Last month, Anchal Bhatheja became the first visually impaired lawyer to appear before the Supreme Court of India. Her presence before the highest court signalled a shift, however incremental, toward a more inclusive justice system, one that recognises the dignity and participation of all citizens, regardless of disability.
This moment also invites reflection on Pakistan’s own justice system, which, despite its constitutional promise of justice for all, continues to exclude individuals by design.
The constitution of Pakistan guarantees every citizen the right to access justice, equality, and dignity. Landmark cases such as Sindh High Court Bar Association and Azizullah Memon affirm that access to courts is a fundamental right and a defining feature of our constitutional framework. The Supreme Court has described it as the “right to participate in every space where law is debated, created, interpreted, and applied, an essential part of the rule of law in any democracy”.
But for those who cannot physically enter courtrooms, follow proceedings, or testify without assistance, these guarantees often feel meaningless.
Most courts in Pakistan, whether district and high courts or even the Supreme Court, are structurally and procedurally inaccessible for persons with disabilities. Basic features like ramps, elevators, accessible restrooms or tactile signage are largely absent, while courtrooms in smaller districts are often overcrowded and dilapidated.
People with visual, hearing, psychosocial or neurodivergent conditions are rarely provided with the accommodations they need, such as Braille materials, sign language interpretation or procedural support to participate meaningfully.
The barriers extend beyond the physical. Procedural hurdles like untrained staff, inaccessible legal forms and a general lack of awareness or sensitivity among legal professionals further marginalise persons with disabilities. These challenges are especially acute for women with disabilities, who often face layered discrimination in family, custody, or harassment cases due to the intersection of gender and disability.
Pakistan ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) in 2011. Article 13 guarantees equal access to justice, while Article 27 protects the right to work in inclusive and accessible environments. Laws like the ICT Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (2020) and other provincial laws have echoed these commitments.
Yet, little has changed on the ground.
Our courts often celebrate their role in defending the constitution and upholding rule of law. But how can they claim this mantle while excluding millions of citizens from participation?
This exclusion is not only structural, but linguistic and cultural as well. The language used in legal texts and proceedings often reflects outdated and dehumanising attitudes. Terms like ‘crippled’ or ‘unsound mind’ reduce individuals to labels and reinforce harmful stereotypes. Recognising this, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah in Asfandyar Khan Tareen v Federation of Pakistan called for a shift towards respectful, humanising terminology such as ‘persons with disabilities’ or ‘persons with different abilities’.
Meaningful inclusion also requires more than just language; it demands tangible change. In Malik Ubaidullah v. Government of Punjab, the Supreme Court made clear that symbolic gestures are insufficient. Without accessible infrastructure, support systems and reasonable accommodations, such as ramps, assistive technology, or inclusive communication tools, persons with disabilities remain excluded from full participation in public life.
And yet, implementation lags far behind.
As former Chief Justice Tassaduq Jillani poetically reminded us: “That glow the Temple, which holds the scales/ Pinning the dreams, the hopes and the oath/ Of Justice for All”.
But for millions, the doors of that temple remain closed.
Institutional reform is urgently needed. Court infrastructure must undergo accessibility audits, with deadlines for necessary modifications. Universal design standards should be mandatory for new buildings. Sign language interpretation, Braille, screen readers and transcription services should be available in every courtroom.
Judges, lawyers and staff must receive training in disability rights. All courts, including the district courts, high courts and the Supreme Court should appoint Disability Inclusion Officers to oversee implementation and address complaints.
The exclusion of persons with disabilities from legal institutions mirrors the segregation seen in apartheid-era systems, where difference was used to deny participation and dignity. South African Justice Albie Sachs once observed that the real test of democracy lies in how it treats difference, not through domination but through inclusion. This insight should guide our own reform efforts.
Unless our courts are rebuilt physically, procedurally, and culturally, we cannot claim to be a just society. For Justice Jillani’s vision of “Justice for All” to be realised, it must begin with access to the courtroom itself.
And until an individual like Anchal Bhatheja can enter a courtroom on her own terms, not by navigating barriers but by being welcomed with dignity, our justice system will remain incomplete.
The writer is a judicial law clerk to the senior puisne judge at the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
