Report on the Asia Pacific Regional Roundtable Discussion in New Delhi, October 7, 2013

Building on the opportunity of having our members and partners from the Asia Pacific region in New Delhi following Parivaar’s National Convention of Self-Advocates and in advance of the Asian Federation on Intellectual Disabilities (AFID) conference, Inclusion International convened a regional roundtable discussion.

The meeting was generously hosted by Mrs Poonam Natarajan, Chairperson, National Trust at her offices. The discussion was chaired by Klaus Lachwitz, II’s President with support from II Council Member Nagase Osamu. Representatives from Parivaar (India), Inclusion Japan (Japan), and the Guardian Federation of Persons with Intellectual Disabilities (Nepal) participated in the discussions.

Decision-Making/II’s Global Campaign, The Right to Decide

Decision-making and Inclusion International’s global campaign on decision-making, The Right to Decide, dominated the roundtable discussions. A self-advocate from Tokyo expressed that parents are“inclined to overprotect their sons and daughters with intellectual disabilities”.

The representatives from Parivaar shared information about the outcomes of their National Conference of Self-Advocates. Mrs. Poonam Natarajan, chair of the National Trust, pointed out that the Indian Guardianship laws are not in line with UN CRPD Article 12. She referred to the attempts of the Government of India to reform and replace the old – fashioned Indian guardianship law, but in course of the discussions it was mentioned by several participants that the reform concept developed by the Government of India will most probably still make use at least of limited guardianship.

All discussants agreed that supported decision – making should be the aim of future legal and practical developments in India, Japan and Nepal, but for the time being the full and complete implementation of Art. 12 CRPD at national level seems to be a dream in most Asian countries far away from the realities of life.

Participants shared criticisms about the lack of supports and services available in India which force parents to act as guardians and that new services would be the key element for the implementation of human rights for persons with disabilities. It was highlighted that the National Trust of India tried to support NGOs and DPOs but the resources of the Trust are limited and cannot meet the needs of individuals and their families.

Education

Participants engaged in a short discussion on inclusive education followed. Everybody agreed that this should be the guiding concept for reforms even though there are significant barriers to be addressed. Challenges identified included: the extreme difficulties facing families to organize the transport school; low teacher salaries; teachers who don’t have the knowledge and experience to practice inclusive education; class-sizes that are too big to take care of the needs of children with disabilities.

Self-Advocacy

Nagase Osamu provided an overview of Inclusion International’s experiences with self – advocacy groups in Japan, Hongkong, Malaysia, Cambodia etc. He referred to the dynamics of these groups and the requests of many self – advocates to gain more independence in society and to be actively included in the work of Inclusion International`s members at national and regional level. Participation and Inclusion are the terms used in many parts of the UN – Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) which show that the self – advocacy movement is not only in line with the CRPD, but the basis to include persons with intellectual disabilities into the societies of their countries as full citizens with equal rights.

Membership Review

Klaus Lachwitz provided an overview of Inclusion International’s membership review. Participants expressed the difficulty in building regional structures in Asia due to a lack of financial resources, poor international relations within many parts of Asia, social, political, cultural and religious differences etc.

Parivaar’s delegation recommended dividing Asia into three or four sub-regions as Asia itself is far too big to be dealt with as “one region”. They recommend that India and China should be treated separately due to the size of its populations. Parivaaroffered to build up a sub-regional structure combining India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and perhaps Myanmar where there are limited connections between DPOs and family groups. One participant suggested II consider the idea of having individual membership as a membership category for II.

Participants endorsed having more than one full member per country. A delegate from the National Trust expressed an interest in becoming a member in II.

Conclusion

The Asia-Pacific Regional Roundtable discussions were very informative and engaging. The discussions on decision-making will make an excellent contribution to II’s global campaign, The Right to Decide. The discussion on membership was worthwhile and the reactions were positive.