Access for the disabled

In Sri Lanka a disabled person is legally defined as a ‘person with disability means any person who, as a result of any deficiency in his physical or mental capabilities, whether congenital or not, is unable by himself to ensure for himself, wholly or partly, the necessities of life’.

The census of 2001 counted 274,711 disabled persons (1.6 percent of the population), but this ignored the seven districts in which tallying did not take place. It also excluded temporarily disable persons, such as pregnant mothers and those recovering from surgery or from injury.

In 2003, the United Nations’ Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific(ESCAP) estimated that 7 percent of the population was physically or mentally challenged. Non-Governmental organisations such as the Foundation for International Training and the Cheshire Trust estimate the proportion of disabled as 5 to 8 percent. The Armed Forces have at least 4,500 disabled personnel.

Therefore, we can conclude that the number of disabled (both permanent and temporary) must lie somewhere between 2 and 8 percent of the population. However, these people are excluded from the mainstream of society, with the provision of services to them being inadequate.

Public places

In developed countries, integrating the physically and mentally challenged into the mainstream is considered to be a priority, to the extent that they are not called ‘disabled’, but ‘otherwise-abled’. Here, however, the disabled are excluded from the mainstream even at the level of the lowest common denominator, that of provision of access to transport and to public places.

About a fifth of all disabled people have hearing disabilities, which are the most easily catered for. Yet, adequate signposting in all three languages or with approved symbols is sorely lacking. Deaf people could, of course, ask for directions, but how many bus conductors, security guards or front desk personnel have training in sign language?

Approximately a third of those disabled have problems with their legs. Yet the provision of access for wheelchairs and crutches to publicly-used buildings is severely limited. Buses and trains do not have wheelchair access - only 55 percent of disabled people use buses, only 36 percent use trains - so most disabled people have to use taxis, most often three-wheelers. The most basic access requirement is entry to public places. However, many buildings have steps with no ramps for wheelchairs. Even pavements, which should be accessible to all, lack provision for wheelchairs to actually get on them.

Most roads do not even have pavements, but have plentiful potholes, making travelling by wheelchair impossible and crutch-aided walking a purgatory. Road crossings are death traps for the disabled - even where there are lights, the crossing time is limited and there is no loud beeping to alert the blind.

National policies and legislation

Another, utterly essential requirement is for disabled toilets - which have adequate hand-holds, blind-readable signs and so on. Given the statistics, at least one in twenty publicly accessible toilets should be for the disabled, but the figure is nowhere even close.

It should be noted that short people (not to mention dwarves and midgets) also have access issues which are not addressed - even such simple ones as location of electric switches, which are often out of reach.

All this is despite the existence of national policies and legislation for the disabled. In 1996, Parliament passed the Protection of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act. In May 2003, the government adopted an all-embracing National Policy on Disability.

Fundamental rights petition

In accordance with the provisions on accessibility and mobility, the government drew up a set of rules, the Disabled Persons (Accessibility) Regulations, which were gazetted in September 2006. This pertained to ‘all public buildings, public places and to places where common services are available, to which buildings, places and services persons with disabilities have access.’

According to these rules, all existing public buildings, public places and places where common services were available, were to be made accessible to persons with disabilities within three years, that is by September 2009. No new buildings were to be constructed or old buildings renovated unless they conformed to these rules.

In 2009, the Supreme Court made a ruling on a fundamental rights petition by Dr Ajith C.S. Perera, a paraplegic and voluntary activist for the disabled. The court ordered, in terms of the Protection of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, that all new public buildings should provide reasonable access for the disabled as per the existing regulations.

In 2011, Dr Perera filed a motion with the Supreme Court, bringing to its notice that its earlier ruling was not being complied with. The court reiterated its ruling, non-compliance attracting punitive repercussions.

Yet, the order continues to be violated. Just the other day, this writer observed a warehouse in the ‘Economic Centre’ in Narahenpita being renovated, with a large flight of steps leading to the raised entrance. There was no sign of an access ramp.

This is notwithstanding the provision in the regulations that ‘No certificate of conformity shall be issued by any “relevant authority” in respect of any building, construction, reconstruction or renovation of a public building, unless the relevant authority is satisfied that the plan ... conforms’. Somebody must be issuing these certificates of conformity to non-complying buildings.

The government is trying to lead by example. The Minister of Health, Maitripala Sirisena, appointed Dr Perera as consultant to accessibility in health sector buildings.

The recently completed Sethsiripaya Stage II project complies with the requirements. The new pavements on the Galle Road at Colombo 3 are disabled friendly, allowing wheelchair access and special tactile paving for guiding the blind.

Yet its good example is rendered useless if officials turn a blind eye to developers who do not take adequate steps to provide reasonable access for the disabled.