The disability community knew for a long time that their rightful quota was being used, misused, and abused by people in power without disabilities. Media reports in the last two years highlighted how 71 teachers were booked for faking disability and 450 fake certificates were issued from a single hospital in Madhya Pradesh.
In Punjab, around 2 lakh such fake disability certificates were issued. Finally, the lid is off as allegations of misuse of disability certificates have been made against bureaucrats such as Puja Khedkar and Abhishek Singh.
Despite the uproar, we should caution against stereotyping the entire disability community as homogenous and especially people with invisible disabilities as cheats. Not all disabilities are visible, especially intellectual, psychosocial, deafness, and blood disorders.
Despite the repeated claims by the government of simplifying disability certificates into UDID, as a medical doctor with the lived experience of disability, I can testify that the procedure is still painful and burdensome.
Even after repeated harassment, this UDID is not even accepted by government bodies like the Railway Ministry and NEET examination. Candidates in NEET UG and PG are forced to prove their disability again and again. However, others who avail quota benefits do not have to travel in person to only 16 assessment centres pan-India.
Disability awareness should be rooted in rights
Lack of awareness is the biggest attitudinal barrier to why we continue to see disability from a charity rather than a human rights perspective. When I applied for my disability certificate in my medical college in Kanpur, despite examining me, I was forced to attach a photo showing my deformed limbs.
My revered Orthopedics professors did not find it unethical, violating the autonomy of their own medical student with a physical disability. Years later, when I learned about my rights, albeit after facing discrimination, I was able to force UPSC and JEE to remove the discriminatory clause of affixing a photo showing disability.
The apathy was highlighted again when one of the cabinet ministers in the Group of Ministers, entrusted to study the Disabilities Bill 2016, remarked how can a person with mental illness be given job benefits? A competent person with a bipolar condition had to go all the way to the Supreme Court, which reversed Delhi High Court’s refusal to appoint him as a judge.
Who are the real experts?
The ableism is sadly rampant among doctors who lack lived experience of disability, despite being deemed ‘experts’. An expert at AIIMS Delhi, while framing guidelines for MBBS, made a ‘candid comment’ in the public document suggesting that checks and measures to safeguard against malingering or willful attempts to become eligible need to be evolved and put in place.
Another expert from the same institution, while debarring those with dyslexia from MBBS, raised concerns about parents obtaining fake autism and dyslexia certificates for their wards, claiming that such demand has grown out of proportion without citing any evidence.
As I wrote in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, there was a minuscule 0.08% increase in two successive years for such certificates, which is neither “overdiagnosis” nor a “rise in fake certificates.” Such ableist claims were debunked by the current Chief Justice of India in Vikas Kumar v. UPSC, where he stated that undue suspicion about the disabled engaging in wrongdoing is unwarranted.
Such a view presumes them, as a class, to be incompetent and incapable of success without access to untoward assistance. Like other stereotypes, this one is also totally flawed and contrary to reality. It is to misunderstand their aspirations, to stamp them with a badge of cheaters, and to deprive them of their lawful entitlements.
When an able-bodied student engages in cheating, the normal consequence is their disqualification or other suitable punitive action. The same consequence can flow from a candidate using their disability to game the system.
Therefore, ordering disability reassessment is violative of the right to dignity and is also an insult to the medical board that issued the certificates. If any action is to be taken, accountability must also be fixed on the doctors issuing such certificates, as the assessment guidelines are gazette notified, and there should be no scope for discrepancies in disability percentages.
Earlier this year, the Court of Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities concluded that the National Medical Commission and the Secretary of the Ministry of Health shall conduct an inquiry against the officials of RML Hospital to determine if there was any malfeasance in refusing a proper disability certificate to a NEET UG candidate who has low vision, with a 70% certificate from Bhopal doctors and 40% from AIIMS Delhi, but RML gave 0%.
Where is the Action?
Section 91 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (RPDA), 2016 states that whoever fraudulently avails or attempts to avail any benefit meant for persons with benchmark disabilities shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with a fine which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both.
Furthermore, Section 92(a) also says that whoever intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a person with a disability in any place within public view shall be punishable with imprisonment. This landmark law was enforced on April 19, 2017, the same day I filed a complaint against a UP Cabinet minister for ridiculing an employee with a disability. The UP State Commissioner for Disability did not inform any action taken, but an RTI revealed that they disposed of the matter by claiming that the ridiculed employee’s hand disability was less than 40%.
In another complaint of mine against a union minister who threatened to break a disabled man’s leg at a program meant for disabled persons in Asansol, the Chief Commissioner’s Court closed the case by stating that I could provide information about it to the Executive Magistrate, and no further intervention was required.
Both of these courts on disability at the state and central levels have statutory powers to safeguard our rights either on complaint or suo-motu as civil courts, but action was found wanting. On the contrary, the Election Commission of India did take action on our complaint by ordering the District Magistrate to register an FIR against a Jharkhand MP abusing disability.
In order to repose faith in the statutory bodies on disabilities and special courts who have been provided teeth by the RPDA, we need their action. Let’s usher in an RPDA-era respecting the rights and dignity of people with disabilities including those with invisible disabilities. If the rights of these marginalized population are not protected, there is little celebrating 75 years of Independence.
The author is a medical doctor and disability justice advocate and teaches at University College of Medical Sciences, Delhi. Views are personal.