Supreme Court’s guidelines for the portrayal of Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) in visual media

Source: The post Supreme Court’s guidelines for the portrayal of Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) in visual media has been created, based on the article “Why the film ‘Srikanth’ gets disability — and ‘Aankh Micholi’ did not” published in “Indian Express” on 15th July 2024

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper2-governance- mechanisms, laws, institutions and bodies constituted for the protection and betterment of these vulnerable sections.

Context: The article discusses the Supreme Court’s guidelines for the portrayal of Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) in visual media, prompted by criticisms of the film “Aankh Micholi” for perpetuating stereotypes. It highlights the need for sensitive representations, as seen in the movie “Srikanth.”

For detailed information on Persons with Disabilities: Rights, Challenges and Solutions read this article here

What are the fundamental principles on disability rights laid down by the Supreme Court order?

The nine-point guidelines outlined by the Supreme Court cover a range of aspects aimed at improving the representation of Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) in media:

1. Model Emphasis: The Court highlighted the human rights model of disability, which builds upon and extends the social and medical models. The medical model views disability primarily through the lens of medical conditions, while the social model sees disability as a product of societal barriers. The human rights model, central to this ruling, asserts that disability is a part of human diversity and that Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) are rights holders entitled to full participation in society.
2. Obligations of Private Parties: The Supreme Court discussed the responsibilities of private entities under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. It noted these obligations while also recognizing their limits, as evidenced in the refusal to compel Sony Pictures to create awareness films, akin to the principles outlined in the Vikash Kumar vs UPSCcase.
3. Stereotypes and Discrimination: The ruling emphasized that stereotypes contribute to discrimination against PwDs. Previous cases like Navtej Johar vs Union of India and Anuj Garg vs Union of India have demonstrated how stereotypes around gender and other characteristics can lead to unconstitutional indirect discrimination.
4. Distinction Between Cinematic and Hate Speech: The Supreme Court differentiated cinematic speech from hate speech. It specified that expressions that marginalize based on group membership and reinforce societal prejudices do not qualify as protected speech under the free speech provisions. This is aligned with the reasoning in cases such as the Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan vs Union of India.

For detailed information on Important Judgments by Chief Commissioner of Persons with Disabilities read this article here

What is the impact of this ruling?

1. The Supreme Court’s guidelines aim to ensure that films portray PwDs more respectfully and accurately.
2. The guidelines advise consultation with disability advocacy groups and careful language use to foster a sensitive portrayal of disability.
3. The effectiveness of these guidelines will be evaluated in the coming years.

Question for practice:

Discuss the Supreme Court’s guidelines on the portrayal of Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) in visual media and their impact on fostering more respectful and accurate representations.