and digital resources etc, they will continue to remain excluded from social participation.

Conference


Given above is a picture of the speakers from the Edict 2010 event in Delhi.

Edict 2010 was organised by the Centre for Internet and Society, in collaboration with G3ict, UNESCO, ITU, WIPO, The Deafway Foundation, DEF and SPACE with the gracious support of The Hans Foundation and the Department of Information Technology, MICT, New Delhi. The main aim was to highlight existing policy and practical barriers for students and educational institutions in developing countries, showcase ICT based solutions which are presently being adopted around the world and point to existing knowledge resources and emerging trends in education. The conference focused on enabling education at all levels: primary, secondary, tertiary and distance education and vocational training. The success of the conference was characterised by the fact that it brought together a wide range of stakeholders, including industry, special and mainstream educators, disability organisations, policymakers from the ministries of education (MHRD) and information technology (DIT), Technology developers and researchers, librarians and persons with disabilities, from several countries like India, USA, Switzerland, Japan, Nepal and Bangladesh, who were all experts with vast experience. Consequently, the sessions were extremely interactive, with a lot of inputs from the participants and it was commonly acknowledged that the sharing of information and learning was equal for both participants and speakers. The break out sessions resulted in a lot of recommendations and insightful observations from the four groups.

The conference was inaugurated by Smt. Vibha Puri Das, Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development. Other special guests were Dr.Indrajit Banerjee, Director, Information and Communications sector, UNESCO and Mr. Andrew Tru from WIPO. Smt. Das released the first copy of the book, ‘E-Accessibility Handbook for Persons with Disabilities’, a book based on the G3ict-ITU on line e-Accessibility Toolkit for Policy makers, which was edited and published by CIS. Dr. Banerjee received the first copy. Smt. Das delivered the key note address; she outlined the situation with respect to education of persons with disabilities in India and highlighted some of the initiatives of the Ministry of Human Resource and Development. She especially drew attention to the NMEICT project of the MHRD, which is a huge fund for supporting initiatives which used ICT to promote Education through ICT. Till now, NMEICT has funded one disability related project for conversion of college level textbooks into daisy format in four languages. The project is being undertaken by IIT Calcutta. She concluded by inviting all persons and organisations present in the conference to apply to the fund for specific projects and said that the ministry would be happy to look at proposals for promoting education for persons with disabilities.

The key note address was followed by remarks from Dr. Banerjee, who gave an outline of UNESCO’s initiatives around the world on education and underscored the importance of attaining the Millennium Development Goal of Education for all for all developing countries and UNESCO’s commitment to support countries in their efforts to do so. Mr.Andrew Tru talked about WIPO’s commitment towards securing access to reading materials for persons with print disabilities in accessible formats around the world and focused on the deliberations on a treaty for the print impaired at WIPO, with special emphasis on the Stakeholders’ Platform initiative of WIPO.

The conference started off with welcome note from the organisers CIS, G3ict, UNESCO, ITU and WIPO. Smt. Vibha Puri Das, Secretary, Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resource and Development gave the key note address and released the e-Accessibility Policy Handbook for Persons with Disabilities, brought out by CIS in collaboration with G3ict and ITU and sponsored by Hans Foundation. The handbook will help regulators around the world in their policy making. Dr. Indrajit Banerjee, Director, UNESCO gave the introductory remarks. This followed by a presentation of Axel Leblois, Executive Director G3ict, on the dispositions of the UNCRPD relating to digital accessibility.

Over the three days, there were presentations from 29 experts on a variety of topics, ranging from discussing challenges and solutions in educational institutions, to technology development and policy formulation and implementation. The profiles of the speakers are given in Annexure A. The conference was attended by 77 participants and was also attended by a large number of participants from other conferences taking place in the hotel from time to time. The list of the 77 participants is given as Annexure B.

Conclusion

The conference was highly engaging and enabled the attendees to explore the challenges and opportunities and equipped them with the tools needed to implement ICT solutions within their organizations. There was a very high level of expertise amongst educators in the conference which was apparent from the discussions, there were persons who talked about education for the blind, deaf, persons with mental disabilities etc with great authority and put forward insightful perspectives. From a technology standpoint, there was a notion that broadband which was at present not easily available was about to explode because of the huge investment that the government was putting into it and hence it was possible that all the solutions which were being discussed in the conference would be more easily available to persons with disabilities uniformly around the country. There are many opportunities to leapfrog in India. In fact, many speakers considered cloud based technologies being adopted in school systems where there was broadband infrastructure available. There was a common consensus amongst all members present in the conference that universal accessibility could only be achieved with the involvement of all stakeholders; public-private partnership is key to ensuring that all private services and technology solutions are also accessible to persons with disabilities. Participants were very impressed with the innovative teaching methods and technologies in other countries, especially in Japan.


Above is a group photo of the participants at the Edict Conference

General Recommendations

Calls for proposals for funding projects should be widely publicized: It was a common feeling of all the participants that even though there were several funds which could be tapped into for projects, there was little information about where these funds existed, how they could be applied for and used to fund different kinds of projects. Government should make some effort to ensure that information about funding opportunities should reach intended beneficiaries.
Accessibility should be integrated into existing education projects: While it is important to initiate specific accessibility related projects, it is equally necessary to integrate accessibility into existing projects such as introducing creation and distribution of accessible content in existing ICT school programmes.
Focus to be given to training students with disabilities: all the groups felt that training was a huge issue and that support for students through training was required. SSA Karnataka gave a good presentation showing how it addressed the issue of training on a large scale. The groups highlighted that the UNCRPD placed an obligation on the government to raise awareness amongst persons with disabilities.
Priority attention should be given to the development of language based tools for all Indian languages, especially minority languages. This includes development of optical character recognition (OCR) and text to speech (TTS) software in different languages. This is critical for all levels and forms of education.
Access to broadband services for persons with disabilities at affordable prices to be promoted to enable effective use of technology to access educational content.
Need to create accessible content and accessible open resources: It was stressed that all study modules used by educators, and open educational resources must be in accessible formats in order to have the widest outreach to students. Cyndi Rowland gave an example where Federal grants would not go to programmes which created non accessible content.
Public procurement should be used to promote accessibility.
Government should focus on early intervention in education because very few disabled children actually enrolled in schools and even amongst those that enrol, a very miniscule percentage go on to complete secondary and higher education.
Need to have a well developed ecosystem: All schools must be equipped with resources to teach disabled children.
Solutions and teaching methods must be innovative and highly individualised. Common approaches to teaching disabled children are less likely to be successful.
Periodic and on going trainings must be given to field practitioners with special emphasis on sharing information about solutions which have been successful or failed in the past.

Specific Recommendations

Training colleges for educators should include a course on disabilities and education for students with disabilities.
Children with disabilities in CBSE, ICSE and all state boards should get at least three years to complete class 10th and 12th examinations.
Children with disabilities should be allowed to give examinations with computers and in formats of their choice.
Each child with a disability should get compulsory training in the use of computers using appropriate assistive technology and be provided these technologies free of cost or at subsidised rates.
The government should launch a mandatory ICT training programme for all teachers in rural and urban areas to train them in the use of assistive technologies.
Course materials for all classes should be provided in CDs and accessible formats in all schools for children with disabilities.
NMEICT should fund development of text to speech software in all Indian languages so that the vast majority of Indian children who cannot read or understand English can continue to study in their native language; it is strongly recommended that such development projects also be entrusted to companies and organisations directly who have expertise in this area and should not be conditional on working with an IIT, IISC or other similar institution. The NMEICT should also fund other projects for the disabled, such as for content creation and so on.
It is recommended that the Digital Library project, which is a praiseworthy and extremely important project for creating open resources to all existing regional and English books should be made accessible since it has the potential to benefit a very large number of persons with disabilities. At the moment, the project involves all the steps which are required to create accessible books, i.e., scanning and OCRing, however, despite the fact that OCR is done, the books are still uploaded as image files and not as accessible word or text or html files which can be read using screen readers. If this was done and we had access to TTS in Indian languages, we would have access to all the traditional Indian literature and manuscripts, which are invaluable to a researcher.
It is strongly recommended that the web sites of all educational institutions, both public and private should be made accessible so that persons using screen readers can access information about the courses, admissions, read about the organisations and apply on line for admissions. It is also recommended that persons with disabilities should be given the flexibility to take on line examinations and that these should be designed in an accessible manner.
It is recommended that all educational institutions and libraries should be made physically accessible for persons using wheelchairs.

What our Speakers and Partners Had to Say

"G3ict was most pleased to organize this very effective workshop with CIS: all stakeholders required to implement the dispositions of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in matters of accessible and assistive technologies in Education actively participated. Disabled Persons Organizations, governments, industry, schools, universities administrators and educators engaged in a very dynamic and practical exchange of experience which created a great learning opportunity for all participants. It also demonstrated that solutions, funding and expertise can be leveraged in India to leapfrog current implementation methods for accessible and assistive technologies. Many participants look forward to build on the momentum of the workshop to develop an ongoing national forum on accessible and assistive ICTs in education. It was clear from the discussions held with government officials that private-public cooperation including industry, education institutions and government agencies are likely to emerge as a result of this dialogue. A most inspiring workshop, among the most successful that G3ict has been involved with in terms of engaging key ICT accessibility stakeholders at a national level."

Axel Leblois

"There is an urgent need to teach disability studies in India across all levels of school and university. Ignorance and discrimination are so high that even the media does not attempt to mask its poor and misinformed portrayal of disabled people. This conference has started a welcome conversation in that direction."

Joyojit

"This meeting brought together an amazing array of individuals that included those with disabilities, those in education, those in Ministry positions, and experts from India and abroad. The energy was palpable and the work that began at this meeting will be felt throughout India for years to come. It is clear that this will be the first of many transformative meetings sponsored by CIS."

For the presentations, click here

Download the agenda and bios here [Word, 609 kb]

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/edict-report

G3ict-GW Global Policy Forum: "ICT Accessibility: A New Frontier for Disability Rights"

praskrishna — 2011-08-26T09:58:36Z

The Institute for Global and International Studies, Elliott School of Intenational Affairs at George Washington University, in cooperation with G3ict hosted this conference in Citiy View Room, Washington, D.C on 15 and 16 November 2010. Nirmita Narasimhan participated in this conference and spoke in the panel on Successful Treaty Implementation: Key Factors of Success and Obstacles.

Background

Just four years ago the UN General Assembly adopted the text of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). Designed to protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities, this was the first international human rights treaty that was negotiated, developed, and written with the active participation of representatives of persons it is designed to protect. The remarkable engagement in and momentum behind this treaty, an international human rights instrument of the United Nations, has led to rapid accession to the treaty. As of September 2010, 146 signatories (including the United States) and 90 ratifying parties to the Convention pledged their commitment effectively extending the benefits of the Convention to more than 75% of the global population.

Despite the notably rapid adoption of the Convention, the global scale of the target population and the wide range of stakeholders, there is surprisingly little scholarship on the policy issues associated with the implementation of the Convention. The Institute for Global and International Studies (IGIS) at the George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs is entering into an ongoing research partnership with G3ict focusing on the global policy dimensions of ensuring accessibility of ICT and implementation of the Convention.

Shortly before the adoption of the Convention, the Global Initiative for Inclusive Information and Communication Technologies (G3ict), a global grass-roots organization of subject matter experts covering the various technical and social dimensions of ICT accessibility, was made a flagship initiative of the UN Global Alliance for Information and Communication Technologies and Development (UN GAID). G3ict is a U.S.-based public-private partnership representing multiple stakeholders from all regions of the world and a variety of backgrounds. It works closely with ITU, UNESCO, UN DESA and the World Bank, among other multilateral institutions active in this policy space. G3ict collaborated over the course of 3.5 years to develop a global, multidisciplinary body of knowledge - expert practices and tools - on the wide range of issues relevant to accessible Information and Communication Technologies, including The Accessibility Imperative, G3ict-ITU Toolkit for Policymakers, and the G3ict Self-Assessment Framework.

Objectives of the Global Forum

In the context of this research program, the Institute for Global and International Studies at the Elliott School of International Affairs hosted, in cooperation with G3ict, a high-profile, high-impact Global Policy Forum on ICT Accessibility to build upon the work of G3ict and to convene a prominent interdisciplinary group of GWU and non-GWU scholars along with an array of global leaders from Government, Industry, and Civil Society to:

review the unique set of processes which made it possible for the CRPD to enjoy one of the fastest rates of adoption among Human Rights treaties and how its digital accessibility dispositions are now promoted by a grassroots multi-stakeholders cooperative work across the globe;
identify specific areas of opportunities in supporting country-level policy making and international cooperative efforts in the field of digital accessibility policy making;
raise awareness among the current Federal Administration officials and industry leaders of the potential leadership role that the United States can play in promoting digital accessibility rights around the world
Proceedings of the workshop will be video recorded, edited and made available on both the IGIS and G3ict web sites and the presentations compiled to produce an update of G3ict’s initial compendium on ICT accessibility policy making, The Accessibility Imperative, with the GWU faculty delivering a “State of the Scholarship” report for publication as well as policy briefs for U.S. congressional leaders.

Program Committee

His Excellency Luis Gallegos, Ambassador of Ecuador to the United States; past Chair of the Ad Hoc Preparatory Committee of the United Nations General Assembly for the CRPD (G3ict Chairperson)
Daniel Aghion, Executive Director, W2i
Mohammed Al-Tarawneh, Inaugural Chairperson and Vice-President 2010, UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
Francesca Cesa Bianchi, Director, External Relations, G3ict
A.R. Forcke, Public Sector Market Manager, IBM Research - Human Ability & Accessibility Center
Larry Goldberg, Director of Media Access, WGBH (or Trisha O’Connell)
Akiko Ito, Chief, Secretariat for the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities/UN Focal Point on Disability, UN DESA
John D. Kemp, Esq., Partner, Powers Pyles Sutter & Verville PC; Executive Director and General Counsel U.S. Business Leadership Network (USBLN®); (G3ict Research Committee Chair)
Axel Leblois, Executive Director, G3ict
Susan Mazrui, Director, Federal Regulatory Affairs, AT&T
Debra Ruh, CEO and Founder, TecAccess
Paul Schafer, Information Technology (IT) Specialist & Assistant Section 508 Coordinator, U.S. Department of State
James Thurston, Senior Strategist, Global Policy and Standards, Microsoft
Dr. Susan Sell, Professor of Political Science and International Affairs; Director, Institute for Global and International Studies, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University
Representative of GWU School of Education

Participants

GWU faculty and non-GWU Academics
International D.C.-based delegations
World Bank representatives
Representatives from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
Representatives from UNESCO
International delegations of Disabled Persons Organizations
ICT Industry and ICT corporate and institutional users
State and local government broadband planners and policy makers
U.S. Federal government representatives
Non-Governmental Organizations
Elliott School Alumni who are significant actors in this policy space

Download the agenda
See the list of speakers
Also see G3ict for full details

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/ict-accessibility-conference

Nirmita Narasimhan wins National Award

praskrishna — 2011-08-17T08:53:12Z

Nirmita Narasimhan was awarded the National Award for Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities from the Government of India on 3 December 2010 on the occasion of the World Disability Day. The award was presented by Smt. Pratibha Patil, President of India under the Role Model category. The award function took place at Vigyan Bhavan in New Delhi from 11:00 to12:30 and was telecast live on Doordarshan.

Nirmita was given a certificate, cash prize and a citation which reads as follows:

Nirmita Narasimhan has excelled in different and diverse fields, despite having a severe disability. She is a gold medallist in MA (Music) from Delhi University and stood first in M.Phil. in Carnatic music from Delhi University. She is the recipient of the Sahitya Kala Parishad scholarship for advanced studies in Carnatic music from the Delhi Government. She is now working actively for digital inclusion and accessibility issues for persons with disabilities at the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore.

Also see the list of recipients in the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment website.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/national-award

Accessibility at CIS – Looking back at 2010

praskrishna — 2011-08-17T08:53:08Z

From its inception, CIS has been working towards reform of copyright law both at the national and international levels and towards formulation of an electronic accessibility policy for India. The year 2010 has been quite eventful for developments in the area of accessibility for persons with disabilities at the national and international levels. In this blog post, Nirmita Narasimhan looks at some of the work done by CIS and other organisations to promote digital accessibility and inclusion for persons with disabilities during the calendar year 2010.

As the year 2010 comes to an end, it seems like a good time to pause and reflect on the various activities and movements which are vibrant in India and the world over for promoting digital access for persons with disabilities and the work which CIS has done in this area.

At CIS, we began the accessibility programme with a vision — a vision of a truly accessible Internet, where every person with a disability could have access to websites and digital content without technology, design or legal barriers. The Internet and ICT technologies should be promoted as desirable tools to empower persons with disabilities to enjoy their basic rights, of education, employment and enjoyment of life.

The first initiative which we were involved in was to formulate a national electronic accessibility policy with the Department of Information Technology to ensure that all government and public websites should conform to WCAG 2.0. Over the past year, the DIT has come out with a draft policy which is now being circulated amongst state governments and ministries for feedback.

The year 2010 has also witnessed several interesting public and private initiatives for digital accessibility in India. The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) began its Indian chapter under the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology. It has been extremely proactive in bringing together experts from around the country and chalking out a systematic work plan for engaging with the public and private sectors to promote awareness and raise skill on web accessibility. An interesting development in the private sector is the accessibility initiative of the NASSCOM Foundation, which is engaging with the IT industry to promote accessibility and employment of persons with disabilities.

The Copyright Challenge

The year 2010 has ended on a more positive note for copyright amendment for the benefit of persons with disabilities. After carrying on a focused six-month long national campaign for “The Right to Read”, disability organisations around the country came together to form the National Access Alliance to jointly lobby for copyright amendments with the Government of India. Several members of the Alliance deposed personally before the standing committee constituted by the Parliament of India to look into the matter and several others sent in written representations. A large part of the month of March was spent in trying to meet and brief the Members of Parliament to gather support for the amendment and to explain the dire necessity for the change. After a nail biting three-month period, the committee came out with its report, which recommended very strongly the pleas of the print disability community with regard to fair dealing for creating accessible versions of books. We are now awaiting the amended draft which should hopefully be presented to the Parliament by the HRD Ministry next year.

On the international scene also, there were positive developments with respect to agreement on the need for a legally binding instrument for exceptions for the print disabled. Early 2010 seemed to be very slow moving with the negotiations seeming to take a down turn when the June SCCR meeting ended without any concrete conclusions and no agreement amongst member states on the matter for the Treaty for the Blind. Several different proposals from USA, EU and Africa have been made in addition to the original BEPM proposal for solving the problem of cross-border sharing of accessible copyrighted materials. While two of these proposals, pertaining to EU and USA, were for non-binding instruments, the fact that they had made specific proposals on this issue showed that there was common consensus about the existence of a serious obstacle to accessing knowledge for print impaired persons, and that it needed an international solution. India was extremely supportive of the Treaty and did her best to help with mobilising developing countries support for the Treaty. The November SCCR ended on a good note with member states agreeing on a time based work plan for tackling three issues — exceptions for the print disabled, libraries and archives and for education, to be carried over 2011–2012.

Apart from WIPO, there have been good developments in other quarters as well. The United Nations Department of Social and Economic affairs started working towards accessibility within the UN system to make all documentation and communications, websites, buildings and human resources of UN and other international agencies accessible. For the first time, Disability was included in the MDG progress report and specifically mentioned in the Outcome Document of the High-Level Summit of the Millennium Development Goals. In addition, the General Assembly at its sixty-fifth session adopted the resolution on realization of MDGs for persons with disabilities for 2015 and beyond. Apart from efforts at the UN level, the year 2010 has also witnessed a lot of conferences and discussions taking place in countries around the world and a lot of organisations like G3ict, ITU and others have been extremely proactive in raising awareness in different countries and governments. February of this year saw the launch of the joint on line publication of G3ict-ITU “e-Accessibility Toolkit for Policy Makers”, a phenomenal work with contributions from over 65 experts around the world on implementation of the digital aspects of the Convention. Subsequently, a print version of this book was edited in-house at CIS and launched during an international conference at New Delhi in October. The book is gaining wide publicity and is being sent to regulators and ministries of IT around the world to assist them in their policy making.

At CIS, we have worked with a wide variety of persons and organisations from varying backgrounds on different issues, ranging from policy formulation to organising events, such as the Edict conference on enabling education through ICT for persons with disabilities. We had a lot of national and international partners, resource persons and participants at Edict 2010 and found the entire event a huge learning experience. We also came in touch with the officials at the Universal Service Obligation Fund in India and are exploring ways in which the fund can be used to benefit persons with disabilities.

This is also a year when the Persons with Disabilities Act is being amended. This process has been a turbulent one, with quite a bit of discord between the drafting committee, the disability sector and the government on the content and form of the new Act and the issues it needs to address. We have been actively involved in this process, giving feedback to the various drafts of the legislations which are circulated, attending consultations and so on. We see this activity taking up a lot of our time over the next year as well.

This year has been quite eventful for the accessibility team. We would like to acknowledge the support of all organisations, institutions and individuals who have supported our work and look forward to strengthening collaborations in the years to come.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessibility-cis-2010

Accessibility in Telecommunications

praskrishna — 2011-11-08T08:08:49Z

CIS seeks to gather information about the accessibility of telecommunications products and services for persons with disabilities and elderly persons in India.

Given below are the links to two questionnaires:

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessibility-telecommunications

The Working Draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2010: Does it exceed its Mandate in Including Provisions Relating to Other Disability Legislations?

praskrishna — 2012-12-14T10:32:18Z

The Centre for Internet and Society, Inclusive Planet and the Centre for Law and Policy Research in this legal note analyse how far the January draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act touches upon the provisions of the other disability legislations, namely the Mental Health Act and The National Trusts Act and thereby exceeds the mandate given by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment to amend only the Persons with Disabilities Act.

Introduction

This is a brief Note on the Working Draft of the Persons with Disabilities Act dated 1.12.2010 (“Working Draft”) on the specific issue of how it relates to the three other disability legislations being the National Trusts Act 1999, the Mental Health Act 1987 and the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992.

From the Working Draft it is seen that there are several provisions which are contradictory to some of the provisions in these three legislations in significant ways. This Note also raises concerns as to whether the Working Draft has exceeded its mandate given by the Committee to only amend the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (“PWD Act”) by attempting to draft a comprehensive disability law which includes even the other disability legislations .

The Committee and its Mandate

The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, through an Office Memorandum1, constituted a Committee to “draft a new legislation to replace the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995” (“Committee”). 2 The main aim of setting up the Committee was to ensure that the PWD Act was in consonance with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and not to amend any of the other disability legislations. 3

After the Committee was set up, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee dated 22-07-2010 4 show that the Chairperson reminded the Committee members of the specific purpose for which it was set up and was therefore “not going to debate on formulating one comprehensive law that would repeal all other current disability legislations such as The National Trust Act, Mental Health Act and Rehabilitation Council of India Act, etc.”5

Subsequently, the Consultant appointed by the Committee released several drafts and the latest Working Draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2010 is dated 01.12.2010(“Working Draft”). 6 The Working Draft surprisingly states that “the mandate of the Committee to the Consultant was to put together a comprehensive legislation which covers all rights of all persons with disabilities.” 7

Further, the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Working Draft proposes to “replace the current disability legislations with a comprehensive law which recognizes all rights of all persons with disabilities.” 8

These statements in the Working Draft raise some confusion as to whether the mandate given by the Committee has been clearly understood before the drafting process commenced. If the mandate was indeed to only amend the PWD Act and not to amend any of the other legislations such as the National Trusts Act, the Mental Health Act and the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, then the drafting should have been restricted to amending the PWD Act to the extent possible, and not to affect the provisions of the other legislations.

The Working Draft on Other Disability Legislations

The Working Draft does not suggest any amendments to the other disability legislations such as the National Trust Act, 1999, Mental Health Act, 1987 and Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992. However, as to the effect that the Working Draft should have on these other legislations, it leaves a “Pending Question” which states9:

“The issue of the induction of the National Trust and the Rehabilitation Council as separate chapters could not be attempted primarily because there was no time left to undertake a coherent and systematic exercise. It may also be noted that as the length of the statute expanded we felt a constraint of space in even incorporating all the provisions of power and accountability in the chapter on the Disability Rights Authority. It may also be noted that all significant authorities in the country have dedicated legislations around them. In this view of the matter the Committee would need to consider whether it would wish to suggest the creation of One Disability Law Code and within which have legislations on : Disability Rights; the Disability Authority; the National Trust; and the Rehabilitation Council. Or whether it would also wish to induct the National Trust and the Rehabilitation Council into this legislation?”

Added to this, the Memorandum on Disability Code (“Memorandum”) prepared along with the Working Draft explains that the reasons mentioned in the Pending Question along with the lack of time prevented the working out of the linkages between the DRA, the National Trust and the Rehabilitation Council of India.10

About the other dedicated legislations, the Memorandum states as follows11:

“Since we reached the opinion that the newly established DRA should have its own legislation we also concluded that the National Trust and the RCI should have their own legislations which should spell out the specific tasks each of those authorities should carry out to implement the rights recognized in the New Rights for Persons with Disabilities Act. The National Trust should be the authority which addresses the issue of multiple discrimination and be mandated to proactively formulate policies and programs by which to ensure the equality and non discrimination of persons with disabilities who are so disadvantaged and the RCI could work on HRD. The composition and powers and functions of the three bodies should be so created that it ensures convergence of operation.”

With regard to the Mental Health Act, the Memorandum makes the following recommendation12

“The proposed new law recognizes the paradigm of legal capacity with support. It also recognizes the right to life, liberty and integrity of all persons with disabilities. The recognition of these rights requires a re-examination of the Mental Health Act. Even if it is accepted that community living and no force are what is required for all; it is necessary to ask what should be done with the existing institutions and the inmates housed in them. The process of dismantling cannot be done without creating alternative services and there is a need to make a transit legislation which addresses this interim situation. The reason for making the transit legislation comes from the main law but to allow coherent operation and efficient implementation of these transitory measures it is better that they are contained in a separate legislation.”

These statements in the Explanatory Notes to the Working Draft shows that it not restricted itself to only amending the PWD Act as envisaged by the Mandate given by the Committee. An examination of the Working Draft shows that it has neither completely substituted the provisions of the three other disability legislations into the Working Draft, nor has it restricted itself to amending only the PWD Act - it is somewhere in the middle, where some many provisions which are covered by the three other disability legislations are significantly altered and at the same time these legislations are not sought to be amended simultaneously.

If the intention of the Working Draft is to replace all the other disability legislations, then it clearly exceeds the mandate of the Committee.

Section 7A(2) of the Working Draft

Section 7A (2) and 7B (2) in the Working Draft are included only within the chapter relating to Legal Capacity. They are phrased unusually to render any legislation, rule, notification, order, bye-law, regulation, custom and practice that deprive a person with disability from exercising his legal capacity as void.

Such a provision in one statute which declares a provision in another statute as void may not even be constitutionally permissible. The function of the legislature is to enact, re-enact, amend and repeal laws. The judiciary under Article 13 of the Constitution can exercise its powers of judicial review to render a provision which infringes on the fundamental rights as void. The legislature however, has no such power.

The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in P.L. Mehra and Ors v. D.R. Khanna and Ors (AIR 1971 Delhi 1) held as follows:
“…the decision in Mahendra Lal Jaini's case, as to the nature of a statute becoming void under Article 13 confirms the view that the statute itself continues to exist on the statute book but has become "ineffectual, nugatory and devoid of any legal force or binding effect". The thrust of these words is that such a law cannot be given effect to by the Courts in deciding upon the rights of the parties. These words are significant only for the purposes of the Courts vis-a-vis the rights of the parties. They would be meaningless if applied to the power of the Legislature to re-enact, repeal or amend a statute. For, one can hardly say that these powers of the Legislature cannot be exercised in respect of a statute which is ineffectual, nugatory and devoid of any legal force or binding effect. Indeed, it would be all the more necessary for the Legislature to amend or cure statutes which are suffering from such defects. The nature of the defects is such that only a judicial decision can point them out. It is not by an act of Legislature but only by a judicial decision that one would know whether a statute is ineffectual, nugatory and devoid of any legal force or binding effect.”

Therefore, the declaration of a statutory provision as ‘void’ can only be done by the judiciary as “voiding” of the law only comes into question at the time of the enforcement or implementation of the law. The legislature’s function is to repair the defect in legislation by amending it or repealing the whole legislation.

The Working Draft, in declaring other legislative provisions as void is being vague as to the specific provisions of specific legislations which are to fall under the Section. The Working Draft cannot make a blanket declaration of all laws inconsistent with legal capacity as void without taking steps to identify the provisions and make amendments or deletions.

Effect of the Working Draft without amendment of other disability legislations

The provisions of the Working Draft are introduced in such a way as to affect the provisions of the other disability legislations. In light of this, the need for amending the provisions of these disability legislations is a pressing one. The inconsistencies between the Working Draft and the other disability legislations range from the definition of ‘persons with disability’ to the recognition of the basic principle of legal capacity. As detailed in the table, the National Trust Act follows a completely different basis for determining who a ‘person with disability’ is. If the definition is not amended under the National Trust Act, it results in an inconsistency in the language under the various disability legislations.

Further, the Working Draft is not correct in declaring that other legislative provisions which deprive a person of legal capacity as void. Declaration that a provision of law is void is not the function of the legislature. Its function is to adequately amend it so as to be consistent with the principles it intends to introduce and enforce. This applies to the principle of legal capacity which the Working Draft aims to bring into all the disability legislations. In order to do so, it has to amend the Mental Health Act and the National Trust Act accordingly.

The authorities under the various disability legislations have their set functions. However, the Working Draft is uncertain as to how to divide the responsibilities of the various authorities. It does not incorporate the various authorities under the Working Draft provisions itself. However, it encroaches on the powers and functions of those authorities by making the Disability Rights Authority or some other ‘delegated authority’ in charge of them. While doing so, it does not even amend the provisions of the other legislations. This is a serious discrepancy as the enforcement of rights and performance of duties under the legislations. If there is a confusion as to which authority is responsible to perform a specific function, then a person might be deprived of the very rights that the Draft seeks to enforce.

Leaving the other disability provisions unamended leads to an especially difficult situation when the courts have to determine the intention of the legislature while drafting and have to apply that intention while interpreting it. Further, it is not clear as to what rights should be enforced against which authority in court. Therefore, the merging of the areas of function between the various authorities makes the enforcement of rights itself difficult and therefore uncertain.

Conclusion

Thus, as seen from the Working Draft, it is clear that it seeks to be one comprehensive law on disability, which would encompass issues addressed by several other disability laws. The explanatory notes state that it leaves the issue of the DRA and the authorities such as the Rehabilitation Council and the National Trust as a Pending Question.

It also refers to a Disability Code, which would encompass all disability legislation within its framework and raise this as an issue for the Committee to decide, when that has never been the mandate of the Committee. The explanatory notes state that it would bring within its fold all authorities such as the Rehabilitation Council and the National Trust and that the linkages between these authorities and the new Disability Rights Authority set up under the Working Draft would have to be worked out through transit legislation. The Working Draft leaves the discretion to the Committee to come to a conclusion as to whether all the authorities have to be incorporated under the same legislations or a separate Code with all the legislations has to be prepared. Thus, the roles which the authorities have to perform are left uncertain. The Mandate of the Committee was to replace the PWD Act, 1995. Therefore, the powers and functions of authorities which are established under the other disability legislations ought to have been left untouched. Instead, the Working Draft seeks to make a comprehensive legislation covering all the disabilities while it leaves the implementation aspect uncertain and undecided.

These statements along with some of the specific provisions mentioned in the table above show clearly that the Working Draft aims to be some kind of a comprehensive code to bring in all disability legislations within its fold and not only to amend the PWD Act, which was its specific mandate. For these reasons, the Working Draft has exceeded the mandate given to it. This has been suggested even by some members of the Committee. 13

Further, the Working Draft by only including Section 7A(2) in its chapter relating to Legal Capacity, which would render all other legislation in contravention to it as void, is not suitable and adequate. There would be adverse consequences if the other legislations are not suitably amended. For example, the entire Mental Health Act would need an overhaul if the right to legal capacity is introduced in the Working Draft. The local committees set up under the National Trusts Act would have to be completely abolished as their only role is to appoint guardians, which is completely done away with in the Working Draft. Thus, the mere inclusion of Section 7A (2) is not sufficient and workable, nor is it within the powers of the legislature to include.

The Working Draft has listed in Schedule 1 the amendments suggested to other legislations. This Schedule is incomplete and the specific provisions relating to the National Trusts Act 1999, the Rehabilitation Council of India Act 1992 and the Mental Health Act 1987 are also legislations which need amendment and should be included in this Schedule.

It is crucial that there is clarity on these important issues as to what exactly is being proposed to be amended. Whether it is only the PWD that is sought to be replaced or all other disability legislations are to be replaced by a Disability Code need to be understood by the drafters. If the mandate is only to amend the PWD Act, then it is important that we restrict ourselves to this mandate so as to ensure that other disability legislations are not affected. The other legislations can be amended at their own time, after the present PWD Act has been revised as per the mandate of the Committee.

Download the working draft in the format you may prefer:

For word, click here
For pdf, click here

Notes

1GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. DEP’T OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT, OFFICE MEMORANDUM FOR THE CONSTITUTION OF A COMMITTEE TO DRAFT A NEW LEGISLATION TO REPLACE THE PWD ACT, 1995., F.No. 16-38/2006-DD.III, (30th April 2010).

2 id

3See id

4See MINUTES OF MEETING, 2ND MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE TO DRAFT NEW LEGISLATION FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES., ( 22nd July 2010).

5See id at Page 1.

6See Working Draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2010, available at http://www.disabilitystudiesnalsar.org/newlaw.php. (Last visited on 24-01-2011).

7See id at Explanatory Note.

8See id at Statement of Objects and Reasons.

9Explanatory Notes: Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act Working Draft, Part IV, available at http://www.disabilitystudiesnalsar.org/explanatory-notes.php. (Last visited on 24-01-2011)

10See Memorandum on Disability Code, Background, available at http://www.disabilitystudiesnalsar.org/bcp-disability-code.php. (Last visited on 24-01-2011)

11See id at Dedicated Legislations.

12See id at Transitory Measures

13“Crisis hits panel on new Disability law” Available at http://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20101224/main5.htm

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/working-draft

Accessible Mobile Handsets in India: An Overview

praskrishna — 2012-12-14T10:29:30Z

Over a thousand mobile handsets are sold in India today and new models are launched almost every few weeks. However, the number of accessible handsets continues to be disproportionately low. The Centre for Internet and Society conducted a research on the mobile market to gauge how many handsets in India are accessible for persons with disabilities. Handsets were judged on the basis of a few common accessibility features and pricing.

The findings reveal that 108 handset models came with screen readers and 100 were magnifier compatible. Thirty one of them were touch phones and only 15 models had QWERTY keypads.

The study found that the price of 60 of the available options was either high or very high (Rs. 10,000 and above) and only 48 handsets are available at a reasonable or low price.

For available handset options for persons with disabilities, click below:

PDF [612 kb]
Open Office [24 kb]
Word [42kb]

Some of the major cross platform and proprietary mobile operating systems were also examined for their accessibility features. These included Windows Mobile, iPhone for Apple, Blackberry, Android, Symbian and Windows Phone 7. All the operating systems offer features such as font customization, menu style, menu icons and voice recognition. However, only two offer built-in screen readers and only one OS offers a built in screen magnifier. Three operating systems support third party screen readers and two also support third party screen magnifiers.

The table [click on the links below] (also compiled by Mukesh Sharma) provides more details on the features offered by various operating systems:

Word [14 kb]
PDF [16 kb]
Open Office [15 kb]

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessible-mobile-handsets

Note on the Authorities under the Working Draft of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2011 (9th February 2011)

praskrishna — 2011-08-24T05:42:13Z

The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MSJE) released a revised draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act which is up for comments on the MSJE website. The Centre for Law and Policy Research, Inclusive Planet and the Centre for Internet and Society jointly submitted a note on the section on statutory authorities.

This Note is on the Working Draft of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2011 (Hereinafter "The PWD Act, 2011") which was released on 9th February, 2011[1] to specifically review the authorities established under the PWD Act, 2011, the powers and functions assigned to the authorities and the effect of the establishment of these authorities.

The Disability Rights Authority
Vague provisions

The main functions of the DRA are to formulate rules, regulations, guidelines, schemes and other activities. Under section 29 (I), the DRA also has the power to monitor enforcment of the Act and to protect the rights of persons with disabilities and to suo moto address violations of rights of perosns with disabilities. In this regard, the provisions of the Act are vague. There are no provisions to indicate what penalties the DRA may impose in the event of any violation of the provisions of the PWD Act 2011. Wide powers are given to the DRA with regard to promotion, protection, monitoring and even enforcement of rights under the Act. However it is not clear as to how exactly these functions, especially the monitoring and enforcement of rights should be performed.

Powers of review and advice

Under Section 29J, the DRA has the power to review and advise the government to take measures with regard to laws that discriminate against persons with disability. This power will affect the functioning of the authorities under the other disability legislations such as the Mental Health Act,1987 and the National Trusts Act, 1999 as these legislations will be considered to be discriminatory on the issue of legal capacity. Therefore these other disability legislations need to be amended before the DRA can act on its review and advice powers.

Further, in many of the provisions of the Act, there is a mention of a 'designated authority' to perform certain functions without specifying what the designated authority is or who designates the authority. It is unclear as to whether the 'designated authority' refers to a new authority to be established under the Act or it refers to the DRA.
The Disability Courts

Multiplicity of Fora for grievance redressal

There is no clarity on the intended structure of the courts at different levels. The word “Court” is not defined anywhere under the Act, which is a great lacuna. There are several different for a provided for grievance redressal under the Act – the DRA, the Court of the National Disability Commissioner, the State Disability Courts and the Grievance Redressal Officer in each establishment. It is not clear as to whether these authorities under the Act have concurrent power or whether a person has to approach one authority and seek remedy before going to another. Over and above these courts and fora, the regular civil courts, family courts, High Courts would also have jurisdiction. It is not clear as to whether the jurisdiction of all other courts is ousted by the Act in setting up the special State Disability Courts and the Court of the National Disability Commissioner.

Section 6(7) and (8) empower “a court or the disability court” to make suitable orders on finding the occurrence of discrimination. These Sections merely mention a ‘court’ without specifying which court is referred to as there is no definition of ‘court’ under the Act. There is also no provision under the Act which allows a person to approach any other ordinary court for reliefs under the Act. Therefore it is not clear as to what this Section refers to when it uses the word ‘court’.
The Court of the National Disability Commissioner

Under Section 29S (2), the Act allows a person to directly approach the National Disability Commissioner only if the person is aggrieved of “discrimination” under the Act and not for other cases of violation. On the other hand, under section 29S (1) (c ) the Court of the National Disability Commissioner has the power to suo moto address all infringment of rights. There is a great contradiction therefore in the jurisdiction of the Court of the National Disability Commissioner.

Further, although there is an entire part of the Act which is dedicated to the imposition of penalties and sanctions, there are no provisions for the National Disability Commissioner to impose any penalties and sanctions.

The National Disability Commissioner acts as the appellate authority on the orders of the DRA. But there is no provision to appeal from the orders of the State Disability Court.
The State Disability Courts

The State Disability Courts have a wider jurisdiction that the National Disability Commissioner in that a person can approach the State Disability Courts complaining of violation of any rights under the Act.
Even in case of the State Disability Court there is no specific provision that allows the court to impose penalties and sanctions detailed under the Act.

Conclusion

The PWD Act, 2011 has made some changes from its earlier draft in December 2010. With regard to the authorities established under the Act, there are many inconsistencies which need to be resolved before the Act can come into force. The powers and the functions of all the authorities need to be clearly demarcated. Further, the empowering provisions should be linked to the provisions which prescribe the procedure through which the powers can be exercised. Provisions imposing penalties and sanctions should be linked to the authorities which have the power to impose the same. There are several authorities which all have power to look into violations of the Act, which can confuse a person seeking remedies under the Act. Unless these issues are addressed, the PWD, Act 2011 would cause major practical problems at the stage of implementing the rights recognised under the Act.

[1]See Working Draft of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2011, available at http://socialjustice.nic.in/pdf/workdraftdd.pdf (Last visited on 21-02-2011)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/rights-of-persons-with-disabilities

Policy Spotlight: 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act

praskrishna — 2011-11-08T10:18:29Z

The means and modes of communication have changed drastically in today’s age and the earlier bright lines, if they ever did exist have become increasingly blurred. The mainstreaming of social media has brought forth some new questions to the forefront, the issue of accessibility being one of them. Jenifer Simpson, Senior Director for Government Affairs and head of the Telecommunications & Technology Policy Initiative at the American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD), elaborates more on the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act in this interview.

The 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (21st CVAA) passed in October 2010 by the United States is a response to the regulatory challenges that the new generation of telecommunication, internet and digital communication devices present for persons with disabilities.

What does the Act do?

21st CVAA is an update to the Communications Act of the United States and brings in new rules for ensuring accessibility to persons with disabilities as technologies change and advance.

The Act extends federal law provisions for hearing aid compatibility for manufactured and imported telephones to all equipment and devices that offer IP-enabled communication services such as smart phones, PDAs, tablet devices, etc.

It also requires all internet based communication technologies to be accessible to persons with disabilities except in cases where it would result in an 'undue burden'[1] on the manufacturer or service provider. In such cases, the latter must then ensure that the equipment and services are compatible with third party assistive technologies to enable use by persons with disabilities.

In addition, 21st CVAA puts in place accountability measures to ensure better enforcements of the accessibility measures outlined under section 255 of the Rehabilitation Act and identifies persons with disabilities as a specific user group that can receive the benefits of universal service programs including broadband connectivity and USD 10 million annual support for assistive technologies. A section of the Act also deals with emergency access and Real-Time Text[2] support.

Video accessibility is a major component of the Act, with provisions having been created for closed captioning and video descriptions of television and web video content (with the exception of online only video programming), accessible programming guide and user interfaces. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is still in the process of rolling out regulations for these provisions.

Jenifer Simpson

Could you briefly trace the kind of advocacy and work that has gone into getting this law enacted?

Advocacy for the 21st CVAA was, and continues to be based in coalition work by disability organizations. First formed in March 2007, the Coalition of Organizations for Accessible Technology (COAT) grew very rapidly due to the strength of its communications advocacy agenda. The groups lobbied the U.S. Congress for three years, conducting both grass roots efforts utilizing the member groups’ leaders and membership, and worked at the national level, providing witnesses and testimony at three Congressional hearings and working hard to bring knowledge of the effort to the larger disability community. The COAT leadership met intensively with industry representatives from the television, communications, and information technology sectors, and then in 2010 saw the legislation passed in both houses (U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate) with signature by the President in October 2010. Note that the final Bill differed somewhat from the Bill that was first introduced in December 2009 as a result of the consultative process with industry and legislators. Critical to advocacy was the role of electronic social media such as a blog-website, an E-list, a Twitter or a Facebook account. This kept everyone informed as to what was going on and is a key way to ensure that everyone knew what was being done.

Where does the 21st CCVA stand as of now, what processes must be completed before it becomes fully effective?

Attached is a copy of the schedule for the rulemakings. Right now this law is enacted. We are in the implementation stage with the implementing federal agency, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), an independent federal government agency, issuing proposed rules or regulations. During that process everyone has a chance to be heard all over again and to influence what will be the final rules. We do have one final rule issued, that is, for the National Deaf-Blind Equipment Distribution program that the new law required. To ensure full implementation, advocacy groups have to be directly involved in the rulemaking processes at the FCC. This includes commenting into the proposed rules, participating in any standards development bodies and otherwise being at the table.

What in your view are its greatest strengths and its failings?

The greatest strength of the new law is that it is based on feasibility. That is, most of the requirements are not new, they are extensions of what was already required, except now, with communications and other technologies connecting largely with the Internet, these older requirements must now be extended to internet-enablement. Furthermore, most of the solutions for accessibility that the new law requires do not require rocket science or major research and development; technological solutions are known in many cases or can be developed easily and widely disseminated. Many will be software solutions that can be developed as part of the usual product design and development cycle, if the entity is willing to do this.

The only failing is that we didn’t really get to go far enough due to industry pushback. For instance, we started out wanting a requirement for captioning and video/audio description of all video material that would be displayed and distributed via the Internet. We did not get this. But we got major steps forward in these areas. That is, a requirement for captioning of any TV shown on the Internet and reinstatement of video description of TV. We also succeeded in ensuring that browsers in cell phones would be designed for accessibility so that blind users who might reach internet content that is accessible would have an accessible ‘ramp’ to that content.

What are the shortcomings of the earlier Communications Act that you would say 21st CCVA addresses?

With technology and communications converging, the 21st CVAA directly addresses newer forms of technology. We previously had section 255 of the Communications Act, enacted in 1996, but regulations were not issued until 2000, four years later. Also, at that time we had a requirement for video description of TV but it was overturned by the federal district court. Disability advocates learned their lessons from these experiences and in the 21st CVAA we redressed these shortcomings.

The 21st CVAA does not address internet content or website accessibility measures that must be taken. These topics are, in the U.S., covered under different statutes. Part of the advocacy process was, early on, to recognize that we needed to craft a law that was feasible despite our need for a comprehensive law. We knew the legislative and regulatory process — this meant some things were not going to be included. COAT works on these other laws to improve and update the regulations for things such as website accessibility.

The law was enacted in October? What if anything, has changed since then? What are you hoping will change?

We are still in the rulemaking phase and won’t see implementation of many of the requirements until next year. A big negative continues to be the bad attitude of some in the various industries to the need for accessibility. Some commenters into the proposed rules are attempting to influence the rules to delay implementation, to create exemptions or carve out waiver situations, and to otherwise stymie what must occur if we are to see people with sensory disabilities able to use most communications technologies like everyone else. Since the 21st CVAA is comprehensive in scope, there is little doubt that disability advocates have to maintain vigilance as the regulations are developed. Passing the law was just the first step, the next steps are implementation.

Are there any loopholes, grey areas in it that you feel could render it less effective?

Since we do not have final rules for most of the law, there are no known loopholes yet. While the law does not go as far as some would like, there is little doubt that this law has major impact and is stimulating change at the companies and within the industries affected.

Do you feel that ICT accessibility can be achieved through policy intervention alone?

First of all, there is nothing to stop any product or service from being designed and developed at the outset to be disability accessible and usable. In fact, there are several companies that do this already as a matter of corporate policy and a commitment to be leaders in this way. It is the rest for whom public policy has to be developed. Such policy must be developed that includes all stakeholders. However, there must be public policy leadership or nothing will change. Leadership involves Congressional members willing to say the law needs to be changed, willing to stand up for the right of people with disabilities to be included. This is the civil or human rights viewpoint and which must extend to disability to be fully inclusive. Leadership can involve a particular company or group of companies saying they will support the new law once they understand the need for the policy change. This happened with the 21st CVAA. Early on the largest wireline/wireless carriers supported the legislation. Most importantly, there must be strong leadership by consumer disability advocates who must make the key decisions and decide the directions and choices at critical junctures in the policymaking process. Also, critical to disability advocacy is the ability to work together in a consensual fashion, to put aside differences and to understand that “we’re all in this together” and to not give up or become discouraged.

Notes

[1].The term "undue burden" has the same meaning as given to it in the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act – “Undue burden means significant difficulty or expense. In determining whether an action would result in an undue burden, an agency shall consider all agency resources available to the program or component for which the product is being developed, procured, maintained, or used."

[2].Real-Time Text is a conversational text feature which can be sent in real time and can provide captioning of a voice conversation.

* The post has been updated to include an interview with Jenifer Simpson

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/communications-and-video-accessibility

Accessibility Policy Making: An International Perspective (Revised Edition 2011)

praskrishna — 2012-12-14T10:27:00Z

A G3ict White Paper researched and edited by the Center for Internet and Society, Bangalore, India. Editor: Nirmita Narasimhan, Revised edition: May 2011

In 2009, G3ict published a comparative review of the web and electronic accessibility policies of 15 countries and the European Union intended to serve as a guide to policy makers on how web accessibility has been implemented in different countries. Since then, there have been several relevant developments in the policy landscape, especially in the United States and the United Kingdom. The White Paper has been updated to keep abreast of these new changes. Some highlights of the revised White Paper include the updated version of Australia's Disability Discrimination Act Advisory Notes, issued by the Australian Human Rights Commission under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 in October 2010; the Equality Act 2010 (replacing the Disability Discrimination Act), The Statutory Code of Practice (2010), BS8878:2010 Web accessibility Code of practice replacing the PAS 78 and the e-Accessibility action plan in the U.K.; and the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 in the U.S.A.

The published G3ict White Paper is available here
Click here to download the White Paper [Word Document, 232 KB]

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessibility-policy-international-perspective

Universal Service — An Instrument for Accessibility

praskrishna — 2011-08-17T08:53:58Z

Every year, billions of dollars are earmarked for fulfilling universal service obligations across the globe. These funds represent a prime opportunity for governments to initiate telecommunication policies and programmes for persons with disabilities, writes Deepti Bharthur.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/universal-service

The Business Case for Web Accessibility

nirmita — 2011-12-07T09:56:47Z

NASSCOM Foundation has published a handbook on web accessibility titled "Understanding WebAccessibility — A Guide to create Accessible Work Environments". Nirmita Narasimhan authored a chapter "The Business Case for Web Accessibility".

The Internet is perhaps one of the most revolutionary things that happened for persons with disabilities. It has transformed their lives from one of ignorance and dependence to one of inclusion and participation. Using assistive technologies, blind persons can now read newspapers and information on websites, deaf persons can understand video content through captioning and persons with different disabilities can access computers in a variety of ways. However, despite these exciting developments in assistive technologies, the relative inaccessi-bility of websites remains a severe impediment to disability access to the internet.

There may be several reasons for complying with web accessibility. These may be:

Social (i.e. acknowledging the right of persons with disabilities to have equal access to information and opportunities offered by the internet);
Legal reasons (i.e. complying with national guidelines, policies or laws);
Technical (i.e. ensuring increased interoperability, reducing server load, time taken in website maintenance and better quality websites); and
Business (i.e. realizing that having an accessible website makes good business sense).

This article focuses on the last reason, i.e. business drivers for web accessibility.

Web accessibility means that a website can be accessed completely by all users, regardless of disability or any disabling factor such as illiteracy, old age or limited bandwidth. Compliance with the Web Content Access Guidelines (WCAG) will ensure that a website will be equally accessible to all disabled users, irrespective of the type of disability (visual, motor, auditory, cognitive or persons who are prone to seizures). Contrary to common belief, an accessible website is not necessarily a boring one. In fact, often times, the difference between an accessible and an inaccessible website may not be evident visually, but only upon use.

It is important for business houses to bear in mind that making websites accessible not only benefits persons with disabilities, but is helpful to every user. For instance, captioning of videos for the deaf will also benefit illiterate persons and persons having limited bandwidth, who constitute a sizeable percentage of the Indian population. Furthermore, nearly everyone benefits from clearly structured content, easy navigation and illustrated graphics. There are over a billion persons with disabilities living around the world, over 70 million in India alone and some surveys also estimate that one fifth of internet users have some form of disability or disabling condition. Hence companies which ensure that their web sites are accessible will be assured of a much wider reach than companies whose websites are not accessible.

An important aspect of creating an accessible website is that if a website is designed and developed in an accessible manner from the very beginning, its cost would exceed the cost of creating an inaccessible web site by perhaps merely 2%. However, on the other hand, if one were to have to retrofit accessibility features into a website, the cost and effort would be the same as that of creating an entirely new site. Furthermore, while the website would become accessible, the maintenance and day to day activities on it would also need to continue to be accessible. An accessible web site enhances ease of maintenance and scalability. Companies must also ensure that the developers maintaining the website must have a good understanding of WCAG.

Perhaps one of the biggest advantages of having an accessible web site is that it also increases its chances of ranking and visibility amongst search engines. There is a significant overlap between guidelines for accessibility and SEO. For instance, both of them require alternative text for graphics, clearly defined heading structures, identification of language of pages and page content, descriptive links etc. Having an accessible website will ensure that it can be accessed on new browsing technologies and platforms, like mobile phones and PDAs. Not only is navigation and usability enhanced, but the separation of content from presentation drastically reduces the download time of accessible web sites, rendering it a pleasurable experience for users to visit the web site.

There is a clear business case in creating products and web sites which are accessible. This is evident in the fact that some of the largest and most successful companies in the world have incorporated accessibility and universal design in their products and services. For instance,

Apple has been committed to accessibility since 1985 and its accessibility website3 features all its accessibility technologies for persons with disabilities as well as other third party products. Apple has integrated universal access into its operating system so that they are usable with Apple and other products.

The accessibility statement on the web site of General Electric4 gives details of its ongoing work on the accessibility of its website and a disabled user can track the company's progress by reading this page. It also provides a help facility for persons who are unable to use the site due to access problems.

A stunning example of a company which has made huge business profits through application of universal design principles in its products is that of NTT DoCoMo which came out with its accessible line of mobile phones called the “Raku-Raku” phone and rapidly captured the majority market share of mobile phones in Japan. The company has sold up to 20 million5 handsets as of July 2011 since its inception and released 18 models.

Some further examples of companies which are committed to accessibility are Cisco Systems Inc.6, AT&T Services Inc.7, France Telecom8, Google9, Hewlett-Packard10, IBM11, Microsoft Corporation12, Nokia13 and Vodafone14. The web sites of these companies have detailed information on the key areas of their accessibility work.

It is therefore clear that companies are increasingly recognizing the wisdom of unlocking their content to a larger audience. Not only do they increase their customer base, but also are able to garner loyalty from their customers as well as bolster their image by showing consideration towards customers with different needs.

The publicity that can be leveraged by business houses on account of their commitment to accessibility and inclusion will go a long way in building a good and lasting relationship with their customers. Hence, companies are strongly urged to make a concerted effort to promote web accessibility through awareness, internal policies and providing requisite training and support. In a world where policy makers are also increasingly becoming aware of the need for web accessibility and mandating it through policies, it will become inevitable for both public and private organizations to have websites which are universally accessible.

Read the original published by NASSCOM Foundation here

Download the entire book here (PDF, 1570 kb)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/business-case-for-web-accessibility

Survey on Banking Accessibility

Vrinda Maheshwari — 2013-06-06T06:12:04Z

The Global Initiative for Inclusive ICTs (G3ict) is launching a survey on the accessibility of financial services in banks for persons with disabilities around the world. The survey is looking at the kind of accommodations being made by different banks and assessing best practices for accessibility to financial services for persons with disabilities.

The object of the survey is to design options for banks to increase their customer base by enabling them to cater to a larger group than is currently able to access services or better serve their communities from a Corporate Social Responsibility standpoint. If you or anyone you know works in the banking sector, please do fill out the survey to help us capture the current accessibility standards in banks and financial institutions. The survey is available here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/survey-on-banking-accessibility

National Resource Kit: The Odisha Chapter (Call for Comments)

anandi — 2013-11-07T06:14:29Z

The National Resource Kit team is pleased to bring you its research on the state of laws, policies and programmes for persons with disabilities in the state of Odisha.

Executive Summary

Odisha has the highest percentage (2.78%) of persons with disabilities in the country. The state has framed the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Amended Odisha Rules 2012 to implement the provisions under the central Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995. The state has issued two notifications in education, one notification in employment and one notification for health and rehabilitation.

State Profile

Capital: Bhubaneswar
Population: 41,947,358[1]
Population of Persons with disabilities: 10, 50,000 (2.78%)[2]. (Census 2001)
HDI: 0.452 Rank: 27th
Literacy: 73.45%
Department: Women and Child Development Department
Directorate: Directorate for Welfare of Persons with Disabilities

Legal Provisions

The state of Odisha has framed the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Amended Odisha Rules 2012 to implement the provisions under the central Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995 (Persons with Disabilities Act).[3] These rules have been issued as an amendment to the previous Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Odisha Rules 2003.

The government of Odisha has formed the Directorate for Welfare of Persons with Disabilities under the Women and Child Development Department to cater to the requirements of persons with disabilities in the state.[4] The government has appointed the Collectors of each district as Deputy Commissioners for Persons with Disabilities for their respective district to assist the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities in discharging their functions.[5]

The state in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) (i) and (2) (h) of Section 13 of the persons with Disabilities Act, appointed the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (SCPD) and Chairperson, Odisha State Commission for Protection of Child Rights as members of the State Co-ordination Committee as constituted in the Department Notification No. 708-WCD, dated the 8th January 2003.[6]

The various provisions by the state of Odisha for the persons with disabilities are listed categorically as under:

Education
The government of Odisha has framed the guidelines for establishment, recognition and grant-in-aid to institutions imparting education to children with disabilities to fulfil the mandates under the Persons with Disabilities Act, National Trust for the Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act 1998 and the Right of Education Act, 2009. [7]

Odisha offers an integrated scholarship scheme for students with disabilities titled ‘Banishree – A Scholarship for Students with Special Needs’.[8] The scheme is open to students to continue their education from Class I to university education. Students from middle school and upwards (Class V and upwards) are eligible to apply under this scheme only if they do not receive any scholarship from the Government of India. Students from special schools registered under the Persons with Disabilities Act are eligible to apply provided that they are not in receipt of any grant-in-aid from the central or state government. Students with disabilities pursuing distance education through recognised universities and government organisation, or those pursuing professional, technical or professional courses in any of the recognised institutes are eligible to apply.

Applicants must fulfill the following eligibility criteria:
Should be bonafide resident of Odisha
Should be a regular student of the educational institution
Total income of the applicant’s family should not be more than Rs. 60,000 per annum.
Should not be in receipt of any assistance, stipend or scholarship from the central or state governments under any other scheme.
Should enrol and regularly attend any institution irrespective of whether the applicant has passed the examination or not in a particular year.

The rates of the scholarship offered under the scheme are given as below:

Within the state:

Class I – Class V: Rs. 100 per month
Class VI – Class XI: Rs. 140 per month
Class +2 and Class +3: Rs. 160 per month
University – Post Graduation: Rs. 190 per month
Technical and Vocational: Rs. 190 per month

Outside the state:

Students prosecuting normal course of study or technical/ vocational / professional education/training not available in the State and not covered by Govt. of India Scholarship are given a scholarship of Rs. 250 per month.

Reader allowance for students with visual impairment:

Primary school: Rs. 100 per month
Middle and High School: Rs. 150 per month
Other studies: Rs. 200 per month

Students with orthopaedic disabilities who have 75 per cent or more disability are eligible for a special transport allowance of Rs. 100 per month.

Employment

The government has made provisions to extend the benefits of the Odisha Revised Pay Rule 2008 to the teaching staff of the special schools for persons with disabilities.[9]

Health & Rehabilitation

The District Rehabilitation Centre (DRC) Bhubaneswar has been renamed as the State Institute of Disability Rehabilitation Bhubaneswar and will function as the nodal centre for disability rehabilitation in the state and will be under the control of the Directorate for Welfare of Persons with Disabilities.[10]

[1]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odisha

[2]. http://www.orissadiary.com/CurrentNews.asp?id=39515

[3]. Women & Child Development Department, No. 1814 Cuttack Saturday September 22 2012/ Bhadra 31 1934, S.R.O No. 518/2012 Dated: 22 June 2012

[4]. Women & Child Development Department, No. 1881 Cuttack Friday, September 28th 2012/ Aswina 6 1934, No. 16140-DW-II-68/2012-WCD Dated: 15th September 2012

[5]. Women & Child Development Department, No. 1588 Cuttack Wednesday July 13 2011/ Asadha 22 1933, S.R.O. No. 537/ 2011 Dated: 30th June 2011

[6]. Women & Child Development Department, No. 982 Cuttack Thursday May17th 2012/ Baisakha 27 1934, No. 7871-DW-II-E-90/2010-WCD Dated: 4th May 2012

[7]. Women & Child Development Department, No. 112 Cuttack Monday, January 14th 20 13/ Pausa 24D 1934, No. 532/2013-WCD

[8]. Women & Child Development Department, No. 1426 Cuttack Friday July 25 2008/ Sravana 3 1930, No. 15776-HW-2-23/2008-WCD

[9]. Women & Child Development Department, No. 2189 Cuttack, Friday September 23 2011/ Aswina 1 1933 No. 15084-DW-I-(A)-40/2011-WCD

[10]. Women & Child Development Department, No. 1290 Cuttack Thursday June 2 2011/ Jaistha 12 1933, No. 10080-DW-H-E-412011-WCD

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/national-resource-kit-odisha-call-for-comments

Visually impaired seek access to print materials

pranesh — 2013-01-16T06:20:49Z

An article in the Deccan Herald (November 3, 2008, page 4) by L. Subramani on the CIS signature campaign.

Rahul Cherian is quoted in this article published in the Deccan Herald.

Bangalore-based Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), an organisation researching on the impact of internet on society, has initiated a signature campaign to persuade the Indian government to support the Treaty for the Improved Access for the Blind, Visually Impaired and other Reading Disabled Persons.

The treaty, drafted earlier this year by the World Blind Union (WBU) and Knowledge Ecology International (KEI), asks governments of various countries to change their copyright laws to allow free access to information of several print disabled persons.

The nation-wide campaign (in India) is being supported by organisations such as National Association of the Blind, Delhi and National Federation for the Blind (who is also an affiliate member of the WBU).

“Those who are visually challenged and otherwise print disabled are able to use computers independently with the help of screen readers and magnifiers (software technology), yet they are excluded from accessing copyrighted materials since such materials aren’t available in accessible formats,” said Nirmita Narasimhan, who oversees the campaign at CIS.

Treaty endorsement
Signatures are sought from individuals and organisations to urge the Government of India to endorse the treaty, which calls for copyright laws to be modified so that organisations of the blind and disabled can convert books available in the market into formats which can be accessed by persons with different visual and reading disabilities.

“The Indian Copyright Act (1957) is not taking into account recent technology advancements that has empowered the print disabled to access printed materials,” said Rahul Cherian, a Chennai-based copyrights lawyer involved in drafting the treaty.

“Collecting signatures from people would be an evidence of public opinion in India regarding the issue and would help us to persuade the Government to make our country a signatory to the treaty. This would mean that the government must make amending the national law a priority.”

Rahul said Indian publishers are largely willing to endorse changes to the law, since they view improved accessibility would bring more readers to the market (it is believed about 30 million persons are print disabled in the country). He also feels opposition from authors is unlikely as it doesn’t seriously threaten their incomes.

Interested can contact: Centre for Internet and Society, No D2, 3rd floor, Sheriff Chambers, 14, Cunningham Road, B’lore - 560 052. P: +91 80 4092 6283. M: 098458 68078. The current address of the Centre for Internet & Society is No. 194, Second 'C' Cross, Domlur, 2nd Stage, Bangalore - 560071, Ph: +91 80 4092 6283

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/deccan-herald-november-3-2008-l-subramani-visually-impaired-seek-access-to-print-materials