
Rethinking Disability Representation: The role and limitations of disabled people's organisations
Disabled People's Organizations (DPOs) are crucial vehicles for advancing the rights and inclusion of persons with disabilities globally. Broadly defined, a DPO is an organization controlled by and primarily composed of people with disabilities.
This 'nothing about us without us' principle is fundamental to their legitimacy and effectiveness. DPOs serve as vital platforms for advocacy, mutual support, and the collective articulation of the disability community's needs and aspirations. Nationally, DPOs frequently contribute to policy direction, offering invaluable perspectives and lived experiences that shape legislation and programs.
However, their contribution often manifests as a 'forum' rather than a 'council,' a distinction that significantly impacts their influence, particularly when engaging with government.
Forums are typically informal platforms where ideas, experiences, and perspectives are exchanged. They serve as consultative spaces without formal decision-making powers. Forums are excellent for fostering dialogue and building solidarity among stakeholders but are not designed to enforce or implement policies.
Councils, on the other hand, are formal decision-making bodies often recognized by law or policy frameworks.
They are empowered to influence, develop, and oversee the implementation of programs and policies. Councils carry legitimacy and authority that forums inherently lack. The importance of a council in the disability sector, especially when partnering with or working with government, cannot be overstated. A council structure allows for a more structured and authoritative engagement. When DPOs participate as a council, their recommendations carry more weight; they can negotiate, hold government accountable, and jointly implement initiatives.
This formalised partnership fosters a sense of shared ownership and responsibility, moving beyond mere consultation to active collaboration. Without the authority of a council, DPOs often find themselves in a reactive position, responding to government proposals rather than proactively shaping the agenda from a position of equal partnership. This often leads to a tokenistic engagement rather than a genuine collaboration that can lead to impactful change.
A significant weakness of the current DPO landscape, both nationally and internationally, is the glaring omission of a dedicated focus on local government issues. Despite the critical impact of local policies on the daily lives of persons with disabilities, national and international disability policies rarely delve into the intricacies of local governance. This oversight means there are effectively no DPOs solely dedicated to addressing issues at the municipal or community level.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), for instance, while a groundbreaking international treaty, primarily focuses on state parties' obligations at the national level. While its principles are universally applicable, it does not explicitly mandate or provide guidance on how local governments should implement these rights, nor does it typically inspire the formation of DPOs focused on local bylaws, accessibility of local infrastructure, or community-level service delivery.
Take a look at its Article 19 which focuses on living independently and being included in the community. While it advocates for community integration, it does not provide guidance on how local governments can adapt infrastructure or services to meet the needs of persons with disabilities in rural or underserved areas. This creates a disconnect between grand policy pronouncements and the lived realities on the ground.
The absence of DPOs dedicated to local government issues has profound consequences. Local governments are responsible for essential services that directly affect the lives of persons with disabilities, including public transportation, accessible infrastructure (sidewalks, ramps, public buildings), local employment initiatives, community health services, and recreational facilities.
When DPOs are primarily focused on national policy, these critical local issues often fall through the cracks. For example, a national policy on inclusive education might exist, but without local DPOs advocating for accessible school buildings, specialized teaching resources, or inclusive extracurricular activities within a specific municipality, the policy's impact remains limited.
This also means that disabled people at the grassroots often feel unheard and unrepresented, as the national DPOs may be too far removed from their immediate concerns.
To bridge this critical gap and strengthen the overall disability movement, DPOs must map a way forward by establishing regional structures. These structures should include regional disability councils dedicated to addressing local issues, even within a national framework. These regional councils would serve as formalized bodies with a clear mandate to engage with local government entities, advocate for specific local policy changes, monitor the implementation of accessibility standards in public spaces, and ensure that local service delivery is inclusive and responsive to the needs of persons with disabilities within their specific geographic area.
Such a decentralised approach would empower local disability advocates, foster stronger community engagement, and ensure that national policies are effectively translated into tangible improvements at the grassroots level. By forming regional councils, DPOs would transition from being mere forums for discussion to authoritative bodies capable of driving concrete change in collaboration with local authorities.
This shift would not only enhance the effectiveness of DPOs but also significantly improve the lives of persons with disabilities by addressing the very real, day-to-day barriers they encounter in their own communities.
(Lucky Tumahole is a Disability Advocate, this is his opinion)
At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Citizen
22-05-2025
- The Citizen
Rethinking Disability Representation: The role and limitations of disabled people's organisations
Disabled People's Organizations (DPOs) are crucial vehicles for advancing the rights and inclusion of persons with disabilities globally. Broadly defined, a DPO is an organization controlled by and primarily composed of people with disabilities. This 'nothing about us without us' principle is fundamental to their legitimacy and effectiveness. DPOs serve as vital platforms for advocacy, mutual support, and the collective articulation of the disability community's needs and aspirations. Nationally, DPOs frequently contribute to policy direction, offering invaluable perspectives and lived experiences that shape legislation and programs. However, their contribution often manifests as a 'forum' rather than a 'council,' a distinction that significantly impacts their influence, particularly when engaging with government. Forums are typically informal platforms where ideas, experiences, and perspectives are exchanged. They serve as consultative spaces without formal decision-making powers. Forums are excellent for fostering dialogue and building solidarity among stakeholders but are not designed to enforce or implement policies. Councils, on the other hand, are formal decision-making bodies often recognized by law or policy frameworks. They are empowered to influence, develop, and oversee the implementation of programs and policies. Councils carry legitimacy and authority that forums inherently lack. The importance of a council in the disability sector, especially when partnering with or working with government, cannot be overstated. A council structure allows for a more structured and authoritative engagement. When DPOs participate as a council, their recommendations carry more weight; they can negotiate, hold government accountable, and jointly implement initiatives. This formalised partnership fosters a sense of shared ownership and responsibility, moving beyond mere consultation to active collaboration. Without the authority of a council, DPOs often find themselves in a reactive position, responding to government proposals rather than proactively shaping the agenda from a position of equal partnership. This often leads to a tokenistic engagement rather than a genuine collaboration that can lead to impactful change. A significant weakness of the current DPO landscape, both nationally and internationally, is the glaring omission of a dedicated focus on local government issues. Despite the critical impact of local policies on the daily lives of persons with disabilities, national and international disability policies rarely delve into the intricacies of local governance. This oversight means there are effectively no DPOs solely dedicated to addressing issues at the municipal or community level. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), for instance, while a groundbreaking international treaty, primarily focuses on state parties' obligations at the national level. While its principles are universally applicable, it does not explicitly mandate or provide guidance on how local governments should implement these rights, nor does it typically inspire the formation of DPOs focused on local bylaws, accessibility of local infrastructure, or community-level service delivery. Take a look at its Article 19 which focuses on living independently and being included in the community. While it advocates for community integration, it does not provide guidance on how local governments can adapt infrastructure or services to meet the needs of persons with disabilities in rural or underserved areas. This creates a disconnect between grand policy pronouncements and the lived realities on the ground. The absence of DPOs dedicated to local government issues has profound consequences. Local governments are responsible for essential services that directly affect the lives of persons with disabilities, including public transportation, accessible infrastructure (sidewalks, ramps, public buildings), local employment initiatives, community health services, and recreational facilities. When DPOs are primarily focused on national policy, these critical local issues often fall through the cracks. For example, a national policy on inclusive education might exist, but without local DPOs advocating for accessible school buildings, specialized teaching resources, or inclusive extracurricular activities within a specific municipality, the policy's impact remains limited. This also means that disabled people at the grassroots often feel unheard and unrepresented, as the national DPOs may be too far removed from their immediate concerns. To bridge this critical gap and strengthen the overall disability movement, DPOs must map a way forward by establishing regional structures. These structures should include regional disability councils dedicated to addressing local issues, even within a national framework. These regional councils would serve as formalized bodies with a clear mandate to engage with local government entities, advocate for specific local policy changes, monitor the implementation of accessibility standards in public spaces, and ensure that local service delivery is inclusive and responsive to the needs of persons with disabilities within their specific geographic area. Such a decentralised approach would empower local disability advocates, foster stronger community engagement, and ensure that national policies are effectively translated into tangible improvements at the grassroots level. By forming regional councils, DPOs would transition from being mere forums for discussion to authoritative bodies capable of driving concrete change in collaboration with local authorities. This shift would not only enhance the effectiveness of DPOs but also significantly improve the lives of persons with disabilities by addressing the very real, day-to-day barriers they encounter in their own communities. (Lucky Tumahole is a Disability Advocate, this is his opinion) At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!


The South African
18-05-2025
- The South African
Donald Trump ramps up his feud with Taylor Swift
Donald Trump has again taken a swipe at pop superstar Taylor Swift, reigniting a feud that has simmered since the 2024 US presidential election. The US president posted on his Truth Social account, claiming that Swift is 'no longer hot' since he declared, 'I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT' last year. This latest barb comes nearly eight months after Swift publicly endorsed Democrat Kamala Harris in the 2024 election. This was a move that irked Trump. He first expressed his disdain in September 2024, shortly after Swift condemned AI-generated images falsely linking her to his campaign, according to People. Donald Trump's all-caps outburst on social media was a rare moment of personal attack from the 78-year-old politician. 'I was not a Taylor Swift fan… She's a very liberal person. She seems to always endorse a Democrat. And she'll probably pay a price for it in the marketplace'. Trump's renewed jab coincided with his recent Middle East tour, showing that his grudge remains alive despite other pressing matters. He even mocked Swift earlier in April during the Philadelphia Eagles' White House visit, referencing her support for boyfriend Travis Kelce. 'How did that work out?' Trump asked the crowd, drawing laughter as he took a sly dig at Swift's sporting loyalties. Taylor Swift, 35, has not responded directly to Trump's latest remarks. She has kept a low profile since wrapping up her record-breaking Eras Tour. The tour grossed over $2 billion globally, making her the top-selling artist of 2024. Despite Donald Trump's claim, Swift's popularity remains robust, with millions of fans worldwide continuing to celebrate her music and activism. As Donald Trump tweeted, 'Has anyone noticed that, since I said 'I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT,' she's no longer 'HOT?'' The answer, judging by Swift's continued success and fan devotion, seems clear: Taylor Swift remains as hot as ever, no matter what Trump says. In Trump's own words, 'She'll probably pay a price for it in the marketplace.' Yet, the marketplace tells a different story – one of a global superstar who continues to thrive despite political spats. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.


The South African
27-04-2025
- The South African
Donald Trump teases third term: Would that be possible?
In a move that has stirred political chatter worldwide, US President Donald Trump recently reignited speculation about a potential third term in office. Despite the clear restrictions of the 22nd Amendment, which caps presidents to two terms, Trump insists there are 'methods' and 'loopholes'. Speaking to TIME magazine on 25 April, Trump revealed that these loopholes are 'well known,' though he claims he does not believe in using them. The president has been candid about the interest he's receiving. 'I have more people begging me to run again' he told TIME, according to People . 'But the only thing that's changed is they think I'm doing a great job, and they like the way I'm running the country'. One of the most talked-about loopholes involves Vice President J.D. Vance running in the 2028 election on a Vance-Trump ticket. The plan would see Vance resign after winning, allowing Donald Trump to step in. When asked directly if he would pursue this strategy, Trump dodged the question and instead boasted about his cognitive test results. He claimed he 'aced it 100%' and challenging interviewers to match his score. The 22nd Amendment, ratified in 1951 after Franklin D. Roosevelt's four terms, explicitly forbids anyone from being elected president more than twice. Amending this would require a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of the states-a Herculean task, especially given the political climate. South Africans watching this political drama unfold might find echoes in their own constitutional debates. The idea of bending or bypassing constitutional limits resonates globally. It reminds us of the importance of strong democratic institutions and the rule of law. Trump's claims also highlight how political figures can challenge norms and stir controversy, even from afar. Trump's supporters remain enthusiastic. Steve Bannon, a former adviser, said in March, 'A figure like this appears once every century, if we're fortunate. We've got him now'. Meanwhile, Republican leaders have cautiously acknowledged the constitutional hurdles. House Speaker Mike Johnson remarked, 'There are constitutional ways to amend the rules, but it's a high bar'. As Trump continues to tantalise with the possibility of a third term, the world watches closely. Will he attempt to rewrite the rulebook, or will constitutional limits hold firm? For now, Donald Trump's hints and boasts keep the political theatre alive-and South Africans, like the rest of the world, remain intrigued by this unfolding saga. In the words of Trump himself: 'I'm doing a good job… and unlike every other president, I took the cognitive test and I aced it 100%'. Time will tell if that confidence translates into a third term. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.