Central Idea:

The Election Commission of India issued guidelines advising political parties on using disability-sensitive language and practices. These guidelines cover inclusive communication, accessible information, and integrating people with disabilities (PwDs) within party structures. The aim is to counter derogatory remarks and stereotypes against PwDs in politics. However, concerns about the effectiveness of these guidelines arise, demanding further refinement and their inclusion in the Model Code of Conduct.

Key Highlights:

• The guidelines address disability-inclusive communication, information accessibility, and inclusion within political party frameworks.
• Recent derogatory remarks by political leaders underscore the necessity for these guidelines.
• Derogatory language contributes to attitudinal barriers under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
• The guidelines are advisory, lacking uniformity and needing a more definitive mandate.
• Absence of these guidelines in the Model Code of Conduct reduces their enforceability.
• Ambiguities in language usage and terminology require clarification to avoid misinterpretation.
• Political inclusion of PwDs is not addressed in the draft National Policy for PwD.
• Lack of data on legislators with disabilities and the absence of a disability column in election forms hinder political inclusion.

Key Terms:

• Disability-sensitive language
• Inclusive communication
• Attitudinal barriers
• Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016
• Model Code of Conduct
• Derogatory remarks
• National Policy for Persons with Disabilities
• Political inclusion

Key Phrases:

• “Advisory guidelines”
• “Attitudinal barrier”
• “Model Code of Conduct”
• “Political inclusion”
• “Derogatory remarks”
• “Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016”
• “National Policy for Persons with Disabilities”

Key Quotes:

• “These guidelines are only an ‘advisory,’ though the phraseology of a few guidelines is in mandatory language.”
• “Instances have underlined the need for these guidelines, such as derogatory remarks by political leaders.”
• “Political inclusion is an ignored aspect within the Indian realm of disability.”

Key Statements:

• “A uniform mandate under all three heads is needed for effective implementation.”
• “Guidelines must be included within the Model Code of Conduct to enhance their enforceability.”
• “The lack of data has contributed significantly to the political exclusion of PwDs.”

Key Examples and References:

• A Raja’s derogatory comparison of Sanatan Dharma to people with leprosy and HIV in September 2023.
• Lack of a disability column in nomination forms and affidavits filed by contestants during elections.

Key Facts:

• The guidelines cover disability-inclusive communication, information accessibility, and inclusion within party frameworks.
• Section 92 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, is mentioned as a punitive measure for breaching guidelines related to disability-inclusive communication.

Critical Analysis:

The article critically examines the advisory guidelines, highlighting their strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement. It emphasizes the need for a more robust and enforceable framework within the Model Code of Conduct and addresses ambiguities in language usage.

Way Forward:

• Refine and make the guidelines mandatory under all three categories.
• Incorporate guidelines into the Model Code of Conduct for enhanced enforceability.
• Provide a detailed list of disability-sensitive words and phraseology.
• Include a chapter on political inclusion in the National Policy for Persons with Disabilities.
• Introduce a disability column in election nomination forms to collect data on legislators with disabilities.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now