Table of Contents

PART I ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 II Analysis of The Electronic Delivery of Services Bill, 2011. ......................................................... 2 (vi) Issues related to persons with physical disabilities .............................................................. 2

48. ............................................................................................................................................... 2 49. ............................................................................................................................................... 2 50. ............................................................................................................................................... 2 51. ............................................................................................................................................... 2 52. ............................................................................................................................................... 3 53. ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Part-II....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Recommendations/Observations of the Committee.......................................................................... 4 Issues related to the Differently abled persons (Clause 2(a) of the Bill) ...................................... 4 10. ............................................................................................................................................... 4

REPORT
PART I
II
(vi)

Analysis of The Electronic Delivery of Services Bill, 2011.

VI. Issues related to persons with physical disabilities 48. One of the Stakeholders 'Inclusive Planet Centre of Disability Law and Policy, in their Memorandum has expressed concerns on accessibility requirement of persons with disabilities. To this, the Department, in their comment on the Memoranda, has stated that the EDS Bill does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. The Bill also defines 'assistance access which means 'assistance to access electronic means. On being asked about their opinion on the definition of 'assisted access being too general, the Department has negated the view and has stated that the term assisted access is a generic provision under the EDS Bill which would include assistance to persons with disabilities. 49. Further, when asked to clarify about the facilities for providing hard copy documents/forms in Braille and large print or for using thumb impressions instead of signatures while submitting the form or receiving the services / provision for providing intermediaries/ professional sign language interpreters etc, for assisting the persons from disabilities at the electronic delivery centre, the Department, in the written reply has submitted as under:"Clause 4(4)(a) of the Bill provides for "(4) The competent authority, while introducing services in an electronic mode, shall (a) simplify and improve the existing process and forms relating to such services in such manner as may be prescribed;" Further, Central /State Governments under Clause 42(2)(c)/44(2)(c) of the Bill have been empowered to frame Rules to "simplify and improve the existing process and forms relating to such services. That is, at the time of making of Rules, special needs of physically handicapped in terms of "assisted access" would be taken care of. 50. In the post evidence communication, the following amendment has been proposed by the Department in the Clause 2 (a):"In Clause 2(a), insertion of the words "by the users including users with special needs" after the words 'electronic services." 51. When the issue was specifically raised during the course of oral evidence, the Secretary suggested as under:-

"In Section IV, Sub-section (iv), the Bill provides for assisted access in such manner as may be provided. So, in the rules, we can give more detailed specifications. There is already a provision for assisted access in the Bill itself. Under these rules, we can elaborate what kind of disabilities are there and what kinds of provisions are needed. xxxxxxx.......................xxxxxxx......................xxxxxxx............. ................xxxxxx We are to come up with those guidelines which will supplement or elaborate it about the ground level, what are all to be done for the people who are physically-challenged, visually-challenged, mentally-challenged, who have hearing impairment, etc. What needs to be done has been put in the form of a policy document by the Department for the electronic procedures." 52. Highlighting the issue of removal of Commissioners, one of the disability organisation, during the course of consultation, in their memorandum submitted to the Committee, stated as under:"There is a provision for removal of Commissioners on the ground of disability without providing reasonable accommodation, therefore Section 12 and Section 19 of Bill must be reworded to state that Commissioners may be removed from office on the grounds of disability only if they are incapable of acting as Commissioners in spite of the provision of reasonable accommodation. The concept of reasonable accommodation is clearly articulated in the UNCRPD and India is mandated to provide reasonable accommodation." 53. Relevant Provision of the Electronic Delivery of Services Bill, 2011 are reproduced as below:Clause 12 12. (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2), the Central Government may, by order, remove the Central Chief Commissioner or Central Commissioner from his office if the Central Chief Commissioner or Central Commissioner, as the case may be, . (f) has become physically or mentally incapable of acting as a Central Chief Commissioner or Central Commissioner, as the case may be 12. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (4), no Central Commissioner or Central Chief Commissioner shall be removed from his office on the ground specified in clause (d) or clause (e) of that sub-section unless the Supreme Court, on a reference being made to it in this behalf by the Central Government, has, on an inquiry, held by it in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed in this behalf by the Supreme Court, reported that the Central Commissioner or Central Chief Commissioner, ought on such ground or grounds to be removed. Clause 19 19. (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2), the State Government may, by order, remove the State Chief Commissioner or State Commissioner from his office if such State

Chief Commissioner or State Commissioner, as the case may be: xxxxxxxxx....xxx. . (f) has become physically or mentally incapable of acting as State Chief Commissioner or State Commissioner, as the case may be. 19. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (4), no State Chief Commissioner or State Commissioner, shall be removed from his office on the ground specified in clause (d) or clause (e) of that sub-section unless the High Court, on a reference being made to it in this behalf by the State Government, has, on an inquiry, held by it in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed in this behalf by the High Court, reported that the State Chief Commissioner or State Commissioner, ought on such ground or grounds to be removed.

In this context, the Department in their reply has stated as under:"xxxx. . As regards the suggestion on reasonable accommodation, drafting of the relevant Clauses are as per similar provisions in other legislations. However, suggestion can be considered while prescribing rules under clause 12 and 19."

Part-II
Recommendations/Observations of the Committee
Issues related to the Differently abled persons (Clause 2(a) of the Bill) 10. One of the associations of differently abled persons during the course of consultations has brought before the Committee the concern with regard to accessibility requirement of persons with disability in the context of the proposed legislation. When the issue was taken up, the Department, in the initial response, informed that term `access under the EDS Bill is a generic provision and would include assistance to persons with disabilities. When the issue was specifically raised by the Committee during the course of oral evidence, the representatives assured that the provisions needed for various kinds of disabilities would be elaborated under rules. Further, in the post evidence communication, the Ministry has suggested insertion of words `by the users including the users with special needs after the words electronic services in clause 2 (a) of the Bill so as to address the concerns of the differently abled persons. The Committee agree with the proposed amendment suggested by the Department. The Committee would also like to emphasize that the specific needs of the differently abled persons like providing hard copy documents/forms in Braille and large print or for using thumb impressions instead of signatures while submitting the form or receiving the services/provision for providing intermediaries/professional sign language, interpreters, locations for offices for availing services for

the purpose of EDS at the ground floor etc. should specifically be taken care of while formulating rules. In this connection the association of differently abled persons drew the attention of the Committee to the provisions made under Clauses 12 and 19 of the Bill whereby it has been provided that the Central Government may by order remove the Central/State Chief Commissioner from his office if a Central Chief Commissioner or Central Commissioner has become physical or mentally incapable of acting as Central Commissioner or State Chief Commissioner, as the case may be. The organisation has suggested that the aforesaid section should be reworded to state that respective Chief Commissioner/Commissioner may be removed from office on the grounds of disability only if they are incapable of acting as Commissioners inspite of the provisions of reasonable accommodation. The Committees attention was also drawn to the fact that the concept of reasonable accommodation is clearly articulated in the UNCRPD and India is mandated to provide reasonable accommodation. To this issue, the Department in the written reply stated that the drafting of the relevant clauses of the Bill are as per similar provisions of other legislations. The Department, however, assured that the suggestion could be considered under the rules to be framed under Clauses 12 and 19. The Committee, therefore recommend that specific suggestions of associations of differently abled persons may carefully be considered and suitable amendments/relevant provisions may accordingly be made in the legislation/rules.