Lessons from Jakarta

THE Asean Secretariat (ASEC) organised a human rights training focusing on human rights mechanisms/systems and disability awareness in Jakarta earlier this month. About forty assistants of the Asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), Asean Commission on the Promotion and the Protection of the Rights of Women and Children (ACWC) and staff of ASEC participated in the three-day event.

The format of the training was a mix of presentations, moderated discussions and participatory workshops by resource persons from all the member countries and beyond. I missed the proceedings of first two days as I only arrived on the conclusion of the second day. However, what I learnt from the other presenters on the third day was eye-opening.

Population of Asean will increase from 633 million people in 2015 to 717 million in 2030 and 741 million people in 2035. The prevalence of moderate disability in Southeast Asia is estimated at 16 per cent while severe disability accounts for 12.9 per cent according to World Report on Disability. This translates into a sizeable number of disabled people who will need support, facilities and reasonable accommodation to achieve effective and meaningful participation in society.

One glaring problem is the lack of accurate data on disability among the member states. Statistics of disabled children and those incarcerated in the penal system are often not included. The absence of accurate information causes evidence-based policy making difficult. Financial resources are finite. Governments make decisions based on the number of people who will benefit from a specific programme. Justification on spending is difficult when the numbers are too few.

Different countries have different methods and motivations in the registration of disabled people and classification of impairments. I was surprised that Malaysia is ranked at the bottom on the prevalence of disability in Asean with only 1.3 per cent of total population registered as disabled persons. Among others, the prevalence is 7.8 per cent for Vietnam, 3.0 per cent for Singapore and 1.0 per cent for Laos.

In my opinion, the comparatively low numbers in Malaysia can be attributed to the refusal to be stigmatised as a disabled person, not needing the benefits that come with registration and the difficulty in getting registered. As at November 2016, a total of 404,000 disabled people are registered with the Department of Social Welfare Malaysia.

Disability rights in Asean are guided by several frameworks. The Bali Declaration on the Enhancement of the Role and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in the Asean Community encourages member states to sign and ratify the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and proclaim the Asean Decade of Persons with Disabilities (2011 – 2020) to promote disabilityinclusive development.

All ten Asean member states have signed and ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. While this does not translate into immediate change, it is the impetus to eventually move governments towards formulating legislations and policies to protect the rights and dignity of disabled people.

On top of that, there is the Incheon Strategy and Sustainable Development Goals. The Incheon Strategy was adopted by governments and disabled people of the Asia-Pacific region to make societies barrier-free. Governments are tasked with the responsibility to collect data on disability so that a comprehensive plan can be formulated to realise the rights of disabled people.

The Sustainable Development Goals contain 17 goals to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure prosperity for all to be achieved over the next 15 years. Disability is specifically mentioned in five of the goals namely access to education, access to employment opportunities, reducing inequalities, creating accessible and sustainable cities and communities, and underlining the importance of data collection and monitoring.

These are all essential information that officials in decision making positions, policy makers and people working in the field of disability need to understand and implement. The amount of material presented in this training can be overwhelming at times and difficult to absorb. It is a good thing ASEC has compiled pertinent resources and presentations, and put them online for participants to refer and study after the training.

On my part, I am honoured to be invited to co-facilitate a workshop on Disability Equality Training with fellow facilitator Samnieng Thammavong from Laos. We were allocated one hour where we guided participants on understanding the meaning and causes of disability. The feedback from some of the participants were very positive, with one saying it was one of the best sessions and she understood the meaning of disability better after that.

Although I was invited to cofacilitate the session, I have learnt more from the other speakers than I had imparted to the participants. Until today, I am still sorting out the information I have gathered from the training. The new knowledge I gained will be put to good use when I conduct the next training.

ASEC must be commended for organising this training to expose and educate assistants from associate organisations on disability rights and challenges of disability-inclusive development at the national, regional and international levels. The lessons learnt are valuable and cannot be gotten anywhere else, especially when the resource persons were gathered from various countries, each bringing with them unique expertise and perspectives. I am glad to be able to contribute a small part towards this training and came out richer from it.