[Part II] Law School Survey 2022: Administrative rigidity & attitudinal barriers - An urgent need for sensitization

“In law school, we feel lonely because people without disabilities do not treat us normally”, “Academic inclusion will happen over time, but I’m hoping for social inclusion”, “Law schools must sensitize all their members, lest social exclusion and indirect discrimination will be the norm” - These are some of the responses that reverberated while recording challenges faced by 40 students with disabilities across 18 traditional and National Law Universities in India. 

With a close overview of the classroom, academic, physical and infrastructural challenges faced by law students with disabilities, it is crucial to also have an understanding of some of the other facets that augment the dichotomy between persons with disabilities and their able bodied counterparts.

If there is one message that the stark statistics scream is - the urgent need for sensitization in law schools - at the administrative, faculty and peer level, so that students with disabilities are not made to feel like outcasts in the legal system. 

In Jeeja Ghosh vs Union of India it was explicitly stated that ‘to enable persons with disabilities to lead a life of equal dignity and worth, it is not enough to mandate that discrimination against them is impermissible. That is necessary, but not sufficient. We must equally ensure, as a society, that we provide them the additional support and facilities that are necessary for them to offset the impact of their disability.” This was reiterated in the Vikash Kumar case.

The social model of disability envisaged in the Convention and RPwD Act that seeks to enable PwDs to realize their full potential has long gained statutory and judicial prominence.

However, how much of this has really percolated into the on-ground realities in the primary pillars of the legal profession - in law schools - is questionable.

The article will scratch the surface through first account experiences of the challenges faced with law school administrations and among peer groups.

Before the rights promised to persons with disabilities as black letter law become dead letter law, it is imperative to blow the whistle on the fallacies exhibited intentionally and unintentionally by authoritative conduct. 

While most respondents in the survey have raised their concerns at some point in time with the administration, a significant number of students were never convinced that authorities would bend to accommodate their special needs given the miniscule minority they are in.

As per the survey conducted, 70% respondents reported being at the receiving end of administrative rigidity.

It is observed that barring few teachers at NALSAR, NLSIU, WBNUJS, UILS and NLIU Bhopal, who were open and sensitive to the needs of students with disabilities, no other institution extended support in any form whatsoever in enabling them to realize their full potential by providing a level playing field.

While the lack of awareness and sensitivity among authorities is a predominant narrative for law students with disabilities facing avoidable difficulties; the more starkly unappealing yet prevalent narrative in some law schools is the systemic oppression and harassment by university administration towards students with disabilities and chronic illnesses.

The three principle tenets underlying the UNCRPD being :

• ‘Equality of opportunity without any discrimination on the basis of disability’,

• ‘Reasonable accommodation’ and

• ‘Universal design’,

Despite this, one of the principal factors responsible for the barriers faced by students with disabilities is the resistance that comes from administrations, who are not only oblivious to the special needs of such students, but are unwilling to deviate from the status quo to provide reasonable accommodations to students with disabilities.

One such instance was when an ILS Law College student experienced a severe relapse of Multiple Sclerosis and had to be hospitalised two days prior to examinations.

The student wrote to all the senior teachers and to the Centre for Mental Health Law and Policy (CMHLP) a sister concern of the college. But, barring two teachers, there was no response from any other authority.

One of the teachers reassured them to take the matter to the highest authority possible to provide them relief, but the same did not materialize in a timely action.

The initial response of the teacher liasoning with the University regarding the possibility of appearing for supplementary exams was - ‘Even if you take it to the University (SPPU), it will ultimately come to me. I don’t care how you make it to college - come in an ambulance, a wheelchair, a stretcher, but come at least on the first day of the exam since it is difficult to promise supplementary exams at the eleventh hour'.

Even after being strongly advised by doctors against appearing for exams, the student ended up shuttling between the hospital and exam hall and appeared for their papers with an IV injected.

Two months after the examinations, the college authorities managed to arrange for supplementary exams not knowing the student had already attempted the exams. 

For students of MNLU Nagpur with locomotor disability and other chronic illnesses, medical procedures require them to be outstationed for prolonged durations of time.

As this hampers the attendance criterion stipulated by the University, most times they are forced to compromise on their medical needs to guard against a year gap.

Students of ILS have also faced grave challenges while completing the complex medical certificate formalities mandated by the college.

On this a student of ILS with an autoimmune disorder said, 

“Since everyone has a different experience with their condition, there might not be one solution. But Institutions should try to be flexible with such students, at the least, reduce the procedural steps in availing any accommodation would help.

So, instead of approaching and explaining a concern to anybody and everybody, a single authority could be delegated to deal with concerns of students with disabilities. Sensitivity training could result in a perspective shift which is a much needed first step in these discussions”.

Another stark instance of administrative rigidity was faced by a student of Sister Nivedita University in Kolkata, diagnosed with a rare heart condition that mandated her to undergo two rounds of open-heart surgery.

While still being admitted, merely a day after the surgery, the student received multiple intimations to complete assignments and submit them at the earliest. Only much later did the student get an extension of two more weeks.

Within a month of being discharged from the hospital, the student was given no respite from the mandatory physical litigation internship they had to undergo as part of their curriculum. For someone who struggled with mobility and chronic fatigue owing to the medical procedures, besides extending some support by giving attendance and considering marks of the previous examination, the administration remained predominantly indifferent to her needs.

These glaring examples are alarming precursors to a systemic deviation of the statutory rights and judicial precedents that further the rights of the disabled community.

It is pertinent to borrow from Justice RM Lodha’s observation in Justice Sunanda Bhandare Foundation vs Union of India,

“In the matters of providing relief to those who are differently abled, the approach and attitude of the executive must be liberal and relief oriented and not obstructive or lethargic…”

77% respondents in the survey reported facing some form of social exclusion owing to the deep entrenched attitudinal barriers among their peer group, with professors, committee heads and the administration on the whole.

This has a direct correlation with the lack of awareness of the capabilities of persons with disabilities and calls for the need to adopt sensitization programs at every level of educational institutions.

Students have shared instances of having to forgo social events either because the venue was inaccessible, a lack of transport or simply not being informed nor invited by their peer groups.

While some students were denied leadership positions owing to their disabilities, some were denied participation in certain committees. Persons with disabilities often face the added pressure of having to prove themselves multiple times to be deemed worthy of given opportunities or be considered at an equal footing as their able-bodied counterparts.

Similar was the case with an RMLNLU student with Spina Bifida who reported of not being given leadership positions owing to her disability.

A student of NALSAR shared in the survey the overt and covert discriminations he faced on campus in the initial years. It was only after the student consistently secured ranks among the top 3 in the batch was the person considered as worthy among their peer groups.

The stigma attached to being a person with disabilities manifests in myriad ways for students across law schools. Some find it extremely difficult to find teammates to take part in competitions, while some peers make deliberate attempts to downplay their competence through their condescending demeanour. 

“There needs to be awareness amongst seniors, teachers and peers  alike to understand our needs. They need to trust our instincts in deciding what is better for us rather than making an assumption/ judgement about it and to give us reasonable accommodations. Also make sure that you aren't overly helpful in everyday tasks that you can see, we're able to manage. Extending help when not required makes us feel less in control of our body and crippled, when we’re not,” an RMLNLU student with Spina Bifida said.

Article 39 of the RPwD Act, 2016 stipulates the need for sensitization programs to be conducted in educational institutes on the human conditions of disability of persons with disabilities.

Persons in authority must take it on themselves to ensure sensitization at all levels at educational institutions to guard the interests and rights of students with disabilities. This should be followed by providing the special resources required for students with disabilities to realize their full potential in law school. 

Only then will there be any concrete practice of the social model of disability as envisaged in the UNCRPD.

Justice AK Sikri in Jeeja Ghosh vs Union of India aptly noted that equality is premised on non-discrimination and reasonable differentiation such that all persons can “equally enjoy and exercise their rights and freedoms. Discrimination occurs due to arbitrary denial of opportunity of equal participation… it means embracing the notion of positive rights, affirmative action and reasonable accommodation. ...to provide additional support to persons with disabilities to facilitate their full and effective participation in society... for a person with disability, the constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights…will ring hollow if they are not given this additional support that helps make these rights real and meaningful for them. Reasonable accommodation is the instrumentality – are an obligation as a society – to enable the disabled to enjoy the constitutional guarantee of equality and non- discrimination” 

Discussing his own days as a student, Senior Advocate SK Rungta in conversation with Bar & Bench's Jelsyna Chacko said, 

“It is a reality that there are attitudinal barriers in educational institutions in treating persons with disabilities equally and granting access to persons with disabilities the same facilities as their able-bodied counterparts.

Even during my time, I remember some of my friends were denied admission to college hostels, because the administration saw blind students as a liability. But we fought for it and ultimately they got admission. These kinds of attitudinal barriers exist during admission, examinations, use of libraries and more.” 

“There is a law now which mandates that the environment needs to be made accessible else it is a gross violation of the law," Rungta added.

In  Union of India v. National Federation of the Blind, the power in diversity that the RPwD Act envisioned, was underscored.

"..the RPwD Act 2016 aims to provide them an even platform to thrive, to flourish and offer their unique contribution to the world. It is based on the simple idea with profound implications that each of us has: 'unique powers to share with the world and make it interesting and richer.' ..The Act tells them that they belong, that they matter, that they are assets, not liabilities and that they make us stronger, not weaker." 

It is therefore amply clear that for students with disabilities to experience a level playing field, action needs to be taken.

Without realizing the need to undertake sensitization programs, the rights of students with disabilities will have a domino effect that reinforces the systemic disadvantage that they are subject to in a society designed for the able-bodied.