Why do people with disabilities still struggle for accessibility and representation?

As India marks the International Day of Persons with Disabilities, the gap between policy announcements and reality remains stark. The Federal spoke to Muralidharan, General Secretary of the National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled (NPRD), about where India stands on accessibility, representation, and inclusion a decade after major national campaigns promised change.

How far has India progressed since the Accessible India Campaign was launched?

The Accessible India Campaign was launched in 2015 by the prime minister with three main verticals: physical infrastructure, information and communication technology, and transport. Despite the publicity, very little has happened on the ground. Yes, some progress has been made, but it has been extremely slow and uneven.

Also read: How 3-foot-tall Ganesh Baraiya with 72 pc disability became doctor after court battle

For example, Railways themselves set targets for full accessibility of Grade A and A+ stations by 2016 and 2017, but none of these targets were met. Even access audits of government buildings have barely moved beyond major cities. The campaign was relaunched with new timelines in 2021, but those too have not been achieved.

Budget allocation has been the biggest roadblock. The campaign earlier had a separate budget head under the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities. Later, it was merged into Scheme for Implementing of Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 (SIPDA), and allocations have fallen drastically — from around Rs 240 crore in 2022-23 to about Rs 115 crore now. With such reduced budgets, most of this remains only on paper.

Given these gaps, what must change to treat accessibility as a priority?

Accessibility is mandated under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, including accessibility vetting at the design and pre-completion stages. But without proper budgets, whatever is written on paper becomes meaningless. We also have guidelines, but they are not enforced.

Section 92 of the Act provides penal provisions, but not for non-implementation of accessibility guidelines. To prosecute a government department for violation, one needs the department’s own permission. This makes enforcement nearly impossible. Without enforceability and adequate budgets, accessibility will remain just rhetoric.

While hiring of persons with disabilities is increasing slowly, is there meaningful representation across sectors?

Opportunities coming from the corporate sector are very minimal and mostly treated as corporate social responsibility. The largest employers in India are the private and unorganised sectors, but reservations apply only to government jobs.

Reservation in the government sector has increased from 3 per cent to 4 per cent under the Act, but even that is not implemented properly. The law also permits several exemptions, which weakens the mandate.

We have long demanded the extension of reservation to the private sector. The government argues that there is no reservation for SCs, STs, or OBCs in private companies, so it cannot be introduced for disabled people. But persons with disabilities form a cross-cutting category with distinct needs and high marginalisation.

Even if reservation is not extended, countries like France and Germany impose an additional cess on companies that do not employ persons with disabilities. We have suggested a similar system. Tax reforms can compel companies to hire and create real opportunities.

Reports show that only 23 per cent of disabled women are employed, compared to 47 per cent of disabled men. Why is gender still missing in disability inclusion?

The Sugamya Bharat Abhiyan was never gender-focused. It did not address gender-specific barriers. But this is not limited to disabled women. Women in general — disabled or non-disabled — are at the bottom of the ladder when it comes to opportunities.

For disabled women, marginalisation is even deeper due to access barriers, social prejudices, and restrictions at home. Patriarchy plays a central role, and without dismantling it, progress will be minimal.

Unfortunately, the disability movement itself has not sufficiently addressed the layered barriers faced by disabled women — unsafe transport, inaccessible healthcare, or restrictions imposed by families. Disability organisations need to prioritise these voices and bring disabled women into leadership spaces. Only then can meaningful change happen.

Groups like persons with intellectual disabilities, autism, psychosocial disabilities, and deafblind individuals are still ignored. How can this be addressed?

Discrimination is widespread. People with intellectual disabilities and mental health conditions face exclusion even in government services. Deafblind individuals remain among the most marginalised.

Again, the core issue is political will and budgetary allocation. Without funding, policy intentions cannot be implemented. We need adequate resources for training, support systems, and workplace accommodations.

Training existing staff is also crucial. Everyone can learn sign language — it is a recognised language. Sensory-friendly spaces, mental-health accommodations, and communication support systems must be created, but that requires sustained budgets and commitment.

As we celebrate days dedicated to disability rights, how do you see the road ahead?

Despite the campaigns and commemorative days, we still have a long way to go to ensure equal opportunity, accessibility, and dignity for persons with disabilities. These cannot remain slogans; they must translate into real action backed by budgets, enforcement, and political will.

(The content above has been transcribed using a fine-tuned AI model. To ensure accuracy, quality, and editorial integrity, we employ a Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) process. While AI assists in creating the initial draft, our experienced editorial team carefully reviews, edits, and refines the content before publication. At The Federal, we combine the efficiency of AI with the expertise of human editors to deliver reliable and insightful journalism.)