Census 2027 Disability Categories Raise Representation Concerns

Why in the News ?

Disability rights organisations have questioned the proposed nine-category disability framework for Census 2027, arguing that it fails to adequately capture all 21 specified disabilities recognised under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, potentially leading to inaccurate enumeration and underrepresentation.

Proposed Disability Framework and Key Concerns

●     The proposed Census framework identifies nine categories:

○      Seeing

○      Hearing

○      Speech

○      Mobility

○      Intellectual disability

○      Mental illness

○      Acid attack

○      Chronic neurological disease

○      Blood disorder

●     The National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled (NPRD) has argued that these categories do not adequately correspond to the 21 specified disabilities under the RPwD Act.

●     Six categories — seeing, hearing, speech, mobility, intellectual disability and mental illness — largely continue the approach followed in the 2011 Census.

●     The term “mental retardation” used earlier has been replaced by the more appropriate term “intellectual disability”.

●     The new additions include acid attack, chronic neurological disease and blood disorder.

●     Activists have raised concerns because several legally recognised disabilities do not appear as distinct categories.

●     They argue that broad classifications could make it difficult for enumerators to identify specific disabilities accurately.

Gaps in Representation and Policy Implications

●     The RPwD Act, 2016 recognises 21 specified disabilities, covering a much wider range of conditions.

●     These include cerebral palsy, dwarfism, muscular dystrophy, specific learning disabilities, autism spectrum disorder and multiple sclerosis, among others.

●     Activists specifically fear inadequate representation of autism, specific learning disabilities and dwarfism.

●     The proposed framework could result in undercounting certain disability groups if multiple conditions are clubbed into broad categories.

●     Inaccurate disability data can weaken policy formulation, welfare targeting, accessibility planning and resource allocation.

●     The concerns are also significant because the government had reportedly indicated that the Census would capture information on all 21 specified disabilities.

●     Rights groups therefore favour a classification system aligned more closely with the RPwD Act to ensure comprehensive enumeration.

 About Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 :

●     The RPwD Act, 2016 replaced the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995.

●     It was enacted to fulfil India’s obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).

●     It recognises 21 specified disabilities, significantly expanding the earlier legal framework.

●     The Act promotes equality, non-discrimination, dignity, accessibility and participation of persons with disabilities.

●     It provides for reasonable accommodation, inclusive education and measures for social and economic empowerment.

●     The Act also strengthens provisions concerning accessibility, employment and political participation.

●     Accurate disability enumeration is essential for implementing these rights effectively and ensuring that welfare programmes reach all eligible groups.