DISABILITY AND HIV

By Wamundila Waliuya

A Presentation made at the Third Meeting of the Africa Regional Judges’ Forum on HIV, Human Rights & the Law held in Johannesburg, South Africa from 15 to 17 Jun. 2016

1.      INTRODUCTION

The rights of persons with disabilities are generally protected after a lot of strategic advocacy by the Disabled People’s Organisations (DPOs). This paper will give an overview of how the rights of persons with disabilities in Zambia have been protected. The overview will indicate the importance of the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities. A brief discussion will also be made on the Sela Brotherton and Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) case and how the judgment from this case impacts on persons with disabilities. In addition, the paper will discuss the United Nations Convention on the Rights of persons with Disabilities.

2.      THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (UNCRPD)

a.       Overview

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was adopted by the UN General Assembly in December, 2006. It was adopted at the same time with its Optional Protocol. The Convention came into force on 3^rd May, 2008. The adoption of the Conventions confirms the position of many disability rights activists that disability is perfectly a human rights issue. It therefore affects all development issues.

It should be noted here that the UNCRPD does not in any way represent a new set of human rights for persons with disabilities. It adopts the same human rights outlined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, and as affirmed by the two International Covenants on Human Rights. What the UNCRPD does is simply to focus on the same rights using a disability magnifier. Equal access to quality health is one of the key human rights issues the Convention focuses on.

The UNCRPD carries “heavy human rights implications” on the lives of persons with disabilities and their families. Before we dwell on the provisions of the Convention, it is essential to understand the medical and social model of perceiving disability. The medical model of perceiving disability focuses on the impairment a person has as being the cause of the difficulties a person with the impairments faces in their life. It looks at the impairment as being the problem that needs to be ‘fixed’ or ‘repaired’ or maybe ‘corrected’ in order for the person having the impairment to function in a manner desirable to the rest of society. So, the medical model blames the person and the impairment they have as being responsible for all their limitations in life. The model is shaped in such a way that it calls for the changing of the person with the impairment so that they fit in society.

On the other hand, the social model focuses on the environment as having barriers that hinder the person with impairment from participating effectively in the affairs of the society. The social model looks at society as having attitudinal and environmental barriers that limit the effective involvement and participation of persons with impairments in economic, social, cultural, political and civil affairs of their society. So, the social model apparently blames the society as being responsible for the inadequacies in the effective inclusion of persons with impairments. The model seems to say, “Change the society by removing all the barriers so that persons with impairments would participate on an equal basis with other citizens of the world”.

In simple terms, the medical model targets to fix the person with impairment while the social model targets to fix the barriers in the society. These are the models upon which the principles of the UNCRPD are premised. These are the same models upon which equal access to quality health and HIV services for persons with disabilities should be premised.

It is obvious now that the UNCRPD focuses on addressing the barriers and obstacles persons with disabilities face in their day-to-day life as they attempt to enjoy and exercise their economic, social, cultural, political and civil rights, including the rights to equal access to quality health and HIV services. Arguably, this means that focus should be on breaking the barriers and obstacles that hinder persons with disabilities from enjoying equal access to quality health and HIV services.

This brings us to the point of understanding the term ‘disability’. Although the UNCRPD does not explicitly define ‘disability’, it views ‘disability’ as resulting from the interaction of impairments with various barriers which hinders full and active participation in society on an equal basis with the non-disabled majority. This tends to place the Convention within the context of the social model which is rights based. So, all efforts that will be made towards enhancing equal access to quality health and HIV services for persons with disabilities should be based on the social model which is rights-based.

Furthermore, what the UNCRPD brings with it is the spirit of accessibility, non-discrimination and independent living. These addresses the discrimination persons with disabilities have been suffering without any protection from a binding international human rights law. The Convention seeks to promote and protect the rights of persons with disabilities and further promotes the respect for their inherent dignity.

The UNCRPD recognises persons with disabilities as persons everywhere as persons before the law. The Convention also holds the reality that persons with disabilities have got the right to enjoy their right to legal capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life. The Convention further states that “State Parties shall take appropriate measures to provide access by persons with disabilities to the support they may require in exercising their legal capacity”. The Article requires State Parties to ensure that safeguards are provided to avoid abuse. It further says that “such safeguards shall ensure that measures relating to the exercise of legal capacity respect the rights, will and preferences of the person...and apply for the shortest time possible and are subject to regular review by a competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body”.

This part of the Convention is very essential in the quest to uphold equal access to quality health and HIV services for persons with disabilities. This is mainly so for those persons with mental and intellectual disabilities who are legally declared as ‘incompetent’ or ‘of unsound mind’. In the spirit of substantive equality, the UNCRPD upholds equal access to health and HIV services for all categories of persons with disabilities while taking into considerations their different circumstances.

The right to legal capacity includes access to support one may require in exercising their legal capacity. This may be in circumstances where the decision making capability of a person with a disability is restricted, but it should not in any way be interpreted as a test for legal capacity. Legal capacity is an inherent right. Rationally, equal access to quality health and HIV services includes the right to access the support a person with a disability may require to exercise their legal capacity.

b.      UNCRPD and Health/HIV

Article 25 of the UNCRPD states that, “States Parties recognize that persons with disabilities have the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health without discrimination on the basis of disability”. According to the General Comment on Article 12 of the UNCRPD (Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Eleventh session, 2014) the right to enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health includes the right to health care on the basis of free and informed consent. The Committee further demands that State parties have an obligation to require all health and medical professionals to obtain the free and informed consent of persons with disabilities prior to any treatment. This includes those persons with mental or intellectual disabilities.

As already indicated, if a person with a disability requires support in giving free and informed consent such support should be provided. Health and medical professionals should ensure that persons providing support do not in any way engage in substituted decision making. The person with a disability should be consulted or made to participate in making decisions when accessing health and HIV services. Failure to engage the person with disability to participate in the decision making process when accessing health and HIV services is a violation of their right to exercise legal capacity.

It is therefore essential that the judiciary officials recognise the provisions of the UNCRPD when interpreting the law when it comes to equal access to health and HIV services.

3.      THE PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES IN ZAMBIA

a.       The Persons with Disabilities Act of 2012

The rights of persons with disabilities in Zambia are mainly protected through anti-discriminatory statute and case law. In 2010, the government of the Republic of Zambia ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. After the ratification of the UNCRPD, the government went ahead to domesticate the Convention through the enactment of the Persons with Disabilities Act of 2012. The Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability.

Part II paragraph 6 (I) of the Persons with Disabilities Act 2012 states that “A person shall not discriminate against a person with disability on the basis of disability”. Therefore, persons with disabilities are protected from discrimination on the basis of their disability in the field of HIV services. This protection includes the right to make free and informed consent in all health matters including HIV services. Notably, it is a violation of the rights of persons with disabilities to fail to provide sign language3 interpreters when delivering VCT services. According to the Zambian Disability Law, this qualifies to be discrimination on the basis of disability.

It is also a violation to fail to provide HIV information in Braille for persons with visual impairments. It is a violation to fail to provide HIV information is easy language for persons with intellectual disabilities. It is a violation not to provide HIV services in accessible buildings which will allow persons with physical disabilities to freely and independently move in. All this qualifies to be discrimination on the basis of disability.

The Persons with Disabilities Act further affirms the provisions of the UNCRPD Article 12 by providing in its paragraph 8 (1) that “A person with disability shall enjoy legal capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life”. Interestingly, this paragraph mirrors the provision of UNCRPD Article 12. The protection of the rights of persons with disabilities to participate in the process of accessing quality health and HIV services is guaranteed by the Act in this paragraph. Even the issue of free and informed consent for all categories of persons with disabilities, including those with intellectual and mental disabilities is guaranteed under the Zambian law. It should always be noted that legal capacity includes supported decision making. It also includes advance directives for persons with mental disabilities. Advance directive means, giving instructions on how a person with a mental disability should be treated by the health institution or even the judiciary when they are in a crisis. This instruction may be formal or informal to a next of kin, a close friend or any attorney.

Deliberately, it is important to cover this part of the Persons with Disabilities Act which directly focuses on the judiciary officials. Paragraph 8 (2) states that “The Judicature shall take necessary measures to ensure that persons with disabilities have equal and effective protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination”. This calls for the State to ensure that the justice system is fully accessible and promoting and protecting the principle of respect for inherent dignity, non-discrimination and independent living. This is a huge challenge to the judiciary officials. On the other hand, it calls for judicial activism. Extremely, judges should ensure that in every case they preside on, legal capacity for persons with disabilities is exercised by all categories of persons with disabilities. Further extremes should be that Judges should refuse to hear any cases of persons with disabilities where the right to exercise legal capacity is denied. This is a protected right in the Zambian statutes.

Paragraph 8 (3) of the Persons with Disabilities Act places the burden of ensuring equal access to justice on the judiciary. This is one of the progressive provisions of the Persons with Disabilities Act when it comes to the protection of all categories of persons with disabilities to participate on an equal basis in the justice system. The Act states that “Where a person with disability is a party in any legal proceedings, the adjudicating body shall take into account the condition of the person with disability and provide procedural and other appropriate facilities to enable the person with disability to access justice and participate effectively in the proceedings”.

These provisions have been views as being difficult to implement by some section of society, especially those operating in the metal health section.

Under its Part V, Division 2, the Persons with Disabilities Act demands that the Ministry of Health should prescribe measures to “provide persons with disabilities with the same range, quality and standard of free or affordable health care and programmes as provided to other persons, including in the area of sexual and reproductive health and population…”. This paragraph in the Act protects the right to equal access to health services including HIV services.

The Persons with Disabilities Act has got a supremacy clause. Part 1 paragraph 3 states that Subject to the Constitution, where there is any inconsistency between the provisions of any other written law impacting on the rights of persons with disabilities as provided in this Act or any other matter specified or prescribed under this Act with respect to persons with disabilities, the provisions of this Act shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency. This paragraph in the Act tends to protect the rights of persons with disabilities against any violations that may be articulated by other laws. The Persons with Disabilities Act tends to ‘amend’ any other statute that is not in line with its provisions in as far as issues impacting on persons with disabilities are concerned. This is how far the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities in Zambia can go in terms of law.

So, the above provisions of the Persons with Disabilities Act 2012 directly protect the rights of persons with disabilities. The law provides for the protection of the rights in the field of education, rehabilitation, mobility, accessibility and participation in political life. The protection of the rights of persons with disabilities in Zambia have further been consolidated by the landmark judgment over the Brotherton vs. ECZ case. The discussion of this case follows below.

b.      Importance of protecting the rights of persons with disabilities

Persons with disabilities have been living a life characterized with systemic discrimination. The discrimination is still rife in many sectors. Therefore, there was need to ensure the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities through the enactment of the Persons with Disabilities 2012. The existence of the law plays a big role in upholding the rights of persons with disabilities. It also prevents discrimination on the basis of disabilities. The public sector is now compelled to avoid discrimination on the basis of disabilities. With the law, persons with disabilities now have got a backing for advancing human rights violation cases to the courts of law.

4.      The Case of Sela Brotherton and Electoral Commission of Zambia

a.       Background

In 2001 persons with disabilities participated in monitoring the general elections. The outcome report of the monitoring was that persons with disabilities found the whole electoral process not accessible. Persons with visual impairments did not have a secret ballot because they were forced to use an assistant against their will. Persons with physical disabilities found it difficult to access the ballot booths because they were placed in rooms which were not physically accessible. Furthermore, persons with hearing impairments could not access electoral information which was propagated through radio and television.

The Electoral Commission of Zambia was given the report with recommendations to make the whole process accessible. Some advocacy work continued until 2011. Persons with disabilities, through the Zambia Federation of Disability Organisations (ZAFOD) remained with no other option but to seek the intervention of the High Court.

b.      Judgment

Judgment on the case was passed on 19^th September, 2011, one day before the general elections. The High Court held that ZAFOD had demonstrated that the Commission had unlawfully discriminated against persons with disabilities, and had unlawfully limited the rights of persons with disabilities to exercise their franchise by not providing premises and services accessible to persons with disabilities. The judge emphasised that “all eligible citizens must be free to cast their vote and they must thus, not be hindered in any way. This decision is significant because disability is not specifically included as a prohibited ground of discrimination in article 23(3) of the Constitution of Zambia. The Court read the prohibition against discrimination in article 23 to include disability, after taking into account the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities Act 1996, which did include such a prohibition against discrimination based on disability.

The judge held that the applicants had proved their entitlement to a remedy, but he declined to postpone the elections, which was to take place the next day. Instead, he ordered that the Commission, an autonomous body, should put in place measures, by the next election, to ensure that persons with disabilities are not disadvantaged in exercising their right to vote. These measures had to include erecting temporary ramps, ensuring that polling booths are located on ground floors at polling stations, and providing a tactile ballot guide for voters who are blind or partially sighted but who do not wish to be assisted in casting their vote. In addition, the judge ordered that the Commission formulates and issues a detailed plan and budget aimed at ensuring equal participation by persons with disabilities in the electoral process.

c.       Impact of the case

After the judgment, organisations of persons with disabilities continued to advocate for the implementation of the court orders. Zambia is going into a general election this year, 2016. The ECZ has put in place a comprehensive action plan to ensure persons with disabilities easily participate in the election without any discrimination. ECZ has continued to consult with persons with disabilities in ensuring that they are consulted. Voter education materials are transcribed into Braille and sign language is being used in voter education campaigns. Election agents have been trained on the need to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities. Tactile ballot jackets will be used to ensure a secret ballot for persons with visual impairments who do not prefer to be assisted.

The above efforts by ECZ, arising from the landmark judgment restores the inherent dignity of persons with disabilities. It increases the opportunities for full and effective participation of persons with disabilities in political life. The actual impact of the case on the rights of persons with disabilities to freely participate in the elections will be tested after the 11^th August, 2016 elections.

5.      CONCLUSION

a.       General comments

It is of my considered view that disability and HIV issues are not adequately addressed and redressed by society. If society is not adequately addressing and redressing HIV issues for persons with disabilities, persons with continue to suffer discrimination on the basis of their disabilities in the field of HIV service delivery.

Recommendations

                                                               i.      State Parties to the UNCRPD should take bold steps to carry out awareness creation activities among the judiciary on the provisions of the UNCRPD in relation to health and HIV human rights issues.

                                                                 ii.      State Parties to the UNCRPD should simplify Article 12 and 25 with other related Articles which directly or indirectly affect the right to equal access to quality health and HIV services for persons with disabilities.

                                                              iii.      States should ensure that the training curriculum for judiciary officials; lawyers, magistrates, judges and other supporting staff are educated on the provisions of the UNCRPD. This must be extended to ensuring that the training curriculum of all personnel involved in justice incorporates the provision of the UNCRPD. Of course, this applies to those countries which have ratified the UNCRPD.

                                                                 iv.      In response to the immediate above recommendation, all countries in Africa must sign and ratify the UNCRPD. Further to that, the governments must domesticate the Convention through enacting domestic laws that will protect the rights and fundamental freedoms of persons with disabilities.

Nothing About Persons with Disabilities Without Persons with Disabilities. Include them and Protect their Rights!

Protecting the Rights of Persons with Albinism

By Wamundila Waliuya

I feel a strong chill up my spine. A strong shiver down my feet. I feel tears in my eyes. My stomach just suddenly goes rumbling just like the strong African drums. I hear a strong eerie sound in my ears. I am sweating. Why? Persons with albinism are being threatened for extinction! Seriously sad and uncalled for.

I write this article as part of the commemoration of the “International Albinism Awareness Day” which falls on 13^th June, 2016. While in the state of feeling all the strange chills, I am delighted that different governments in Africa agreed to recognise this day and actually go ahead to financially promote the day. It is important to realise that the condition of albinism is a simple condition of the absence of a colouring pigmentation of the skin, eyes and hair.

The pigment is called melanin.

The pigment, melanin protects the body of any human being from the effects of rays called ultra-violet rays from penetrating the skin into the body. These rays may cause some cancer. This is why persons with albinism may be seen with rough skins, dark dots on their skins and breaking or bleeding lips. It is a purely biological condition. The colour of the skin is not in any way associated to any spiritual or religious matters. Persons with albinism are born with the condition because their parents carry biological information on albinism. Such biological information is referred to as genetically passed information. Genetically passed information is passed over to offsprings by the parents. Therefore, albinism is passed over to the children by their parents. It is not a spiritual creation. No!

Persons with albinism are purely human. They are born just like any other human being. They grow and live just like any other human being. They die just like any other person. Persons with albinism get ill and die in the way the rest of human nature gets ill and dies. The myth of persons with albinism disappearing to no way instead of dying is a serious traditional misplacement in reality, fact and truth. Persons with albinism live die and get buried just like any other human being. They are just human beings. Nothing extra about them. The colour of their skin is biological not spiritual!

Do we realise that the naming of persons with albinism and “objects” created by God creates the unnecessary stigma, discrimination and threat of the life of these individuals? Nomenclature, especially in our African traditional language raises uncertainty on whether persons with albinism are natural humans. This contributes to the threat to the right to effective participation in socio-economic activities like education, employment, sports, family life, health and politics. I tend to interact with the associations of persons with albinism in the Southern African region. The President of the Association of Persons with Albinism in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) disclosed that persons with albinism where being killed or abducted to enhance political influence by politicians. He said, “Politicians are killing persons with albinism in order to use their parts to win elections”. Obviously any part of the body of a person with a disability can never assist a person to win elections. Never!

The President of the association of persons with albinism in Swaziland told me that “discrimination begins from the family and it is spread to the community. So, change must begin from the family.” The persons with albinism movement in Zambia praised government in for recognizing the 13 June Albinism Day and called for the protection of their freedom to movement and life. It is interesting that the President of Malawi has acknowledged the killing, abducting or threat to life of persons with albinism as a national problem. This is encouraging. When Presidents speak people listen. It is now the responsibility of the Presidents of the different countries in Africa to explain what albinism is. The Presidents must with express and immediate urgency order appropriate Ministries to put in place legislative and administrative measures to protect the rights of persons with albinism to life. Public institutions should also put in place strategies for awareness raising on issues around albinism. Furthermore, States should ensure that associations of persons with albinism are economically and technically equipped to carry out vigorous awareness raising campaigns on albinism. Traditional leaders and healers should also be engaged to understand the realities of albinism. Parents of children with albinism face fear and trauma because of the threat on the lives of their children. States should put in place measures to manage the pre-victimasation, victimization and post-victimisation situations they undergo. The mass media should take broad steps to positively create awareness on the reality and facts around albinism. It is also the responsibility of faith based organisations to preach the human nature of persons with albinism. The message should be that ‘albinism is not a spiritual creation, but a biological condition’. This call should attract immediate attention.

The issue of mutilating, abduction and murdering persons with albinism is a threat to their right to life; liberty and security of person; freedom of movement; respect for inherent dignity; health; independent living and being included within the community; employment; social protection; education; family life, sports, culture and recreation; freedom of association and expression; and protection against inhuman and degrading treatment. It also diminishes the right of persons with albinism to the right to mental and physical integrity. The matter violates the right of persons with albinism to protection from abuse, exploitation and violence. This is occurring in circumstances where many African countries have signed and ratified international human rights instruments which promote and protect the rights of all people including persons with albinism. The matter of equal protection before the law is seriously abrogated! The matter of equal recognition as persons before the law is also seriously being violated. Persons with albinism are persons before the law everywhere and in all aspects of life. Nothing is magical about their skin colour. Nothing at all! Reminder. You never know that you are carrying the albinism gene until you sexually meet and conceive with another person with the albinism gene. So, it is the responsibility of every human being to promote the rights of persons with albinism and de-mystify it. The African States must take the lead and carry the leadership. African Union, where are you over this issue? The EU must carry the flag against the mutilation, abduction and murder of persons with albinism. The matter should be treated as a matter which threatens socio-economic development. States usually undermine issues that affect the so-called minority groups. Persons with albinism may be considered as being few in most African counties but they contribute immensely to the socio-economic development of their countries. Many of them are teachers, medical doctors, lawyers, economists, and entrepreneurs. Many more are activists, musicians and academicians. Why should we deliberately ignore this mass of developmental cadres? Protection of the rights of persons with albinism fully lies on the States. Civil society should compliment the leadership of the State. By the way, the State comprises the executive, judiciary and legislature. Each one of these wings carries fully responsibility in ensuring the effective protection of the rights and fundamental freedoms of person with albinism.

It is important at this juncture to highlight myths with needs to be thrown out of the minds of individuals and the perimeters of the communities. Deliberately, I have4 thought of addressing the myths because of the strong belief in the myths I have come across during my advocacy community work. Some of the myths are already addressed in my paper but will be referred to here:

i)                    Persons with albinism are not a strange creation of God. They are a creation of what ever created the rest of nature.

ii)                  The colour of persons with albinism does not signify gold color of ritual colour. It is the absence of melanin. Melanin is a pigment which gives the skin the ‘black’ colour.

OUR RESPONSETO PRESIDENT LUNGU'S SPEECH TO PARLIAMENT

22^nd September, 2015.

TO ALL MEDIA HOUSES

Press Statement

For Immediate Release

This statement is released as a reaction to the speech given by the President of the Republic of Zambia, His Excellence, Mr. Edgar Chagwa Lungu. Disability Rights Watch believes that the speech was message-carrying and it contained what Zambians and the international co-operating partners always want to hear. The speech partly carried a great promise for the people of Zambia in general and if all words became deed, we would see and experience the “transformation” the speech is advocating. The speech was also encouraging to Disability Rights Watch (DRW) because it touched on some issues DRW has for some time been advocating, especially the expedition of the enactment of the Mental Health Bill in the current sitting of the National Assembly. We pass our open gratitude to the President for this because the enactment of the Bill will be a landmark decision for persons with psycho-social disabilities.

The Mental Health Bill will remain a landmark decision because of its stance in clarifying the human rights of persons with psycho-social disabilities. It empowers persons with psycho-social disabilities to participate in making decisions that affect their life either direct and independently or through supported decision making. This is a key fundamental right that has for a long time been suppressed by the archaic Mental Disorders Act of 1951. Persons with psycho-social disabilities, together with other disability organisations have been calling for the establishment of the National Mental Health Commission which would oversee the promotion and protection of the rights of persons with psycho-social disabilities and at the same time monitor the implementation of mental health services in Zambia. The pronunciation of the enactment of the Mental Health Bill in the speech gives hope to all who have been calling for this. The Bill promotes the establishment and implementation of community-based mental health services. Its early enactment in the current sitting of the National Assembly will be a great stride by government in de-institutionalizing mental health services and subsequently decongesting the psychiatry hospital and units in Zambia. The implementation of community-based mental health services is also a step towards reducing the huge stigma attached to mental health problems. This might even reduce the myths around mental health problems. DRW is excited with the Presidential proclamation and gives the President a loud applaud.

What we are waiting for is the implementation of the pronouncement and consequent provision of adequate funding and human resource towards the rolling-out of all that which is advocated in the Mental Health Bill. We also are keen to see the immediate move to begin developing regulations to the Bill for the smooth implementation of its provisions. What is more exciting for DRW is that the Presidential pronouncement is in line with the UN Sustainable Development Goals which will be adopted this year as a post-MDDG development propeller. The SDG Goal number 3 is clear on promoting mental health.

The President also brought out the issue of equitable and quality education. We believe that equitable quality education carries the principle of inclusion with it. We call upon the Minister of Education to ensure that that the Ministry of Education begins to promote and implement “true” inclusive education whose systems and implementations processes appropriately include learners with all forms of disabilities. The system should also promote and implement inclusive life-long education. This calls for appropriate teacher training; inclusive curriculum development and implementation; creating safe and accessible infrastructure and school environments; allocation and disbursement of adequate funds and; of course effective involvement of communities.

The President also said “government is reviewing the policies on education, science and technology as well as the technical education, vocational and entrepreneurship training in order to make them more relevant to the current and future needs of our country”. This is very essential. This is a great opportunity for Zambia to ensure all policies governing the education system promote inclusive education and technical and vocational training. Many persons with disabilities are left out by the whole education system because the system is not yet inclusive. This again opens an opportunity to begin tuning our system to the provisions of the coming UN Sustainable Development Goals. Goal number 4 is on ensuring equitable and quality inclusive education for all. The policies should also take into consideration the provisions of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which call for inclusive education. Zambia has ratified the Convention and domesticated it through the enactment of the Persons with Disabilities Act of 2012. So, we need to see a system change that will ultimately emerge into true equity, access, achievement by all learners and of course quality. The President directed the Minister to complete the policy reforms by June 2016. We hope this directive is adhered to.

The President called for community based entrepreneurship through co-operatives. This is a great move. It falls into the call for community-based rehabilitation to trigger inclusive development. Community-based entrepreneurship is one way of empowering citizens and this must benefit persons with disabilities who champion community-based rehabilitation. Since DRW has been one of the champions of community-based rehabilitation, we shall now adopt the statement as one of our advocacy issue. We shall stand to ensure co-operatives form part of community-based rehabilitation for persons with disabilities. We take this opportunity to call upon all co-operatives to ensure that persons with disabilities be included in the formation and leadership of any co-operative. We also support the move by the President to move the Department of Co-operatives from the Ministry of Agriculture to the Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry. This will encourage the co-operatives to diversify their economic activities.

In his speech, the President touched on the issue of addressing unemployment among citizens especially the youths. This has been a running ‘song’ of the government. It is important to deliberately target youths with disabilities and ensure that they are in decent and gainful employment. This should be in both the informal and formal sectors. Youths with disabilities have got less employment opportunities than their peers without disabilities. Therefore, it is just prudent to develop specific targeting strategies to empower them. Economic empowerment for youths with disabilities should include open up access to start-up capital for entrepreneurship. In view of this, we are in support of the President’s statement that “access to capital is a challenge for most of our entrepreneurs and innovators who wish to establish or grow their businesses”. This is worse for youths with disabilities. So, as measures are being taken to ensure easy access to affordable capital, specific measures should be taken to ensure youths with disabilities are included. Furthermore, in order to empower youths with disabilities, government should practice preferential procurement by prioritizing entrepreneurs with disabilities. Measures should also be taken to build the skill capacity of entrepreneurs with disabilities to produce goods and services that will go at competitive prices.

The President stressed the issue of infrastructure development across all sectors. Since the government is emphasizing inclusive development, it is essential to ensure that all infrastructure, across all sectors, is accessible and safe to persons with disabilities. Therefore, it is important to ensure minimum standards for accessibility are urgently developed. Inaccessible infrastructure is one of the largest barriers hindering persons with disabilities from effectively participate in national development. Such infrastructure is also a form of discrimination on the basis of disability. The issue of accessibility should also affect the transport and ICT sectors.

The issue of building universities in every province is key for national development. This should go with building the capacity of the academic human resource in all these universities to embrace inclusive tertiary education. It is sad to note that the already existing universities are not yet inclusive in terms of infrastructure, training and assessments. The new universities should be inclusive from the onset. Persons with disabilities should find it easy to enroll, study and achieve academic and professional development. 

As we conclude, we call upon the government to expedite the process of launching and implementing the National Policy on Disability. We also urge the government to take keen interest in supporting the UN Sustainable Development Goals and quickly adopt them as part of our transformation agenda in our post-2015 national development plans. This will ensure that persons with disabilities play a big role towards achieving our Vision 2030 as a nation.

Signed,

Wamundila Waliuya,

Executive President.

Cell:+260977459925 s

ZAMBIA MENTAL HEALTH BILL FOR FINAL DRAFTING

The Government of the Republic of Zambia has finally moved the long pending Mental Health Bill for final drafting. A drafting workshop of the Bill runs from 4^th August to 17^th August 2015 in Chongwe district east of Lusaka. This move is the most exciting among all stakeholders who have been concerned with the issue of the Bill being finalized.

It should be noted that the development of the Bill stands as far back as 2004 and before. The call for a new Bill to govern mental health services and provide for the rights of mental health users was necessitated by the dehumanizing and discriminatory nature of the Mental Disorders Act of 1951. The 1951 Act is derogative in nature and does not fit in this era of advancing human rights, especially with the adoption of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2006. Fortunately, the Government of the Republic of Zambia ratified the UNCRPD in 2010.

The Mental Health Bill which is being drafted repeals the Mental Disorders Act of 1951. The advantage the new Bill carries is that it promotes the rights and inherent dignity of persons who have mental illnesses or psycho-social disabilities. If some clauses will be adopted as it is in the current draft, it will recognize the right of mental health users to making their own decision and participating in decisions made around their treatment and rehabilitation. It goes on to provide for supported decision making.

One key issue about this Bill is that it establishes the Mental Health Commission which will oversee the provision and management of mental health services in Zambia. The Bill further provides for mental health tribunals that will act as ‘watchdogs’ for the rights of mental health users. Mental health users who will feel that their rights have been violated will be able to launch complaints to relevant authorities who will then have the matters heard by the tribunal. This s interesting but will need a lot of careful scrutiny to ensure effectiveness.

We would not like to pre-empt the drafting which is being led and chaired by the Ministry of Justice. We are however grateful to government for supporting the drafting process now.

Disability Rights Watch

August 4^th, 2015.

Do we stand by it? Africa!

 We are glad that African counties attended the Global Partnership for Education meeting which was held on 21^st May, 2015 in Korea. This was a great meeting because of the commitments the partner countries held themselves to. Mostly, we are cheered by the recognition of children with disabilities in the commitments. Many African counties were represented at the meeting. These commitments are made at a time when the world is developing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) – post-2015 development framework. Financing towards education is critical if the SDG indicators are to be met. African countries have a tendency of committing themselves to a lot of international protocols and statements but do nothing to financially support their commitments. Education is key for development. Without education, coupled with ICT, development will be a non-starter in Africa. It should be noted that when we talk about education in this era of globalization and inclusive development, we are talking about inclusive education. Inclusive education is about equal education for all regardless of social or economic status, gender, religion, disability, ethinicism, race or any other condition or status.

Children with disabilities are key in achieving quality education. It is therefore important that African governments allocate and disburse adequate finances towards quality education for children with disabilities. Such finances should go towards appropriate teaching and learning materials; ICT for inclusion; accessible infrastructure development; teacher training; curriculum development and awareness creation. Awareness creation should never be ignored in as far as implementing inclusive education because the right and correct messages must be sent out to the communities about this new phenomenon in Africa.

Financing inclusive education can only be effective when there are clear policies and strategies to guide the financing and implementation. Clear monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of inclusive education should also occur and this should include active participation of the communities and parents. Policies and strategies must be explicit in the way they address inclusive education as a transformative process that aims at including everyone in the implementation and monitoring of the education sector. Parents of children with disabilities and their children should play a critical role in this transformative process. So, African governments should be seen to lead the journey into the post-2015 SDGs.

Remember: children with disabilities are usually the first to be forgotten and the last to be remembered. Let us make them the first to be remembered and last to be forgotten.

Ministerial Statement on Education Financing

May 21, 2015

1.            We, Ministers of Education from countries that have held office in the Global Partnership for Education, met on 21 May 2015 in Incheon, Korea. The meeting was co-chaired by H.E. Julia Gillard, Chair of the Board of Directors of the Global Partnership for Education, and H.E. Serigne Mbaye Thiam, Minister of Education from Senegal and Chair of the Governance, Ethics, Risk and Finance Committee of the Global Partnership for Education. 

2.            We assembled under the theme of “Education Financing for the Future” at the margins of the World Education Forum at an important moment for education around the world, and in our countries. We express our appreciation for the important support that the Global Partnership for Education has provided to our national education efforts, and to the help of donors provided through the Global Partnership for Education since its establishment in 2002. 

3.            As members of the Global Partnership for Education, we are committed to taking concrete steps and joint actions to deliver a better quality education for all of our populations, including the most marginalized and vulnerable.

4.            We note that the global community is increasingly recognizing the benefits of investing in education and is likely to endorse an ambitious education Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) agenda, including universal access to primary and secondary school. Lifting ambition means at least an additional US$39 billion per year will be needed from all external funding sources in order to provide the financing required to achieve these goals. 

5.            We are committed to increasing our domestic financing significantly in order to achieve equitable and inclusive quality education for all, as evidenced by the outcome of the Global Partnership for Education Replenishment Conference held in June 2014 in Brussels, hosted by the European Union, where partner developing countries committed to increase education financing by US$26 billion over four years.

6.            However we believe that the total resource gap cannot be closed without dramatically increased efforts in external financing for education and we are deeply concerned that the Global Partnership for Education Fund target of US$3.5 billion over four years has not been met. The Global Partnership for Education is key to mobilizing global and national efforts to achieve quality education for all children, prioritizing the poorest and most vulnerable, through inclusive partnership, financing and a focus on effective education systems.

7.            We welcome the ambition contained in the political declaration of the World Education Forum, and the call for increased global efforts to ensure that the education Sustainable Development Goals are achieved.

8.            We further welcome the language contained in the proposed Outcome Document of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development, which will be held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, in July 2015. It recognizes the importance of delivering quality education to all children, including in situations of conflict and fragility, and which calls for the Global Partnership for Education to be strengthened and scaled up to ensure that all girls and boys, including children with disabilities, complete free, equitable and quality early childhood, primary and secondary education leading to the relevant and effective learning outcomes. 

9.            We call on all governments to support an ambitious Financing for Sustainable Development Agenda for Education. We furthermore call on the international community to increase significantly its ambition and financial support for the Global Partnership for Education.

DRW LAUNCHES AESI APPROACH

AESI Approach

Disability Rights Watch will use the AESI (Access and Empowerment for Social Inclusion) approach in all its work. It will use the AESI approach to plan, implement, monitor and evaluate all its work. The AESI approach is a twin-track approach that will be used to achieve effective social inclusion of persons with disabilities in society.  The twin-track approach means that DRW will ensure public service providers mainstream their facilities and services to enhance access by all categories of persons with disabilities while at the same time Disabled People’s Organisations (DPOs) are empowered with strategic advocacy skills to effectively influence policy and practice change.

AESI and the twin-track approach

Access

DRW will be engaged in strategic advocacy at global, regional, sub-regional and national level to ensure full and effective inclusion of persons with disabilities in development. DRW will work with DPOs, DPO Networks at all levels, INGOs and other Civil Society Organisations in advocacy work. It will ensure women and children participate in matters that or may affect them. It will also ensure persons with psycho-social and intellectual disabilities participate on an equal basis with other people. The purpose of this strategic advocacy is to ensure that all public services and facilities are accessible to persons with disabilities and that persons with disabilities can access the same services and facilities on an equal basis with others.

DRW will use the following advocacy strategic approaches: rational; collaborative; pressure; strategic litigation.

Empowerment

DRW will build the capacity of DPOs to be able to carry out effective strategic advocacy work at national and community level. DRW will deliberately target DPOs that have a direct link with their individual members, beneficiaries and communities. It will build the capacity of these DPOs in: strategic advocacy; resource mobilisation; reporting; organisational management.

January, 2015.