Lack of critical data on persons with disabilities make judicial reform difficult: Report
Launched by Pacta, a Bengaluru-based law and policy think tank, the report exposes critical data gaps and systemic exclusion of persons with disabilities across India's police, prison, judiciary, and legal aid systems.
The report also underscores how India's justice system, despite some progressive mandates, remains largely inaccessible to persons with disabilities due to the absence of reliable data and poor institutional implementation.
In his foreword to the report, former Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud observed that data-driven reports are invaluable.
"They go beyond anecdotal or moral appeal. They enable precise policymaking, track compliance, and create accountability. They also provide civil society, courts, and policymakers with the tools to move from aspiration to action," wrote Justice Chandrachud in his foreword.
According to the former CJI, in documenting the barriers and the breakthroughs, the report by Pacta makes an even deeper argument: that inclusive systems benefit everyone.
Justice Chandrachud added that the curb cut effect uplifts our collective expectations from institutions.
"Positive measures such as accessible filing systems, disability sensitisation, and representation within institutions do not just help persons with disabilities; they strengthen the justice system as a whole, making it more humane, participatory, and responsive," he added.
The report also pointed out that many courts, police stations, and prisons remain physically and digitally inaccessible, and even hostile for persons with disabilities despite legal mandates.
According to Nivedita Krishna, founder of Pacta, for persons with disabilities in India, the justice system remains difficult to navigate marked by physical, procedural, attitudinal, and systemic barriers.
"Over 26 million persons with disabilities in India continue to be excluded from the justice system. A relentless focus on disability inclusion through awareness, enforcement of reservation policies, infrastructure accessibility, and comprehensive data collection are needed to realise full inclusion of persons with disabilities in the justice system," she added.
Persons with disabilities are also largely absent from justice sector jobs, with mandated employment quotas not being effectively implemented, is yet another key finding of the report.
To correct the imbalance, the report suggests that the Collegium must adopt a holistic approach when considering judicial appointments, proactively identifying and recommending qualified persons with disabilities.
Other recommendations suggested in the report include mandatory disability-disaggregated data across all four pillars of the justice system, public accessibility audits and transparent reporting of reasonable accommodations and integration of disability rights into training curricula for police, judiciary, and legal aid actors.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Silent protest held in Belagavi demanding release of arrested Kerala nuns
Belagavi: Hundreds of Christians gathered in Belagavi on Friday evening to stage a silent protest rally, demanding the immediate release of two Kerala-based Catholic nuns and a tribal youth, who were recently arrested in Chhattisgarh under controversial circumstances. Organised by the Catholic Association of Belgaum and other Christian organisations, the rally was led by Bishop Rev Dr Derek Fernandes. Around 400 participants, including priests, nuns, seminarians, and laypersons, assembled at the DC Compound at 4.40pm. The peaceful march concluded at the zilla panchayat CEO's office, where a memorandum addressed to the president of India, the prime minister, and the chief minister of Karnataka was submitted to deputy commissioner Mohammed Roshan. The memorandum highlighted the wrongful arrest of the nuns and the youth at Durg Railway Station on July 25 under Section 143 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Religious Freedom Act (1968), which pertains to religious conversion through force or inducement. They were accompanying three adult tribal women, aged 18–19, from Narayanpur to Agra for nursing jobs. The women all signed parental consent letters and carried valid identification. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Your IQ Is 140 If You Can Answer 10 of These Questions Correctly. IQ International Undo According to the memorandum, the arrests were prompted by pressure from a right-wing activist who falsely alleged forced conversion, sparking a mob protest. It is alleged that the charges were politically and communally motivated. Investigations and family statements later confirmed that the women travelled willingly and without any coercion. Speaking at the rally, Bishop Derek Fernandes condemned the arrests as 'unjust and frivolous,' asserting that Catholics are not involved in forced conversions. He also decried the physical assault on the nuns and warned against the rise of communal violence. "We demand the immediate release of the innocent and an end to baseless persecution. The govt must protect minority rights and uphold India's secular values," Bishop Fernandes stated. Deputy commissioner Mohammed Roshan, who received the memorandum, assured the gathering that appropriate action would be taken. Other notable participants included Rev Fr Philip Kutty, Rev Nooroddin Mulla, Clara Fernandes, Louis Rodrigues, Fr Pramod Kumar, Sr Pastor Ankalgi, and Sister Lourdes Joseph.
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order
By Nate Raymond Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order -U.S. President Donald Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship appeared on Friday to be headed toward being declared unconstitutional by a second federal appeals court, as judges expressed deep skepticism about a key piece of his hardline immigration agenda. A three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sharply questioned a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice as to why they should overturn two lower-court judges who blocked the order from taking effect. Those lower-court judges include one in Boston who last week reaffirmed his prior decision to block the order's enforcement nationally, even after the U.S. Supreme Court in June curbed the power of judges to broadly enjoin that and other policies. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week became the first federal appeals court to hold Trump's order is unconstitutional. Its ultimate fate will likely be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Department attorney Eric McArthur said on Friday that the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 after the U.S. Civil War, rightly extended citizenship to the children of newly-freed enslaved Black people. "It did not extend birthright citizenship as a matter of constitutional right to the children of aliens who are present in the country temporarily or unlawfully," he said. But the judges questioned how that argument was consistent with the Supreme Court's 1898 ruling interpreting the clause in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, long understood as guaranteeing American citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. "We have an opinion by the Supreme Court that we aren't free to disregard," said Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, who like his two colleagues was appointed by a Democratic president. Trump's executive order, issued on his first day back in office on January 20, directs agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. Every court to consider the order's merits has declared it unconstitutional, including the three judges who halted the order's enforcement nationally. Those judges included U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston, who ruled in favor of 18 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, who had swiftly challenged Trump's policy in court. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized children born to individuals who are here unlawfully or who are here on a temporary basis are nonetheless birthright citizens," Shankar Duraiswamy, a lawyer for New Jersey, argued on Friday. The 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court on June 27 sided with the administration in the litigation by restricting the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions and directing lower courts that had blocked Trump's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders. But the ruling contained exceptions, allowing federal judges in Massachusetts and New Hampshire and the 9th Circuit to issue new decisions stopping Trump's order from taking effect nationally. The rulings on appeal to the 1st Circuit were issued by Sorokin and the New Hampshire judge, who originally issued a narrow injunction but more recently issued a new decision in a recently-filed class action blocking Trump's order nationwide. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Indian Express
3 hours ago
- Indian Express
India rejects UK report alleging ‘transnational repression'
India Friday categorically rejected as 'baseless' a British parliamentary report that named it among countries engaged in 'transnational repression' in the UK. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said the allegations stemmed from 'unverified' and 'dubious sources' predominantly linked to proscribed entities and individuals. 'We have seen the references to India in the report and categorically reject these baseless allegations,' said MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal. 'These claims stem from unverified and dubious sources, predominantly linked to proscribed entities and individuals with a clear, documented history of anti-India hostility,' he said. Jaiswal said the 'deliberate reliance on discredited sources calls into question the credibility of the report itself'. The report made by the British Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights listed India along with China, Egypt, Eritrea, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, Bahrain, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates as countries allegedly engaging in 'transnational repression' in the UK. The report titled 'Transnational repression in the UK' was made public on July 30. Some of the details related to India cited in the report were provided by Sikhs for Justice, a pro-Khalistan organisation banned in India under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and other UK-based Sikh groups.
