'BCI Creating Entry Barriers For Disabled Lawyers': Says Blind AIBE Candidate; Seeks Proper Implementation Of 2018 PwD Guidelines

As per the Government of India "Guidelines for conducting written examination for persons with benchmark disabilities 2018":

• The facility of Scribe/Reader/Lab Assistant should be allowed to any person with benchmark disability as defined under section 2(r) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, i.e. not less than 40% of a specified disability, and has limitation in writing including that of speed if so desired by him/her;
• The candidate should have the discretion of opting for his own scribe/reader/lab assistant or request the Examination Body for the same;
• In case the candidate is allowed to bring his own scribe, the qualification of the scribe should be "one step below" the qualification of the candidate taking examination;
• Compensatory time of not be less than 20 minutes per hour of examination should be allowed for persons who are allowed the use of scribe/reader/lab assistant;
• As far as possible, the examining body should also provide reading material in Braille or E-Text or on computers having suitable screen reading software for open hook examination.

Inter alia, these policies should have a certain level of flexibility, to accommodate the specific needs on a case-to-case basis.

In this backdrop, the aggrieved law graduate in this case, owing to his disability, had urged the Council to (i) grant him approval for bringing a scribe for writing his examination, (ii) provide him extra time of 20 minutes per hour to write the examination, and (iii) permit him to carry a laptop, since AIBE is an open book exam.

To his utter shock and surprise however, the authority initially denied him the permission to carry a laptop for an open book examination, despite the explicit stipulation in the 2018 Guidelines and further, stalled the other two requests for bringing a scribe and availing extra time.

"It will be decided at the releasing date of the admit card," the Council said in repos one to the candidate's request.

On a subsequent perusal by the candidate, the Council permitted him to carry a laptop, without internet facility. It also permitted him to bring a scribe, who should be "just 12th qualified not earlier than 2019."

"The Bar Council's requirement of a scribe not qualified more than 12^th pass shows its regressive mindset towards the equal right of disabled candidates to appear in the exam," the candidate said while emphasizing that the only restriction with respect to a scribe as per the 2018 guidelines is that the scribe should be "one-step down in qualification" from the candidate appearing the exam.

On pointing this out to the authorities, he said, no response is forthcoming till date.

Furthermore, he insisted that whereas the 2018 Guidelines prescribes 20 minutes per hour compensatory time for persons with disabilities, the BCI has "self-invented" a percentage bracket of at least 50% certified disability, for claiming compensatory time.

"In times of the pandemic, where the systems have been ruptured and lives disturbed, the Bar Council is only making it more difficult for the disabled candidates by its stubbornness, rigidity, and an ableist attitude.

As a cherry on the top, the Council does not have a functional system to resolve the candidates' grievances; where emails are never replied to, and calls never picked up," the aggrieved student said.

He claimed that this is a long standing problem, which can be resolved only after a clear policy for the benefit of physically disabled candidates is laid down. He further hoped that the Council will establish a dedicated Help Desk, for similarly situated candidates to raise their grievance.

Rahul Bajaj, a blind lawyer who gave the AIBE in 2017, said that he faced similar challenges in obtaining the legally guaranteed accommodations when he gave the exam.

"The stipulation that the scribe must be no more than a 12th pass student in 2019 or after betrays a profound inability to accept the capabilities of the disabled and strikes at the heart of their freedom to choose a scribe. When I asked them to allow me to use a laptop with a screen reader, the pushback initially was that they had been told that "the computer can tell you all the answers". Such ignorance would be laughable if it weren't adversely affecting the lives of many.

These arbitrarily created stipulations are a product of ableit minds and deny a level playing field to lawyers with disabilities. What could be more disquieting than the body responsible for regulating the legal profession in this country acting in brazen disregard of the existing legal framework?" he lamented.

"This episode also shows how so many still view reasonable accommodations, not as legally guaranteed rights, but as a favour to be doled out as per their wishes."Rahul said.