Trauma Of Disability -By Esther Pius Ekong

On one of those days, while returning from school in the company of my schoolmates, we saw a deaf and dumb girl, judging from her school uniform to be a student of Junior Secondary School, running out of a bush path. While speech failed her amidst teary eyes, her hands demonstrated what the mouth was unable to express. As we got closer, we noticed that her hair was filled with grass and sand. Her uniform was torn and stained with blood, and there were bruises on obvious parts of her body. We came to the conclusion that she had been raped, even though she had struggled so hard to defend her dignity. She beckoned us to follow her to the locus criminis, but we could not summon the courage to embark on such uncertain apprehension. Frustrated by our obvious reluctance to accompany her, she left and continued murmuring in pain while gesticulating. We continued our journey home discussing the predicament of the disabled victim.

During one of the Federacion International De Abogadas (FIDA) counselling sessions, a Ph.D. degree holder with a speech impediment, who had long been due for promotion, was denied promotion despite her outstanding performance at work. She came to FIDA for intervention, and the matter was resolved amicably without recourse to court.

Another instance occurred when my colleagues and I went to the O/C Gender Office to follow up on a case of rape. While sharing our challenges, the O/C Gender Officer told us about her experience with a rape victim who was in Senior Secondary School and a chronic stammerer. In the course of writing her statement, the girl had written down the names of her abusers and the dates on which she was violated on a sheet of paper in school. At intervals, she broke down in tears. The names she had written down were subsequently used to arrest the boys (her schoolmates) who had raped her.

This is a family scenario involving a man whose wife had lost the sight in one of her eyes as a result of domestic violence, while the other eye was seriously threatened. The man sought a divorce and prayed for custody of the children of the marriage. While giving his evidence in the witness box, he stated that his wife had lost one eye and could barely carry out duties as a wife and mother. He questioned how she would be able to care for the children if custody was granted to her.

In response, the woman established with evidence that she had not been incapacitated before the marriage. She had entered the marriage with both eyes intact but lost one eye as a result of domestic violence. Despite her disability, she believed that granting her custody of the children would be in their best interest.

Persons with disabilities face a lot of challenges in society, notwithstanding the constitutional provisions guaranteeing freedom from discrimination. While some people are born with disabilities, others become disabled as a result of circumstances such as accidents, domestic violence, medical negligence, prolonged labour and other unfortunate events.

Irrespective of how a disability comes about, Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (As Amended 2023), provides thus: (1) A citizen of Nigeria of a particular community, ethnic group, place of origin, sex, religion or political opinion shall not, by reason only that he is such a person:- (a) be subject either expressly, or in the practical application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any executive or administrative action of the government, to disabilities or restrictions to which citizens of Nigeria of other communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex, religions or political opinions are not made subject; or (b) be accorded either expressly by, or in the practical application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any such executive or administrative action, any privilege or advantage that is not accorded to citizens of Nigeria of other communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex, religions or political opinions.

Section 42 (2) & (3) further provides thus: (2) No citizen of Nigeria shall be subjected to any disability or deprivation merely by reason of the circumstance of his birth. (3) Nothing in subsection (1) of this section shall invalidate any law by reason only that the law imposes restrictions with respect to the appointment of any person to any office under the State or as a member of the armed forces of the Federation or member of the Nigeria Police Force or to an office in the service of a body corporate established directly by any law in force in Nigeria.

Persons with disabilities yearn for equal opportunities to strive, not to be pitied. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. Even though they are capable and willing to earn a living, society continues to discriminate against them. Such discrimination is contrary to the Constitutional protection earlier cited and the provisions of Section 28 and 29 of the Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities (Prohibition) Act, 2018.

Section 28 Provides thus: (1) A person with disability has the right to work on an equal basis with others and this includes the right to opportunity to gain a living by work freely chosen or accepted in a labour market and work environment that is open. (2) A person who contravenes subsection (1), commits an offence and is liable on conviction to nominal damages of a minimum of N250,000 payable to the affected person with disability. (3) Where a company contravenes subsection (1)- (a) the company commits an offence and is liable to nominal damages of a minimum of N500,000 payable to the affected person with disability; and (b) any principal officer of the company involved in the violation is liable to N50,000 damages payable to the affected person with disability.

Section 29 further provides that: All employers of labour in public organisations shall, as much as possible, have persons with disabilities constituting at least 5% of their employment.  

The stories of the school girls are examples of persons who believe that their disabilities should not constitute a barrier to living a normal and fulfilling life. Their determination to pursue education and participation meaningful in society demonstrates that disability should not be equated with inability.

However, beyond legislation, there is a need for stronger institutional protection. Just as we have the Family Court, there should also be a specialised court or judicial mechanism dedicated to the effective administration of justice in cases involving persons with disabilities. This will further buttress the fact that, no matter the individual, fiat justitia ruat Caelum, that is, let justice be done though the heavens fall.

While you live, allow persons with disabilities to be capable in their own way. Do not define them by their disabilities. They deserve not pity, but a fair chance to strive. Society must move beyond legislation to implementation and from sympathy to inclusion. In the end, what society once regarded as a limitation was never an inability at all. It is important to understand that, salus populi suprema lex esto, meaning, the welfare of the people shall be the supreme law.

Esther Pius Ekong, legal practitioner can be reached via idangbenedicta@gmail.com