As India prepares to observe Constitution Day on November 26, a critical examination reveals foundational gaps in the document concerning disability rights. Legal experts argue that the Indian Constitution contains deep-rooted ableist assumptions that continue to marginalize citizens with disabilities.
Historical Exclusion and Constitutional Ableism
According to a significant intervention in constitutional history, Assembling India's Constitution by Rohit De and Ornit Shani, ordinary people including disabled citizens attempted to shape the constitutional text through petitions and memoranda. The Deaf and Dumb Society of India specifically raised concerns about inbuilt discrimination in existing laws and demanded affirmative action in employment.
The Constituent Assembly's response that adult franchise would sufficiently address disabled citizens' concerns caused significant anguish to the Society's members. This historical moment demonstrates how disabled people were systematically prevented from contributing to the core meaning-making of the Constitution, resulting in what experts call testimonial erasure.
Constitutional Provisions Under Scrutiny
The Constitution marginalizes disability questions in obscure places or treats disability as a deficit. Entry 9 of the state list places people with disabilities alongside the unemployable, thereby validating the stereotype of disabled individuals being unproductive.
Article 41 represents a classic example of constitutional ableism, grouping disability with unemployment, old age, and sickness. Furthermore, the Constitution permits valid discrimination where a person with disability can be removed from office for infirmity of mind and body.
Contemporary Manifestations of Constitutional Ableism
This foundational ableism continues to influence contemporary disability discourse and legal frameworks. The Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, adopted a medical model of disability, making doctors the sole arbiters of disability without clear criteria for calculating disability percentage.
While the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and subsequent court judgments show progressive trends, constitutional ableism persists. Recent Supreme Court judgments, including the Omkar Ramchandra Gond case (2024), celebrate only particular types of disabled citizens those who are upwardly mobile, apolitical, and fit nationalist narratives of perseverance.
The contrasting treatment of late Prof G N Saibaba, who had over 90% disability, and Father Stan Swamy, who lived with Parkinson's disease, demonstrates how disability rights are extended selectively. Both individuals received little empathetic accommodation despite their significant disabilities, revealing that constitutional protection often depends on able-nationalist expectations rather than principles.
As Constitution Day approaches on November 26, 2025, experts Vijay K Tiwari and Sanjay Jain urge India to confront these foundational gaps. The social contract between disabled citizens and the Republic remains based on ableist assumptions that require honest acknowledgment and reform.
