Representative image
Credit: iStock Photo
The disability rights movement in India can be traced back to 1981, when the UN General Assembly declared that year the International Year of the Disabled. India enacted the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, (PWD Act) expressing its commitment to promoting and protecting the rights of citizens with disabilities. After ratifying the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on October 1, 2007, the 1995 law was replaced by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPWD Act), aligning domestic legislation with the international convention.
Yet, 30 years after the disability legislation came into force, most Indians with disabilities remain excluded from mainstream development and continue to face barriers to accessing political, economic, and socio-cultural rights on an equal footing. This exclusion stems largely from the absence of truly inclusive governance.
Inclusive governance must begin with the collection of disability data to shape evidence-based policies and programmes. Karnataka is among the few states to collect disaggregated data on citizens with disabilities. The Social and Educational Survey 2025 includes six specific questions on disability and another 60 on health, education, livelihood and socio-economic status. This dataset should inform both disability-specific and mainstream policies and programmes. The government must also ensure that periodic socio-economic and administrative surveys are disability-inclusive, with the Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities represented on advisory and expert committees overseeing data collection.
Social protection shields citizens with disabilities from poverty and exclusion and strengthens resilience across the life cycle. The Department for the Empowerment of Differently-Abled and Senior Citizens should maintain a database of beneficiaries of central and state-sponsored schemes. People with disabilities face additional costs for assistive devices, rehabilitation, human assistance and early intervention services — often met through out-of-pocket expenditure. Karnataka should consider a dedicated scheme, like Janani Shishu Suraksha Karyakrama (JSSK), to cover disability-related expenses. The state’s ‘Kutumba’ entitlement management system should maintain disaggregated data on families with persons with disabilities and the benefits they receive.
Citizens with disabilities face multiple barriers—physical, communicational and attitudinal—in accessing public services. The hardships intensify in rural districts, talukas and villages. The government’s flagship grievance-redress initiative, Janaspandana, should prioritise complaints from citizens with disabilities. It would also
be useful to track, department-wise, the number of pending disability-related grievances, enabling the State Commissioner for Disabilities to follow up and ensure timely resolution.
Karnataka became a pioneer by establishing the Office of the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (SCPD) in 1998 under the PWD Act, 1995, and has since undertaken several initiatives to mainstream disability in socio-economic development. Many proactive measures remain in place.
Between 2001 and 2005, the SPCD conducted sensitisation sessions for officials across key departments — from the Chief Secretary to the Section Officers — on disability laws, barriers faced by citizens with disabilities and ways to embed disability into developmental policies and programmes. In collaboration with the Police Commissioner’s office, senior police officers were trained disability rights and the need for accessible police stations. NGOs led many of these sessions, promoting participatory governance. The disability commissioner also addressed senior police officers at the Annual Police Conference on key issues concerning citizens with disabilities.
The SPCD designed and implemented the District Disability Management Review (DDMR) a monitoring tool to review accessibility of socio-economic programmes, particularly social assistance. The system continues to operate today.
Access to justice, a critical right for citizens with disabilities guaranteed under the disability law, received focussed attention. The SPCD conducted awareness sessions for judges of the Karnataka High Court on the PWD Act, 1995, and the barriers faced by citizens with disabilities. Through the Karnataka Judicial Academy, judicial officers were sensitised to disability rights. In collaboration with the Karnataka Bar Council, newly enrolled lawyers were trained on the Act. A legal-aid cell, managed by Alternative Law Forum (an NGO), was set up within the SPCD to provide legal advice to aggrieved citizens.
Corruption in the delivery of social assistance schemes was a recurring challenge, with several cases reported to the SPCD between 2001and 2005. To protect citizens from abuse of power, the office assumed a watchdog role and installed anti-corruption hoardings—similar to those of the Central Vigilance Commission—in public offices frequented by citizens with disabilities. The SPCD assistant commissioner’s mobile number served as a 24/7 helpline for complaints by citizens with disabilities.
Recognising these efforts, the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (Government of India) declared Karnataka as a ‘Model State’ for implementation of the PWD Act, 1995. Karnataka remains the only state to have appointed eight NGO representatives as state commissioners, whose experiences and close engagement with rural disability communities have significantly advanced the implementation of disability legislation. The UK government’s Department for International Development (DFID) studied the work done by the office of the SPCD between 2001 and 2005, acknowledging its unique contribution to inclusive governance in its report, Mainstreaming Disability in Development- A Country Report of India (2005). Karnataka’s legacy of participatory, disability-inclusive governance qualifies as a model for building an inclusive society.
(The writer is a former UNDP chief technical advisor on inclusive governance, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt of Lao PDR)
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.