Beyond the elections: Disability and political representation

The EC also aims to ensure assured minimum facilities for PWDs in every polling station, including separate queues. Persons with visual impairments can take companions along to cast their vote.

Bengaluru/New Delhi: The polling station in Bengaluru’s Sunkadakatte had seen major changes of late. A recently built ramp adorned the entrance, as long queues of people waited in the burning noon sun to cast their votes, during the Karnataka Assembly elections last year. Yet, when Anitha (38) arrived at the centre, having travelled 20 km on her three-wheeled mobility bike, she was unable to make her way to the polling booth.

There were no wheelchairs stocked at the facility. “The ramp was too narrow, and could only accommodate a two-wheeler. It could not fit my three-wheeled assisted bike. The only person to ask for help was the security guard, who shrugged it off and told me to ‘manage’ like the other voters with disabilities, who were forced to crawl up the ramp, to the booth to cast their vote,” says Anitha. Finally, she came up with the idea of sitting on a chair and being carried to the polling booth. This year, she will travel to the same centre in an auto, at a cost of Rs 400 each way, to cast her vote.

Information was the missing resource at his polling booth, says Faiyaz, a voter who has a speech and hearing impairment. “Nobody speaks to you or assists you in the entire polling booth area. I did not understand why I was voting, or for whom, but I cast my vote,” he says. The lack of access to information is also a pervasive problem prior to voting day, he adds.

Manoj, a colleague, says: “It is difficult for people with hearing and speech impairments to watch and understand the videos that political parties put out, and many of us are not able to read the written documents either.” Manoj, who is from Kerala, explains that the situation is similar in his home state. Despite being proficient in lip-reading, following along with videos is nearly impossible, he says. Census 2011 showed that literacy among people with disabilities stands at just 55%.

Both Faiyaz and Manoj have voted before, having depended on different sources to inform their choices. For Faiyaz, it was family, friends, or, in some years, a choice at random. For Manoj, signs of development in his neighbourhood helped him zero in. “Years ago, there was no metro or train facility in my hometown in Kerala. I saw the facilities improve over the years, so I am voting for the party behind the change,” he says.

They both excitedly recall a singular video in the Karnataka Assembly outreach last year, which included sign language interpretation. “But this was the first and only such video we have seen. Otherwise, we only see political leaders speak at rallies and do not understand what they are saying,” adds Manoj.

The Karnataka State Assembly elections saw several milestone changes in inclusion – key initiatives being the ‘vote from home’ option, increasing polling booth accessibility and a wider local outreach among the community. Perhaps these were driving forces leading to the registration of 5.5 lakh voters with disabilities, a 158% rise from the previous election.

The nationwide Lok Sabha elections seem to hold similar promise, with 88.4 lakh voters with disabilities registered, compared to 62.63 lakh during the 2019 elections. However, a lack of nuance in assessing the diverse needs of persons with disabilities (PWDs) and the absence of inclusive outreach leads us to ask: Will the elections truly host an enabling environment for all people to vote with dignity?

Without a doubt, the visibility of disability rights has been growing over the years. But progress has been painfully slow, especially considering the community makes up such a significant portion of the population. In the Census 2011, it was estimated that PWDs make up 2.21% of the population, amounting to 2.68 crore.

Data discrepancy

However, 13 years after the enumeration exercise, this number is considered a gross underestimation. According to UN data from 2023, persons with disabilities constitute 16% of the world's population, with 80% living in the global south. “It is likely that our data aligns with the global percentage. Further, only seven disabilities were recognised during the 2011 Census exercise. Now, this number is 21,” says Nipun Malhotra, a person with disability and founder of Nipman Foundation, a disability rights advocacy organisation. Still, the outdated, minuscule figures are used as the basis for policymaking and budgetary allocation for PWDs to this day.

“Even if we consider the percentage of PWDs to be a modest 7 or 8%, when we include their families, they constitute about 30% of the voter population,” he adds. Yet, among the 543 seats in Lok Sabha, currently, none are filled by a person with a disability. As of 2020, four MPs and six MLAs in India’s history were reported to be persons with disability. “We have seen MPs in wheelchairs, sometimes when they are injured or unwell, or one or two leaders with disability. But this is very rare,” says Manoj.

People with disabilities are also absent in political party outreach as well. “The political participation of persons with disabilities has been invisibilised. We find little to no mention in the manifestos of political parties and in policy. Despite constituting an estimated 7 to 8 crore of the population, the community is still an afterthought,” says Arman Ali, executive director of the National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People.

Arman’s experience in 2019 was one of the key driving forces behind intensive focus and expedited action on accessibility this election. When the prominent disability rights activist went to vote in the previous elections in his constituency in Guwahati, he found that his polling station was located on the first floor, with no ramp or a lift.

Despite the Election Commission’s repeated declaration of aiming for ‘no voter left behind’, he was forced to wait until five or six people finally carried his wheelchair up the stairs so he could cast his vote. The incident drew nationwide attention and criticism, following which accessibility for people with motor disabilities saw a great deal of traction.

Changes have trickled in over the past decade. “The 2016 Act, which was a new, standalone policy for PWDs was a milestone that changed how we view PWDs and their rights,” says S Babu, deputy director, policy and advocacy at the Association for People with Disability (APD), Bengaluru.

The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, is viewed as a progressive piece of legislation, and a stark improvement from the existing 1995 policy which excluded several disabilities and failed to be comprehensive in enshrining the rights of PWDs.

“The legislation coming into force also brought in a significant change in the attitude and importance attributed to including PWDs in political and social spaces,” Babu says.

He also points to the proactive work of the Election Commission in various districts across Karnataka to map, reach out to and include persons with disability in recent years. “When we have found gaps or pointed out the need for changes to ensure accessible spaces, we have seen the district administration take immediate action,” he says. Babu cites the example of the provision of magnifying glasses at polling booths for senior citizens and people with low vision. The ‘vote from home’ option represented a shift as well, he says.

Close to 20,000 voters with disabilities used this facility in Karnataka last year, in a first-of-its-kind initiative. Soon after, this was replicated for thousands of voters with disabilities in state elections to follow in Madhya Pradesh (21,051), Rajasthan (12,121), Telangana (9,961), Chhattisgarh (1,501) and Mizoram (170), according to a written reply in the Lok Sabha.

Voters with “a benchmark disability certificate (not less than 40% of specific disability)” can opt to vote from home in the upcoming elections too.

While this has made voting an option for people with severe disability, activists point out that there are concerns— “No doubt, this is a positive step. However, what does it mean for the public participation of PWDs in the democratic process? Should policy not make the community more visible?” asks Babu.

Further, he says that the focus should, rather, be on making public spaces and voting more disability-friendly, instead of relegating PWDs to their homes. “In one way, we are causing them to miss out on the visible celebration of the ‘democratic habba’,” he adds.

The information gap also stands to widen. “Information is already so hard to come by when your mobility is limited. With this, if we never leave home to interact with other voters or the community, it only becomes worse,” says Fakirappa Harijan, a disability rights activist and PWD from Belagavi district.

In some cases, the local administration is bridging this gap. “The administration is proactive in my village. For instance, last week, polling personnel visited my home to check if I needed assistance, transport arrangements or wanted to use the ‘vote from home’ facility,” says Fakirappa. He says that the officials check the ballot list and reach out to all PWDs in the neighbourhood. The activist believes the situation is better in his village since there is a vocal and active disability rights community all year round.

The availability of facilities is largely location-dependent, says Devikala M L, programme coordinator, APD. “Since my constituency is in the centre of the city, I have seen significant improvements since 2003. Now, there are special considerations for PWDs, be it ramps and railings, help with registration or necessary medical facilities. This is definitely not the case for PWDs in interior areas, even in Bengaluru,” she says. The outreach of the local administration is active as well, with Urban Rehabilitation Workers and ASHA workers approaching PWDs and ensuring they can register and travel to the polling booths.

In the absence of equal access to rights, however, the inclusion of PWDs is growing increasingly tokenistic. “Many efforts are being made from a promotional angle. I have seen several videos meant to be ‘inspirational’, showing PWDs crawling and struggling to reach the polling booths, but overcoming the difficulties to vote anyway. These stories are glorified and used as advertisements, but are real setbacks to ensuring PWDs are given the dignity and respect they deserve,” says Devikala.

This is also evidenced in the culmination of inclusion programmes only around election time, adds Fakirappa. “What about the rest of the year, when we struggle to reach government schemes, get documentation, and connect with our elected representatives?” he wonders.

Continued political representation

Schemes, policies and measures to support persons with disabilities have evolved and been strengthened over the past decade. However, they remain largely focused on employment and education. The rights of PWDs to participate in the civil and political systems of the State remain limited, and mostly out of reach.

Efforts to reach out to the community in the political space are organised largely and solely around election campaigns. While rights groups and activists have consistently highlighted these gaps, their voices remain largely unrepresented.

The absence of lived experiences in policymaking spaces has had devastating and far-reaching consequences. Take, for instance, the question of accessibility itself. It involves much more than choosing a school building with a ramp, says Fakirappa. Wheelchair availability, polling booth height, distance from the entrance to the booth, and smaller steps at the entrance — these factors make a difference but are rarely considered. “Even a ramp needs to be constructed properly. It needs to be sturdy, and wide enough to accommodate the wheelchair and an attendant, but this is rarely the case,” he says.

Quite often, the approach to accessibility also lacks nuance. “Only one type of disability is considered and addressed. There is no conversation about the needs of the lesser-known or lesser-visible conditions like Parkinson’s disease, thalassemia and haemophilia,” says M Srinivasilu, president of the Telangana-based Network of Persons with Disability. He says that eight years have passed since the 2016 legislation recognising these conditions as disabilities came into force. But there has been very little progress in ensuring those with these conditions are able to receive official documentation and access schemes.

“There is a lot of ambiguity regarding how people with mental health conditions, or those in shelters and homes can vote,” says Arman. There also continues to be a debate around how persons with intellectual disabilities can access their voting rights, perhaps with the assistance of their legal guardians. However, as of now, no provisions have specifically been made to include persons with mental and intellectual disabilities.

While Electronic Voting Machines are equipped with Braille, additional support systems and personnel specifically meant to assist persons with visual impairments are missing.

In addition to considering the needs of people with different disabilities, the discourse must widen to account for intersectionality. “You can be disabled and a woman, you can be disabled and Muslim,” says Vijay Kishor Tiwari, assistant professor of law, at the West Bengal University of Juridical Sciences and a PWD. Each of these identities influences a person’s needs, lived experience and perspective. “People with disabilities are not a monolith,” he adds.

While accessibility is an essential first step, limiting the conversation and action to this dimension is a grave misstep. “In order to be real stakeholders in democracy, PWDs need to be able to discuss the performance of their representatives, the health of the Opposition, the safety of minority communities and express dissent – these are crucial elements of political agency,” Vijay says. Yet, quite often, when a person with disability speaks up and expresses political dissent, they are met with a brutal reaction, he says.

Rohit Kumar, co-founder of Young Leaders for Active Citizenship (YLAC), explains that one of the reasons representation remains critically low specifically for PWDs is an unfriendly ecosystem. “On average, a Lok Sabha candidate would have to campaign and reach around two million people. This would require active outreach to voters, accessing public spaces, which is still very challenging for PWDs. We lack a conducive ecosystem for PWDs to enter the political space,” he says. YLAC is working on several programmes to deepen the engagement of youth and PWDs in policymaking and societal change.

Representation

A common demand among activists is a policy for reservation for PWDs in the legislature. “We have seen reservations come into place for several disadvantaged communities. Considering the size of the population with disabilities, it is high time we make provisions for them to be included as well,” says Babu.

This must extend across all levels, emphasises Nipun. “We need disability nodal officers at various levels who can inform policymaking in health, education, housing — to bring the disability lens to it.” Nipun also advocates for a ‘disability cell’ to be added to political parties, to include their voices in the campaigns, manifestos and outreach.

If we truly want to reach the ideal of “no one left behind”, we need to stop placing an unfair burden on PWDs. “Unless we proactively work from our end, our rights are ignored and excluded,” says Devikala. Addressing barriers is critical, she adds. “Over the years, the system may have become open to all, but it is still built to be more difficult for persons with disabilities.”