Barriers to Inclusion: Strategies for People with disability | IGF 2023

Saba

The session aims to explore policies, strategies, and technologies that promote inclusive and accessible digital services for people with disabilities. It acknowledges the challenges faced by individuals with disabilities in bridging the digital divide and aims to address these challenges by examining ways to close the gap and provide equal opportunities for all. Key policy questions to be addressed include inclusive technology and digital services design, bridging the digital divide, and accessible training programs. The session emphasises the importance of inclusivity and accessibility in digital technologies and services, and highlights the ongoing efforts and commitment in this regard. The panel discussion will feature guest speakers Judith, Gunela, Teoros, Denise, and Mohamed Kamran, who are experts in the field, and their contributions will be appreciated. The session aims to provide a platform to discuss and explore innovative solutions for promoting inclusivity and accessibility in the digital realm.

Audience

During the discussion, the speakers focused on the challenges and opportunities of digital inclusion for people with disabilities. They emphasized the importance of adopting a granular approach to address the specific needs of each disability type. It was argued that people with disabilities have diverse requirements, and efforts in digital inclusion need to be both broad and deep to cater to these specific needs.

Collaboration between governments, businesses, and individuals was identified as a key driver for meaningful change in digital accessibility. The speakers stressed that fostering a collaborative environment can lead to impactful initiatives and solutions that benefit people with disabilities. This collaboration could involve sharing resources, knowledge, and expertise to achieve greater accessibility and inclusion.

Furthermore, it was emphasized that the inclusion of people with disabilities should go beyond technical accessibility and encompass the content and functionality of digital platforms. The speakers argued that it is not enough to simply make digital platforms technically accessible; it is equally important to ensure that the content and functionality of these platforms are designed in a way that caters to the needs of people with disabilities.

Another important point raised during the discussion was the need for better recognition of different types of disabilities and parameters in countries. The classification of disabilities varies from country to country, leading to inconsistencies in support and accessibility measures. Therefore, addressing this issue and working towards a more inclusive and comprehensive understanding of disabilities is crucial.

Additionally, the speakers highlighted the low representation of people with disabilities at the Internet Governance Forum and the low internet use among this population in some countries. These observations underscored the urgent need to focus on including people with disabilities in all fields, especially in internet access and participation. Increasing the representation of people with disabilities at forums and conferences, as well as improving the availability of accessible internet services, are crucial steps in ensuring their equal participation and inclusion.

In conclusion, the discussion shed light on the challenges and opportunities of digital inclusion for people with disabilities. It emphasized the importance of a granular approach, collaboration, and recognition when addressing the specific needs of different disability types. The inclusion of people with disabilities should extend beyond technical accessibility to include the content and functionality of digital platforms. Moreover, improving representation and increasing internet accessibility for this population are vital for their equal participation and inclusion.

Marjorie Mudi Gege

Stigmatization of people with disabilities is a pervasive issue that affects individuals across all sectors of society. However, it is particularly detrimental for people with disabilities as they often face additional challenges and barriers due to the stigma associated with their conditions. One of the main factors contributing to this issue is the fact that some disabilities are not immediately visible, leading to misunderstandings and further stigmatization.

Education and policy play crucial roles in combating stigmatization towards people with disabilities. Education has the power to reshape attitudes and perceptions by teaching individuals about the humanity and capabilities of people with disabilities. By educating society about the diverse range of disabilities and the unique challenges faced by individuals living with them, empathy and understanding can be fostered, reducing stigma and promoting inclusivity.

Furthermore, the implementation of effective policies is essential in addressing the issue of stigmatization. It is important to examine whether policies exist to protect individuals with disabilities and promote equal opportunities. However, determining the existence and accessibility of such policies can be a time-consuming process. Nevertheless, it is imperative to ensure that policies are in place and readily available to support individuals with disabilities, as they serve as a foundation for fostering a more inclusive and accepting society.

In addition to education and policy, advocacy is considered a never-ending but necessary process in battling stigmatization. Advocacy plays a significant role in raising awareness and promoting the rights and needs of people with disabilities. By amplifying their voices and experiences, advocates can challenge misconceptions and break down stereotypes, facilitating social change and progress towards a more equitable society.

In conclusion, the stigmatization of people with disabilities poses a significant challenge that needs to be urgently addressed. Education, policy, and advocacy are essential components in combating this issue. By promoting inclusive education, implementing effective policies, and advocating for the rights of individuals with disabilities, society can work towards creating a more accepting and inclusive environment. It is crucial that we strive to dismantle the misconceptions and prejudices surrounding disabilities, fostering a society where everyone is treated with dignity, respect, and equal opportunities.

Theorose Elikplim Dzineku

Advocacy work is crucial in making technology and digital services accessible for people with disabilities. Currently, there are several challenges that need to be addressed. Firstly, content creators often overlook the needs of individuals with disabilities, resulting in inaccessible content. Secondly, many users are unaware of the accessibility options on their devices, which limits their ability to access digital content effectively. Additionally, those who cannot afford devices with built-in accessibility features are left out, leading to a significant accessibility gap.

The issue is particularly pronounced in Africa, where limited awareness exists on how to make content accessible. This lack of understanding perpetuates the accessibility gap, further marginalising individuals with disabilities. To tackle this, capacity-building initiatives are needed to educate content creators and users on the importance of accessibility and provide them with the skills to make content accessible.

Involving people with disabilities in problem-solving and content creation is crucial. By including individuals with disabilities in the design and development of accessible content and applications, the products can better cater to their needs. Opportunities should be created to utilise the skills of people with disabilities, who often have computer science expertise.

Collaboration between organisations, governments, and civil services is essential for effective inclusion. This collaboration can lead to increased funding and support for initiatives like the inclusive tech programme in Ghana, led by Dr. Millicent, a disabled individual. The programme organises hackathons and technology training sessions for people with disabilities, empowering them with the skills to navigate digital technologies.

Stigma in online spaces is a significant challenge for individuals with disabilities, which needs to be addressed through policy interventions. People with disabilities often face discrimination and abuse online, amplified by misconceptions and the complexity of disabilities. Policies should be implemented to counteract this stigmatisation and create a safe and inclusive online environment.

Education and awareness are vital in combating stigma and prejudice. Many people have misconceptions about disabilities due to a lack of understanding. By promoting quality education and raising awareness, society can develop a more inclusive attitude towards people with disabilities, reducing inequalities.

Advocacy for disability rights and awareness must continue as an ongoing process. It is crucial to advocate for the rights of individuals with disabilities, promote accessibility and inclusion, and challenge societal barriers. This will create a more inclusive and accessible digital landscape that empowers individuals with disabilities and reduces inequalities.

Judith Hellerstein

The analysis highlights the issue of digital accessibility and inclusion for people with disabilities. Judith Hellerstein, who represents multiple interests in the sector, is an important figure. She runs her own firm, Halicyn Associates, and works directly with the US government on accessibility. Hellerstein has participated in events organized by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and is a co-coordinator of the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability.

Hellerstein advocates for the development of stronger digital economies and increased accessibility. She helps countries develop their digital economies and emphasizes accessibility. Currently, only 3% of the internet is accessible for persons with disabilities worldwide. With over 1.3 billion people with disabilities globally, there is a clear need to make technology and digital services more accessible and inclusive.

The analysis supports efforts to update the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and enforce Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). These initiatives aim to legally mandate digital accessibility and ensure that companies follow guidelines to make their online content accessible to all users. Updating the ADA and enforcing WCAG 2.1 or 2.2 standards are seen as important steps in achieving greater accessibility for people with disabilities.

The analysis also points out the need for better awareness and practices in developing and designing accessible content. Companies often fail to inform developers about accessibility guidelines, creating barriers for people using screen-readers. Issues with metadata and image descriptions also contribute to the lack of accessibility. Therefore, improving awareness and incorporating accessibility practices in the development and design of digital content are necessary.

In terms of education, there is a strong argument for making programs accessible and inclusive for people with disabilities. Programs should be designed to be accessible to all, regardless of their disabilities. This applies to both online and in-person education. The analysis also highlights the importance of adequately describing pictures and diagrams used in educational materials to ensure that persons with disabilities can fully understand the content. An example is given of a person who developed a special Braille keyboard for STEM education, underscoring the need to adapt educational materials for different learning needs.

It is acknowledged that there is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to meeting the educational needs of people with disabilities. Different disabilities, such as visual impairments, hearing impairments, and cognitive disabilities, require tailored approaches to address their specific needs. Therefore, to achieve true accessibility and inclusion, it is crucial to understand and address the unique challenges faced by different groups of individuals with disabilities.

Lastly, the analysis stresses the importance of testing platforms used for education programs for accessibility. Many programs claim to be accessible, but when used as a whole, they may not meet accessibility standards. To ensure that these platforms are truly accessible, it is essential to have accessibility testers and firms that can thoroughly audit and test the programs. This will help identify and address any accessibility barriers, ensuring that people with disabilities can fully participate in education programs.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights the need for greater digital accessibility and inclusion for people with disabilities. Judith Hellerstein’s advocacy for stronger digital economies and increased accessibility, efforts to update the ADA and enforce WCAG guidelines, as well as the need for better awareness and practices in developing and designing accessible content, are all important steps towards achieving this goal. Additionally, the analysis underscores the importance of making education programs accessible and inclusive, tailoring approaches to meet the specific needs of different disabilities, and testing platforms for accessibility.

Denise Leal

The analysis suggests that there is a pressing need for greater inclusion and visibility for people with disabilities in Brazil and Latin America. The speakers argue that in order to achieve this, policies need to be implemented and there needs to be a better understanding of these policies to make education and training programs more accessible. It is highlighted that only 14% of people with disabilities in Brazil pursue higher levels of education, indicating a significant gap in access to quality education. Additionally, there is a large wage gap of almost 25% less for people with disabilities in terms of salaries in Brazil, further emphasizing the need for equal opportunities.

The analysis also points out the crucial role that technology plays in increasing accessibility and connectivity for people with disabilities. It is noted that the legal system in Brazil is primarily online, which enables individuals with disabilities to participate more effectively. Social media platforms are also becoming key venues for speech for individuals dealing with disabilities, enabling them to have a voice and share their experiences.

However, the analysis also highlights the need for appropriate moderation on social media and online spaces to protect people with disabilities from online bullying and hate speech. Instances of online bullying and hate towards people with disabilities in Latin America have been reported, and it is emphasized that moderation is necessary to safeguard individuals from online harm.

The analysis further emphasizes the importance of recognizing and accepting invisible disabilities. People with disabilities that are not easily visible often face difficulties and prejudice. It is argued that their rights are not immediately recognized, and it is imperative to raise awareness and promote acceptance of invisible disabilities.

Furthermore, the analysis emphasizes the role of communities in providing internet access for disabled individuals and other minorities. A successful example in Brazil is mentioned, where indigenous and traditional communities have taken the initiative to self-organize internet access. This highlights the potential of communities as key players in bridging the digital divide and ensuring accessibility for all.

An interesting point raised in the analysis is the question of the economic feasibility of making online content more inclusive. There is a consideration that economic interest plays a role in determining the inclusivity of online content, raising questions about the prioritization of accessibility in commercial ventures.

Lastly, the analysis laments the lack of attendance at events discussing disability issues. It is argued that more space and voice should be given to discuss situations for the improvement of infrastructure and technology for people with disabilities.

In conclusion, the speakers in this analysis shed light on various aspects related to inclusion and visibility for people with disabilities in Brazil and Latin America. They stress the importance of policies, understanding, and accessibility in education and training programs. Technology is seen as a powerful tool for connectivity and accessibility, while moderation is necessary to protect individuals from online harm. Recognition and acceptance of invisible disabilities, the involvement of communities, and the economic feasibility of inclusivity are also key considerations. The analysis highlights the need for increased attention and dialogue to address the challenges faced by people with disabilities and work towards a more inclusive society.

Gunila Astbrink

Gunila Astbrink, an influential advocate in the field of accessibility and disability within internet governance, actively supports individuals with disabilities and promotes accessibility. She is championing inclusivity by accompanying three persons with disabilities to the IGF meeting and mentoring them in their journey within internet governance. Astbrink argues that mainstream legislation and policy should include provisions for accessibility, highlighting Australia’s national disability strategy and the Telecommunications Act. She commends the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACAN) for enforcing accessibility-related policies. Astbrink emphasizes the importance of including disabled individuals in policy implementation and praises ACAN’s representation of consumers and consumers with disabilities. She also promotes the use of public procurement provisions to ensure widespread use of ICT accessible products. Astbrink believes that organizations should have accessibility champions to collaborate with content and tech developers. She highlights the employment challenges faced by people with disabilities and stresses the need for greater opportunities and support. Astbrink calls for more representation from the disability community in internet governance discussions and encourages individuals to voice their concerns to the IGF Secretariat and the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG). She mentions the existence of a funding program and a training program on disability in digital rights and internet governance. Overall, Astbrink’s work aims to reduce inequalities and create a more inclusive society.

Muhammad Kamran

The analysis reveals several important points discussed by the speakers. Firstly, Muhammad Kamran, a practicing lawyer from Pakistan, is highlighted as an expert in cyber crime. This establishes his credibility in the topic and sets the stage for further discussions.

The speakers also discuss the increasing prevalence of cyber crimes with the advancement of technology. This negative sentiment implies that as technology evolves, so do the methods and sophistication of cyber criminals. This poses a significant challenge for individuals, governments, and organizations to protect themselves from cyber threats.

To address these issues, the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is presented as a platform for finding solutions to cyber crime. This positive sentiment emphasizes its importance in bringing together various stakeholders to tackle the complex issues surrounding internet governance and cyber security.

The broader impact of technology on our lives and future generations is acknowledged. This neutral sentiment indicates that technology is seen as a powerful force that influences various aspects of society. It can bring numerous benefits but also raises concerns about its potential negative consequences.

One of the positive aspects highlighted is the use of technology to assist people with disabilities. The existence of assistive apps and devices like Google Assistant is mentioned as evidence to support this argument. The sentiment here is positive, implying that technology has the potential to improve the lives of disabled individuals by providing them with greater accessibility and independence.

The speakers also emphasize the importance of making digital platforms accessible to everyone. This requires implementing features such as screen readers or captioning and involving disabled individuals in policy-making. This positive sentiment highlights the need for inclusivity and ensuring that technology is designed with consideration for people with disabilities.

The topic of disability and inclusivity continues with the understanding that disabled individuals should be considered “specially abled”. This neutral sentiment challenges societal perceptions of disability and promotes a more empathetic and positive approach towards disabled individuals.

To effectively utilize technology, it is argued that training and resources should be provided to disabled individuals. The sentiment here is positive, indicating the importance of empowering disabled individuals with the necessary skills and tools to fully engage with technology. The mention of alternative formats such as Braille or audio versions further highlights the need for accessibility.

Collaboration between tech organizations, government, and disability organizations is seen as essential to address the challenges faced by disabled individuals. This positive sentiment acknowledges that by working together, these stakeholders can combine their expertise, resources, and influence to create meaningful change and greater inclusivity.

Furthermore, the argument is made that disabled individuals should be actively involved in policy designing. This positive sentiment emphasizes the importance of consulting disabled persons when developing effective policies and programs. Their lived experiences provide valuable insights that can help create more inclusive and sustainable solutions.

Finally, the responsibility for promoting disability rights and advocacy is also stated to fall on disabled individuals themselves. This neutral sentiment implies that it is not solely the government’s responsibility, but disabled individuals should also actively participate and advocate for their own rights. This promotes a sense of empowerment and agency within the disabled community.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights various important discussions regarding cyber crime, the impact of technology, and inclusivity for disabled individuals. It stresses the need for collaboration, accessibility, and the active involvement of disabled individuals in policy-making and advocacy. These insights provide valuable considerations for addressing the challenges and opportunities presented by technology in creating a more inclusive and secure society.

Saba:
Good afternoon, welcome to this session on digital inclusion and accessibility. Today, we have a crucial objectives to explore policies, strategies, technologies, and that can promote inclusive and accessible digital services, especially for people with disabilities. So we aim to address the challenges they face and also identify on the ways to bridge the digital divide. Throughout this session, we will delve into three important key policy questions. First, we will address the topics on policies that can be implemented in different regions across the world to ensure that technologies and digital services are designed inclusively. And second, we will examine strategies to bridge the digital divide, empowering people with disabilities rather than marginalism. So lastly, we will explore how training and education programs can really be implemented or can be more made accessible and also inclusive to meet the needs of people with disabilities. So by the end of this session today, we hope all participants joining us from onsite and joining us from online will gain valuable knowledge on how this really properly include and provide systems, digital services, and technologies that really allow all people to actively participate and also engage in the digital world. So now, let me introduce our panelists and speakers who will shed light on these important topics. First, we have speakers from onsite here, Judit from the private sector representing the Western Europeans group. Second, we have Gunela from Asia Pacific representing the civil society group. And third, we have from online speakers, Teoros from civil society representing the African group. And lastly, we have Denise who will be onsite here representing the private sector and also from the Latin American and Caribbean group. And we also have from our online speakers, Mohamed Kamran representing the private sector Asia Pacific group. So I will give the floor to the onsite speakers to introduce themselves and also I will give the floor to our online moderator to introduce our online speakers. Thanks so much and welcome to everyone coming here.

Judith Hellerstein:
So my name is Judit Halicyn, although I have multiple hats, I do have my own firm Halicyn Associates and besides doing other policy and regulatory work trying to help make countries have more effective digital economies, I also do a lot of work on accessibility directly with the U.S. government. I’ve participated in several of the ITU, the Plenipotentiary, the Council Working Group on Intended Public Policy and other ones. But here I am also representing the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability. We’re one of the main Dynamic Coalitions here. We had our session yesterday. And I am one of the two co-coordinators here. So I welcome you all to the session. Thank you.

Gunila Astbrink:
And I appreciate the invitation to participate in this particular session. And my name is Gunilla Astbrink and I’m based in Australia, but I work globally as chair of the Internet Society Accessibility Standing Group and Judith just mentioned the DCAD, the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability. And through the generosity of INTSURF, we have three persons with disability able to come to the IGF to participate and I’m fortunate to be mentoring them in their progress in Internet governance. Thank you.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Thank you very much. Now I will give the floor to our online moderator Marjorie to introduce our online speakers. Hello. Hello, Sabah. Hello, everyone. I’m happy to be here and happy to have you all for this session. I’m Gege Marjorie. I’m in Cameroon, Africa. And I would like to introduce our online speakers. So we have Theoros Elekplim and Mohamed Kamran, who will be talking on the first policy question. Okay. So I would like to give the floor to Theoros now to introduce herself more properly.

Theorose Elikplim Dzineku:
Thank you, Marjorie. And hi, everyone. Good morning. Good afternoon. And hi from Dawn. My name is Theoros Elekplim. But I’m currently a PhD student at Penn State University. Just like any of most of our speakers, I guess I’ll borrow Judith’s words to say I share many hearts. I work with the Ghana Youth IGF as part of the CRM team member. I’m currently also part of the ISOC alumni network. And I do advocacy work and inclusion in encryption and online safety as well. So I’m glad to be here. And I hope that we have a fruitful discussion. Thank you, Marjorie.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Okay. Thank you very much, Theoros. So that is really nice to have you here. So I’ll give the floor to Mohamed Kamran. Mohamed, you have the floor.

Muhammad Kamran:
Hello, everyone. I hope you all are doing well. And my video finds you well. So my name is Mohamed Kamran. I’m from Pakistan. And currently I’m in Peshawar. I am a practicing lawyer. I have graduated two years ago. And my specialty is criminal law and specifically cyber crimes and such kind of things. With the passage of time, day by day, as technology is coming into our lives, the thieves are also getting smarter. And cyber crimes and such issues are also increasing day by day. So I have some expertise in that. And IGF, I think, is a platform where we can address such issues. We can find some solutions to that. And also how technology is having an effect in our life and also the generation that is coming up next, like after us, how it is affecting their lives. So I think being here is going to be fruitful for me and maybe for myself and others as well. Thank you so much for having me.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Okay. Thank you very much. So we’re just going to move directly into our first question, which is, what policies can be implemented in your region to ensure that technology and digital services are designed and developed to be inclusive and accessible to people with disabilities? So this policy question will be addressed by our speakers, Theoros and Judith Hellerston. So I’ll give the floor first to Judith.

Judith Hellerstein:
Hi. Thanks so much. So it’s actually a combination of policies and also awareness raising. With policies, it has to do with, I’m from the U.S. And in the U.S., we have the Americans with Disabilities Act, which works to ensure that things are, at least government right now, all government websites and other websites are accessible for persons with disability. But there’s also a movement working now as an effort to update the act to make sure that websites and other areas are accessible. And with that is the key is the guidelines to be looking at the World Wide Web, the accessibility guidelines. And with that is a series of guidelines from the W3C, which is the abbreviation of that. And they work on web content guidelines. There’s work on all types of publishing of dialogues. And the key also is that you need, everything needs to follow the WAI, the Web Accessibility Initiatives Guidelines, whether, and especially on websites, is the WCAG has to be 2.1 or 2.2. And there’s a really big problem lately because today, throughout the world, only 3% of the internet is accessible for persons with disabilities, despite there being over 1.3 billion globally. And a lot larger. So it’s a very big problem since many, and the problem is also made more problematic is that companies are not telling developers they need to follow these guidelines. And so developers are not doing it. And then they have to retrofit a system. So the real issue is what you need more is enforcement that everyone has to follow and make sure that all the sites are at least WCAG 2.1 and either AA, preferably AAA compatible. And if you look at the WAI, so it’s W3C.org, and if you look at WAI or the WCAG, you can get those. And that is really the key to make them. Besides the laws we have is also on making sure that these are accessible. And they also has an issue of metatags. So what we, when I say awareness is that people, when they’re creating sites or when they’re publishing images or other things, they’re not aware that when they take an image and that people can’t see it. And so when a person using a screen reader comes across that, it’ll just say image, or it may say possibly man, possibly with a dog, possibly who. And so all the pictures need to be described. And also what PowerPoints or any of these images. Or some people like to do cut and paste from a document. But when you’re cutting and pasting, you’re creating an image. And then it makes an accessible document inaccessible. So you have to be aware that you have to save the documents. It’s really easy in Word. You could save it and upload it or links. And the metatags is really easy. You can just right click on it. So the software is easy to use. It’s that people are just not aware.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Okay. Thank you very much, Judith, for that. I would like us to now have Fiora’s opinion about the policies that can be implemented in her region to ensure that technology and digital services are designed and developed to be inclusive and accessible for people with disabilities. So Fiora, you have the floor.

Theorose Elikplim Dzineku:
Thank you so much, Marjorie. And again, I’m grateful for the first speaker because she has actually tackled on part of the things that I wanted to say. And so I’m not going to repeat that again. I’m glad she did spoke about the platform regulations and how content can be more accessible online as well. So I’m speaking from the African region. And I’m going to delve more on advocacy work. Because one of the points that she made, which is very real, is the fact that people just don’t know that something like that exists. And people are not even, I wouldn’t use the word not interested, but people seem to forget that not all content is easily accessible by everyone. So even content creators in themselves do not make provisions for that. For example, when somebody is creating a YouTube video, who are the audiences in mind? And how does the person, for example, make that particular video accessible to everyone? The whole idea is to create an almost seamless way of consuming content where we don’t necessarily have to say this is for able people and this is for disabled people. Because virtually it’s just all one humanity. So access is very important. But advocacy is more important, especially in my opinion. Because the content creators and the platform moderators, platform creators, sorry, I’m not even aware of that mistake. I know for Apple devices or even some mobile phones now have accessibility options where you can have voice over text to help you out. Or you can have an easier way of navigating your phone without necessarily being able to see it or hear it. There’s a way of that. But again, within the African region, how adoptive is that? How many people are aware of that? How often do we do capacity building and training people to teach people? And the major issue is how many people can afford those devices? We’ve had in other sessions and we’ve had the issue about internet accessibility, the digital affordance of technology and devices as well. So the question is how many people can even afford the mobile devices that have those options? What is the percentage of that? And those who cannot afford those devices, what is the percentage of that? Now, I mean, it’s obviously those who are in the minority gap of affordance are huge. Now, how do those people still access content? If they go to the internet cafes in the local communities and say, I want to read something on the internet, how accessible is that content to them? How do they know about that? And how do we probably say would handle such a situation as well in our institutions, in our schools? How many schools have a computer lab that is built to cover that? Those are some of the questions that is still, I mean, some of the questions that needs to be explored. But overall, the idea is that we should come to a middle ground where we bridge the gap, where we don’t necessarily have to assume that everybody can easily access content online, and everybody should be able to understand, everybody should be able to afford the whole devices that are able to provide accessibility. I’ve always stood the whole idea, or I’ve always stand on the idea that there shouldn’t be any clear discrimination or gap to necessarily point out that this person is able and this person is not able. Technology, in its sense, should be basic to everybody. And I’m glad you really spoke about the web and how content are tagged. Again, I would ask within our African context, and I stand to be corrected on that, but how many of us know that? How many of us know how to meta-target? I was surprised that you said you can just do it in Word and right-click, and my question is now we know we can right-click and put things or meta-tags on it, but how many of us know that before this session? How many of us will remember after this session? But if there is any training and capacity building at every level in our schools, perhaps we can get used to doing that, and we can know that there are just basic and easy ways of making sure everybody’s included. And that’s where the advocacy work comes in. That’s where the grassroots community work comes in. Not that just after session speaking, we leave it behind, but after IGF and after various sessions where we speak about bridging these gaps, what do we do after that? I’m going to end here for now and leave the floor, but that’s something we can think about and take home and see what each individual can do to contribute. Thank you.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Theoros, for that very insightful opinion. So I’ll just pass the floor now to Saba, on-site moderator, for the next phase of this.

Saba:
Thank you. Thank you very much, Marjorie and Theoros and Judith for your valuable insights on the first question. Now let’s move to our second policy questions. How can the digital divide between people with disabilities and those without disabilities be bridged? What strategies can be employed to ensure that technology is used to empower rather than marginalize people with disabilities? I invite Gunela, joining us from on-site, to speak on this question, and also Mohamed Kamran, joining from online, to speak on this question. Over to you.

Gunila Astbrink:
Hello. Yes, I live in the Asia-Pacific region, which we are now in for the IGF, and I’ve been asked to speak more specifically about activities in this region. And this region is the most populous in the world. It has huge populations, as we know, over one billion, two little countries in the Pacific that might have 2,000 people. That’s it. And the greatest diversity in religion, language, culture, and economies. So there’s a lot of challenges in this region. And one of the things, though, when it comes to bridging the digital divide is to ensure that mainstream legislation and policy include clauses about accessibility. So it’s not that they are separate policies, which are very important, but having them as part of communications acts, communications policy, really does make a difference. And if we take the case in Australia, sure, we have a national disability strategy that has some key aspects on accessibility to communications technologies, but also the Telecommunications Act includes specific provisions there as well. And certainly when it comes to disability discrimination legislation. But with all of those cases, implementation has to happen. It’s one thing having the policies, but they need to be implemented. And that’s really where persons with disability come in to ensure that they are part of a process in helping implement policies. In Australia, there is funded through the federal government, and it’s actually in the Telecommunications Act, the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network, ACAN. And its role is basically to represent consumers and consumers with disabilities in government, in the private sector, to make sure that there are implementation actions happening in all of those cases. And so again, you have consumers generally being represented in this body, but specifically persons with disabilities. So there is that cross fertilization of ideas and strategies and advocacy. And I also wanted to mention the public procurement provisions that are in force in a number of countries. It started in the U.S. with something called Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. And it means that governments need to include ICT accessibility criteria when they purchase anything ICT related. And in Europe, it has been harmonized with European standards, and one is called EN 301549. And that is talking about user requirements by persons with disability and how to achieve that in public procurement. That has been adopted in a number of countries across the world. Kenya, for example, India, and Australia. And we want to see the implementation of that public procurement type of provision. And my final point in this particular session here is, in a mainstream organization, to try and make sure that there is an understanding of accessibility and persons with disability and bridging that digital divide. It’s really, really important to have accessibility champions. People who have some knowledge of accessibility and work in various parts of an organization and can remind content developers, any tech developers, to make sure that accessibility is included as particular products are developed. Thank you.

Saba:
Thank you very much for that insight. Now, I will give the floor to Marjorie. And then, second question will be also answered by Mohamed, joining us from online. Over to you, Marjorie.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Sure. Thank you, Saba. So, Mohamed, can you please take the floor? So, how can a digital divide between people with disabilities and those without disabilities be bridged? And what strategies can be employed to ensure that technology is used to empower rather than marginalize these people?

Muhammad Kamran:
Okay. Thank you, Marjorie, for the question. See, I think technology can help us in many ways, specifically when it comes to the disabled people. It can help us in various ways. There are assistive apps. There are assistive devices. Google Assistant is one of the very small examples. I think if we include that to other gadgets and to other devices, it can be helpful to us. Coming to the bridging of a technology between the disabled people and others, first of all, I think that disabled people are not only like we cannot call them disabled, but we should call them specially abled. Because if God takes one thing from you, he is going for sure he is going to give you so many other blessings where he has not blessed with that thing, the normal people. He is going to bless you with that. So, I think there are people who are specially abled to bridge the digital divide between people with disabilities and other people. It is important to normalize the digital platforms and technologies and to make it easily available to everyone. Such digital platforms can include like implementing the feature like screen readers or captioning, adjusting phones, which is available in some apps and some phones, but not everything. And I have used the word normalizing these things. So, we have to normalize all these things and we have to make it available as much as we can. Also, by prioritizing accessibility and engaging the disabled people while making these programs and while making these strategies, because if disabled people are a part of making these policies, these policies will be made so much effective on the ground root level, because they are the ones who are the effectees. They know where the lacuna lies and they are the ones who are going to tell us how we can make strategies which are the best in ground level. So, providing training and resources to individuals with disabilities can also help them navigate and utilize technology very effectively. As I have said earlier, that if we leave it to the people who are the effectees, only then are we going to get the results as much effective as we need. So, yeah, collaborating. One more thing, it is I think one of the most important things, that collaboration with the technology organizations, like those organizations which work for technologies or the government entities, and also the disabled organizations, or I would say those organizations who works for disabled people. So, technology companies and disabled organizations, along with the government entities, can collaborate while making such platforms, while making such programs or policies, I think is going to be one of the very effective ways to bridge the technology between the disabled people and those who are normal people. So, training and education programs to be made very accessible to every one of us, specifically to individuals who are disabled. Providing alternative formats, such as Braille or audio version, and physical assistance to the learning environment should be made very accessible, because only physical learning environment and the physical learning environment is going to help them in the best way. Because if let’s say if a person is blind, so if he sits there in a physical learning environment, I think he is going to learn it as fast as like none other platform. That is why I have included physical learning environment into my opinions. Incorporating assistive technologies, as I have mentioned earlier, that Google Assistant is also a very effective thing, but we can include such assistive technologies in different gadgets, in different platforms, and to different aged people, like Google Assistant is going to work the same for everyone. But if we divide it according to our age groups, for example, what a 10 years old kid will need is different from what a 25 years old person would need. So, I think dividing it into age level is also important to me. Offering flexible learning options, such as online courses, etc. If someone has no access to physical learning environment, they can be given options with online learning. For example, we are connected through online. See, some of us are sitting in Ghana, some I’m in Pakistan, some are in Japan. So, online connectivity is also very important. Same goes for the disabled people, because they’re the ones who need it more than us.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Oh, Mohammed, thank you. Please round it off now. Okay, I’m sorry I’m taking long. I’m sorry.

Muhammad Kamran:
So, yeah, disabled individuals are to be involved in designing all these policies. My last point would be, as I mentioned earlier, that while designing each and every policy and program, we need to consult these people, because they are the ones who are effective. So, they are the ones who are going to give us the policies which are effective on the ground. Thank you so much.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Thank you very much, Mohammed. That was very insightful. I learned a lot about it and many things that I don’t even know about. So, I think we can move now to our next policy question. That is policy question three. So, Sabah, we have Denise there already. You’re welcome, Denise.

Saba:
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much, Marjorie. Now, I really want to give the floor now to Judith to share on the trainings and also what kind of education programs can really be made to accessible and inclusive to meet the needs of people with disabilities. So, I would like to give the floor to Judith to answer this question, and please, if you have any comments or if you have any questions, feel free to raise your hand from here, and for online participants, you can also put in the chat, and Marjorie will take one of that. Judith, over to you, please, and also, please, at the end, you can also raise about your key takeaways and also recommendations on all of those topics.

Judith Hellerstein:
Sure. Thanks so much, and thank you for giving me the floor. I’m going to be leaving shortly afterwards because I’m organizing another 530 session on Policy Network on Meaningful Cognitivity, so I apologize. I have to run out afterwards, but one of the key on the training and education programs, the key is that programs needs to be designed to make accessible to all, and I know a lot of places like to use a lot of pictures and descriptions, but then all these pictures need to be described because otherwise, persons with disabilities are not getting anything out of them. We had a perfect example of one of our disability fellows who created a special braille keyboard in India for STEM education, and so you need to have a lot. You need to rethink the sessions and what you’re trying to gain out of it, and so that way, you could actually address all the people and everyone can benefit from the same session, so if you use pictures, you really have to describe them. If you use diagrams, you have to describe them because otherwise, the person is not going to be able to get there, and they’ll get frustrated, and they’ll drop off, and if you really want to have people to be active in it, they need to feel part of the whole conversation and part of the learning, and they need to partner with it, so that is really the key is that you need to have, you need to rethink how you’re going to do online education or in-person education to focus on how you’re going to meet the needs, and there’s also the problem is that there are many different needs. You have a person with visual disabilities, you’re a person with hard of hearing, and then you have a person with cognitive disabilities, and so each one is very different and has a different approach, so there’s no one, there’s no one thing fits all approach. You need to have tailored the approach to the actual group, and so that way, you can really address all the issues with a cognitive one. You have to also make sure that it’s not too many images or not too, the pictures is not taking up the whole screen because they cannot deal with all the pictures, while maybe a hard of hearing person will want that, so you really have to work with who is the community you’re trying to address, and then figure out how you’re going to address it, and how you’re going to meet needs of those, so that’s sort of what one goal you have in mind in there, and the other one is make sure everything is accessible. Make sure that the platform that you’re using is accessible. Oftentimes, people think the platform is, or the plate of the company said, oh yes it is, but it really isn’t, and so the key is often to get these programs be audited and tested by another company who’s in that business to audit and test them, and to make sure they are actually accessible, because so many programs say they are, and it could be that individually the components are, but when put together in the actual program, it no longer is accessible, so that’s why it’s the key to have accessibility testers, and have a firm who’s audited that. The enforcement is the key. Places say, oh yes, we’ll do it, oh yes, but then it may have been initially, but then as they added more and newer material, they didn’t keep up those standards, and then the whole program becomes inaccessible, so I would say that’s my takeaways. Make sure that you have an online program tested by an accessibility firm to make sure that it actually works, and that there is no, and that pictures are described, everything is described and appropriately meta-tagged so that people can be reading and seeing it. And now I have to run off to my, so sorry, but Gunala has my information and she can direct any questions, probably also answer any of them.

Saba:
Thank you, thank you very much Judith for your insightful. Now I will give the floor to Denise to answer on how trainings and educational programs can be made more accessible and inclusive to meet the needs of people with disabilities. Denise, first introduce yourself and answer. Thank you.

Denise Leal:
Hello everyone, I am Denise Leal from Brazil. I am here to represent Latin American Caribbean people. I belong to the private sector and academia and I am also part of the youth Latin American Caribbean IGF and I was part, I am a former fellow from the youth program of Brazil and you might be thinking why am I here speaking on the topic. I was also a volunteer and a teacher in the inclusion program in Brazil in Pontifico University of Goiás and we worked there with elderly and also people with disability. I had some experience in the topic then, so answering this question, before answering this question I wanted to say that I am very happy because we have this session, because we are giving voice to this topic, to this theme. It’s really important, it’s a thing that we need to do more often and I wish we had more participation on the topic and that the IG community really could get more involved on it. And for beginning, when we talk about training and education programs and how they can be made more accessible and inclusive to meet the needs of the people with disabilities, I think that first of all we need to give space and voice to the people with disability to speak about their situations, how they feel and what are their needs, because sometimes, very often, we don’t really give a space to them to speak about their needs or we don’t have patience enough to listen to them speaking, because we think that, oh, they speak in a different way or they hear in a different way. We must be patient when a person without disability sees and listens to a person with disability. The person really needs to be heard at that point and we need to give space and voice and power to these people to say what are their needs. And, of course, we need policies on the topic, but also we need people to understand the policies. In Brazil, we have almost 15 percent of the population as a person with disability, so it’s a large amount of people, it’s not a small number. In Latin America, it’s 85 millions of people with disability and, therefore, we need to work on policies to make training and education programs more accessible, not only the online one, but also the online one, but also the on-site. Schools need to be more accessible and when it gets to the technology topic and internet topic, what we have seen in Latin America is people with disability are getting space on social media to speak and it’s nice. When it comes to internet, the social media is having a paper, a work on the topic. They are occupying spaces on internet and it’s nice and we need to also moderate more the social media because I have seen some cases where, in Latin America, people with disability have suffered bullying, online bullying, online hate for speaking about their lives and their problems, their issues. Therefore, what we need, of course, our colleague has spoken really well on the topic that we need training, online training, online platforms that are really accessible, but also we need to moderate the social media, the websites, so that we don’t have people with disabilities suffering in these spaces from all the kinds of problems that they could suffer in online spaces. I also believe that technology plays a huge role on the topic, helping people to get more connected, to learn more. I have a friend that has spoken on the youth Latin American Caribbean IGF and he’s today a lawyer and he is a person with disability. He is able to be a lawyer because today in Brazil, the legal system is almost everything online, works online, so he is able to use the online platform, the technology, to help him in his legal activities. So today he is in a high, he has high education, he has studied and he’s planning to go for a master’s degree because of technology on education in Brazil education. I also wanted to highlight an important point, which is we have in Brazil only 14% of people in going for higher levels of education, so it’s a really small number, 14 people of all the people with disability, so it’s a really, really small number and also there is a wage gap of almost 25% less for people with disabilities in terms of salaries, so it’s so unfair and the law is, the law talks about it, we cannot have wage gap of salaries, but it is a reality. So we have policies on the theme, we have laws on the theme, but how can we make them a reality, a practical reality? We must, how is the accountability of the theme, of the topic? So I wanted to leave you with these answers and also these questions and I hope that in the next years, in the next IGFs, we have more involvement on the theme, on the topic and we have even more people with disabilities speaking and occupying spaces. Thank you.

Saba:
Thank you, thank you very much Denise for your valuable inputs. So far we have been discussing on implementing policies that really prioritise inclusive and accessible design on using technology and also digital services, especially considering the diverse needs of people that are with disabilities. You also talked about the need to develop a training in support programs to enhance the literacy, digital literacy and also the assistive technology skills for people with disabilities and also offering ongoing technical support to address the accessibility challenges have also been mentioned as well. And bridging the digital divide also has been mentioned by providing accessible access, affordable accesses to some devices and also internet connectivity, creating accessible digital content and also some of the tailored digital literacy programs as well. We have also been discussing on fostering the collaboration among different stakeholders to promote the digital inclusion and raising awareness and advocacy has also been mentioned for the rights and needs of those people in the digital realm. Now I will give the floor to any questions or comments from on-site and also please feel free to share your comments and questions in the chat and Marjorie, our online moderator, will take it from there.

Audience:
Hi everyone, I’m Joelson Diaz from Brazil. I represent here the Federal Council, the Federal Bar of the Brazilian Bar Association, although at this moment I’m speaking on my personal capacity. Well, I see this very empty room, regrettably, which means to me that we have this big challenge on including persons with disability. We talked a lot about inclusion in this conference, women, indigenous people and so on, which is quite important, of course, but it looks like the challenge to include persons with disabilities is even bigger. Well, I have a brief statement and two questions to the panelists. I’d like to express my sincere appreciation to the sponsor organizers and organizations for hosting this crucial panel on the inclusion for people with disabilities. The insights from the panelists have been deeply insightful, emphasizing the complexity, dimensions of digital accessibility. The Internet serves as a gateway for many to find partners, jobs and purchase products. Ensuring that apps and platforms are designed to allow persons with disabilities to have the same opportunities is not just about technical accessibility, but also inclusivity in content and user experience. In this regard, I have the first question. Given the diverse types of disabilities and the unique challenges which presents in the digital space, how can we ensure that our efforts in digital inclusion are not just broad, but also deep, addressing the specific needs of each disability type? Additionally, how can we foster a collaborative environment where governments, businesses and individuals work hand-in-hand to drive meaningful change in digital accessibility? And finally, in addition to technical accessibility, how can we ensure that the content and functionalities of digital platforms are inclusive, allowing persons with disabilities to fully engage in online activities such as dating, job hunting and shopping? What strategies can be employed to ensure that digital content is both accessible and relevant to their needs? Thank you very much.

Saba:
Thank you very much for that question. Now I will give the floor to Gunil to answer on the first question and second question. Maybe Tioros, if you can add on

Gunila Astbrink:
that one. Thank you. Yes, there was a lot in those two questions. I will probably start by addressing one aspect in your second question and relating to employment. And that is a huge issue. And I will refer to Vidya Y, who is a DECAD Disability Fellow here at the IGF. And she is blind and she finished her high school education with a gold medal. And she was the only one of her cohort who didn’t get a job at the end. And she has done a degree in computer science, etc. So she started her own organisation because she’s a very strong woman. But the percentages of people with disabilities who have employment is far, far too low. And what is happening in some countries, like Sri Lanka and Australia, is that there are organisations training both persons with disability in marketable jobs. But as well as that, raising awareness in companies that may employ those people. And being part of the interview process, being mentoring there for a number of months as a person joins the workforce. So that process really does make a difference. And it’s been quite successful. But it’s long term. And it’s again this thing about employers understanding that a person with a disability isn’t a liability. They are not a liability. People with disabilities have proven by many studies to be very loyal employees, very consistent in their work. And there might be some accommodations needed in the workplace. But it’s to raise that awareness of how it can be achieved. So I might pass it on to if anyone else wants to have a say on that question.

Saba:
Thank you very much. Maybe, Tiorus, if you can add on the second question, and then we proceed to other one.

Theorose Elikplim Dzineku:
Thank you so much. I’ll try to make my answer very brief, actually, so we could have more questions in there. But just on a quick one, I agree with the person that asked the question, because this is more like, I wouldn’t say very important than the other sessions, but this is a critical topic. And when he said that the room was empty, I saw the camera going on, I was like, well, yeah. And it’s always a challenge that we face, that we talk about inclusion, and yet we don’t include the people who need to be included. So it’s more like trying to solve somebody else’s problem without having the person there to give you the whole idea of that. But that not withstanding, I do agree with my earlier speaker, making the whole, I agree with her point on the idea that the people with disability have equal rights and are equally committed to their work, just like how we able people are also committed. Now, the first question is on how to address specific needs. In all honesty, to address somebody’s need, you have to speak to the person. It’s easier being an able person saying you need to build a platform, you need to do this, without necessarily talking to the disabled people. So again, I’ll come back to the whole idea of speaking to people who need the help and asking them how they want to help. It’s always better to speak to them to tell our innovations and to tell our building ideas around what they want, and not what we assume they want. So it’s always needed to have them included in every discussion we do as well. There’s also another question on collaboration, how does government and other people collaborate? Well, I don’t know if this is a simple answer, but there has to be collaboration. So reaching out to them. I know in Ghana, for example, we have an organization called inclusive tech, being owned by Dr. Millicent, she herself is disabled. She usually or mostly have hackathons for disabled people training them in innovation, building technology, that’s just one thing. I’m sure other countries have similar things as well. If we could collaborate with government or civil servants or get funding to do all those things, that should help. And my last part of concluding on this point as well, how do we create content? Again, I’ll come back to my first point. Let’s ask the people what type of content they want, if they can be involved. I’m sure that there are a lot of challenged disabled people, sorry, who are computer science people, they know how to build the app. Why don’t we give them the opportunity to do that? I guess that will help. Thank you.

Saba:
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much, Theoros. Since we are also running out of time, maybe for the next questions. Okay. Okay. So we have a question from onsite, and I will give the floor to Veronica.

Audience:
Hello. Can you hear me well? Hello, everyone. My name is Veronica. I’m Italian. I’m the chair of the Internet Society Youth Standing Group. Thank you, first of all, for bringing the topic of disability to the IGF. And I do actually have a question. I have a comment because I would actually like to bring my own experience. When I was a child, due to an infection, I lost between the 30 and 70 percent of my hearing ability. And for me, the interaction since I was a child has always been very difficult, especially with people that have a very low tone of voice. So I always have to ask them to repeat what they say. And hearing your panel, your intervention, I think that is something that is lacking, and it’s granularity of approach. Because not all disabilities are the same, and not all of them have to be treated like that. For example, in my experience, I don’t have full hearing capacity, and the interaction in person for me is always very difficult. In order to hear your intervention, I always have to read the subtitle. So for me, you know, those type of auxiliary instrument for me are very helpful. And on the other hand, I had to give a lighting talk the other day, where this instrument was not actually available. And for me, it was very difficult to understand people who were talking at the microphone. And just for you to say that sometimes also digital tools are very helpful. I have a better interaction online compared to the interaction I have on site or in presence. So what I would like also to invite you to consider is also that digital tools can be an amazing tool to help people with disability. Mine is de facto a disability, but it’s not recognized in any way. Because in order to be recognized as a disabled person, each country has its own parameters. So it’s not always simple, you know, to get access to, how to say, aid to on this. So, yes, this one. Thank you very much, Veronica, for your comment. And next, please. Hello, this is Umar Khan from Pakistan. I will leave some disappointment to second the Brazilian guy, and some statistics from Pakistan as well, with regards to the person with disabilities. These empty chairs in the room show the seriousness toward the inclusion of the digital literacy for the people with disabilities. So I think these rooms should have been more crowded than ever. We also have seen very less number of people with disabilities, some disability in the IGF during the international conference center. So this also shows that the actual people with the disabilities, with the inclusion of them in any field, especially in the Internet, this is somehow a disappointment. And I think the IGF should take it very serious. If I just come to the statistic of my country, my friend, my class fellow, and my college colleague is also on the panel, Mohammad Kamran. I’m so happy for him to be here on the panel. Pakistan having a population of around 236 million population, and in which 6% of the population is somehow with disability physically or mentally. But it’s also a disappointing moment that only 37% of the population among the 236 million are using Internet. The general public, only 37% of the Internet users are in the population. So you can guess, you can observe that a country having 236 million population having just 37% of the Internet user, how will you take or how will you notice the people with disabilities? So I think IGF should really work, and the technical, the companies, and the civil society should be more serious, and I’m hopeful that we can see some good number of people with disability next year in IGF happening anywhere. So I’m hopeful for that. Thank you.

Saba:
Thank you very much for that comment and questions. Now I will give the floor to our speakers on-site and online to give their final remarks or final words, and also they can address the comments and also the questions asked. I will give the floor to the speakers, and please make it very brief, up to 30 seconds. Over to you.

Gunila Astbrink:
Thank you very much. Yes, in regard to the gentleman from Pakistan, I totally agree with you, and we need to have more persons with disability attending, because the disability community’s motto is nothing about us without us. We need to be here. I have a disability. We need more people who represent our own voices, and I would strongly suggest that you write to the IGF Secretariat, to the MAG, to express your disappointment that there aren’t enough persons with disability here. The IGF Secretariat has a funding program, but it still isn’t enough people with disability coming here, and just one short point is we have, as the accessibility standing group, a training program on persons with disability in digital rights and internet governance, and paired with the DCAD, the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability, we have a small amount of funding to bring people here, but we need so much more. So thank you very much for that point.

Denise Leal:
Hi. I would like to thank you for your participation and questions. I was a little bit worried, since we didn’t have lots of participation, but we had questions, comments, and online questions also. It’s really an important point, and well, thank you, Veronica, for what you have said. Have you spoken to us? It’s the same in Brazil, about how it’s sometimes difficult to recognize the disability of a person, and most importantly, when the person doesn’t have a disability which is visual, which you can easily see, the person suffers a lot of prejudice and doesn’t have her rights recognized immediately. So it’s important that you say to others and that we talk about it, because we also have these disabilities that we cannot see, but we must recognize their existence, that these people also need somehow help and somehow to be recognized as people with disabilities. And thank you for the Brazilian, another Brazilian person here, I don’t remember your name, Joelson, I think. Yes, thank you for being here and for your comment. I think that it’s actually difficult, hard, your question. What strategies are both accessible and relevant? How can we make the online content more inclusive? Well, we have ways to make it, but also, do we have the economic interest in making it? And also, I think that this answer and this question goes aligned with the question from my other friend, the other lawyer here from Pakistan, about the technical and infrastructure aspects for internet. I think that we have an example in Brazil, a successful example of the indigenous and traditional communities where they couldn’t have access to internet, so that the community itself organized an internet, a local internet. So maybe in the case of people with disability and other minorities, maybe the answer is the communities itself, not the disability, the people with disability community, but other minorities and local communities could be the answer to it. But we have to mobilize and to make these peoples understand the needs of all these minorities and communities. In the case of the indigenous, they could make it, because they were all located in the same place. But how can we make it? How can we make our small communities and minorities work together to find an infrastructure solution? I believe it’s possible, but we have to work harder on showing it to people. As you have all noticed and told us and spoken about it, we don’t have that many people here. We should have a crowded room, but we don’t have. So we must mobilize more people and have more space and voice to talk about these situations, so that we can have a better infrastructure and technology for people with disability. Thank you, everyone.

Saba:
Thank you. Thank you very much, Denise. Now I will give the floor to Marjorie to take the floor to our speakers for their final remarks or recommendations or any key takeaways.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Thank you very much, Sabah. So we have Tiaras and Mohamed remaining. And I would just please like that also we include our online participants. So I’ll read out their questions. And then while you give your final remarks, we’re just going to touch on them, please. So this is from Joseph Komiti. He said, why would make systems and apps as well as content online accessible to people with disabilities? What policies can be implemented to protect abusive content against people with disabilities online, because there is some kind of stigmatization, especially on social media. This is from Joseph, IGF Ghana Hub. And then we have the next, can our world truly progress if we continue to build barriers that exclude people with disabilities? Or should we unite to break down these obstacles of creating a more inclusive future? So maybe Tiaras, you can start. Thank you.

Theorose Elikplim Dzineku:
Great. So, again, I’m going to try as much as possible to keep it very short and all of that. Now, in terms of policies and stigmatization, I mean, this real stigmatization is really in every sector. But I guess it’s worth for, for the one with worse for people with disabilities, because again, some of the things as Veronica said, and as all our speakers keep saying over and over again, is that some of the disabilities are not like, visually, it’s not visual for you to see. And the mistake we keep doing all the time is to try to group everything as one. So this is what I would say, that policy takes time. But the question is, we even need to know if we have policy, such policies, for example, I would not really say Ghana, we do have or not, because honestly, I’ve not done data research on that. And I would not want to say that on authority. But it will be a good thing, a good thing to find out if we do have one, how accessible is that? How are people even aware of such a policy? Is there a common knowledge that we have to do in terms of stigmatization? I guess it would still stem from education, teaching people that people with disabilities are human. And there’s no problem with that. And we are okay. And everything is fine. It’s a good thing to start with. And as I conclude, I just want to take the time to just even say thank you to everyone. We hope that this session are extended more. But I will leave my email in the chat. Feel free to suggest any project any capacity building training. This is not just a one time of discussion. It could be some something that continues and hope that next year was we have discussion on the same area, we have a more fuller room and we have people who would really, really want to tell and probably share what they have been going through and how we can basically build content around them as well. But I will still stand on my first point at the beginning that advocacy is always key. Advocacy never ends, it starts. But it’s a continual process. And I hope that we all take that in. Thank you so much. And I’ll hand over to Karma.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Thank you. Please 30 seconds. Thank you.

Muhammad Kamran:
So thank you so much, everyone. And I hope all the answers, all the questions have already been answered. And as far like what, what we can do for implementing these ideas. I was just like, we have talked in detail about in details about all of these things. But I’m going to add one more thing. We said that government should do this and we should do this and that. But one more thing that I want to add here, why after seeing the situation in the hall in the room right now, that the people with disabilities needs to also address their issue. Like, we are not going to be like, we are not only be the ones who are going to talk about that, but they are going to make us talk about all this. Like this empty room is an example that maybe they’re not interested to be a part of all this. So they have to be interested. And we have to, yeah, we have to be organizing some conferences or some awareness sessions to educate them so that they can come up and talk about their disabilities. So I think we have talked about all the aspects possible in a very short span of time. And I’m sorry if I have left anything. And I’m thankful to all of you for having us here, for letting us speak. And I hope to see all of you in some other tomorrow. Thank you so much.

Marjorie Mudi Gege:
Thank you very much. Yes, I have the floor. Thank you.

Saba:
Thank you very much. So we have come to the end of our session now. And I would like to thank our speakers, our panelists for their valuable inputs and also contributions. Indeed, your expertise and also insights has been really, truly enlightening. And what I would like to say is let’s all together continue our efforts to ensure the inclusivity and accessibility in digital technologies and digital services. So thank you all for attending our today’s session, for joining us from on site or joining us from online. And we hope you found this very informative and thought provoking. And yeah, remember that your involvement is really crucial on creating a more inclusive future for all persons. Have a wonderful day. Thank you so much.