C. APPROACHES, SCOPE AND COVERAGE OF LEGISLATION 1. APPROACHES (a) Comprehensive versus specific laws The main objective of recent legislation for disabled persons in the ESCAP region is to facilitate the fulfilment of their rights to equality and participation in society. Australia, China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Pakistan, Philippines, Republic of Korea, New Zealand and Thailand have legislation which entitles people with disabilities to have access to education, training, employment and rehabilitation services. In spite of that common main objective, the countries and territories of the ESCAP region have differed in their approach towards the formulation of legislation for disabled persons. While Australia, China, Hong Kong, Philippines and Thailand have adopted an inclusive approach by enacting an unified, comprehensive law for people with disabilities covering diverse areas of life, Japan, the Republic of Korea and New Zealand, have adopted a separate approach by enacting laws to cover specific areas of life. The Federal Disability Discrimination Act (1992) of Australia is an example of an inclusive approach. It covers all areas, including education, vocational training and employment. In contrast to this, the Special Education Promotion Law of the Republic of Korea is an example of a separate approach. Its coverage is confined to education only. Likewise, the countries and territories of the ESCAP region have also differed in their approach to the promotion of equality and participation of people with disabilities through legislation. With the exception of Australia, Philippines and Viet Nam, no other country/territory of the region has informed the secretariat of the incorporation, in existing laws, of enablement provisions for people with disabilities or the identification, in existing laws, of discriminatory provisions against people with disabilities. The Disability Discrimination Act (1992) of Australia calls upon the State to remove, by 1996, all discriminatory legislation. In the Philippines, discriminatory provisions against people with disabilities have been identified and steps have already been taken towards the removal of those provisions. (b) Role of non-governmental Organizations Information on the process of development of legislation in the ESCAP region indicates that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have played a significant role in working with government agencies on this task. People with disabilities have been actively involved in advocacy, consultations and public awareness-raising activities pertaining to the formulation, revision and enactment of such legislation. Service delivery organizations, at international, regional and national levels, have also played an important role in galvanizing the attention of policy makers. For example, at a time when legislation concerning disabled persons was still a new issue in the region, Rehabilitation International (RI) had convened in Manila an international conference on the subject. This action had been followed up through the organization of workshops on the subject, in conjunction with subsequent RI conferences in the ESCAP region. In the case of the Disability Discrimination Act (1992) of Australia, all concerned citizens groups, NGOs, including those working with people with disabilities, and government agencies, were involved. It is noteworthy that the focal point for the Act is the Human Rights Branch in the Attorney-General s Department. The China Disabled Persons Federation played an important role in involving diverse disability groups from all over China in the development of its legislation. The views of people with disabilities in China on their aspirations and needs, and information on their living circumstances were actively sought and taken into consideration. NGOs also participated in formulating Hong Kong s Disability Discrimination Ordinance (1995). The focal point for the Ordinance is the Commissioner for Rehabilitation. For the drafting and revision of The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (No. 67 of 1995), the Ministry of Welfare, Government of India, launched a wide process of consultation with hundreds of NGOs, including NGOs of all disability groups, across the country. For the drafting of the Bill over the course of the period 1981 to 1995, the Ministry constituted three committees. NGOs were adequately represented on all three committees. In the final stages of its work, the Ministry circulated the draft Bill to over 200 NGOs in the country for their comments. The draft was revised on the basis of the suggestions received by the NGOs and was thereafter introduced in Parliament for enactment. All State Governments were also consulted in the process of formulation of the Bill. In 1993, following upon the achievements of the United Nations Decade of Disabled Persons in Japan, a major amendment was made to the Fundamental Law for the Mentally and Physically Disabled Persons. As part of the amendment, the title of the Law was changed to the Fundamental Law for Disabled Persons. Major revisions included, inter alia, a comprehensive definition of disability, increased representation of persons with disabilities at the policy-making level, establishment and reporting of policy and plans for disabled persons, promotion of access to physical environments and information, as well as the inclusion of "full participation" as a fundamental principle of the Law. The 1993 amendment was a reflection of the climate of opinion within Japan that was linked with the passage, in 1990, of the Americans with Disabilities Act in the United States of America. Persons with disabilities in Japan called for similarly comprehensive legislation to be enacted. During the preparation of the bill, organizations of and for disabled persons in Japan advocated major changes to the existing law. As a result of their effective advocacy, most of their views were reflected in the amendment. For example, they had strongly advocated a broader definition of disabled persons, to be based on the World Programme of Action concerning Disabled Persons. They had also advocated the inclusion of persons with mental disorders. Two senators with disabilities played a crucial role in introducing new concepts of disability policy into the amendment. Through those two senators and other concerned legislators, organizations of and for persons with disability in Japan were able to make significant contributions to the amendment. Ultimately, the amendment was, in effect, so comprehensive and far-reaching that the revised Law bore little resemblance to the old law. The Philippines formulated its Magna Carta for Disabled Persons with the active participation of NGOs, including organizations of people with disabilities, in a wide process of consultation involving all concerned interest groups and agencies. Their participation was facilitated by the National Council for the Welfare of Disabled Persons, which is also the Government focal point for legislation to protect the rights of people with disabilities. In Thailand, self-help organizations of people with disabilities played a critical role in the process that culminated in the enactment of the Rehabilitation Act (1991). The Council of Disabled People of Thailand (CDPT), a national umbrella organization of all disability groups, was instrumental in maintaining continuous advocacy for the formulation, strengthening and eventual adoption of that legislation over a period of about 10 years, which coincided with the United Nations Decade of Disabled Persons. Following the enactment of the Act, CDPT continuously approached the Royal Thai Government for timely issuance of ministerial rules and regulations to expedite implementation of the Act. As a result of CDPT s perseverance, its members were invited to serve on the National Committee on Rehabilitation for Disabled Persons in the formulation of ministerial rules and regulations. With financial assistance from the Government, CDPT has conducted several training seminars and workshops for people with disabilities, as well as government officials, at the central and provincial levels, to disseminate information on the Act and the ministerial rules and regulations. Thus, in the development of legislation, particularly in the case of legislation enacted and/or revised in the 1990s in the ESCAP region, there has been a marked involvement of NGOs, including organizations of people with disabilities. 2. SCOPE The examples of legislation reviewed differ in scope of application and in the disability groups covered. (a) Application There is considerable difference in the scope of application of the legislation reviewed. The difference is related to the type of approach adopted towards addressing the needs of people with disabilities, i.e., an inclusive or a separate approach. While legislation formulated on the basis of the inclusive approach encompasses several areas of life, that based on the separate approach applies to a specific area only. (b) Right to self-esteem and dignity In all instances, the legislation reviewed recognizes the right of persons with disabilities to self-esteem and a life with dignity. The guiding principle contained in the legislation is that people with disabilities have a right to be treated equally and to be protected from prejudices which hurt their dignity. The following provisions illustrate the safeguards for the protection of this right: 1. Protect the dignity of persons with disabilities; (1) 2. Prohibit discrimination against persons with disabilities in diverse areas of life; (2) 3. Penalize vilification of persons with disabilities (including incitement to hatred towards and contempt for persons with disabilities by any activity in public); (3) 4. Ensure equality of opportunity. (4) (c) Rehabilitation and welfare measures The examples of legislation reviewed stipulate various welfare and rehabilitation measures for persons with disabilities. Among them are the following: 1. Medical examination, treatment, training and referral of persons with disabilities to welfare and medical institutions; (5) 2. Disability pensions and allowances; (6) 3. Distribution, free of charge or at subsidized cost, of assistive devices to persons with disabilities. (7) (d) Education All the examples of legislation reviewed contain enablement provisions that promote disabled persons access to education. The following actions are among those proposed to be undertaken by the respective governments at different levels: 1. Prohibit discrimination in the matter of admission of disabled persons to educational institutions; (8) 2. Ensure free and compulsory education to children with disabilities up to a certain age; (9) 3. Promote literacy among persons with disabilities through different forms of education such as special, integrated and non-formal education; (10) 4. Adapt and equip existing educational institutions to suit the special educational needs of diverse disability groups; (11) 5. Provide financial assistance, e.g., scholarships to disabled students, as well as material assistance in the form of distribution of equipment and braille books free of charge or at subsidized cost; (12) 6. Promote research to develop enabling technology and teaching methods for the education of persons with disabilities; (13) 7. Organize human resource development programmes, e.g., teachers training courses; (14) 8. Adapt and modify education syllabi to enhance disabled persons access to education. (15) (f) Vocational training and employment To support attainment of the goals of equality of opportunity and integration of disabled persons in the economic sector, the following measures have been included in the legislation reviewed: 1. Prohibit discrimination in employment on the ground of disability; (16) 2. Ensure equal pay for equal work and the same conditions of service for disabled workers as for non-disabled workers; (17) 3. Implement a scheme of positive discrimination in favour of persons with disabilities through a quota system reserving a certain percentage (which may range from two to five per cent) of places for persons with disabilities in the training and employment programmes (18) of public and private sector entities; 4. Promote the participation of people with disabilities in employment through strengthening programmes for various forms of employment, e.g., open and sheltered employment and self-employment; (19) 5. Provide incentives to establishments promoting the employment of disabled persons and preferential treatment to disabled individuals, through tax concessions, subsidies and grants; (20) (g) Fund In some cases, the legislation provides for the establishment of a fund for the rehabilitation and employment of persons with disabilities. The fund has different names, depending on the emphasis given. It is called a social fund in Indonesia. (21) The "Disabled Persons Rehabilitation Fund" is the name given in Pakistan. In Thailand, its name is "A Fund for Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons". In the Republic of Korea, it is called the "Employment Promotion Fund for the Handicapped". The sources of funding may be government grants, donations of money or property, levies collected from employers who default on the hiring of persons with disabilities, or other income. Below are some of the specific purposes of such a fund: 1. To serve as revolving capital for expenses incurred in the implementation and provision of assistance to disabled persons and support of institutions providing medical, educational and social rehabilitation and vocational training; (22) 2. To improve the social welfare level of persons with disabilities, particularly the poor among them who are not obtaining rehabilitation services, poor families who are dependants of disabled persons receiving rehabilitation services, and poor disabled persons who have been rehabilitated or who have a skill but who are not yet employed; (23) 3. To establish training centres for disabled persons, and give financial assistance to persons whose disability precludes their undertaking employment; (24) 4. To pay allowances to employers who exceed the quota for employment of disabled persons and subsidies to those who employ disabled persons although the jobs of the establishment are regarded as unsuitable for disabled persons; (25) 5. To finance the establishment and repair of facilities or equipment for employing disabled persons, as well as measures for administering their employment; (26) 6. To disburse grants to employment entities, special schools and social welfare corporations, to facilitate education or training of disabled persons. (27) An establishment which does not employ a disabled person, as required by law, may simply be required to pay into a national fund each month the sum of money it would have paid as salary or wages to a disabled person had it employed such a person. (28) However, there also exists detailed formulae for computing the amounts to be paid by employers who default on meeting quotas for the employment of disabled persons, as stipulated by the various provisions of the respective laws. (29) (h) Barrier-free built environments Many of the examples of legislation under review have made provisions to promote the accessibility of the built environment for persons with disabilities. For example, Article 46 of the Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons stipulates that the State and society shall gradually regularize the Design Code for the Accessibility of Disabled Persons to Urban Roads and Buildings and adopt barrier-free measures. The legislation of Australia and Hong Kong both recognize disabled persons right of access to premises, public facilities and services and specifically cite that it is unlawful to discriminate against disabled persons in this respect. However, in both cases, there is no provision for compliance to promote accessibility. The Fundamental Law for Disabled Persons, Japan, renders it obligatory for the State and local bodies to take the necessary measures to facilitate disabled persons use of telecommunications and broadcasting services and to improve the facilities providing information to them. According to New Zealand s Community Welfare Act (1975), it is mandatory to construct buildings other than houses in such a manner as to enable people with disabilities to enter into and exit from them easily and safely. The Act also covers the requirements of persons with disabilities for access to streets. As of 15 November 1994, the Republic of Korea had some 30 laws and regulations with provisions related to facilitating access for persons with disabilities and elderly persons. Among them are the Architecture Law, the Town Planning and Zoning Act, the Parking Lot Law, the Housing Construction Expedition Law, the Public Parks Law and the Road Law. The Welfare Law for Persons with Disabilities of the Republic of Korea is most comprehensive on access issues. It casts an obligation upon those persons constructing public facilities, such as roads, parks, public buildings, transport facilities, communication systems, and apartment houses, to ensure that the facilities are accessible for persons with disabilities. Clauses 44 to 46 of the above-mentioned Indian Bill includes provisions for different features of the built environment: the transport sector (rail compartments, buses, vessels and aircraft, including toilets and waiting rooms); roads (auditory signals, kerb cuts and slopes, zebra crossings, railway platforms, symbols and warning signals); the built environment (ramps in public buildings, toilet adaptations for wheel-chair users, braille symbols and auditory signals in lifts, and ramps in hospitals, primary health centres, and other medical care and rehabilitation institutions). Furthermore, there are examples of specific national-level access legislation in the ESCAP region. The Building Code of Australia (1993) requires local government councils to ensure that all new buildings (with certain minor exceptions) be accessible, in accordance with the relevant Australian Standard.(30) In addition to A.S. 1428 Part 1, which is a minimum Standard, two more standards were issued in 1992. A.S. 1428 Part 2, Enhanced and Additional Requirements Buildings and Facilities, meets the access requirements of 90 per cent of people with disabilities for independent access, and includes provisions for those with sensory disabilities. A.S. 1428 Part 3, Requirements for Children and Adolescents with Physical Disabilities is believed to be the only one of its kind in the ESCAP region. The Act Making Buildings Accessible and Usable for Elderly and Physically Disabled Persons (Act No. 44 of 1994) and the Act for Promotion of Use of Communications and Broadcasting Services by Disabled Persons (Act No. 54 of 1993), are both examples of specific legislation that has been enacted in Japan to enhance the convenience of disabled persons. Act No. 44 contains 21 fundamental and 25 recommended standards eight features of the built environment (entrances/exits, corridors, stairs, slopes, elevators, lavatories, parking area and passageways on the building site). The Batas Pambansa Bilang 344 (Accessibility Law and Implementing Rules and Regulations) of the Philippines covers the access requirements of persons with disabilities with respect to buildings and related structures for public use, public transportation (passenger buses and trains, including those of the Light Rail Transit Authority), and streets and highways (audio-visual aids at pedestrian crossings, kerb cuts and ramps at sidewalks). In Singapore, before the Building Control Act (1989) and Building Control Regulations (1989) came into force, few buildings had been designed with special provisions for people with physical disabilities and elderly persons. The Regulations require certain minimum facilities to be provided in all new buildings which elderly persons and persons with physical disabilities are reasonably expected to have access. The Code on Barrier-free Accessibility in Buildings (1990), drawn up in pursuance of the Building Control Regulations (1989), provides detailed guidelines to developers, architects and engineers in planning and designing various special facilities in their building projects to cater to the needs of elderly persons and persons with physical disabilities. The Code s requirements are being systematically introduced into new buildings and existing ones which are undergoing major retrofitting exercises, to make Singapore s building stock more friendly to persons with - physical disabilities and elderly persons. (i) Prevention, early detection and intervention The legislation of China, Japan, Philippines and the Republic of Korea, as well as the Bill for the protection of the rights of disabled persons, which is under consideration by Parliament in India, cast an obligation upon Federal, Provincial/State and Local Government to integrate prevention of the causes of disability into the respective national health programmes. The following list is illustrative of actions contemplated concerning prevention. 1. Popularize knowledge of good pre- and post-natal care, as well as disability prevention, and formulate laws and regulations dealing with disability causing factors, such as heredity, diseases, medical poisoning, accidents, calamity and environmental pollution; (31) 2. Undertake surveys; (32) 3. Conduct investigations and research pertaining to causes of occurrence of disabilities; (33) 4. Strengthen pre-school and school health programmes and make it mandatory to screen children once a year to identify borderline cases for prevention of disabilities; (34) 5. Strengthen mother-child health care programmes such as immunization, genetic counselling and information dissemination on the causes of disabilities and ways to prevent them. (35) (j) Exemption The legislation reviewed also contains provisions which outline circumstances in which those laws would not be applicable. The legislation of Australia and Hong Kong make an exception to the operation of the laws in question with regard to an act committed by any person which otherwise is "discrimination within the meaning of these laws but could be covered within the ambit of unjustifiable hardship". In other words, these laws protect the act of any person or agency from their operation, which though constituting a "discriminatory act", may exempt the perpetrator from punishment by covering the act under an explanation of "unjustifiable hardship". (36) (k) Repeal of existing discriminatory provisions Section 49, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons, Philippines, repeals the operation of the provisions of any other law, which are inconsistent with those of the Magna Carta. Thus the Magna Carta has supremacy over other laws in all matters concerning persons with disabilities in the Philippines. 3. COVERAGE Broadly, the legislation reviewed covers people with locomotor disabilities, sensory disabilities and intellectual disabilities. However, the legislation of Australia and Hong Kong, in particular, defines the term "disability" in the widest possible sense. In addition to physical, sensory or intellectual disabilities, they include the following: 1. Presence of organisms in the body capable of causing illness; 2. Disorder affecting thoughts and perceptions of reality. The Disability Discrimination Act (1992) of Australia defines disability as follows: (37) "Disability in relation to a person, means: a. Total or partial loss of the person s bodily or mental functions; or b. Total or partial loss of a part of the body; or c. The presence in the body of organisms causing disease or illness; or d. The presence in the body of organisms capable of causing disease or illness; or e. The malfunction, malformation or disfigurement of a part of the person's body; or f. A disorder or malfunction that results in the person learning differently from a person without the disorder malfunction; or g. A disorder, illness or disease that affects a person s thoughts, process of perception of reality, emotions or judgment or that results in disturbed behaviour; and includes a disability that h. Presently exists; or i. Previously existed but no longer exists; or j. May exist in the future; or k. Is imputed to a person." This definition includes disability that currently exists, has existed in the past or may be caused in the future. Thus it clearly identifies disabilities that are wide-ranging in aetiology, nature and time span. The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India, includes the following in the meaning of disability: (38) a. Blindness; b. Low vision; c. Leprosy-cured; d. Hearing-impairment; e. Locomotor disability; f. Mental retardation; g. Mental illness. Of particular significance for persons with disabilities in India is the inclusion in the above list of leprosy-cured persons. For people affected by leprosy, specific mention of them as a separate category represents a triumph for leprosy workers who have in recent year, increasingly advocated for this group to be officially included as a disability group, to facilitate their social and economic rehabilitation, as distinct from their medical treatment. Also of significance is the separation of groups who had earlier been treated as belonging to one category: blind and low-vision persons (earlier not distinguished as being two groups with different needs and abilities); and persons with mental retardation and those with mental illness (earlier treated as being of the same category of people with mental disorders). (39) This definition is expected to have far-reaching implications for the five above-mentioned disability groups whose separate needs and entitlements will be given legal sanction through the adoption of the Bill. The Bill further defines "person with disability" as meaning a person suffering from not less than forty per cent of any disability as certified by a medical authority. The Disabled Persons Fundamental Law (1993) of Japan is singular in its specific mention of people with extensive disabilities. The State and local public entities are obliged to endeavour to provide the necessary life-long protection for "severely disabled persons who have substantial difficulties in becoming independent". (40) ___________________________________________________________________________ (1) Section 2, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines; Article 3, Disabled Persons Fundamental Law (1993), Japan. (2) Sections 5 and 6, Disability Discrimination Act (1992), Australia; Sections 6 and 7, Disability Discrimination Ordinance No. 86 (1995), Hong Kong; Sections 32, 34-36, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines. (3) Section 44, Disability Discrimination Ordinance (1995), Hong Kong. (4) Sections 5, 9 and 12, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines. (5) Articles 9 and 20, Welfare Law for Persons with Disabilities (1989), Republic of Korea; Chapter II, Articles 4 and 5, and Chapter III, Articles 6-8, Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia, No. 36, 1980, Re. Social Welfare for the Disabled. (6) Article 34, Welfare Law for Persons with Disabilities (1989), Republic of Korea; - Article 20, Disabled Persons Fundamental Law (1993), Japan; Articles 40 and 41, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1990). (7) Articles 23 and 24, Welfare Law for Persons with Disabilities (1989), Republic of Korea; Article 17, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1990); Article 10 ([3] and [4]), Disabled Persons Fundamental Law (1993), Japan; Clauses 28 and 42, The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (8) Section 22 ([1] and [2]), Disability Discrimination Act (1992), Australia; Section 22 ([1] and [2]), Disability Discrimination Ordinance (1995), Hong Kong; Section 12, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines; Article 12, para. 4, Welfare Law for Persons with Disabilities (1989), Republic of Korea. (9) Article 18, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1990), China; Article 5, para. 1, Special Education Promotion Law (1994), Republic of Korea; Clause 26(a), The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (10) Sections 14 to 16, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines; Article 19, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1991), China; Clause 27, The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (11) Article 12, para. 5, Welfare Law for Persons with Disabilities (1989), Republic of Korea; Section 12, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines. (12) Section 13, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines; Article 24, para. 1, Special Education Promotion Law (1994), Republic of Korea; Article 17, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1990), China; Clauses 27(f) and 30(d), The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (13) Article 12, para. 2, Welfare Law for Persons with Disabilities (1989), Republic of Korea; Article 12(2), Disabled Persons Fundamental Law (1993), Japan; Article 26, Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1990), China; Section 17, Magna Carta of Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines; Clause 28, The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (14) Article 25, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1990), China; Article 23, para. 1, Special Education Promotion Law (1994), Republic of Korea; Clause 29, The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (15) Section 12, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines; Article 19, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1990), China; Article 25, para. 1, Special Education Promotion Law (1994), Republic of Korea; Clause 30(2), The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (16) Section 15(1), Disability Discrimination Act (1992), Australia; Section 11, Disability Discrimination Ordinance (1995), Hong Kong; Section 5, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines. (17) Section 15(2), Disability Discrimination Act (1992), Australia; Section 11(2), Disability Discrimination Ordinance (1995) Hong Kong; Section 5, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines. (18) Article 33, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons; Section 5, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines; Articles 34-35, Act relating to Employment Promotion, etc., of the Handicapped (1991), Republic of Korea; Article 125(3), Labour Code of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam (1995); Clauses 33 and 41, The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995). (19) Articles 29-31, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1990); Sections 6 - 8, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines; Clauses 38 and 40, The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (20) Section 8, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines; Article 37, Act relating to Employment Promotion, etc., of the Handicapped (1990), Republic of Korea; Article 33, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1990); Article 125(2), Labour Code of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam (1995); Clause 41, The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (21) Articles 14-16, Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia, No. 36 (1980) Re. Social Welfare for the Disabled. (22) Section 17 (3 [b] [e])), Disabled Persons (Employment and Rehabilitation) Ordinance, 1991, Pakistan; Section 16, Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Act (1991), Thailand. (23) Articles 14-15, Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia No. 36 (1980) Re. Social Welfare for the Disabled. (24) Section 17 (3 [a]), the Disabled Persons (Employment and Rehabilitation) Ordinance (1981), Pakistan. (25) Article 49 (2), Act relating to Employment Promotion, etc., of the Handicapped (1991), Republic of Korea. (26) Articles 47 and 49 (3), Act relating to Employment Promotion, etc., of the Handicapped (1991), Republic of Korea. (27) Section 2, Article 18 (3)-3, Law for Employment Promotion, Etc., of the Disabled (1960, amended 1976), Japan. (28) Section 11, Disabled Persons (Employment and Rehabilitation) Ordinance (1991), Pakistan. (29) Articles 27-33, Law for Employment Promotion, Etc., of the Disabled (1960, amended 1976), Japan; Articles 37-45, Act relating to Employment Promotion, etc., of the Handicapped (1991), Republic of Korea; Ministerial Regulation No. 3, Ministerial Regulations (1994) Issued Pursuant to the Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Act (1991), Thailand. (30) A.S. 1428 Part 1 (1988), Design for Access and Mobility - General Requirements for Access - Buildings. (31) Article 11, Law of the People s Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons (1990), China. (32) Clause 25(a), The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (33) Article 26-2, Disabled Persons Fundamental Law (1993), Japan; Article 8, Welfare Law for Persons with Disabilities (1989), Republic of Korea; Clause 25(a), The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (34) Clause 25(c), The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (35) Section 20, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons (1991), Philippines; Article 26(2), Disabled Persons Fundamental Law (1993), Japan; Article 8, Welfare Law for Persons with Disabilities (1989), Republic of Korea; Clause 25 ([e] - [h]), The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995), India. (36) Section 11, Disability Discrimination Act (1992), Australia; Section 4, Disability Discrimination Ordinance (1995), Hong Kong. (37) Section 4. (38) Chapter I, Clause 2 (i). (39) See also Chapter I, Clause 2(b), (e), (n), (o), (q), (r) and (u), The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill (1995). (40) Article 11. ___________________________________________________________________________