Article 9 Accessibility
Absence of a comprehensive accessibility policy framework: The government should be held responsible to include accessibility into preliminary plans of public policies and urban development. Accessible environment should be established through budgetary screenings, suggestions and evaluations, rather than passive, slow, and scattered improvement based on individual complaints.
Uneven distribution of resources due to insufficient evaluation: Existing accessible facilities are insufficient, and not designed to be adaptable for different needs. For example, insufficient accessible facilities and wheelchair accesses in theatres, railroad systems and mass transportation services results in difficulties for persons with disabilities and competition among them to use those facilities, or lead to extended waiting time.
Persons with disabilities are unable to live independently due to lack of technological integration: The tendency of segregating persons with disabilities from general services is still widely observed. Persons with disabilities cannot access ticketing services over the internet, and are unable to designate a companion seat during the booking process. Persons with disabilities still rely on assisting personnel to operate ticketing (or ‘specialized’ depending on what is appropriate) kiosks as they are not designed with accessibility in mind.
Physical accessibility (in response to Paragraphs 44-53 of the State Report)
In response to Paragraphs 44 and 49: Current barrier-free legislations only covered the physical building itself, limiting wider participation of persons with disabilities. For example, the definition of “public space” in the Tobacco Hazard Prevention Act refers to any space that is designed for public use. However, by comparison, the definition of “public space” in Acts that regulates accessibility is limited to fixed buildings. Surrounding environment such as non-fixed facilities and temporary exhibitions are not covered by the Acts. We recommend that when legislating laws concerning rights of persons with disabilities, the government should actively consider all aspects of the overall life experiences of persons with disabilities before carefully placing their different needs into categories for more detailed analysis to correctly enumerate the improvements that are needed. Other than fixed buildings themselves, government should also take into consideration the facilities and services, including traffic flow design and information provision, that can be made available to persons with disabilities using all forms of public transport, their stations, ports, and facilities, as well as parks, sporting grounds and outdoor recreational spaces.
We recommend:
Government in raise current minimum standards on regulatory requirement for barrier-free access: We recommend the government expands the scope to develop better barrier-free access to historical sites and monuments, heritage buildings, and barrier-free access laws regulating existing buildings. Government should hold periodic discussions assessing each individual complaint and increase the participation of persons with disabilities in those discussions. Finally, periodic nationwide meetings of Accessibility Advisory Panels should be held to facilitate the exchange of recommendations and best practices, making available best practice examples and networks.
Unnecessary restrictions in the law should be abolished: Public spaces that are accessible by the general public, whether they are publicly or privately owned, should be required to provide services that will allow persons with disabilities to access those spaces on an equal basis with others. This should include all public spaces, such as restaurants, hotel, civic centers, bookstores, theatres, opera halls, community clinics, recreational areas, and camping grounds. Current laws only regulate the actions of government agencies, leaving private company and individual owners skirting their social responsibilities. Where the reasonable distinction can be made between private and public entities in the provision of barrier-free access, that should be based on the extent of burden required (for example, limited barrier-free access in privately owned public space to ensuring access corridors, reception areas and toilets are accessible to persons with disabilities), and not be determined on the physical size of the public space.
A comprehensive barrier-free access requirement and auditing framework should apply to all public building that is specific to the type of building and their use (except simple expansion and addition to existing buildings). Government should development appropriate barrier-free programs and trainers, as well as requiring the participation of government agencies, contractors and subcontractors, building supervisors and auditors with the aim to increase the general capacity of barrier free access principles and standards among these professionals.
In response to Paragraph 45 of the State Report: There are currently no regulation governing barrier-free access to pedestrian sidewalks. There are also no remedies available where sidewalks are blocked after barrier-free improvements. Despite the fact that the Government have allocated 366.03 million NTD on ‘arcade leveling projects’, many sections were then blocked by nearby shops with impunity through stacking goods, parking motorbikes and bicycles and road blocks to prevent these sections to be used by others. These roadblocks are often also found blocking barrier-free access entrance to parks and buildings preventing persons with disabilities effective access into these areas. This demonstrates the government’s fund are misplaced in targeting providing physical access only, without serious consideration being given to the right of persons with disabilities to move and live independently.
In response to Paragraph 46 of the State Report: Barrier-free access in education institutions remain restricted to teaching buildings only. This impedes the rights with persons with disabilities’ right to fully integrate and participate in campus life. Significant barriers continue to exist in classroom podiums, lecture theatres, libraries, gymnasiums, school shops, activity centers, club and society venues, and even in dormitories. For example, despite all schools are required to have accessible toilets, due to inadequate location planning and numbers of toilets, students with disabilities find it difficult or impossible to use the toilet during the short recess time between classes. Access to classroom podiums and assembly hall stage is often impeded by steps or door threshold, while access to school gates and other entrance pathways are often blocked by physical barriers. Barrier-free vertical access to different floors of school buildings are often inadequate or inconveniently located, causing students with disabilities difficulties in accessing special subject classrooms, activities centers and assembly areas. Students who needs specialized assistance such as a portable hoist or personal assistance often have to bear the burden of paying for these needs. Some schools even require that members of the student’s family live with the student in the dormitory to provide required support.
Installation of assistive devices by schools should serve the objective of actively improving the participation of school life by persons with disabilities. School should not demand students with disabilities to adapt and use existing second-hand assistive devices. Some schools go even further in preventing students with disabilities from taking assistive devices provided to them by the school outside of school ground, or demand the return of these assistive devices that have been individually assessed and tailored for the student’s use upon leaving the school permanently (such as graduation). Individually tailored assistive devices are not necessarily suitable for the unique condition of another student with disabilities, rather than helping students, this is more likely to cause resources displacement and wastage.
Schools not only should fulfil the rights of persons with disabilities to receive an education without discrimination and on the basis of equal opportunity in accordance to Article 24 of the CRPD, they also serve the important function of allowing persons with disabilities to practice independent living and receive appropriate vocational training. However, students with disabilities are often excluded from participating in laboratory, physical education and classes with practical component. We recommend schools should collaborate with vocational training teachers to design and implement the necessary assistive devices and workflows to allow students with disabilities to fully participate in practical and laboratory classes, as well as ensuring that teaching materials are suitable for the challenges of the students’ future career.
Regarding how these issues impact on right to education of students with special needs, refer to article 24 of this Report.
Recommendations:
-
Each school should establish a committee to promote barrier-free access, with membership that include current students with disabilities and their parents. All out of campus class and field trip activities should ensure barrier-free access to students with disabilities, including transportation and any other assistive services that are required.
Committees that supervises rights of persons with disabilities shall be included in official institutional design of school administration, current students and guardians shall be included as commissioners. Accessible programs shall be included in plans of field trips or outdoor activities, providing accessible transportation and assisting personnel.
When planning and allocating resources for future long-term policies, especially in the area of education, social, and labor welfare, The Government should adopt a person-centered philosophy and design, ensuring the development assistive strategies are individualized to the specific need of each person with disabilities. The government should take the person-centered stance and design the allocation of resources, devices and assistance based on education, social welfare, labor welfare and long term nursing policies in the aim of individualized assistance.
The Ministry of Education should provide specialized training programs that meets the special needs of students with disabilities for teachers to allow them to facilitate students’ full participation in practical and vocational training classes and increase their capacity to meet future living and vocational needs. Some examples might include establishing a database of specialized educational material, research and workshops on design of assistive devices, and drafting adjustment plans and accessibility plan for practical and vocational training classes.
-
In response to Paragraph 47 of the State Report: How can it be possible to improve employment situation without an adequate support system in vocational trainings? Currently improvement to workplace accessibility relies on passive adjustments made in response to specific situation. Due to the fact that offices and factories are not regulated by existing barrier-free laws, it can be difficult for persons with disabilities to even access the workplace premise for their recruitment interview. Because of this lack of accessibility and movement space for persons with disabilities in workplace environment, it is often not possible for persons with disabilities to participate in career skill training courses or on-job training.
Vocational counseling and assessment should be used as a tool to help persons with disabilities to realize their potential, rather than another barrier for them to effectively participate in the workplace. However, vocational training facilities, including those run directly by the government, or those under contract or receive grant from the government still don’t have adequate barrier-free access for persons with disabilities. A case in 2013 involving a wheelchair-bound person who were evaluated to have failed the written test component of their vocational assessment process, solely because they were not able to access the testing venue due to lack of an elevator in the venue illustrate the continued inadequacies. Currently, vocational training courses targeting persons with disabilities are specifically designed and limited in the fields covered. The government continue to ignore improvements need to address barriers facing persons with disabilities in the workplace.
Recommendation: All vocational training facilities receiving government support, whether it is under government contract or grant and including computer/IT training, cooking and auto mechanic training, should adopt and implement appropriate barrier-free access guidelines. Facilities should also provide participants with disabilities with the necessary individualized support services, as well as assistive personnel and devices.
In response to Paragraph 50 of the State Report: Article 54 of the “Housing Act” provides protection for the right of persons with disabilities to equality of access to housing. However, the realization of such right remain difficult as the law is inflexible to deal with different situation. For example, the installation of a pitiless elevator would often be the most ideal solution in the confined space of existing aging apartment buildings; however, the Government is not actively seeking to amend existing law on lifting devices for better barrier-free access. Even if person with disabilities is successful in gaining government subsidy to improve barrier-free access to common areas in the building they reside in, it is often met with objections from other residents in the building claiming infringement to their property rights and refusing to consent to the work required. Although the “Housing Act” would override other autonomous ordinances and executive orders, the implementation and enforcement of the protections provided for in the “Housing Act” remains difficult. Even if persons with disabilities can improve the accessibility within their residence, they are effectively locked inside their home and unable to access the rest of the building.
In response to Paragraph 52 of the State Report: Barrier-free access to financial services remain unrealized. Current legislations require banks to ensure their physical premise be made barrier-free, however there are currently no legislative requirement for banks to install barrier-free Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs). It was not until 2016 when the government started to take actions in improving existing situations. However, barrier-free ATMs remain limited in its distribution and numbers. Finally, existing counters in most banks are too high causing difficulties persons with disabilities to perform necessary banking functions such as signing documents.
In response to Paragraph 53 of the State Report: Government policies towards providing barrier-free access to outdoor recreational areas are shallow and avoid tackling the deeper accessibility issues facing persons with disabilities. For example, the “Principles for the Establishment of Accessible Facilities at the Main Entrance of Urban Parks and Greeneries”, enacted by the Ministry of Interior in 2014, only require barrier-free access to main entrances to these spaces. This means an outdoor space would be in compliance with the law even if only one of its entrances have barrier-free access. It is not required that other entrances, or any other facilities inside the park, such as adult exercise and children’s playground facilities’ to be made barrier-free. This results in persons with disabilities unable to exercise their rights to enjoy these recreational areas equally to all others. Finally, Government regulations on National Parks and National Scenic Areas only extend to physical buildings, ignoring other facilities such as outdoor footpaths, traffic flow planning, and observation areas without barrier-free access requirement.
Public information (in response to Paragraph 54 to Paragraph 56 of the State Report)
Information relating to barrier-free access provided by the Government are often difficult to access. The most common platform for information dissemination has been through the use of mobile apps. But persons with disabilities who needs to access these apps would be required to own a smartphone that is capable of running these apps. Many people with disabilities, especially elderly people, lacks the economic capacity and the technical knowledge to access the platform. Current information is also provided in a segregated and singular manner. For example, information regarding barrier-free (step-free) buses is not incorporated into the existing bus scheduling apps. A person with disabilities who wishes to access such information would first need to use an app to find out the schedule of the bus they require, then use another app to confirm that the bus used for that time has step-free access, making the information difficult to access and use.
We recommend:
Activities and events that are organized by government agencies, or receive funding from the government should clearly indicate related barrier-free access information available in both promotional material and at the venue. Event organizer should ensure that such information includes, in a clear and easy to access format, location and barrier-free transportation options to get to the venue, available facilities, and how they can access regulatory required assisting staff and services that must be made available to ensure barrier-free participation of the event. Any limitation to these facilities will need to be clearly explained. We also recommend the Government should introduce legislation that stipulate the requisite barrier-free facilities in these events.
Other than the main pages of governmental portal websites, event-oriented themed website should also actively update and integrate accessibility information.
Barrier-free access to information for hearing impaired persons: Currently sign language translation is only available in one news program broadcasted by the Public Television Service (PTS). While other channels provide sign language translation during the broadcast of significant news events, the sign interpreter usually only occupies approximately ⅛ of the screen, and is often blocked by news tickers, subtitles and other graphics shown by the broadcaster. This often results in the sign language interpretation being blocked anyway and persons with hearing impairment are still not able to access the content of the translation.
We recommend:
Legislate mandatory sign language interpretation during news broadcast across all TV stations. Sign language interpreter should take up at least ⅙ of the available screen space. The Government should further prohibit and punish any covering, cutting or omission of sign language interpretation.
Legislate to require news broadcast should be provided with Subtitles to make news more accessible to hearing impaired persons.
Government should broaden the use of sign language interpretation across different activities and events, not only limited to presidential election debates, but also extend sign language interpretation to cover municipal, district mayoral and legislative representative elections as well.
Barrier-free access to information for visually impaired persons: Despite the availability and convenience of electronic books, publishers are not required by law to provide formats that can be accessible to both visually abled and visually impaired persons. Visually impaired persons therefore have to rely on third party voice over software, delaying their access to the same material. We recommend that all publications should be required by law to be published in barrier-free accessible formats, as well as providing services to those who have other difficulties access conventional printed publications.
The Government should legislate to require the availability of barrier-free access to information: Whether it is material available physically or those published online, the information should have a barrier-free access version. This can be achieved through a combination of graphics, symbols, colors and texts to create easily recognizable and understandable information for persons with both physical and mental disabilities, allowing them to fully integrate into the society.
Transportation and Communications (in response to Paragraph 57 to Paragraph 60 of the State Report)
In response to Paragraph 57 of the State Report: The Committee for the Promotion of Accessible Transportation Environment, established by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications have invited representatives from organizations of people with disabilities and relevant experts and scholars to serve as members of the Committee. However, the work of the Committee is not open for more persons with disabilities to participate directly. The Committee members appointed by the Government lacks true representation of persons with disabilities’ interests, it is difficult for persons with disabilities to submit feedback in a timely fashion, and the Committee members lack actual authority to affect changes within the urban planning process. We recommend all meeting minutes of the Committee should be made public, as well as allowing for attendance and participation of the public. Persons with disabilities should account to at least one-third of the Committee membership, and their appointment be recommended by civil society groups.
In response to Paragraph 58 of the State Report: Until 2016, more than 46 percent of buses in urban areas were upgraded to non-step models. However, due to interregional gap, for the countryside with underdeveloped transportation system, insufficiency is more apparent than ever before. Upgrading program targeting freeway schedule bus services that initiated by the government in 2014 were not successful. There are only one to three accessible buses per route, which are not included in ordinary services. Schedules are not transparent, thus rendered this program useless.
In response to Paragraph 59 of the State Report: Even though station for High Speed, Taiwan Rail, Mass Rapid Transit, and Light Rail Transit systems are in conformity to accessibility regulations, the actual carriages of these systems still lack a comprehensive and cohesive barrier-free access design and plan. There is currently a severe shortage of wheelchair and companion seats in public transport carriages. In addition, barrier-free seats on Taiwan’s High Speed and normal train services cannot be booked online, causing unnecessary inconvenience for persons with disabilities. High Speed Rail (HSR) stations are mostly located in suburban area where shuttle service is needed to get to the city center. However, the buses used in these shuttle services are not completely barrier-free, causing persons with disabilities taking more time to travel from HSR stations to city center than using HSR itself. Despite the fact that barrier-free access enabled taxis were included in the Government’s transportation policy, the number remain extremely low, with only 404 taxis equipped with barrier-free access out of approximately 90,000 taxis across Taiwan according to a 2014 survey.
Recommendations:
Public transport should be subjected to legislative requirement to include gradual improvement and performance indicator targets. Vehicles used in public transportation can be re-designed through multi-purpose design strategy to increase the number of wheelchairs they can accommodate. We recommend that every carriage should have space for at least four wheelchair seats. Designs in the door and aisle of carriages should be done with multiple use in mind, allowing for additional wheelchair spaces spread across the carriages. This can be done through fold-up seating in the carriage for example. All seating options shall be available through online ticketing services.
In areas where public transport resources are scarce, priority should be placed to increase the number and ratio of barrier-free access enabled minibuses and taxis, as well as providing subsidies to allow persons with disabilities the freedom and flexibility to choose the method of transport that is most convenient for them. We recommend the Government to further legislate to require the number of barrier-free access enabled taxis to be at or above 20% of the total number of taxis within the next five years. Interior design of the taxis should also be multi-purposed, with seats that can be fold up easily to accommodate passengers with disabilities.
In response to Paragraph 60 of the State Report: The responsibility for providing barrier-free access to passenger ships falls on the Maritime Port Bureau, Ministry of Transportation and Communication, with the planned completion of the “Regulation for Administering Passenger Ships’ by the end of 2016. However, hardware facilitating barrier-free access at ports and onboard passenger ships remain inadequate and limited, with assistance primarily coming from staff working at these facilities. The Regulation does not even specify the minimum ratio of wheelchair seats that must be made available in ports and onboard passenger ships. We recommend the Regulation should include: Passenger ships should be designed with the need or wheelchair-bound passengers in mind, working towards a multi-purpose design model. Ships should be required to have more than merely 1% of wheelchair space made available to passengers who require it. Ships and ports should be equipped with barrier-free toilets, and announcement of important information should be made in both voice broadcast and text display on screen. Information relating to boarding and ticketing and any necessary human resources to assist passengers with disabilities should also be taken into account in the planning and design of the facilities. Government should conduct comprehensive audits of ports and docking facilities, making the result public, and coordinate a reasonable timeline for implementation of improvements in consultation with civil society groups representing persons with disabilities.
Recommendations:
The Civil Aeronautics Administration should develop and enact comprehensive procedures targeting services provided for passengers using electric wheelchairs. This should include regular education and trainings and a simplified complaint mechanism to handle complaints arising from the use of, battery limitations, and the transportation of electric wheelchairs in accordance to international regulatory framework.
State and people representing persons with disabilities should engage with commercial airlines, encouraging them to lift restrictions on the number of persons with disabilities that are allowed to board any flight, the selection of seats, use of wheelchairs and type of wheelchairs that can be on board, as well as not confiscate the battery of necessary assistive devices needed by persons with disabilities while onboard.
Other facilities and services
It is recommended for the government to develop and draft design guidelines and guiding documentations on providing barrier-free access that can be adapted to different type of public venues and facilities. The documentation should include recommendation for venue administrators to provide basic barrier-free access facilities, information, additional resources, and incidents response mechanisms designed for people who have physical, mental, hearing, and visually impairment. Government should also promote the guidelines through regular training covering both government and privately owned spaces.
Public spaces should provide support or respite areas for persons with disabilities. Currently facilities available in public spaces ignores needs of persons with mental disabilities that are invisible to others, leading to an exclusion of the protections they are entitled to. Utility spaces for flexible use shall be provided in public spaces.
The lack of support and respite areas causes persons with mental disabilities, including emotional and chronic psychological sufferers, persons with psychiatric illness, and persons with Tourette Syndrome, to be admitted into hospital or be subjected to compulsory hospitalization orders as their only option in time of needs. This negatively impacts on their ability to complete their studies and work, leading to further stigmatization by society of them evading their responsibilities or unable to handle pressure.
People who require to perform peritoneal dialysis in public places face severe limitations. Most public places lack spaces that are suitable for people needing dialysis. It is a common misconception that the procedure can be done in barrier-free restrooms as these restrooms often lacks the required hygiene standards to be suitable for dialysis procedures. Specifically designed medical room is still uncommon in public places, where persons requiring dialysis are often prevented from using nursing / breastfeeding rooms as management of the public place may feel that the use of nursing room for this purpose is against regulation. The lack of suitable dialysis space severely restricts the liberty of persons who requires it, but is currently not protected under any legislation.
For persons with autism spectrum conditions and Tourette syndrome, quiet personal spaces are essential in public places. It is recommended that public places should be equipped with suitable private space, providing preventative and incident support.
Places for public use should be equipped with the necessary assistive devices to fully a realize barrier-free life for persons with disabilities. Portable hoists should be made available in hospitals and hotels to allow persons with severe disabilities to easily get on and off their bed. Swimming pools should also be equipped with portable hoists, accessible changing facilities and wheelchairs that are suitable for underwater use. These assistive devices should not be restricted to only specific persons with disabilities, but designed in such a way to allow all who might have the need to access various assistive devices available at the venues.
The realization of Barrier-free housing. The housing environment should be made barrier-free in residence of persons with disabilities, rented residence, school, dormitory and even at remand centers and prisons. Facilities should incorporate resources that are specifically designed for each individual to provide for reasonable and appropriate support to persons with disabilities.
Accessibility in working environments and trainings, refer to Article 27, Paragraph 218-219 of this Report.