Supreme Court orders accessibility, safety and dignity for all people at new buildings

The Supreme Court ordered on Wednesday, 27 April 2011, several measures to be enforced in the design and construction of public buildings and facilities in the greater interest of the country and all people, taking into serious account the submissions made by Dr. Ajith C.S. Perera – a voluntary disability activist.

It was the result of the argued and finalised outcome of the court proceedings of a fundamental rights petition filed by this petitioner, a paraplegic, who appeared in person on wheelchair.

The endeavours here were aimed to promote wider gainful opportunities, minimise waste of human potential and ensure safety in built environments to all people, especially to the seniors, pregnant mothers and those with debilitating conditions, ailments and impaired vision.

The bench comprised Chief Justice Asoka de Silva, Justice Gamini Amaratunga and Justice K. Sripavan. DSG Indika Demuni de Silva represented the respondents.

The implementation of this order is believed to become a meaningful potential solution to a grievous national problem of paramount public interest.

The need for Court orders

In July 2009, Dr. Perera appeared in person on his wheelchair and presented facts at the Supreme Court to justify about the poor quality design of public buildings through non-compliance with laws in force.

Perera then argued: “Laws to require public buildings and facilities to be made safe and accessible to persons with restricted mobility were established in 1996 and further strengthened by the introduction of accessibility regulations under this law in 2005 and thereafter, receiving on 20 March 2007 unanimous Parliament approval.”

He added: “Inept bureaucracy has failed to establish a formal mechanism to effectively implement the legislation even after 12 years.”

Perera then successfully persuaded the Supreme Court to issue several orders, in the larger interest of the society and the country, making it mandatory for all new public buildings to be made ‘inclusive’ and to bring ‘punitive repercussions’ for violators.

Reporting of the escalating violations

In early April 2011, Dr. Perera filed a Motion for the purpose of bringing to the notice of Supreme Court failures to comply with the earlier given order of 14 October 2009, in order to arrest escalating violations and promote effective enforcement of this earlier Court order, in the larger interest of the country and all people.

Perera argued that denial of implementation further aggravated social, economic and psychological issues, plaguing the country in untold proportions.

Perera said: “People have different levels of ability to move freely, and together with the growing number of seniors and those with debilitating conditions along with pregnant mothers, elders with small children or carrying heavy luggage, an estimated 25% of our population amounting to around five million have their movements restricted.” Technology and resources go waste if this significant number of people are denied of their inherent right to access and use them with dignity. Perera emphasised that violations to this order results in poor building design that impedes or deny gainful and productive opportunities and creates unwanted safety hazards to a wide and increasing segment of people in their day-to-day activities, thereby crippling their precious lives socially, economically and mentally.

Perera concluded that the implementation of court orders, however, would empower all these people with restricted movements to be seen as assets rather than liabilities and thereby they form a potential solution to a national problem of paramount public interest.  He then prayed for more precise and specific Court orders in the larger interest of a formidable and sustainable national economy and a better Sri Lanka through ‘social inclusion’ of everyone.

After hearing the submission and arguments from both sides, the Court replaced the order made on 14 October 2009, with the following orders:

New Supreme Court Orders (coming into immediate effect)

The Supreme Court recognised that people have different levels of ability to move freely and that many – especially the growing numbers of seniors, disabled persons, pregnant mothers and visually impaired persons – are restricted in their movements. The safety of this wide sector is paramount and cannot be negotiated or diluted.

1. All parts of new public buildings and public places, especially toilet and wash facilities, as defined in the accessibility regulations in force, hereafter shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the design requirements specified in accessibility regulations of October 2006.

2. Compliance with this Court Order is mandatory to design buildings, to approve building plans, to certify completed buildings and to issue ‘Certificate of Conformity’. No person or body of persons shall furnish any false statement in any return or information in this regard.

3. All authorities empowered to do so with owners and co-owners of these new constructions are equally responsible partners for enforcing these orders. They shall refrain from doing so for all new constructions which violate these orders.

(Authorities meant here include architects, builders, commissioners of local government and officers of the UDA & BOI, heads of government and private sector institutions, and ministries and provincial ministries.).

4. Failure to comply here, Court Order state, is a serious punishable offence attracting punitive repercussions.

Clarification of these orders

These orders mean the following key parts of a public building stipulated by the accessibility regulations in force, not just the entrances, should be designed in accordance with the minimum design requirements: floor surfaces, pathways and corridors, doors and entrances, steps and stairs, hand rails and grab bars, ramps (where needed), lifts, toilets and wash facilities, car parks and signage.

Design requirements provide the basic architectural needs that address the mobility needs of the widest possible range of persons.

‘Public building’ means, a building the public users in normal day-to-day life for: Commercial purposes, community, social, recreational and educational purposes, industrial purposes, residential purposes.