Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities (PWDs): Barriers, Principles and Guidelines

Abstract

Access to justice for persons with disabilities (PWDs) on an equal basis with others, is one of the fundamental rights enshrined in UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and other legal charters. Therefore, this article analyzed the various barriers faced by PWDs in access to and the administration of justice. The article also analyzed some legal frameworks on access to justice for PWDs like Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Similarly, the article analyzed the roles of legal actors like the police, the prosecutors and lawyers for ensuring access to justice for PWDs. Finally, the article analyzed some international principles and guidelines on access to justice for persons with disabilities.

Keywords: Access to Justice, Barriers, Human Rights, Guidelines, Legal Capacity,  Principles, Persons with Disabilities (PWDs).

1. Introduction

Around 15% of the world’s population, or one billion people, live with some form of disability (WHO and World Bank, 2011). Persons with disabilities face a range of exclusion and barriers to education, employment, healthcare services, social and political participation as well as access to Justice. These exclusions and barriers are contrary to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) which calls upon all countries to respect and ensure the equal rights and inclusion of all persons with disabilities to education, employment, healthcare services, social and political process as well as access to Justice.

Every person with disability should, on an equal basis with others, enjoy the rights to equality before the law, to equal protection under the law, to a fair resolution of disputes, to meaningful participation and to be heard. Thus, countries must ensure equal access to justice for all persons with disabilities by providing the necessary substantive, procedural, and age- and gender appropriate accommodations and support. The United Nations Human Rghts (UNHRC) is intended to assist countries and other actors to design, develop, modify and implement justice systems that provide equal access to justice for all persons with disabilities, regardless of their roles in the process, in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).

While access to justice is fundamental for the enjoyment and fulfilment of all human rights, many barriers prevent persons with disabilities from accessing justice on an equal basis with others. Such barriers include restrictions on the exercise of legal capacity; lack of physical access to justice facilities, such as courts and police stations; lack of accessible transportation to and from these facilities; obstacles in accessing legal assistance and representation; lack of information in accessible formats; paternalistic or negative attitudes questioning the abilities of persons with disabilities to participate during all phases of the administration of justice; and lack of training and orientation about PWDs for professionals working in the field of justice. Also, in the justice system, persons with disabilities are usually considered to be unworthy of, unable to benefit from or even likely to be harmed by due process protection provided to all other citizens. Even fundamental rights, such as the right to remain silent and the presumption of innocence, may be denied either directly in law or policy or indirectly in custom and practice (UNHRC, 2017).

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) details that people with disabilities have the right to equality before the law. All people with disabilities should have the same access to their rights as other people, and the same ability to exercise their rights. Thus, police, courts, judges, and governments should not presume that persons with physical, sensory, intellectual or psychosocial disabilities are unable to exercise their rights just because they have a disabilities (Smith, 2013).

Furthermore, guaranteeing access to justice is indispensable to democratic governance and the rule of law, as well as to combating inequality and exclusion. Since the adoption of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), there has been a blueprint for achieving inclusion based on the human rights-based approach to disability. Hence, the Principles and Guidelines on access to justice for persons with disabilities have been developed and endorsed by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the International Disability Alliance (IDA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2020).

2. Conceptual Clarification

2.1.  Access to Justice

Ortoleva (2016), describes ‘Access to Justice’ as a broad concept that encompasses peoples’ effective access to the systems, procedures, information, and locations used in the administration of justice. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and therefore everybody should have equal access to justice when their dignity and rights are infringed upon. While access to justice is a human right it is also of critical importance in the enjoyment of all other human rights, e.g. if a person with a disability has been denied the right to work they may wish to turn to the justice system to seek a remedy (solution). Thus, people who feel wronged or mistreated in some way usually turn to the justice system for remedy or redress. 

In addition, people may be called upon to participate in the justice, for example, as defendants, witnesses, or experts in a trial. Thus, users of the justice system include both direct (active users) and indirect (passive users). Active users include people with direct interests in the outcome of a case, such as the parties to a case and their family members and court support groups (for example, civil society organizations). They may also include people with a public duty to ensure that cases are disposed of in accordance with the law (state agencies responsible for investigation, law enforcement, prosecution, and rehabilitation) as well as others involved in the case (pro-bono lawyers, volunteer counsellors, and social workers). 

More so, indirect (passive users) are members of the public, including those who attend open court to witness judicial proceedings and those who never enter a courthouse. They also include all those who benefit from effective judicial systems. If the system functions well and upholds the rule of law, all citizens are given adequate protection and can go about their daily activities without fear. The needs of these silent users must be accounted for, because a fair, efficient, and responsive legal system provides an important public good. Thus, the symbolic component of access to justice steps outside of doctrinal law and asks to what extent a particular legal system promotes citizens’ belonging and empowerment. This presupposes that every citizen can participate in all aspects of the justice system without discrimination whether as witnesses, volunteer counselors, legal aid providers, lawyers, or judges (Flynn, 2014).

According to Smith (2013), Access to justice includes social, intellectual, communication, institutional, physical and economic accessibility. It involves three key components, which are: substantive justice, procedural justice and symbolic justice. While the focus of Substantive justice is on the rights and available to those who seek a remedy; Procedural aspects of access to justice focus on the opportunities and barriers to getting ones claim into court or other dispute resolution setting. Such barriers may be physical, structural (legal process), communicative and/or language barriers, information and advice barriers, prohibitive cost, uncertain outcome, and court or tribunal setting being inappropriate.

2.2. Persons with Disabilities (PWDs)

According to the World Health Organization (WHO) (2011), “Disability” is an umbrella term covering impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions. Impairment is a problem in the body function or structure; an activity limitation is a difficulty encountered by an individual in executing a task or action; while a participation restriction is a problem experienced by an individual in involvement in life situations. Disability is thus not just a health problem. It is a complex phenomenon, reflecting the interaction between features of a person’s body and features of the society in which he or she lives. Overcoming the difficulties faced by persons with disabilities requires interventions to remove environmental and social barriers.

Article 1 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) (2006), defines persons with disabilities as including: “those who have long-term physical, mental, psycho-social, intellectual or sensory impairments, which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others”. Importantly, this definition has been shifted away from a purely medical model of disability to social model. Therefore, disability is the ‘social effect of the interaction between the individual impairment and the social and material environment’. 

2.3. Human Rghts

Human rights are the rights held by all persons by virtue of their common humanity to live a life of freedom and dignity. These rights are universal, and everyone regardless of sex, race, nationality, and economic background shares them equally. They are inalienable (they can neither be taken away nor given up), and they are indivisible (no right can be suppressed in order to promote another right). Human rights define and affirm humanity, they exist to ensure that human life remains sacred and guarantee that inhumanity and injustice are prevented or redressed. Accordingly, The United Nations Charter affirms that, “Universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction” is essential (Ladan, 2015).

Human rights can be described as those inalienable (natural) rights and privileges enjoyed by the citizens of a given state, which are usually stated in the constitution of the country. It is the responsibility of the state to ensure that its citizens enjoy these rights (Dibie, 2008).

2.4. Legal Capacity

Legal capacity refers to the capacity to be both a holder of rights and an actor under the law. Legal capacity to be a holder of rights entitles persons to full protection of their rights by the legal system. Legal capacity to act under the law recognizes that person as an agent with the power to engage in transactions and create, modify or end legal relationships. Legal capacity includes both the capacity for a right to recognition everywhere as persons before the law (‘legal recognition’) and the capacity to ‘exercise’ those rights (Bach, 2017).

According to European Group of National Human Rights Institutions (2014), legal capacity means the capacity to have rights and the power to exercise those rights. Both of these elements are integral to the concept of legal capacity because they establish the rights and responsibilities of persons with disabilities to make their own decisions. Practically, legal capacity is the law’s recognition of the validity of a person’s choices. It is what allows a person to act within the framework of the legal system. It makes a human being a subject of law.

Legal capacity comprises of two parts: the capacity to have rights and the capacity to act or exercise these rights. The first part includes the right to be a subject before the law; for instance, to be somebody who can own property, have a job or start a family. The second part (to exercise rights) goes further and includes the power to dispose of one’s property and claim one’s rights before a court.

2.5. Procedural Accommodation

Procedural accommodation refers to all necessary and appropriate modifications and adjustments in the context of access to justice, where needed in a particular case, to ensure the participation of persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others. Unlike reasonable accommodations, procedural accommodations are not limited by the concept of “disproportionate or undue burden” (Washington State, 2019).

Reasonable accommodation can be used as a means of ensuring accessibility for the person with disability in a particular and specific situation. It seeks to achieve individual justice in the sense of ensuring non-discrimination or equality, while respecting the dignity, autonomy and choices of the individual. Therefore, a person with a rare impairment may seek an accommodation that does not fall within the scope of any accessibility standard. Unlike reasonable accommodations, procedural accommodations are related to a specific procedure before the court or court proceeding and enabling the participation in it and cannot be disproportionate, as is sometimes the case with reasonable accommodations. They relate to the manner of participation, including the manner of questioning/hearing the party in the proceedings, the form and type, or method of communication, etc. (e.g. sign language, Braille, easy-to-understand and easy-to-read format), whatever option the person with disability chooses himself/herself (European Group of National Human Rights Institutions, 2014).

3. Legal Frameworks on Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities

Persons with disabilities are entitled to enjoy all the rights contained in all previously adopted international and regional human rights instruments that are relevant to justice systems, access to justice and, more generally, the administration of justice on an equal basis with others without discrimination. 

3.1. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) (1948)

The Article 8 of UDHR said that “Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.” And article 10 of the Declaration specifies that “Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him”. This means that the UDHR makes provision for equality before the law, and equal protection of the law. It further provides for the basic right of the individual to a fair trial and public hearing in both civil and criminal proceedings, and the right to an effective remedy. Those Articles 8 and 10 of UDHR are equally applied to people with disabilities.

3.2. The European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) (1970)

The Article 6 (1) specifies that “Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interests of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice”. (2) “Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law. Article 13 said that “Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity”. Those Articles 6 and 13 of ECHR are equally applied to people with disabilities.

3.3. American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR) (1969)

The Articles 8 said that (1) “Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature”.

(2) “Every person accused of a criminal offense has the right to be presumed innocent so long as his guilt has not been proven according to law. During the proceedings, every person is entitled, with full equality, to the following minimum guarantees: (a) the right of the accused to be assisted without charge by a translator or interpreter, if he does not understand or does not speak the language of the tribunal or court; (b) prior notification in detail to the accused of the charges against him; (c) adequate time and means for the preparation of his defense; (d) the right of the accused to defend himself personally or to be assisted by legal counsel of his own choosing, and to communicate freely and privately with his counsel; (e) the inalienable right to be assisted by counsel provided by the state, paid or not as the domestic law provides, if the accused does not defend himself personally or engage his own counsel within the time period established by law; (f) the right of the defense to examine witnesses present in the court and to obtain the appearance, as witnesses, of experts or other persons who may throw light on the facts; (g) the right not to be compelled to be a witness against himself or to plead guilty; and (h) the right to appeal the judgment to a higher court”. Article 24 said that “All persons are equal before the law. Consequently, they are entitled, without discrimination, to equal protection of the law”. 

Article 25 (1) said that “Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties. (2) The States Parties undertake:

1. to ensure that any person claiming such remedy shall have his rights determined by the competent authority provided for by the legal system of the state;

2. to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; and

3. to ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted”.

Those Articles 8, 24 and 25 of ACHR are equally applied to people with disabilities.

3.4. Human Rights Act of the United Kingdom (HRAUK) (1998)

Article 6 said that (1) “Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice”. (2) “Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law”. (3) “Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights:

1. to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;

2. to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence;

3. to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;

4. to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;

5. to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court”.

This Article 6 of HRAUK is equally applied to people with disabilities.

3.5. African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) (1981)

Article 3 (1) “Every individual shall be equal before the law”. (2) “Every individual shall be entitled to equal protection of the law”. Article 7 (1) revealed that “Every individual shall have the right to have his cause heard. This comprises: (a) the right to an appeal to competent national organs against acts of violating his Fundamental rights as recognised and guaranteed by conventions, laws, regulations and customs in Force; (b) the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty by a competent court or tribunal; (c) the right to defence, including the right to be defended by counsel of his choice; (d) the right to be tried within a reasonable time by an impartial court or tribunal. (2) No one may be condemned For an act or omission which did not constitute a legally punishable offence at the time it was committed. No penalty may be inflicted for an offence For which no provision was made at the time it was committed. Punishment is personal and can be imposed only on the offender. Those Articles 3 and 7 of ACHPR are equally applied to people with disabilities.

3.6. Arab Charter on Human Rights (ACHR) (2004)

The Article 11 states that “All persons are equal before the law and have a right to enjoy its protection without discrimination”. Article 12 states that “All persons are equal before the courts. The State Parties ensure the independence of the courts and the protection of judges against interference, pressure or threat. All persons within the territory of the State Parties are ensured a right to legal remedy”. Article 13 (1) states that “Everybody has the right to a fair trial in which sufficient guarantees are ensured, conducted by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law, in judging the grounds of criminal charges brought against him or in determining his rights and obligations. State Parties shall ensure financial aid to those without the necessary means to pay for legal assistance to enable them to defend their rights”. (2) “The hearing shall be public other than (except) in exceptional cases where the interests of justice so require in a democratic society which respects freedom and human rights”. Those Articles 11, 12 and 13 of ACHR are equally applied to people with disabilities.

3.7. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) (2006)

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) explains the right to access to justice in the context of disability. Article 13 of the UNCRPD specifically addresses access to justice, directing countries to ensure effective access to justice for persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others, including through the provision of specified accommodation, in order to facilitate their effective role as direct and indirect participants (art.13(1)). It further prescribes positive measures to be taken for the fulfilment of the rights of persons with disabilities in relation to justice. For example, State parties are to promote appropriate training for those working in the field of administration of justice, including police and prison staff (art. 13(2)).

Although all provisions of the UNCRPD are relevant to access to justice, several, beyond Article 13, are of particular importance. 

► Article 5, Equality and Non-Discrimination, requires countries to recognize that all persons with disabilities are equal before and under the law, and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection from and equal benefit of the law (art.5(1)). Countries are to further prohibit all discrimination on the basis of disability and guarantee persons with disabilities equal and effective legal protection against discrimination on all grounds.

► Article 12, Equal Recognition before the Law, requires countries to recognize that persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life, and to take appropriate measures to provide access by persons with disabilities to the support that they may require in exercising their legal capacity.

► Article 14, Liberty and security of the person, requires countries to ensure that persons with disabilities are not deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily, and that any deprivation of liberty is in conformity with the law, and that the existence of a disability shall in no case justify deprivation of liberty. The implementation of Article 14 is particularly important because persons with disabilities have been subjected to serious human rights violations while detained or residing in institutions and also because those detained in institutions or isolated in their homes without any contact with the outside world may lack the ability or freedom to pursue legal claims for their own protection.

► Article 16, Freedom from exploitation, violence and abuse, requires countries to take all appropriate measures to protect persons with disabilities and directs them to put in place effective legislation and policies, including women- and childfocused legislation and policies, to ensure that instances of exploitation, violence and abuse against persons with disabilities are identified, investigated and, where appropriate, prosecuted.

► Article 23, Respect for private and family life, requires countries to take measures to protect the rights of persons with disabilities in relation to marriage, family, parenthood and relationships. With regard to parenthood, countries are to take measures to ensure that persons with disabilities retain their fertility on an equal basis with others.

4. Barriers Face by Persons with Disabilities in the Administration of Justice

In spite of protection afforded under international human rights law, particularly the UNCRPD, persons with disabilities usually continue to face numerous barriers in terms of access to justice. Barriers and impediments often involve combined forms of inaccessibility and other forms of discrimination. Overarching barriers, which can be compounded for those living in rural areas or in socio-economically disadvantaged situations, or for those facing multiple forms of discrimination, include: (1) Legal barriers; (2) Attitudinal barriers; (3) Information and communication barriers; (4) Physical barriers; and (5) Economic barriers. These five categories of barriers are discussed below in details.

4.1. Normative (Legal or Policy) Barriers

Legal barriers to justice for persons with disabilities include instances where the rights of persons with disabilities are not enshrined in law, or where law, policy or practice are contrary to the provisions of the UNCRPD. Additional barriers may be created where a State’s legal framework is confusing or complicated, or where there are overlaps or incompatibilities between international acts and national laws or policies (McChesney, 2021).

4.2. Attitudinal Barriers

Negative attitudes and false beliefs or assumptions on the part of relevant actors, including police, lawyers and judges, may result in persons with disabilities being considered and treated as less credible at all stages of legal processes – including when reporting a crime, in terms of whether one can serve as a witness or in making legal decisions, seeking remedies for alleged violations of their rights, or otherwise participating in legal proceedings (McChesney, 2021).

4.3. Information and Communication Barriers

Persons with disabilities cannot seek remedies for injustices if they do not know what their legal rights are, or how to exercise them under law. In many countries there is limited access to information provided in accessible formats, for example educational materials regarding one’s rights or on what constitutes a crime and how to report it, or how to find legal or other services. Lack of accessible information or modes of communication further limits the ability of persons with disabilities to report crimes or their effective participation in legal proceedings (McChesney, 2021).

4.4. Physical Barriers

Access to justice for persons with disabilities can be impeded where measures have not been taken to ensure the accessibility of relevant physical environments, including court houses, police stations, and the offices of lawyers and relevant service providers such as victims’ advocates and healthcare facilities where forensic evidence is gathered (McChesney, 2021).

4.5. Economic Barriers

Persons with disabilities are disproportionately among the world’s poor. A lack of economic resources can directly impact one’s access to justice in numerous ways. For example it can affect one’s ability to engage and pay for quality legal counsel where it is not provided at no cost; to engage in litigation, which can be expensive and lengthy; or otherwise seek remedies for alleged violations of rights, or to serve as a juror when doing so takes one away from one’s gainful employment or pursuit of a livelihood (McChesney, 2021).

5. Ensuring Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities by Overcoming the Barriers

This article has reviewed a broad range of barriers facing persons with disabilities in relation to access to justice. Overcoming those barriers will require a holistic and integrated approach and possible actions for overcoming these barriers.

5.1. Overcoming Legal Barriers

overcome legal barriers can be carried out by comprehensive reviews of the legislative framework, to identify legal barriers posed by discriminatory legislation, regulations, policies or practices. Where legal barriers are found to existed national/domestic laws and policies should be amended, as indicated in Article 4, General Obligations, of the UNCRPD, in order to create enabling disability law and policy frameworks: for example, ensuring that non-discrimination applies to persons with disabilities, ensuring that reasonable accommodation is a required element of non-discrimination and inclusion of Disabled People Organisations (DPOs) in law and policy development.

Once national/domestic laws and policies have been brought in line with the UNCRPD, it is important that the disability community, national human rights institutions and government bodies (e.g., ministries of justice, national judicial training institutes, electoral commissions, and law reform commissions) should engage in training on the content and interpretation of disability rights standards (Stephanie, 2018).

5.2. Overcoming Attitudinal Barriers

The attitudes, perception and awareness of police officers, lawyers, judges, staff of correctional facilitates, and other professionals in the justice system on how to accommodate persons with disabilities effectively and make the processes accessible and inclusive are extremely important. There is a huge need for disability awareness training and capacity-building among all law enforcement agencies and justice sector personnel (Stephanie, 2018).

Approaches to training may entail the following:

1. Including disability components, including the role of the justice sector in implementing relevant international standards, such as the UNCRPD, in programmes designed to strengthen justice sector institutions.

2. Ensuring that regular training of police, prosecutors and prison officials should includes a disability component and covers accessible communications and reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities in the criminal justice context. Law enforcement officers should receive adequate and sufficiently in-depth training on the needs and rights of persons with disabilities to enable them to respond effectively to crimes involving persons with disabilities.

3. Improving the investigative capacity of police /or prosecutors through disability awareness training. Training should also be provided on cultural competence, to allow officers to work effectively with persons with disabilities across different cultures - for example, indigenous persons with disabilities.

4. Including persons with disabilities and Disabled People Organizations (DPOs) in community programmes on crime prevention and in community policing.

5. Providing training to strengthen the skills of attorneys interested in litigating in disability cases and building a network of appropriately-trained attorneys (UNDP, 2020).

Training programmes should be devised in collaboration with persons with disabilities 

and their representative organizations. One strategy for addressing attitudinal barriers is working to increase the full participation and inclusion in the legal profession of persons with disabilities. This may well require the removal of discriminatory policies and practices in the admissions process for law school, para-legal training and related training so that persons with disabilities can enter and participate in the legal profession. 

In addition, reasonable appropriate accommodation must be provided for persons with disabilities in training for legal profession jobs. This requires, for example, that disability accommodation services are offered at law schools and universities more generally. Other strategies include coverage of disability law in judicial professional development and continuing legal education sessions. Including disability law as a component of legal education and continuing professional development will raise the general level of awareness of disability law and the accommodation of persons with disabilities in accessing justice.

There is also a need for community-level awareness-raising on disability and for empowerment of communities to support their members, including persons with disabilities, in obtaining access to justice; this includes for example ensuring that persons with disabilities enjoy equal access to legal aid services and legal literacy programmes, implementation of campaigns against stigma and stereotyping, and provision of human rights training for key service providers (UNDP, 2020).

5.3. Overcoming Information and Communication Barriers

Capacity development regarding disability for those involved in the administration of justice should include a focus on accessible communications and information; and a national scoping exercise on access to justice for persons with disabilities should consider the extent to which informational and communications barriers may exist at different stages of legal processes. In consultation and cooperation with persons with disabilities, governments should consider in developing a comprehensive disability accessibility plan that covers communications with persons with disabilities in ways that are accessible to them, for example, sign language interpreters, Braille, and others (Stephanie, 2018).

5.4. Overcoming Physical Barriers

In order to ensure physical access to justice sector facilities/buildings, police stations, courthouses and prisons must be accessible to persons with disabilities. Disabled People Organizations (DPOs) should be consulted and provide input on accessibility measures prior to any new construction or renovation of such facilities/buildings. Furthermore, accessibility audits conducted in collaboration with DPOs should be performed on all existing infrastructure with the goal of developing low-cost strategies to ensure physical accessibility to justice sector facilities/buildings including courthouses and police stations (Stephanie, 2018).

5.5. Overcoming Economic Barriers

The recommended scoping exercise should include an analysis of economic barriers to 

access to justice face by persons with disabilities. The nature of such barriers may vary from country to country. However, in seeking to overcome economic obstacles, the critical role of legal aid should be considered, as well as the availability of transportation and necessary support or medical services. Budgeting may also be necessary for appropriate accommodation for individuals requiring assistance, for instance to fund sign language interpreters, aids for the blind and the wheel chair users, etc (Stephanie, 2018).

6. Specific Areas of Concern

6.1. The Role of the Police in Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities

As the first point of contact with the criminal justice system, the police play a very significant role in shaping the way in which alleged offences are handled, and whether cases proceed to trial. Given their role as gatekeepers to the justice system, the attitudes and dispositions of the police towards persons with disabilities who are victims of crime have a significant bearing on those victims’ experiences of seeking legal redress. Police perceptions of people with disabilities, not least their capacity to be reliable reporters and witnesses of crime, have been shown to be key to understanding how incidents of abuse or harassment are handled. 

Unfortunately, in many countries police officers lack awareness of disability or of working with victims with disabilities and, indeed, usually endorse general stereotypes of persons with disabilities as vulnerable and lacking the capacity to be competent and credible reports of crime and therefore poor witnesses. In addition, many police officers have difficulty distinguishing between different disabilities, most particularly intellectual disability and mental illness, and may not be able to recognize where persons with disabilities require additional support.

Negative experiences with law enforcement officers and fear that reported crimes will not be taken seriously can contribute to barriers in the reporting of crimes. Such barriers can also include uncertainty on the part of people with disabilities and third parties regarding what constitutes a crime, and when reporting of an incident should take place. Reporting can also be complicated where there exists variability in police policies and practices relating to who handles people with disabilities when they report a crime and where there are no clear recording procedures for crimes relating to persons with disabilities. Persons with disabilities also face challenges when there is a lack of accessible police stations, information and modes of communication. For example deaf people may have difficulty in making contact with the police in an emergency situation (UNHRC, 2017). Therefore, positive perception or attitude of police officers about disability, play an important role in access to Justice for people with disabilities

6.2. The Role of Lawyers in Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities

Persons with disabilities may face barriers to accessing adequate and quality legal counsel for a variety of reasons. Where legal aid services are not provided at low or no cost, one may lack the economic means to engage a lawyer. Where information is not available in accessible formats, persons with disabilities may not be able to identify or locate a lawyer, or be aware of how a lawyer can be of assistance. Similarly, where accessible and affordable transportation is not available or where a lawyer’s office is not accessible, persons with disabilities may be unable to reach or enter their offices. In some cases lawyers lack training to work with or best serve clients with disabilities and this can affect the quality of service obtained by the client. Therefore, to ensure effective role of lawyers in access to Justice for people with disabilities, disability-orientated lawyers should be involved in providing legal services to people with disabilities (UNHRC, 2017).

6.3. The Role of Service Providers in Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities

In navigating justice systems, those who have experienced crime often need services 

beyond those of law enforcement officers, including services from victim advocates or health care providers. Victim advocates are professionals trained to support victims of crime. They can explain how the justice system works, offer information, emotional support or help in identifying specific sources of support or resources such as support groups, and can even assist in the process of filling out paperwork. In some cases advocates accompany survivors of crime to court and provide counselling. For persons with disabilities, many of the overarching barriers highlighted above can affect their ability to obtain such support. Barriers can include economic barriers where State or other support for such programmes does not exist, as well as barriers where physical environments and facilities are not accessible, where information or communication opportunities are not available in accessible formats, and in cases where victims’ advocates hold negative views on persons with disabilities or lack understanding of how to work with clients with disabilities. Similar barriers may be faced in relation to hospitals or medical providers that play an important role in not only treating those who have experienced abuse or assault but also in terms of evidence collection, such as sexual assault forensic exams, or in treatment where one has been the victim of physical or sexual assault or abuse (UNHRC, 2017).

6.4. The Role of Courts in Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities

Beyond the challenges outlined above, persons with disabilities face legal barriers to their participation in legal proceedings in court, including legislation, regulations, policies, or practices expressly barring persons with disabilities from serving as witnesses or jurors. Participation can also be severely limited by a lack of accessible information or communications - for example where information is not available in accessible formats, examples being sign language provision for people who are deaf; easy-to-read material for persons with cognitive disabilities or large print for persons with low vision; or where assistive technology is not made available. Information and communication barriers can be compounded in instances where persons with disabilities do not speak the dominant language or the language used in proceedings.

Inaccessibility of proceedings may also be experienced where measures have not been taken to ensure the accessibility of relevant physical environments. In the case of courthouses this includes building entrances; courtrooms, including counsel tables and jury and witness boxes; bathrooms; public service offices, such as those used by victim support services or clerks; and holding pens, where criminal defendants may be held while awaiting court appearances. Physical barriers can impede access to justice in instances where the offices of lawyers, service providers and police stations are physically inaccessible. 

As noted above, persons with disabilities also face legal barriers to justice in instances where their rights are not protected under domestic law. Courts can, however, play an important role in the interpretation and enforcement of human rights treaty obligations. In most legal systems where the UNCRPD has been ratified, courts will possess the authority to consider its human rights standards, either because international standards have been expressly incorporated into domestic law and as such are binding, or because courts are able to use international standards as a guide to interpreting domestic law. In some instances international human rights standards may be helpful in filling gaps where domestic law is ambiguous or under-developed. This may be especially true in legal systems where disability rights standards are under-developed. An initial challenge with a newly ratified treaty such as the UNCRPD is for judges to be made aware of its obligations. In many cases neither judges nor lawyers have any background in disability law, which underscores the importance of training judges and lawyers in the rights of persons with disabilities. In many African countries, as in many countries around the world, disability law frameworks are not yet fully developed. Some of the concepts in the UNCRPD are not yet incorporated into domestic law and policy. It is for this reason that some judges may not be comfortable with rendering decisions on the basis of the UNCRPD, even if their country has ratified the treaty (UNHRC, 2017).

7. International Principles and Guidelines on Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities

Despite the wide variety of legal, social, economic and geographical systems in the 

world, countries can and should align their laws, rules, regulations, guidelines, protocols, practices, and policies on these Principles and Guidelines. However, the Principles and Guidelines are not intended to preclude innovation, provided that such innovation complies with the Convention and the Principles and Guidelines and that it seeks to ensure equal access to justice. Nor should they be interpreted as limiting any other international, regional or national laws or standards that are more conducive to the realization of the right of access to justice for persons with disabilities (ICJ, IDA and UNPD, 2020). 

Therefore, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the International Disability Alliance (IDA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2020) outline the following international principles and guidelines on access to justice for persons with disabilities:

Principle 1: All persons with disabilities have legal capacity and, therefore, no one shall be denied access to justice on the basis of disability

Guidelines

1. States shall guarantee that persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity on an equal basis with others and, where necessary, shall provide the support and accommodations necessary to exercise legal capacity and guarantee access to justice.

2. To that end, States shall:

(a) Ensure that all persons with disabilities are considered to have legal capacity, and the right to act on and exercise legal capacity;

(b) Recognize and assume the full capacity and right of persons with disabilities to participate in the proceedings of all courts, tribunals and forums;

(c) Ensure that constructs such as “cognitive incapacity” and “mental incapacity”, as determined, for instance, by functional or mental status assessments, are not used to restrict a person’s right to legal capacity;

(d) Repeal or amend all laws, regulations, policies, guidelines and practices that directly or indirectly restrict the legal capacity of persons with disabilities, including those that allow for substituted decision-making and those that require that a person be “of sound mind” to take any action, thereby excluding persons with disabilities from equal access to justice;

(e) Repeal or amend all laws, regulations, policies, guidelines and practicesthat establish and apply doctrines of “unfitness to stand trial” and “incapacity to plead”, which prevent persons with disabilities from participating in legal processes based on questions about or determinations of their capacity;

(f) Repeal or amend all laws, regulations, policies, guidelines and practicesthat restrict or exclude witnesses with disabilities from presenting testimony based on assessments of their capacity to testify;

(g) Repeal or amend all laws, regulations, policies, guidelines and practicesthat authorize or otherwise empower medical professionals to be the sole or preferred “experts” in determining or opining on a person’s capacity to make decisions, to testify or for any other purpose;

(h) Repeal or amend all laws, regulations, policies, guidelines and practices preventing persons with disabilities from initiating and pursuing legal claims;

(i) Create an actionable and enforceable right to receive the individually determined procedural accommodations, including support, necessary to enable persons with disabilities to participate effectively inall proceedings in any court, tribunal or forum;

(j) Provide intermediaries or facilitators, wherever and whenever needed, to enable clear communication among and between persons with disabilities and courts, tribunals and law enforcement agencies to ensure safe, fair and effective engagement and the opportunity to fully participate in legal processes;

(k) Ensure that persons who have been declared to be without capacity for any purpose have the right to appeal or otherwise seek restoration of their legal capacity and have access to legal assistance to pursue their claims;

(l) Establish or support alternative justice mechanisms, such as restorative justice, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, and cultural and social forms and forums of justice, that are available to persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others, without regard for any construct of capacity to participate;

(m) Repeal or amend laws, regulations, policies, guidelines and practices, including court orders, that subject defendants with disabilities to detention in a prison, a mental health facilityor other institution for a definite or indefinite term (sometimes referred to as “care-related hospitalization”, “security measures” or “detainment at the governor’s pleasure”) based on perceived dangerousness or need for care.

Principle 2: Facilities and services must be universally accessible to ensure equal access to justice without discrimination of persons with disabilities.

Guidelines

1. To guarantee equal access to justice and non-discrimination, States must ensure that the facilities and services used in legal systems are built, developed and provided on the basis of the principles of universal design by taking, at a minimum, the following actions:

(a) Enacting and implementing enforceable laws, regulations, policies, guidelines and practices that guarantee the accessibility of all facilities and services used in the justice system, based on the principles of universal design, including:

(i) Courts, police facilities, prisons, detention and forensic facilities, jury facilities, administrative offices and other such places (including toilets, cells, offices, entrances, lifts, canteens and recreational spaces in those places);

(ii) Information, communications and other services, including information and communications technology and systems;

(b) Ensuring that all means of transportation used in the justice system areaccessible;

(c) Ensuring that adequate financial resources are available to make the justice system physically accessible to persons with disabilities in accordance with the principles of universal design;

(d) Guaranteeing the provision of procedural accommodations when facilities and services fail to ensure access to the existing physical environment, transportation, information and communications for persons with disabilities.

Principle 3: Persons with disabilities, including children with disabilities, have the right to appropriate procedural accommodations.

Guidelines

1. To avoid discrimination and guarantee the effective and equal participation of persons with disabilities in all legalproceedings, States shall provide genderand age-appropriate individualized procedural accommodations for persons with disabilities. They encompass all the necessary and appropriate modifications and adjustments needed in a particular case, including intermediaries or facilitators, procedural adjustments and modifications, adjustments to the environment and communication support, to ensure access to justice for persons with disabilities. To the fullest extent possible, accommodations should be organized before the commencement of proceedings.

2. States shall ensure the provision of a range of procedural accommodations, while also ensuring that such accommodations are implemented so as to properly balance and respect the rights of all parties by, among other things:

Independent intermediaries and facilitators

1. Establishing, funding and implementing a programme of independent intermediaries or facilitators trained to provide communication assistance to parties to the proceedings and the justice system to determine whether accommodations and support are necessary and which accommodations and support are appropriate, and to assist with communication throughout the course of the proceedings;

2. Designing and implementing a programme of independent intermediaries or facilitators in a manner consistent with local procedures and customs, and in line with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities;

Procedural adjustments and modifications

(c) Adopting procedures for hearings that ensure the fair treatment and full participation of persons with disabilities, including children with disabilities, during proceedings, as appropriate, such as:

(i) Adaptation of the venue;

(ii) Appropriate waiting spaces;

(iii) Removal of cloaks and wigs;

(iv) Adjustments to the pace of proceedings;

(v) Separate building entrances and waiting rooms and protective screens to separate persons with disabilities from others if necessary due to physical or emotional distress;

(vi) Modifications to the method of questioning in appropriate circumstances, such as allowing leading questions, avoiding compound questions, finding alternatives to complex hypothetical questions, providing extra time to answer, permitting breaks as needed and using plain language;

(vii) Use of pretrial video recording of evidence and testimony, if necessary, practical and possible, in such a manner as not to contravene basic rights, such as the right to confront and crossexamine witnesses;

(d) Allowing persons with disabilities, at all stages of the process if they sochoose, to be accompanied by family, friends or others to provide emotional and moral support, without replacing, however, the role of an intermediary or facilitator;

Communication support

(e) Ensuring that all processes in the justice system provide the technical and other support necessary for parties,witnesses, claimants, defendants and jurors to use any form of communication as necessary for their full participation, including:

(i) Assistive listening systems and devices;

(ii) Open, closed and real-time captioning, and closed caption decoders and devices;

(iii) Voice, text and video-based telecommunications products;

(iv) Videotext displays;

(v) Computer-assisted real-time transcription;

(vi) Screen reader software, magnification software and optical readers;

(vii) Video description and secondary auditory programming devices that pick up audio feeds for television programmes;

(f) Supporting communication, in addition to intermediaries or facilitators, through the use of third parties, including:

(i) Note-takers;

(ii) Qualified sign language and oral interpreters;

(iii) Relay services;

(iv) Tactile interpreters;

(g) Ensuring that all interpreters are able to interpret effectively, accurately and impartially, both receptively (i.e. understanding what persons with disabilities are saying) and expressively (i.e. having the skill necessary to convey information back to those persons), while using any necessary specialized vocabulary (e.g. legal or medical) and respecting professional and ethical standards;

Procedural accommodations for persons accused of crimes, prisoners and detainees

(h) Ensuring that police officers, prosecutors and others involved in arrests and investigations of criminal offences are knowledgeable about the rights of persons with disabilities, are alert to the possibility that a person may have a disability and, throughout the course of an arrest or investigation, adjust their responses accordingly;

(i) Ensuring that independent third persons, such as attorneys or others, are available to accompany persons with disabilities to the police station to assist them in the investigative process, including, for example, fingerprinting or giving a biological sample, and that intermediaries or facilitators,or similar, are available to facilitate communication between persons with disabilities and law enforcement and court personnel;

(j) Removing barriers that prevent or discourage prisoners and detainees with disabilities from challenging their imprisonment and remedying conditions of confinement by, for instance, providing legal standing to prisoners’ rights organizations and representative organizations of persons with disabilities, simplifying procedures, shortening timelines for decisions and providing effective remedies;

Requests for and offers of accommodations

(k) Enacting and implementing laws, regulations, policies, guidelines, practices and processes that enable persons with disabilities to request procedural accommodations, including modifications of or support in legal processes, with appropriate protection of their privacy;

(l) Ensuring, throughout the course of legal proceedings, that all participants are advised of the availability of procedural accommodations if needed and desired because of disability;

(m) Ensuring a process for determining the need for and providing procedural accommodations, including communication assistance, to children with disabilities, as well as additional safeguards, when necessary, according to their evolving capacities and their right to have their views heard.

Principle 4: Persons with disabilities have the right to access legal notices and information in a timely and accessible manner on an equal basis with others.

Guidelines

1. To guarantee the right to timely and accessible information, States shall:

(a) Enact enforceable laws, regulations, policies and guidelines that fully recognize a right to timely notice and information about all aspects of judicial processes;

(b) Ensure that information about justice systems and procedures can be accessed by various methods, including, as appropriate and needed:

(i) Sign language;

(ii) Video and audio guides;

(iii) Telephone line advice and referral services;

(iv) Accessible websites;

(v) Induction loop, radio or infrared systems;

(vi) Amplification devices and document magnifiers;

(vii) Closed captioning;

(viii) Braille;

(ix) Easy Read and plain language;

(x) Facilitated communication;

(c) Ensure that all notices that require a response or an action to be taken (e.g. summonses, subpoenas, writs, orders and sentences) are availableby accessible means and in accessible formats, such as those listed above in guideline 1 (b);

(d) Ensure that notices and information include clear understandable information about how a procedure works, what to expect during a process, what is expected of a person, where to get help with understanding the process and the person’s rightsin the process, in language that is not merely a repetition of the statute, regulation, policy or guideline – for example, plain language;

(e) Ensure that support is available in real time for individuals who need assistance to understand notices and information by providing, forinstance, interpreters, guides, readers, intermediaries and facilitators, and other forms of support.

Principle 5: Persons with disabilities are entitled to all substantive and procedural safeguards recognized in international law on an equal basis with others, and States must provide the necessary accommodations to guarantee due process.

Guidelines

1. States shall ensure that all substantive and procedural safeguards recognized in international law, whether in criminal, civil or administrative procedures, including the presumption of innocence and the right to remain silent, are afforded to all persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others. Procedural accommodations, when needed, must be available to all persons with disabilities, including suspects and accused persons, who require assistance to participate effectively in investigations and judicial proceedings.

2. Accordingly, States shall:

(a) Ensure that all suspects and accused persons with disabilities are presumed innocent until proven guilty under the law;

(b) Ensure that suspects or accused persons with disabilities are provided with accessible and understandable information about their rights, including the right not to incriminate oneself;

(c) Ensure that, in all interactions with first responders, persons with disabilities have the right to be free from discrimination and any use of forceor coercion based on disability, for example, perceived differences in behaviour or manner of communication– including through the provision of adequate support that is unrelated to and independent of police orlaw enforcement involvement;

(d) Ensure the provision of procedural accommodations to persons with disabilities at the time of their arrest, including procedural adjustments and communication support, and the use of de-escalation techniques, as appropriate, to safeguard all due process guarantees and prevent police violence and abuse;

(e) Draft, enact and implement laws, regulations, guidelines, procedures and policies to protect persons with disabilities from being exploited on account of their disability in any phase of the justice process;

(f) Ensure that procedural accommodations, including support, for effective participation are available so that persons with disabilities have the right, on an equal basis with others, to make their own choices of how to defend themselves;

(g) Ensure that health-care and psychosocial support are available at the request of persons with disabilities, based on their free and informed consent, irrespective of the outcomeof any police action or judicial proceedings, and not contingent on a plea bargain, confession or conviction.

Principle 6: Persons with disabilities have the right to free or affordable legal assistance.

Guidelines

1. To guarantee the right to a fair trial, States shall provide free or affordable legal assistance to children with disabilities in all matters, and to all other persons with disabilities in all legal procedures and proceedings that relate to violations of human rights or fundamental freedomsor those that could negatively affect such rights or freedoms, in particular the rights to life, liberty, personal integrity, property, adequate housing, decisionmaking autonomy and family integrity. Legal assistance must be competent and available in a timely manner for persons with disabilities to participate equally in any legal proceedings.

2. To that end, States shall:

(a) Enact and implement laws, regulations, policies, guidelines and practices affording the right to legal assistance in all judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings, regardless of the role of persons with disabilities in the process or the possible consequences or outcomes;

(b) Create, fund and implement legal assistance programmes to provide free legal representation to persons who cannot afford to retain legal assistance, including persons with disabilities, at a minimum in matters concerning:

(i) Loss of life or liberty, including by imprisonment, detainment,placement in an institution, forced or involuntary medical treatment (e.g. sterilization) or involuntary hospitalization; loss of legal capacity (e.g. guardianship); or loss of family integrity by forfeiture of parental or custodial rights;

(ii) Loss of housing, shelter or property;

(iii) Any other situation, including all criminal matters that do not carry the risk of incarceration, small claims and civil cases, in which a person with disabilities may bedisadvantaged in communicating, understanding or being understood in the process;

(c) Ensure, in addition to the matters listed above in guideline 2 (b), that free legal assistance is available to persons with disabilities on terms that are no less favourable than those for persons without disabilities and, at a minimum, whenever necessary, on an individualized basis, as a procedural accommodation;

(d) Ensure, in addition to legal assistance, access to legal advice through, for example, telephone or digital gateway services, paralegal services and online legal help services, using assistive technology as necessary;

(e) Repeal or amend any laws, regulations, policies, guidelines or practices that restrict the legal capacity of persons with disabilities to retain and instruct a lawyer;

(f) Ensure easy access to legal assistance, removing all administrative, communication and physical barriers to such access;

(g) Ensure that specialized services for victims (e.g. gender-based violence units) are equally accessible for persons with disabilities;

(h) Make procedural accommodations, such as interpreters, assistive technology and intermediaries and facilitators, or the resources necessary to obtain such accommodations, available to lawyers to support effective communication with clients, witnesses and other persons with disabilities in the discharge of their professional duties;

(i) Amend, when necessary, ethical and other relevant regulations applicable to lawyers to require them to respect and advocate for the will and preferences of their clients with disabilities and to follow their expressed instructions; any laws, regulations, policies, guidelines or practices to the contrary should be repealed or amended;

(j) Repeal or amend all laws, regulations, policies, guidelines and practices that impose substituted decision-making in legal proceedings, including those that allow for the appointment of decision makers against the will of persons with disabilities (e.g. guardians ad litem, next friends and similar arrangements); or decisions made on the basis of the “best interests” of the persons concerned, as opposed to being based on their own will and preferences;

(k) Provide free legal assistance and support to all persons with disabilities who have experienced violence, in particular women and girls with disabilities, including professional victim support, advice about legal rights, and assistance in reporting crimes and initiating legal proceedings.

Principle 7: Persons with disabilities have the right to participate in the administration of justice on an equal basis with others.

Guidelines

1. The right to equal access to justice requires that persons with disabilities have the opportunity to participate directly in adjudicative processes and be involved in various roles in the administration of justice on an equal basis with others. States should ensure that persons with disabilities are able to act as judges, lawyers, prosecutors, witnesses, jurors, experts and court officials in the justice system without discrimination.

2. To this end, Governments, legislatures and other authorities, including judicial councils and other independent judicial governing bodies and independent self-governing legal professional bodies, must each, within their respective roles, take the following actions:

(a) Remove barriers that prevent or discourage persons with disabilities from entering justice system-related professions by, for instance:

(i) Providing reasonable accommodations throughout legal and justice-related education programmes;

(ii) Providing reasonable accommodations during certification and licensing examinations or processes;

(iii) Prohibiting questions about health and disability in applications for admission to the legal profession and positions in the justice system;

(iv) Ensuring that all facilities and structures in the justice system are universally accessible to workers with disabilities.

(b) Remove all disability-related barriers, including laws, that prevent persons with disabilities from being judges or jurors or serving in any other justicerelated positions;

(c) Ensure the equal participation of persons with disabilities in the jury system by providing all necessary support, reasonable accommodations and procedural accommodations;

(d) Consult closely with and actively involve persons with disabilities and their representative organizations in all discussions and decision-making about justice-related issues by, for example, providing meaningful participationon boards, committees, commissions, sentencing councils and other guidance and oversight organizations;

(e) Collect disaggregated data on the participation of persons with disabilities in the justice system and, using that data, develop andimplement strategies to reform policies, practices and laws to ensure equal access to justice.

Principle 8: Persons with disabilities have the rights to report complaints and initiate legal proceedings concerning human rights 

violations and crimes, have their complaints investigated and be afforded effective remedies.

Guidelines

1. States must have accessible, easy-to-use, transparent and effective mechanisms for individuals to report complaints about human rights violations and crimes. Complaint adjudicators and tribunals must provide remedies that are individually tailored and may include redress and reparation.

2. Accordingly, States shall:

Complaint mechanisms

1.  Establish complaint mechanisms, for instance, national human rights institutions, tribunals and administrative bodies – with the power to hear complaints, including complaints about disability-based discrimination, from persons with disabilities and others and to order remedies;

2. Ensure that persons with disabilities may file criminal complaints on an equal basis with others;

3. Ensure that civil and criminal complaint mechanisms are accessible, using, for example, hotlines and e-service complaint methods;

4. Provide voluntary alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, such as conciliation, mediation, arbitration and restorative justice;

5. Ensure that complaint mechanisms and investigations are gender sensitive to guarantee that victims of gender-based violence are able and willing to come forward safely;

6. Ensure that special protection units (e.g. those dealing with gender-based violence, hate crime, children and trafficking in persons) are accessible to persons with disabilities and responsive to their needs;

7. Ensure that mechanisms, when appropriate and desired, provide for anonymity and confidentiality;

Responding to grave, systematic, group or 

large-scale violations

8. Ensure that complaint systems and the justice system are capable of detecting and responding to grave, systematic, group and large-scale violations of human rights through, for instance, class actions, actiones populares, public inquiries and prosecutions, following a complaint or on the initiative of the system itself;

Investigations

9. Ensure that all investigators, including law enforcement officials, are knowledgeable about the rights of persons with disabilities and are alert, throughout the course of investigations, to the potential need for procedural accommodations when investigations involve persons with disabilities;

10. Ensure that, when appropriate, an intermediary or facilitator or other appropriate third party is enlisted to assist in the investigation process;

11. Ensure that, when working with victims with disabilities, law enforcement officials assess the risk of the former being subjected to further offences, and whether any voluntary protective measures (such as a safe haven) are needed;

Remedies

12. Ensure, in the criminal context, that those who abuse or otherwise mistreat persons with disabilities are prosecuted and, when appropriate, convicted or subject to other effective sanctions;

13. Ensure that effective remedies are in place for human rights violations,including the right to be free from disability-based discrimination and the rights to restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition. Such remedies should, among other things:

(i) Be enforceable, individualized and tailored to meet the needs of claimants;

(ii) Ensure that victims are protected from repeat violations of their human rights;

(iii) Be proportional to the gravity of the violations and the circumstances of each case;

(iv) Be provided on the basis that an individual’s free and informed consent is required for any rehabilitative measures;

(v) Address the systemic nature of human rights violations.

Principle 9: Effective and robust monitoring mechanisms play a critical role in supporting access to justice for persons with disabilities.

Guidelines

1. States have an obligation to designate independent frameworks to promote, protect and monitor implementation of the rights of persons with disabilities and their equal access to justice. To ensure independent monitoring, States shall either provide the necessary mandates and resources to established monitoringmechanisms or create new ones when they do not exist.

2. States, therefore, should take the following actions:

(a) Designate independent monitoring mechanisms in accordance with Article 33 (2) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, including establishing and maintaining national human rights institutions in accordance with the principles relating to thestatus of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (the Paris Principles) with a mandate to monitor implementation of the Convention;

(b) Ensure that all monitoring mechanisms have institutional, financial and political independence;

(c) Promote the regular exchange of information among monitoring mechanisms to identify challenges and implement strategies to address common issues;

(d) Ensure the meaningful participation of persons with disabilities and their representative organizations in designing and implementingindependent monitoring mechanisms;

(e) Include a mandate to actively monitor and identify violations of the rights of persons with disabilities, particularly those deprived of liberty and placed in institutional settings;

(f) Include a mandate for the independent monitoring mechanisms to gather and publicly report data on human rights violations, including barriers to access to justice;

(g) Ensure a mandate and funding for raising awareness about the human rights-based approach to disability andsupport training programmes for this purpose.

Principle 10: All those working in the justice system must be provided with awareness-raising and training programmes addressing the rights of persons with disabilities, in particular in the context of access to justice.

Guidelines

1. States must remove barriers to justice for persons with disabilities by providing training on the rights of persons with disabilities to all justice officials, including the police, judicial officers, lawyers, health professionals, forensic experts, victim service professionals, social workers, and probation, prison and youth detention staff.

2. To this end, Governments, legislatures and other authorities, including judicial councils and other independent judicial governing bodies and independent selfgoverning legal professional bodies, musteach, within their respective roles, take the following actions:

(a) Enact and implement laws, regulations, policies, guidelines and practices that create a legal obligation for all persons who have a role in the administration of justice to participate in human rightsbased training on the rights of persons with disabilities and the provision of accommodations in accordance with guideline 2 (j);

(b) Provide training on an ongoing basis to all those working in the administration of justice, including by national human rights institutions and representative organizations of persons with disabilities;

(c) Ensure that persons with disabilities and their representative organizationsparticipate in the development and presentation of all training referenced in the present guidelines;

(d) Monitor and evaluate training and ensure the participation andactive involvement of representative organizations of persons with disabilities in such monitoring and evaluation;

(e) Launch awareness-raising strategies that include training programmes and media campaigns, based on the human rights model of disability, for all judicial officers, lawmakers, policymakers and law enforcement officials to eliminate prejudice and promote recognition of rights;

(f) Make training manuals widely available for all those engaged in the administration of justice, especially police officers, prosecution authorities and judicial officers;

(g) Use training to familiarize police officers, including first responders and investigators, prosecution personnel and judicial officers, with good practices in interactions with persons with disabilities, including response, behaviour and appropriate accommodations;

(h) Develop, fund and implement guidelines and training for lawyers and law students on the rights of persons with disabilities and procedural accommodations, in accordance with guideline 2 (j);

(i) Provide persons with disabilities and their families with training and access to information on rights, remedies, claiming redress and the legal process;

(j) Ensure that training programmes are comprehensive and address at least the following topics:

(i) Factors or system features that can result in barriers for persons with disabilities;

(ii) Removal of barriers to access to justice for persons with disabilities;

(iii) The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the human rights model of disability;

(iv) The acknowledgement that persons with disabilities have the right to recognition aspersons before the law, including combating harmful genderand disability stereotypes and prejudices;

(v) The obligation to respect the legal capacity of persons withdisabilities, including legal agency and standing;

(vi) Communication skills, including identifying the need to engage experts for communication assistance;

(vii) De-escalation of situations and prevention of the use of force;

(viii) Procedural accommodations;

(ix) Reasonable accommodations;

(x) Combating ableism and overcoming prejudice against persons with disabilities;

(xi) Sexual, reproductive and family rights;

(xii) Intersecting forms of discrimination on the basis of disability and other grounds, including sex, gender, indigenous status, race, sexual orientation, migration status, minorities and disadvantaged communities, and poverty;

(xiii) Awareness and understanding of the rights of persons with disabilities to have equal access to information.

8. Conclusion

Access to justice is a fundamental right, as well as a prerequisite for the protection of all other human rights. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) interprets the right to access to justice in the context of disability, directing the State parties to ensure effective access to justice for persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others and prescribing positive measures to be taken for the fulfillment of rights in this regard. This article highlighted a variety of overarching obstacles/barriers faced by persons with disabilities, as well as specific areas of concern, in relation to access to justice and also set out approaches to overcoming them. Most importantly, ten international principles and guidelines as endorsed by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the International Disability Alliance (IDA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2020) were reviewed in this article.

References

Bach, M. L. (2017). A New Paradigm for Protecting Autonomy and the Right to Legal Capacity’ 2010 <http://www.lco-cdo.org/en/disabilities-call-for-papers-bach-kerzner>  accessed 30,

May 2022.

Dibie, C. C. (2008). Essential Government for Senior Secondary Schools. Lagos: Tonad Publishers Limited.

European Group of National Human Rights Institutions (2014). Amicus Brief in the European Court of Human Rights - D.D v Lithuania Application No. 13469/06. <http://www.interights.org/userfiles/Documents/DDAmicusHumanrightsinstitutionsfdf> accessed 4 June, 2022.

Flynn, E. (2014). ‘Making human rights meaningful for people with disabilities: Recognizing a right to advocacy in international human rights law’ <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1924375>  Accessed on 9 July, 2014.

International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), International Disability Alliance (IDA) and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2020). International Principles and Guidelines on Access to Justice for Persons with Disabilities. Geneva: UN Press. 

Ladan, M. T. (2015). ‘Access to Justice and the Justice Sector Reform in Nigeria’, A Paper Presented at the First International Conference on the state of Affairs of Africa, organized by the International Institute for Justice and Development [11JD]. Boston, Massachusetts, USA, Oct, p.10 <http://www.iijd.org/PDf%20files/Mohammed-Tawfia-Ladan-Justice-Sector-Reform-Nigeria>  Accessed on  20 June, 2015.

McChesney, D. (2021). Promoting Disability Accommodation in Legal Education and Training (Reach Canada). Retrieved from: http://www.reach.ca/lepof/table.htm on May, 2022.

Ortoleva, S. (2016). Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Legal System Accessibility’, 17 ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law 281 <https://sites.google.com/site/womenenabled/access-to-justice>  accessed on 12 August, 2017.

Smith, N. (2013). ‘The Face of Disability in Nigeria: A Disability Survey in Kogi and Niger States’. The Journal of Disability, CBR and Inclusive Development, Vol 22, No.1, 35-46.

Stephanie, P. (2018). “Inaccessible Justice: Human Rights, Persons with Disabilities and the Legal System,” 17 ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law, 281 (Spring 2018). Retrieved from: http://sites.google.com/site/womenenabled/access-to-justice on June, 2022.

UNCRPD (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Retrieved from: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/rights/convtexte.htm on August, 2022.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2020). Access to Justice: Practice Note. Retrieved from: http://www.undp.org/governance/docs/Justice_PN_English.pdf on July 3, 2022.

United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) (2017). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 12 January 2017. A/HRC/31/62 

Washington State Access to Justice Board (2019). Ensuring Equal Access for Persons with Disabilities: A Guide to Washington Administrative Proceedings. Retrieved from: http://www.wsba.org/Legal-Community/Committees-Boards-and-Other-Groups/Access-toJustice-Board/ATJ-Committees/~/media/Files/Legal%20Community/Committee_Boards_Panels/ATJ%20Board/EnsuringAccessGuideBook.ashx on August, 2022.

World Health Organisation (WHO) (2011). “Chapter 4: Rehabilitation”, in World Report on Disability, p. 96–133.

WHO and World Bank (2011). World Report on Disability. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report.pdf on 5 July, 2022.

SDG and PWDs: Access to Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for Persons with Disabilities (SDG Target 9.c)

 

Abstract

The Sustainable Development Goals number 9 (SDG target 9.c) aims to increase access to Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for all including people with disabilities. Therefore, this article focuses on  persons with  disabilities by analysing the international and  the regional normative frameworks on disability and ICT and highlighting the challenges persons with disabilities face in accessing ICT based on the available evidence.  It also analyzed the situation of persons with disabilities in ICT, and current practices in some countries regarding access to ICT for persons with disabilities. The article likewise concludes with the ways forward to increase accessibility of ICT for persons with disabilities.

Keywords: Information and Communication Technology (ICT), Persons with Disabilities (PWDs), Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Introduction

The World Health Organisation (WHO) and the World Bank Report on Disability (2011), provides a global statistics on disability which indicates that 15% of the world’s population, or more than one billion people in the world today have a disability; and 80% of these people live in developing nations.

Information and communication technologies (ICT), when accessible and available, can serve as critical enablers that allow persons with disabilities to realise full and effective opportunities to participate, on the basis of equality, in all aspects of society and development. ICTs can help persons with disabilities have a greater access to knowledge and independent living. However, there are a few principles that should be taken into consideration while introducing ICTs. Whether one is considering the respective needs of rich and poor, rural and urban, those with access to the internet and those without (the digital divide), ICT has the power to bring people together but, where persons with disabilities lack access to ICTs, they can also leave people behind (UNESCO, 2020).

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 SDGs provide a powerful framework to guide local communities, countries and the international community toward the achievement of disability-inclusive development. It pledges to leave no one behind, including people with disabilities and other disadvantaged groups, and has recognized disability as a cross-cutting issue to be considered in the implementation of all of its goals.

Therefore, the Sustainable Development Goals (Goal 9) focuses on Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation. It has 8 targets in which target 9.c is based on increasing access to information and communications technology and strive to provide universal and affordable access to the Internet in developed and developing countries (UN, 2018).

This article will address access to ICTs as it relates to persons with disabilities, beginning by presenting the international normative frameworks in this area. An overview of global ICT access and usage among persons with disabilities is presented. The article also illuminates national initiatives and ends with recommendations to improve access to ICT among persons with disabilities. 

Persons with Disabilities (PWDs)

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) (2006), describes 'Disability' as an “evolving concept” and says that “persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others”. Disability is an outcome of an interaction between health conditions (such as cerebral palsy, depression or lung disease), and environmental factors (such as inaccessible transportation, limited social support or air pollution).

Disability is diverse not only in extent but also in kind. There are people who live with severe sensory, mobility, communication or cognitive impairments (e.g. people who are blind or deaf, wheelchair users, or children with intellectual disabilities) but there are also people with mild and moderate impairments who need help to keep these impairments from worsening. Finally, as we age, we experience multimorbidities in which several, mild or moderate impairments across many body functions occur together, producing relatively high levels of overall disability.

Information and Communication Technology (ICT)

ICT (Information and Communications Technology - or Technologies) include any 

communication device or application such as radio, television, cellular phones, computers, satellite systems as well as network hardware and software and associated services (UNESCO, 2020).

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is a 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted by the 193 Member States of the United Nations at the General Assembly in September 2015. It outlines a transformative vision for economic, social and environmental development and will guide the work of the Organization towards this vision for the 15 years.

Likewise, the 2030 Agenda provides a powerful framework to guide local communities, countries and the international community toward the achievement of Disability–Inclusive Development. The 2030 Agenda (SDGs) pledges to leave no one behind, including persons with disabilities and other disadvantaged groups, and recognizes disability as a cross–cutting issue to be considered in the implementation of all of its goals. 

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which includes 17 Goals and 169 targets as well as 238 indicators, sets out an ambitious vision for sustainable development and integrates its economic, social and environmental dimensions. This new Agenda enshrines the expectations, aspirations and priorities of the international community to be achieved by 2030 (UN, 2018).

SDG 9 and its Targets

The SDG 9 focuses on ‘Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure’. It details that, investments in infrastructure, transport, irrigation, energy and information and communication technology are crucial to achieving sustainable development and empowering communities in many countries. It has long been recognized that growth in productivity and incomes, and improvements in health and education outcomes require investment in infrastructure.

Inclusive and sustainable industrial development is the primary source of income generation, allows for rapid and sustained increases in living standards for all people, and provides the technological solutions to environmentally sound industrialization.

Technological progress is the foundation of efforts to achieve environmental objectives, such as increased resource and energy-efficiency. Without technology and innovation, industrialization will not happen, and without industrialization, development will not happen.

Therefore, SDG 9 has 8 targets which are as follows:

Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure, including regional and transborder infrastructure, to support economic development and human well-being, with a 

focus on affordable and equitable access for all.

Target 9.2: Promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and, by 2030, 

significantly raise industry’s share of employment and gross domestic product, in line with national circumstances, and double its share in least developed countries.

Target 9.3: Increase the access of small-scale industrial and other enterprises, in particular in developing countries, to financial services, including affordable credit, and their integration into value chains and markets.

Target 9.4: By 2030, upgrade infrastructure 

and retrofit industries to make them sustainable, with increased resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes, with all countries taking action in accordance with their respective capabilities.

Target 9.5: Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities of industrial sectors in all countries, in particular developing countries, including, by 2030, encouraging innovation and substantially increasing the number of research and development workers per 1 million people and public and private research and development spending.

Target 9.a: Facilitate sustainable and resilient infrastructure development in developing countries through enhanced financial, technological and technical support to African countries, least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States.

Target 9.b: Support domestic technology development, research and innovation in developing countries, including by ensuring a conducive policy environment for, inter alia, industrial diversification and value addition to commodities.

Target 9.c: Significantly increase access to 

information and communications technology and strive to provide universal and affordable access to the Internet in least developed countries by 2030 (UN, 2019).

SDG 9.c and PWDs

SDG target 9.c commits to significantly increase access to ICT and to provide universal and affordable access to the Internet or ICT generally in developed and  developing countries by 2030. This represents a crucial target in the development of digital inclusion, in particular for persons with disabilities. 

The reach and power of ICT has grown tremendously in recent decades. In today’s digital age, ICT plays a central role in nearly all aspects of life. ICTs affect how people work, play, vote and interact. For persons with disabilities, ICTs can also represent a powerful opportunity to improve quality of life, enhance inclusion and social engagement and make independent living possible: “For most people, technology makes things easier. For persons with disabilities, technology makes things possible”. ICTs can offer persons with disabilities opportunities for education, work, leisure, social interaction and political participation as well as provide access to public services and information. Online access to public services, e-learning materials which can be adapted to the needs of students with disabilities, and text-to-voice devices, among others, are indeed giving persons with disabilities the ability to further engage in society. 

As information and communication move increasingly online, digital technologies present an unprecedented opportunity for the inclusion of persons with disabilities. At the same time, they also present a major risk of leaving persons with disabilities further behind, in cases where these technologies, products, content and services are not created with accessibility in mind. Increasingly, digital inclusion – i.e. the ability of all persons, including persons with disabilities, to access and use ICTs – and ICT accessibility must be seen as a critical element for ensuring inclusion and the achievement of other SDGs for persons with disabilities (UN, 2019).

International Normative Frameworks on Disability and ICT 

The current international normative frameworks, which include provisions on ICT and persons with disabilities, focus mainly on affordable and equitable access, on removing barriers in access to ICT for persons with disabilities and on promoting ICTs that respond to the needs of persons with disabilities. Some of these normative frameworks are as follows:

1- United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) (2006): A key framework in this regard is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) (2006), which recognizes the critical role that information and communication plays in ensuring that persons with disabilities fully enjoy human rights and fundamental freedoms. The Article 4(g) of UNCRPD calls also for promoting research and development and enhancing the availability and use of new technologies, including ICTs. In addition, the Article 9 is dedicated to accessibility and stipulates that States Parties should take appropriate measures to ensure persons with disabilities have access, on an equal basis with others, to information and communications, including information and communications technologies and systems. To ensure this access to ICT, the Article 9 further calls for removing barriers to information, communication and other services including electronic services and emergency services and to promote the design, development, production and distribution of accessible ICT at an early stage. The Article 21 urges private entities and the mass media, which provide services and information through the Internet, to make these accessible to persons with disabilities. ICT also plays a key role in meaningful habilitation and rehabilitation, and the Article 26 calls on States Parties to promote the availability, knowledge and use of assistive technologies used in this regard.

2- The International Telecommunication Regulations (2012): This is one of the major international frameworks focusing on information and communications, specifically calls on Member States to promote access for persons with disabilities to international telecommunication services. In addition, an outcome document of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), the Geneva Plan of Action (2003), calls for full inclusion of persons with disabilities in the information society and encourages the design and production of ICT equipment and services that meet the needs of persons with disabilities and promote the development of technologies in line with the Universal Design Principle. It also addresses the need to nurture local capacity for the creation and distribution of software in the local context for the population, including persons with disabilities. Another WSIS outcome document, the Tunis Commitment (2005), also stressed that the needs of persons with disabilities should be taken into account in providing equitable and affordable access to ICTs. Furthermore, the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)+10 Review and Strategic Directions for Building Inclusive Knowledge Societies for Persons with Disabilities (2013) states that for ICT to be accessible, persons with disabilities need to be able to “perceive output information, understand it and act upon it”.

Other international frameworks that stress the importance of ensuring access to ICTs for persons with disabilities include the New Urban Agenda (2016), which calls for facilitating access for persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others, to ICTs and systems. It also commits to promote the development of national ICT policies and e-government strategies to make ICT accessible to the public, including persons with disabilities.

In addition, several international normative frameworks have recognized the importance of international cooperation in expanding access to ICTs. This is particularly relevant for persons with disabilities for whom state-of-the-art ICTs can make a crucial difference with regards to their independent living. UNCRPD Article 32 highlights the importance of international cooperation in the facilitation of access to and sharing of accessible and assistive technologies, some of which are ICTs. In the same vein, SDG target 17.8 commits to fully operationalize the technology bank and science, technology and innovation capacity-building mechanism for the least developed countries and enhance the use of enabling technology, particularly ICT (UN, 2019).

Regional Normative Frameworks on ICT and Disability

Normative frameworks on ICT established at the regional levels have also reflected the needs and perspectives of persons with disabilities. 

1- The European Union Digital Agenda (2010): It emphasizes the importance of accessibility of websites and online services, and calls for addressing the challenges of accessibility and usability of persons with disabilities by helping them participate in digital society, including by training them. In this Digital Agenda, the European Commission commits to systematically evaluate accessibility in revisions of legislation, following the UNCRPD. Relatedly, the European Accessibility Act (2015) seeks to improve the functioning of the internal market for accessible products and services by eliminating obstacles caused by divergent legislation in order to facilitate accessibility for persons with disabilities. 

The European Union directive on “the accessibility of the websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies” (2016) aims to improve the accessibility of public sector websites and mobile applications, particularly for persons with disabilities.

2- The Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities (CIADDIS): It was adopted in 1999 to advance the rights and fundamental freedoms of persons with disabilities. While this instrument does not specifically mention access to ICTs, there are directives that encourage States Parties to eliminate discrimination against persons with disabilities including by providing accessible communications. Within the framework of the Organization of American States, the Program of Action for the Decade of the Americas for Persons with Disabilities (2006–2016) called for the elimination of communication and information barriers in all communications media and public services to improve access for persons with disabilities (measure 5.f) and for designing and executing education programmes using new ICTs to meet the educational needs of students with disabilities (measure 3.f).

 

The Action Plan for the Information Society in Latin America and the Caribbean (eLAC2015): It adopted in 2013 recognizes that ICTs are tools for economic development and social inclusion. Its Goal 6 commits to promote ICT access and use by persons with disabilities with emphasis on the development of applications that consider standards and criteria on inclusion and accessibility. The Digital Agenda for Latin America and the Caribbean (eLAC2018) adopted in 2015, complements the eLAC2015, with an emphasis on achieving universal access to digital services and content production including vulnerable groups, which implicitly includes persons with disabilities (Objective 1). The eLAC2018 also ensures ICT access for vulnerable groups to improve their social, educational, cultural and economic integration (Objective 18) (UN, 2019).

The Situation of Persons with Disabilities Regarding Access to ICT 

1- Access to and use of the Internet 

Internet websites have been ranked as one of the most important ICTs for persons with disabilities for health care, education, employment, access to government services and participation in political and public life. However, significant gaps are observed between persons with and without disabilities in the use of the Internet, with persons with disabilities reporting lower usage. Among 14 countries, around 2011, the average gap was 18 percentage points, with some countries reaching gaps as high as 30 percentage points. On average, in these countries, 19% of persons with disabilities use the Internet versus 36% of persons without disabilities. In all 14 countries, compared to persons without disabilities, the percentage of persons with disabilities using the Internet is lower. Countries with overall higher Internet usage tend to have higher gaps between persons with and without disabilities in Internet use. Households with persons with disabilities tend also to have lower Internet access. Among 26 countries, 9% of households with persons with disabilities versus 13% of households without disabilities have access to the Internet. In nine of these countries, the gap is above five percentage points.

The gap between access to the Internet at home and use of the Internet varies with age. For instance, in 11 Latin American and Caribbean countries, a higher percentage of younger persons with disabilities, especially those under the age of 40, use the Internet than have Internet access in the home, whereas for adults aged 40 and above with disabilities it is more common to have access in the home than report Internet use. These patterns suggest that for the younger generation of persons with disabilities use of the Internet is not constrained by not having connectivity at home, which may reflect the rising popularity of smart phones and other portable devices that have Internet connectivity, or the use of the Internet in public places by younger generations. For older adults with disabilities, having Internet access does not equate with Internet use. The age differences are much more pronounced for use than access. This can be due to the fact that access may be related to household income level, whereas use of the Internet and ICT more generally are marked by a digital age divide.

Several reasons may explain the lower use of the Internet among persons with disabilities, with unaffordability of the Internet, unaffordability and inaccessibility of the devices on which to access the Internet (e.g. computers or smartphones) and lower ICT skills among persons with disabilities, all possibly playing a significant role. Indeed, persons with disabilities have lower employment rates and lower incomes, and may have extra costs related to disability, making it more likely that the costs of Internet subscriptions and electronic devices will be prohibitive for them. For instance, data available for three countries in sub-Saharan Africa indicate that 15% of households without persons with disabilities but only 8% of households with persons with disabilities are able to afford Internet costs. Households with persons with disabilities are also less likely to have a computer (11% of households with versus 16% of households without persons with disabilities).

In addition, persons with disabilities are less likely to receive an education and are thus more likely to have lower levels of digital literacy. And, even with similar levels of education, they may face additional barriers to using the Internet. For example, around 2010, in 11 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, persons with disabilities were less likely to use the Internet than persons without disabilities with identical education levels. Although Internet usage increased with the level of education for both persons with and without disabilities, the gaps between the two ranged from 6 percentage points in primary education to 14 percentage points in tertiary education.

Even where digital education, ICTs and Internet connections are all available, electronic devices often remain inaccessible unless special assistive technologies are also provided. For example, persons with physical disabilities may not be able to operate the standard devices used for navigating the Internet (mouse, keyboard, screen), and may need alternate devices suited to their needs. Persons with visual, reading, cognitive, or other disabilities may encounter barriers with inaccessible digital content (e.g. webpages and documents), and may require more accessible formatting or assistive software. In addition, shops selling electronics are not always accessible for persons with disabilities. Crowdsourced reports on 6,015 electronic shops worldwide, mostly from developed countries, indicated that 43% were not accessible for persons using wheelchairs (UN, 2019).

2- Access to and Usage of Mobile Phones 

Mobiles phones can have a strong impact on the independent living of persons with disabilities. However, similar to Internet ownership, households with persons with disabilities are less likely to own a mobile phone. Among 36 countries, 53% of households with persons with disabilities, compared to 60% of households without persons with disabilities, own a mobile phone. In 11 countries, the gap is larger than 10 percentage points. Gaps tend to be wider in countries with lower coverage. 

Even if a mobile phone exists at home, persons with disabilities may not be able to use it. Individual ownership of mobile phones is likely to be lower for persons with disabilities. For instance, in Uganda, in 2016, persons with disabilities were less likely to own a mobile phone. Women with disabilities were the least likely to own one, only 42% as compared to 46% of women without disabilities, 52% of men with disabilities and 66% of men without disabilities. Likewise, the percentage of women with disabilities who used a mobile phone for financial transactions was only 26%, whereas 34% of women without disabilities and 48% of men without disabilities did so (UN, 2019).

3- Use of TV and Radio 

In four developing countries, the use of radio and TV tends to be lower among persons with disabilities, but the gaps between persons with and without disabilities are narrower than those observed for the Internet. On average, 74% of persons with disabilities and 78% of persons without disabilities listened to the radio; 65% of persons with disabilities and 72% of persons without disabilities watched TV (UN, 2019). 

4- Affordability of ICT 

Persons with disabilities and their households have more difficulties affording ICTs. For instance, in three countries in sub-Saharan Africa, around 2012, on average only 37% of households with persons with disabilities could afford a TV, 61% could afford a radio and 67% a mobile phone. In all three countries and for all ICTs, the ability of households with persons with disabilities to afford ICTs was lower as compared to households without persons with disabilities. In Turkey, in 2007, only 53% of persons with disabilities could afford a computer, and 82% could afford a telephone. In 34 countries in Europe, the percentage of persons who can afford a computer is slightly higher among persons without disabilities (95%) than among persons with disabilities (91%). In these countries, the percentage of persons who can afford a telephone and a TV is about the same among persons with and without disabilities (99%) (UN, 2019).

5-Accessibility of ICTs 

A growing number of mainstream, everyday ICT such as mobile devices and desktop computers increasingly offer functionalities that facilitate communication and information access for persons with disabilities. Features such as text-to-speech and voice recognition, ability to change contrast and colour schemes, touch and gesture input, and screen magnification, which in the past required specialized standalone software and hardware, are embedded within off-the-shelf ICT devices. These features enable persons with disabilities to receive information and content in the format that they can perceive and prefer. For example, a person with visual impairments can use text-to-speech functionality or software to read a website, a person with hearing impairments can use SMS or instant text messaging to communicate, and a person with mobility impairments can use voice recognition to operate and navigate their digital device.

Another key trend in recent years is the inclusion of accessibility features in web pages, which reduce the need for costlier specialized assistive technologies. For instance, some web pages use bigger fonts or particular colour combinations, which are easier for the visually impaired. Similarly, captions in audio or video content on web pages are useful for the hearing impaired. Some websites also include features so that persons with motor impairments can navigate the sites without a pointing device.

However, the large majority of websites lack features which promote accessibility and include features that are inaccessible for persons with disabilities. This includes governmental websites. Among governmental portals of the 193 United Nations Member States, the fonts and colours in the portals can be reconfigured in only 32% of countries (a feature helpful for those with visual disabilities); and website content can be read aloud (a feature helpful for those with severe visual difficulties) in the portals of a mere 7% of countries. Only 4% of governmental websites include video in sign language, which makes information and websites accessible for persons with hearing difficulties. Moreover, persons with disabilities will encounter additional barriers in many national portals: in 35% of countries, national portals included features that can only be used with a mouse, which poses difficulties for persons with hand mobility disabilities; in 48% of countries form elements were not labelled; and in as many as 63% of countries graphical elements were lacking descriptive text, which create difficulties for persons with visual disabilities. Although more recent data on all these features are not available, it is known that there has been progress on the number of governmental websites that allow for changes in font type and size, a feature which is useful for persons with visual disabilities. In 2012, 31% of countries allowed for flexible font size and type; this has since increased to 40% in 2014.

Enhanced accessibility of mobile phones and services has remained a relatively underdeveloped segment of the ICT market, yet the technology supporting accessibility is becoming more developed with a growing number of accessibility applications for smartphones. Some applications, like screen readers, do make the tool accessible; others, like GPS, can increase the accessibility of physical environments for persons with disabilities. Although many features and applications are available free of charge, affordability remains a major issue, especially for smartphones. Screen readers and text-to-speech applications cost several hundred US dollars on some mobile platforms. Another issue limiting usage of accessibility features and applications is language, as they tend not to be available in local languages. For instance, in India, there are 22 official languages yet most applications only exist in Hindi. Other countries where many languages are used, such as several African countries, encounter similar barriers (UN, 2019).

Current Practices in ICT and Disability 

At the country level, laws, policies and programmes have been progressively introduced to enhance access to ICT for persons with disabilities. Most of these initiatives have focused on providing access on an equal basis with others and improving ICT accessibility. Some countries have focused on improving ICT skills through the training of persons with disabilities, sometimes focusing on youth.

On legislation promoting ICT accessibility, for instance, in Latin America and the Caribbean, ICT and persons with disabilities are mentioned under the general disability law in 13 countries and territories, and are a provision of the general telecommunication law in 6 countries. Standards and guidelines have been created for accessible websites, documents, and other digital media. One of the most universally recognized and widely used is the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. These guidelines aim to provide a single shared standard for web content accessibility that meets the needs of a wide range of users including those with disabilities. Many national governments have adopted the WCAG into their basic web accessibility standards, and in some cases, the WCAG has even been written into the law. Capacity-building on web accessibility for web designers and programmers is crucial in encouraging the development of accessible websites and was provided in some countries. Disseminating information on accessibility guidelines for ICTs has been another way to raise awareness and promote accessibility.

Other guidelines and standards exist for a variety of technologies. The Guidelines for Accessible Information cover many forms of digital media, including video, audio, text and images. The International Organisation for Standardization (ISO) published accessibility standards for a variety of ICTs, including standards for hardware devices like keyboards and screens, standards for software, and standards for accessible PDF documents. The EPUB3 accessibility guidelines were also developed for eBooks. Many countries have standards for closed captioning in television and digital video broadcasting, such as China, European countries, Japan and the United States. In addition, the Telecommunications Accessibility Guidelines for Older Persons and Persons with Disabilities and the recommendation on Audiobased Network Navigation System for Persons with Vision Impairment have been developed by the International Telecommunication Union’s Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T). 

Countries are also adopting accessibility requirements in public procurement thus influencing accessibility in government services and promoting overall ICT accessibility through ripple effects in the broader consumer market. Policies have also been established requiring telecommunications service providers, public sector organizations (including government-owned banks), public accommodation, commercial facilities, producers and distributors of digital media to provide accessible services. 

Increasingly, online content has become more accessible to persons with disabilities through online videos with captioning; and national news agencies have developed news services in easy language that is accessible to persons with intellectual disabilities. TV broadcasters have been offering television programmes with described video and closed captioning, as well as audio services for some programmes; and sign language interpretation videos have been made of national radio programming. Countries have also established funds that support the accessibility of broadcasting content. National and international funding mechanisms have been playing a significant role in promoting the development of ICTs for persons with disabilities. For instance, funds have been established to promote open-source accessible digital e-readers (textbooks) for children of primary schools in Kenya and a mobile application to help children with speech impairments to communicate in India. Funds have also been set up to disseminate examples of best practices for accessibility, to raise awareness through mainstreaming of ICT accessibility standards and to support the distribution of specialized equipment to low-income persons with disabilities in order for them to be able to access ICT (UN, 2019).

Conclusions and the Way Forward 

According to UN (2019), digital technologies have been spreading, but not all persons with disabilities have been able to partake of the benefits of using ICTs. Digital gaps remain between persons with and without disabilities. In some countries, the gap between persons with and without disabilities reaches 30 percentage points for Internet use, 10 percentage points in access to the Internet in the household, and 5 percentage points in radio and TV use. This digital gap persists because many technologies are not accessible or affordable for persons with disabilities. More than 60% of national online portals are not accessible for persons with disabilities. Regarding affordability, limited data suggest that in developing countries households with persons with disabilities are half as likely to afford Internet costs, and less likely to be able to afford radio, TV and a mobile phone.

Yet, access to ICTs is recognized as crucial for the independent living and inclusion of persons with disabilities and is thus imperative for achieving all SDGs. The evidence above suggests that access to education is crucial to increase access to ICTs among persons with disabilities. Moreover, there are a number of initiatives, projects and organizations worldwide carrying out innovative practices to enhance access to ICTs for persons with disabilities, the majority of which are based in developed countries. Many developing countries lack basic ICT infrastructure for persons with disabilities. Considering the vast potential of Internet technology to improve the lives of persons with disabilities and to contribute to the realization of various SDGs for persons with disabilities, wider Internet access should be considered a priority. 

Looking forward, the following recommendations offer guidance on how to strengthen the ICT ecosystem to ensure inclusion and accessibility for persons with disabilities: 

(1) Raise awareness and enhance knowledge of ICT accessibility. Improving awareness of the barriers and solutions presented by ICTs for persons with disabilities will be crucial to successfully increase ICT access and use among persons with disabilities. In particular, key stakeholders such as governments and decision makers, educators, statisticians, non-governmental organizations particularly organizations of persons with disabilities, and ICT industries in the public and private sectors must be alerted to the vast potential of, and urgent need for, accessible ICTs to improve quality of life and inclusion among persons with disabilities. Methods to achieve this could include the development of academic programmes and training programmes highlighting ICT accessibility and Universal Design. 

(2) Involve persons with disabilities directly. In order to properly understand the variety of needs and abilities that ICTs can address, as well as necessary accessibility requirements, persons with disabilities must be involved at every stage of ICT development. One of the most effective ways to do this is to work together with organizations of persons with disabilities, particularly those which have expertise in the field of ICT accessibility and connect them with ICT businesses for their input and insights. 

(3) Promote the principles of Universal Design in the mainstream ICT industry and the public sector. Implementing Universal Design principles is more inclusive, affordable and often simpler than developing specialized software or hardware for persons with disabilities. Good ICT examples of Universal Design that have already been developed can be scaled up. The benefits of exercising Universal Design extend not only to persons with disabilities, but also to companies by opening new market opportunities for vendors. 

(4) Adopt national accessibility policies and regulations. ICT accessibility policies and regulations build a foundation for implementing ICT accessibility in different areas and can promote the accessibility of virtual environments. Setting national standards and regulations facilitates the implementation of ICT accessibility because the actors involved in the production of ICTs will know what is expected. 

(5) Create dedicated focal points in relevant ministries/departments dealing with ICT accessibility to coordinate and encourage ICT accessibility in line with CRPD provisions, including through relevant policies and incentives to regulate all actors in the ICT industry and market and in public procurement. A dedicated focal point can also oversee the development of policies and directives and, in collaboration with other national bodies, be responsible for monitoring national progress towards ICT accessibility, organizing public campaigns, and coordinating data collection activities. 

(6) Provide affordable Internet access for persons with disabilities. Introduce programmes, policies or regulations that facilitate free or reduced-rate Internet access for persons with disabilities, particularly those in lower income brackets. This could be in the form of either a monetary social benefit for persons with disabilities, or non-monetary benefits such as free or subsidized mobile devices and Internet subscriptions. Mobile Internet access, in particular, should be prioritized, given that mobile network coverage is globally higher than broadband penetration, and is expected to increase further, especially in developing countries. Alternatively, community resource centres could be established, where persons with disabilities can have facilitated access to the Internet. Affordable Internet access is a crucial element of digital inclusion, as it can provide job opportunities, access to information and education materials, access to services and social participation. 

(7) Provide funding mechanisms to support the development of open-source software: Open-source software offers many advantages. It can be acquired free of cost, and can be adjusted according to different user needs, languages, and cultural contexts. This will be particularly important in areas where financial resources are lower and commercially available software may not be affordable for persons with disabilities. Open-source software is also an ideal way to address directly the needs of users with disabilities, because it gives programmers with disabilities a chance to directly fix inaccessible software themselves. 

(8) Involve all relevant stakeholders and increase funding to support Universal Design and low-cost ICTs for persons with disabilities: Many of the recommendations presented here involve multiple stakeholders. Governments, the private sector, and non-governmental organizations all have potential roles to play. Overall, both involvement and funding in the area of ICT accessibility should be increased. The social responsibility departments of large corporations could also be an important part of this change by dedicating more resources to the issue of digital inclusion for persons with disabilities. Funding should be provided to support Universal Design, open-source software, and low-cost assistive ICTs worldwide, as many developing countries lack the financial resources to use specialized commercial solutions. International cooperation and capacity-building in ICT accessibility should be promoted. 

(9) Develop and publish comparable data on access to and use of ICTs disaggregated by disability as well as on accessibility of ICTs: With the current lack of comparable statistics on access and use of ICT by disability status, as well as on accessibility of ICTs, it will be impossible to know to what extent target 9.c is being met. There is an urgent need for reliable and comparable data and analysis in order to ensure accountability among Member States and other relevant actors. A systematic collection of data, a clear methodology for comparison, regular data evaluation, and a publicly available platform to showcase to interested parties are strongly recommended for a successful analysis of the state of the 2030 Agenda in 

terms of ICT access, use and accessibility.

References

UNESCO (2020). Global report: opening new avenues for empowerment: ICTs to access information and knowledge for persons with disabilities. Retrieved from: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/resources/publications-and-communication-materials/publicatins/full-list/unesco-globalreport-opening-new-avenues-for-empowerment-icts-to-access-nformation-andknowledge-for-persons-with-disabilities/ on 28 August, 2022.

United Nations (UN) (2019). Disability and Development Report Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities. New York: UN Press.

United Nations (UN) (2018). The 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals: An opportunity for Latin America and the Caribbean (LC/G.2681-P/Rev.3). Santiago: UN Press. 

UN (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). Retrieved on March 14, 2022 from https://www.un.org/development/desa/disbilities/convention-on-the-rights-ofpersons-with-disabilities/article-1-purpose.html

WHO & World Bank (2011). World Report on Disability. Retrieved on March 19, 2022 from: http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report/en/