HE is specially abled to take on a fight for the disabled. For he himself has borne the brunt of many prejudices against the physically impaired. And always battled against them. In this tireless crusade, the insensitivity that 32-year-old, orthopaedically-impaired Javed Abidi recently faced on a flight to Bangalore spurred him to file a public interest litigation (PIL) against Indian Airlines (IA), the civil aviation ministry and the Union of India.
The PIL that could prove to be a landmark in the country's movement for the rights of the disabled had its beginnings in an objection made by an airhostess who was a stickler for rules. "Unlike most airline staff who ignore international aviation rules and seat handicapped persons in the front row—it's convenient for the airline staff and the disabled—she was determined that I be shifted since I would be blocking the emergency exit in case of an accident," observes Abidi. Agreeing to the reasonable demand, Abidi asked for an aisle chair to move him. The airline didn't have one.
"They can't stick by one rule and not another. Sure, airline safety is important, but what about the safety and dignity of disabled passengers? Not only is it physically unsafe to be bodily lifted up, but also very humiliating," says Abidi. A heated argument ensued. Abidi was asked to deboard. The flight was delayed. And in the end, Abidi agreed to be bodily lifted. He had given in. But not quite. On getting off, he lodged a formal complaint. Two odd months later, he filed the PIL which was admitted in the Supreme Court on August 11. The petition seeks that IA provide aisle chairs on all flights and ambulifts in all airports, 50 per cent concession for all disabled persons and speedy implementation of the Disability Act, 1995.
Judging by the reaction of Jayanti Natarajan, minister of state for civil aviation, it seems Abidi's battle is already half won. The minister told Outlook that she was aware of the PIL and thought the demands so valid that they hardly needed argument. "I have already directed the secretary to make available aisle chairs on every flight. He is to get back to me. But it will be done systematically," she promises. Natarajan is somewhat less willing to commit herself on concessional rates for all disabled people, but says she will look into it.
On his part, Abidi feels there is no dearth of supportive laws or people in authority who have the good intent to implement them: "It's just that we, the citizens, have to bring it to their notice." It is inspiring to hear him talk of the little victories that he has won by doing his 'duty' as an Indian. All government buildings, Abidi says, are rule-bound to have ramps to enable movement by people in wheelchairs. "I make it a point to report to the authorities when I find a building lacking this facility," he says.
Obviously, no cause is too small for Abidi, nor any cause too big. He was the founder member and secretary of the Disabled Rights Group, an advocacy group which played a key role in the passage of the Disability Act, 1995. "It was a cross-disability group of eight that did it," says the modest crusader. The group worked on the premise that the time had come to move from demands for charity to demands for rights. So, after work they would meet, write letters, articles, memoranda and "generally create a nuisance so that we became difficult to ignore". Now, as executive director for the National Centre for Promotion and Employment for Disabled People, he spends hours lobbying for jobs that belong to the physically impaired. To strengthen the voice of the movement, Abidi has also associated himself with the Disabled Peoples International, one of the world's largest disability groups. He is the secretary general of this body which has advisory status with WHO and ILO.
All of which is a far cry from 1989, when Abidi returned from the US with a degree in mass communication, all set to become an intrepid reporter. After some successful assignments, however, Abidi decided "one journalist less wouldn't make a difference to the world of journalism, but one hand more could mean a lot to the movement for the disabled". And it did.
