Content area
In an ideal liberal or representative democracy, the participation of every person in the democratic process is essential. Although prior research has examined political inclusion and exclusion from many perspectives within democracies, few studies have focused on the political involvement and representation of people living with disabilities (PLWDs) in Africa. This study addresses this deficiency. This study analysed the status of inclusivity in Africa, focusing on the political engagement and representation of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) in the democratic process, as well as the factors influencing their inclusion or exclusion. The study employs an explanatory research design, utilising document and desk review/analysis with secondary data sources. The notion of political and democratic inclusion is utilised as an analytical framework. Research indicates that although numerous African nations have embraced various international and domestic laws safeguarding the political participation and representation rights of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs), many have merely offered superficial compliance with these regulations. Consequently, the political engagement and representation of PLWDs remain inadequate, reflecting a state of democratic instability across the continent. Factors such as low educational attainment and pervasive negative attitudes towards PLWDs persistently obstruct their political involvement and representation in Africa. Tt states that Africa has not yet fulfilled the ideal of political and democratic inclusion regarding the substantial and unimpeded participation of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) in the continent's political and electoral processes, which contributes to the democratic instability in the region.
ABSTRACT
In an ideal liberal or representative democracy, the participation of every person in the democratic process is essential. Although prior research has examined political inclusion and exclusion from many perspectives within democracies, few studies have focused on the political involvement and representation of people living with disabilities (PLWDs) in Africa. This study addresses this deficiency. This study analysed the status of inclusivity in Africa, focusing on the political engagement and representation of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) in the democratic process, as well as the factors influencing their inclusion or exclusion. The study employs an explanatory research design, utilising document and desk review/analysis with secondary data sources. The notion of political and democratic inclusion is utilised as an analytical framework. Research indicates that although numerous African nations have embraced various international and domestic laws safeguarding the political participation and representation rights of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs), many have merely offered superficial compliance with these regulations. Consequently, the political engagement and representation of PLWDs remain inadequate, reflecting a state of democratic instability across the continent. Factors such as low educational attainment and pervasive negative attitudes towards PLWDs persistently obstruct their political involvement and representation in Africa. Tt states that Africa has not yet fulfilled the ideal of political and democratic inclusion regarding the substantial and unimpeded participation of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) in the continent's political and electoral processes, which contributes to the democratic instability in the region.
Keywords:
Political participation, Representation, Inclusion, Democracy, People living with disabilities
JEL Classification: M38
Introduction
This article examines the present condition of democratic inclusivity in Africa, focusing on the political engagement and representation of those living with disabilities in the democratic process. Among the objectives of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 10, "reduced inequalities," are to "ensure equal opportunities and eliminate discrimination" (goal 10.3) and "promote universal social, economic, and political inclusion" (target 10.2). The World Health Organisation (2011) asserts that the economic, educational, and health exclusion rates of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs), along with their political representation and engagement, as well as the extent of prejudice faced by this group, starkly contrast with Sustainable Development Goal 10-particularly objectives 10.2 and 10.3. Opokua, Mprah, and Saka (2016) say that "the right to participate in political activities is a fundamental human right for every citizen," particularly in a democracy; nevertheless, persons living with disabilities are often denied this privilege. This suggests that it is improbable for several African nations to accomplish SDG 10 by 2030 and achieve democratic consolidation.
Political participation in a democracy entails engagement in political events and activities, including affiliation with a political group, voter registration and participation in elections, and candidature for political positions during electoral processes (Krishna, 2013; United Nations, 2012). Christensen (2011) asserts that maintaining confidence within any political system necessitates the active engagement of citizens in the political process. Typically, democracy is fortified and solidified by the equal rights to political participation and representation, which in turn safeguards fundamental human rights and fosters social inclusion (UNHCHR, 2015; Hall and Alverez, 2012). In the absence of this, there are indications of a democracy in transition. As Koroli (2005) asserts, and correctly so, the involvement of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) in state decision-making empowers them to make choices that directly impact their lives. Consequently, it is imperative to prioritise the political involvement and representation of those living with disabilities in democratic nations. This indicates that the electoral process and legislation must facilitate the participation of persons with disabilities (PLWDs), ensuring that election materials are accessible, suitable, and comprehensible for PLWDs (NDI, 2012). It also suggests the cultivation of an appropriate atmosphere and environment that enables persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) to engage fully in public and political issues (Virendrakumar, Jolley, Badu, and Schmidt, 2018).
The WHO (2023) reports that there are around 1.3 billion individuals with disabilities worldwide, constituting 1.6 percent of the global population. The continuous rise of this figure underscores the necessity for equitable political involvement and representation of those living with disabilities in democracies. Despite the available data indicating a substantial population of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) globally (1.3 billion) and particularly in Africa and low-income nations (Virendrakumar et al. 2018), their political participation and representation persistently decline in democratic countries, often facing discrimination regarding political engagement (IDEA, 2023). The IDEA (2023, p. 7) states that "individuals with disabilities are also faced with challenges arising from legislation, policies, and procedures, in addition to barriers to physical and informational access." Aremu and Abiodun (2023) assert that such marginalisation and exclusion jeopardise the participation and equitable representation of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) in politics, hence challenging the principle of inclusion in democracy. This is accurate despite the numerous national and international statutes established to protect and ensure the participation and representation of persons living with disabilities in democratic processes. The "United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)" (UN, 2006) mandates that nations eliminate all obstacles preventing persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) from engaging in political activities (European Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2014). Likewise, states "shall eliminate all forms of discrimination and shall adopt legislative and administrative measures to guarantee the rights of individuals with disabilities and other marginalised groups," as stated in "Article 8 of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections, and Governance" (Virendrakumar et al. 2017, p. 4). Article 8 posits that the inclusivity of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) indicates a robust democracy, and conversely.
Persons Living with Disabilities (PLWDs) are marginalised in the political processes of numerous democratic African nations. Although prior research on the topic in Africa offers insights into disability prevalence and the economic and social inclusion of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs), there is a paucity of studies addressing the political participation and representation of PLWDs across the continent, particularly as an indicator of democratic dynamics. This paper addresses the gap by offering answers to the following enquiries: Whatis the status of political participation and representation of persons living with disabilities in Africa in relation to the level of democracy? What obstacles impede the political engagement and representation of persons living with disabilities in Africa? This aims to address the persistent problems and establish a pathway to enhance the political involvement and representation of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) across the continent, so augmenting the likelihood of achieving democratic consolidation and Sustainable Development Goal 10 in Africa promptly.
Literature Review
Theoretical and Conceptual Background
Conceptual Clarifications
According to the WHO (1990, p.213), disability refers to "Any limitation or lack (resulting from an impairment) of ability to perform an activity in the manner or within the range considered normal for a given individual, resulting from an impairment or a disability, that prevents the fulfillment of a role that is considered normal (depending on age, sex, social and cultural factors) for that individual". Accordingly, the definition infers that someone with a disability may be impaired, handicapped, or both.
The UNESCO (2017) cited in Aremu and Abiodun (2023, p.343) defines inclusion as the procedures put in place to ensure that every member of society, irrespective of social status, or unique/peculiar features, differences, or challenges, is allowed to fully participate in societal development. It is also the removal of all such barriers that may hinder a certain group(s) or individual(s) from effective social engagement/involvement (Aremu and Abiodun, 2023, p.343). The inclusion of PLWDs will therefore, entail the design of society in such a manner that it promotes the full participation of PLWDs, and ensure their equitable and equal access to economic, social and political opportunities and resources (Aremu and Abiodun, 2023, p.344).
Democracy, popularly defined as a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, implies the inclusion of all the people in the decision making process, irrespective of physical or socio-economic status. Hence, whereas the deprivation of certain group from participating in the democratic decision making process signals a democracy in flux, an ideal and consolidated democracy must eliminate such hindrances and deprivations.
Democracy and the Inclusion of PLWDs
While the CRPD makes provision for the inclusion, and political participation of PLWDs, the provision is only achievable when states commit to conscious and intentional efforts to roll out, and implement those policies that will remove all hindrances posing threat to the inclusion and political participation of PLWDs (Human Rights Watch, 2012; IFES, 2014). Evidence are replete in the history of mankind, how PLWDs have often suffered systemic and strategic discrimination from participating in decision making in the affairs that directly affect them (Schur et al. 2002), especially in democracies. The exclusion and marginalisation of PLWDs has been with human society from time immemorial, hence, Schur et al. (2013) are of the view that the processes/strategies to promote and protect the rights of PLWDs have started several years ago. Nevertheless, in 1981, the UN declared the "International Year for Disabled Persons," and this signalled a positive turnaround in the protection of rights of PLWDs, and the quest to ensure their inclusion (Meekosha, 1999). Whereas, gains have been made in the global efforts to ensure the inclusion of PLWDs (Schur et al. 2013), the fact remains that the political participation and representation of PLWDs is still largely restricted (Sackey, 2014), which puts a dent on the inclusivity tenet of democracy. Schur et al. (2002) observed that this challenge is not peculiar to unconsolidated or fledgling democracies, but it is also glaring in many advanced democracies. He noted for instance, that while the rights of PLWDs is reasonably protected in the US, the political participation of PLWDs is still far lower when compared to those without disabilities.
PLWDs continue to have unequal rights and access to political activities like being elected into political positions; voting, etc. compared to other citizens (United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC, 2014). While the political participation of PLWDs is low, worse still is that PLWDs are rarely elected into high political offices like ministers, and parliamentarians (Schur et al. 2013), governors and presidents, on the few occasions they get elected. For example, with respect to voting, only 7 percent and 3 percent of PLWDs voted during the US 2008 and 2012 general elections respectively (UNHRC, 2014). Also, with respect to being elected into office, in 2014, out of the 151 seats in the Croatian Parliament, only 7 were PLWDs; and Poland and the UK had only 3 PLWDs (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2014). In the same year, South Africa had only 17 PLWDs as parliamentarians, while in Kenya, out of the 24 seats constitutionally reserved for PLWDs, only 12 of the seats were filled in 2015 (Wanamesi, 2015).
Several studies have unravelled the factors that drive their low level of political participation and representation. Among others, low level of literacy, negative perception of PLWDs, poverty, inaccessible physical environment, lack of financial support and resources, lack of electoral materials that suit the special needs of PLWDs from political participation and representation (Sackey, 2014; Human Rights Watch, 2012; Baffoe, 2013). Furthermore, because some PLWDs (those with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities) are perceived as not being capable to make sound political decisions independently, electoral laws have out rightly disenfranchised such categories of PLWDs (Human Rights Watch, 2012; IFES, 2014; Sackey, 2014). Other factors identified by ODIHR (2019) include: lack of support from the society, restrictive laws/legal framework, inaccessible physical environments, and communication methods; unemployment, low income, inadequate staff training, and multiple layers of discrimination, etc.
The signing and ratification of the UNCRPD has been done by a total of 160 countries, including those of African continent (Virendrakunar et al. 2017). In Africa, despite the various policies, the Africa Disability Rights Yearbook (2015, p.316) avers that "people with disabilities remain invisible on the African human rights system because the current legal framework does not adequately protect them" (Open Society Foundation, 2015). The "Draft Protocol on the Rights of PLWDs" was introduced in Africa by the African Commission on Human and People's Rights. This was towards the realisation of the rights of PLWDs to participate and ensure their inclusion in political participation (Suping and Moswela, 2019). While these laws are existing, the mere recognition of these rights of PLWDs to participate in politics, does not often guarantee that they will compete on the same level with people without disabilities (Oluchina, 2015).
Theoretical Framework
The paper adopts the principle of democratic/political inclusion as a framework of analysis. The "all-affected" principle (Beckman, 2008, p.349) provides a theoretical foundation for providing explanations for universal suffrage and participation of all in democracies. Associated with the like of Dahl (1970), Beckman (2008; 2023), democratic /political inclusion emphasises the fact that all citizens, and indeed, every one that is affected by public decisions should be accorded the freedom to take part in these decisions in a democracy, without facing any form of prejudice. Therefore, "everyone who is affected by the decisions of a government should have a right to participate in that government" (Dahl, 1970, p. 64). Dahl uses the term "government" to refer to the democratic states and any related terms. When Dryzek (2002) asserted that everyone impacted by a policy decision must have the capacity or chance to engage in discussion regarding the substance of the policy decisions, he further extended the democratic/political inclusion principle. Further projecting the democratic/political inclusion concept implies that the right to take part in the political process must be accorded to everyone who is "subject to the government and its laws" (Dahl, 1989, p.123). These therefore suggest that all people should have access to engage in the political process and state affairs that give rise to those laws, policies, and decisions, since they are state citizens bound and affected by them.
Accordingly, the legitimate/formal interpretation of the democratic/political inclusion principle implies that "the participatory right should extend to anyone who is a legal subject" (Beckman, 2008, p. 350). According to Beckman (2008), voting rights and democratic inclusion include the right to suffrage. As a result, "suffrage is under inclusive whenever people affected by political decisions are denied participatory rights" (p. 351). Thus, the right to vote (political participation) and the right to be elected (political representation) in a democracy, are both included in this premise. An individual must be included in the democratic process "no matter what" (Beckman, 2023, p. 10) if they satisfy the requirements for citizenship and other eligibility requirements. This includes having a disability.
The democratic/political inclusion theory is relevant to explain and provide a clear understanding of the inclusivity in democracy, using the political participation and representation of PLWDs in Africa as a premise. As the principle argues, no legitimate member of the state should be left out of the political process of the state, irrespective of the physical challenge or otherwise. PLWDs are citizens with equal rights as other citizens in the state, and should therefore, be accorded equal rights to political participation and representation in the democratic process, regardless of their physical challenges. This inclusion should extend to suffrage (participate in voting and be able to stand for elections).
Methodology
Methodologically, the paper adopts the explanatory and qualitative research designs, relying on document and desk review/analysis, using secondary data sources. It adopts the archival research method, which is "a qualitative approach that encompasses a wide range of actions used to make it easier to examine written materials and documents created by and about organizations" (Munene, Shisanya, Obando and Doctoral Scholars, 2019, p.61). It is based on the archival research method's document analysis strand, a qualitative research instrument that depends on interpreting several documents and assigning meanings based on different themes (Shenhav, 1999). As a result, information is obtained from the body of previous research on the topic, including textbooks, journal and magazine articles, government gazettes and papers, online resources, reports of international organizations on the rights of PLWDs, etc. It embraces pragmatism as a paradigm for study, emphasizing the "what" and "how" concerns in the field. According to Creswell (2003, р. 11), "[it] applies all approaches to understanding the problem and places the research problem' at its center." The main reason this research paradigm is thought to be the best fit for this paper is that it addresses the "what" research issues. In other words, what is the situation with regard to PLWDs' political participation and representation in the democratic process in Africa, and what are the obstacles standing in their way? Discourse analysis was the method used to analyze the data.
Findings and Discussion
The State of Political Participation and Representation of PLWDs in the Democratic Process in Africa
Several laws and policies exist in Africa that protect the right to political participation and representation of PLWDs in the democratic process on the continent. In total, 91 percent of countries on the African continent has ratified the UNCRPD, representing 49 out of 54 countries on the continent (UN, 2017). This, on the face value, shows a high commitment from African countries to ensure the political inclusion, and participation and representation of PLWDs, albeit, an examination of implementation is paramount. Only 5 countries - Equatorial Guinea, Somalia, Eritrea, Botswana, and South Sudan have neither signed nor ratified the UNCRPD (UN, 2017). At country level, some African countries have also enacted laws and policies to protect the right to political participation and representation of PLWDs in the democratic process. Virendrakumar et al. (2018) identified only 18 countries in Africa who have national laws and policies towards the promotion of political participation of PLWDs. They include: Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Nigeria, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire, Mauritius, Mauritania, Burundi, Cameroon, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Mali, Tanzania, Niger Republic, Guinea, Zimbabwe, and Kenya (Virendrakumar et al. 2018, p.525). Nevertheless, Niger, Burkina Faso and Mali have all now fallen under military rule. These laws and policies make room for PLWDs to vote (participation), and be voted for (representation), and also provide special considerations for PLWDs such as ease of access to polling stations, prioritisation at polling station, assistance with voting process at polling station, and accessible communication (Virendrakumar et al. 2018, p.525).
However, depending on the type of impairment, various laws across the continent also restrict PLWDs' rights to political representation and involvement in the democratic process. Burundi exempts PLWDs with mental illness (EISA, 2007; IFES, 2015); Kenya exempts PLWDs with "unsound mind" (Inclusion International, 2015). Furthermore, individuals with mental disabilities are restricted from participating in or being represented in politics by the "Electoral Act (1998) of South Africa", the Constitution of Zimbabwe, the Constitution of Zambia, the "Electoral Acts" of Gabon, Malawi, and Kenya (Lord, Stein, and Fiala-Butora, 2014). These restrictions mean that some legitimate citizens of the state are excluded for the political decision making process, as against the mandates of the UNCRPD and the political/democratic inclusion principle upon which this paper is based.
Furthermore, beyond mere making provisions for the protection of the rights of PLWDs to political participation and representation in Africa, how has African states fared in ensuring that these provisions are implemented to the latter. On the positive note, in the 2000 and 2004 general elections in Ghana, the Ghanaian EC adopted the tactile ballot guide to aid the participation of visually impaired persons to vote; also raised awareness about the right of PLWDs to vote and adopted the sign language respectively. The visually impaired were also trained on how to serve as election observers (Osman et al. 2008). Also, countries like Mauritius, DRC, South Africa, and Cameroon put measures in place to ensure that the physical environment of voting are easily accessible to PLWDs during elections (Virendrakumar et al. 2018). In Mauritius, adjustable height booths are adopted to make it easy for PLWDs using wheelchairs (Permanent Mission of the Republic of Mauritius to the United Nations, 2011); and for South Africa, it is possible for PLWDs to request home visits to enable them to register or correct their registration (EISA, 2010). For ease of access for PLWDs, only floors are used as polling stations for PLWDs in DRC, while they are also assisted during the voting process (EISA, 2007). In Cameroon, through a project, "Accessible Elections for People with Disabilities," ramps were built, tables lowered, and lightening improved in polling units to allow ease of participation for PLWDs (Republique de Cameroun, 2011).
There are also evidence of resource investment in the education of PLWDs in order to increase their level of political participation in Malawi, Zimbabwe, and Cameroon (Virendrakumar et al. 2018). Many initiatives have been implemented in nations like Ghana, Cameroon, Liberia, Mauritius, Zimbabwe, Sudan, and Kenya, to support inclusive elections (where PLWDs can cast ballots and be elected) (Strengthening Transparency Accountability and Responsiveness in Ghana, 2015; Rebuplique de Cameroun, 2011; EISA, 2012; IFES, 2013; Permanent Mission to the United Nations and other International Organizations at Geneva, 2011; National Democratic Institute (NDI), 2012; Permanent Mission of the Republic of Mauritius to the United Nations, 2011). The representation of PLWDs in various government structures has also been a priority for several of these regimes.
In spite of all of these efforts, overall, it appears that the inclusivity of PLWDs in the democratic process on the continent, in terms of political participation and representation remain relatively low. In Nigeria, there is inadequate knowledge about the inclusion of PLWDs; there is lack of possibilities for people with disabilities to engage in politics or hold leadership positions, as well as inaccessible electoral processes and infrastructure. The "INEC's Framework on Access for People with Disabilities in the Election Process" is not being implemented to a sufficient degree (World Bank Group, 2020, p.ix). Across the African continent, evidence show a general negative attitude towards PLWDs from poll officers at polling stations, and in terms of political appointments and voting for PLWDs from the electorate (Virendrakumar et al. 2018). Virendrakumar et al. (2018) also show that there are no evidence of specific strategies aimed at tackling these negative stigma and attitudes from the public. Furthermore, there has not been evidence and documented information on the level of effect that these legislations and efforts have on the political participation and representation of PLWDs in Africa (Virendrakumar et al. 2017, p.30).
Polling places and voting materials continue to make it difficult for PLWDs to participate in the political and electoral process, which means that many of them throughout Africa still struggle to access their rights to political representation and participation (OHCHR, 2011; Open Society Foundation, 2015). In spite of their low rate of political participation, PLWDs in Africa have even lower representation. Thus, Suping and Moswela (2019, p. 22) hold that "in most African societies, the right of PWDs [People with Disabilities] to be elected also continues to be neglected." Most African communities hold the view that people with disabilities (PWDs) are limited to representation; they are unable to speak for other segments of the community or themselves.
The African Commission on Human and People's Rights introduced the "Protocol II on the rights of Persons with Disabilities." Countries bound by the Protocol II are mandated to ensure equal access and opportunities in political affairs (Clause 16). It also mandates member states to reserve at least 5 percent representation in parliament, at national, sub-national and local levels for PLWDs (Akwetey and Mutangi, 2022, p.30). The Protocol also mandates political parties to make reservations for PLWDs at party level. Albeit, not many African countries have been able to strictly and fully implement these mandates. In Nigeria, PLWDs testify that they are still being highly disenfranchised because of the high level of difficulties they face in the process of getting their voters' card and taking part in voting process (Aremu and Abiodun, 2023, p.346). Botswana has not signed the UNCRPD and the "Democracy Charter", and PLWDs have been historically exempted from political participation as is the case with many African states (Open Society Foundation, 2015). Hence, election materials and polling stations are not easily accessible for PLWDs in Botswana, and laws which guarantee their rights to political participation and representation are absent (Supping and Moswela, 2019). As also observed by the European Agency for Fundamental Human Rights (2015), the limited participation of PLWDs in the democratic process in Africa is manifested in diverse dimensions, and political representation is worse off, because even where PLWDs are allowed to participate freely and equitably, they may not stand for elections, or hold any political office. In Cameroon, PLWDs are rarely involved in political decision making "because they are not considered capable of making good decisions" (Opukua, et al. 2016, р.986-988), are rarely considered for political appointment, and are apathetic towards participating in the voting and electoral processes because their special needs are not being met (Opukua et al. 2016). All of these are glaring evidences of the democratic flux in Africa.
The systematic exclusion and/or restriction of the rights of political participation and representation of PLWDs in the democratic process in many parts of Africa is alarming; it is against the political/democratic inclusion principle. These type of restrictions translate into the exemption of bona fide citizens of the state, who are bound by the decisions, laws, and policies of the state.
The Table 1 below shows a summary of the inclusion status of PLWDs in Africa
Factors Hindering the Political Participation and Representation of PLWDs in the Democratic Process in Africa
Several factors could be held responsible for the relatively poor/low level of political participation and representation of PLWDs in the democratic process in Africa. Some of these factors incude:
i. PLWDs have Lower Level of Education: The fact that PLWDs have the lower chances of gaining education due to inherent barriers, continue to hinder their political participation and representation in Africa. According to the World Bank Group (2024), this factor is as a result of insufficient resources to accommodate PLWDs in formal education; bullying from peers, and/or exclusion from school activities. Opukua et al. (2016) also affirm the fact that formal education is germane for seamless political participation and representation, albeit, PLWDs are often not able to get adequate formal education because of inaccessibility of education physical, mental and psycho-social environment to PLWDs in many African countries. The World Bank Group (2020) found this factor prevalent in Nigeria, for instance.
ii. Unfavourable Technologies: Many of the technologies deployed for political and electoral process in Africa are largely inaccessible by PLWDs (Virendrakumar et al. 2018). This has contributed in no small measure to the low level of political participation and representation of PLWDs both pre-election and election periods. Many of the technologies have not taken the special conditions and needs of PLWDs into consideration, hence, it poses a significant challenge to their participation in the electoral process.
iii. Physical/Natural Environment: The physical/natural environment, and unsafe buildings for PLWDs is also a major factor hindering their political participation and representation. This factor is prominent in Malawi, DRC, Mozambique, Nigeria, and Ghana, etc. (Virendrakumar et al. 2018, p.528). The inaccessible roads or poor state of local roads which voters need to travel to exercise their franchise in many Africa countries, often hinder PLWDs from participating. This factor also includes those barriers in the physical environment and inadequate access to information, which hinder PLWDs to have access to equal participation and have requisite and adequate access to important information about the political process. (NDI, 2019, p.3). For instance, the physical and visually impaired in Cameroon complained about the inaccessibility of physical environments where political activities take place, as a barrier to their participation (Opukua et al. 2016).
iv. Relationships and Support: Another major factor that hinders PLWDs from political participation and representation in Africa, is that they usually receive little very or no support from their communities, families, groups, and friends. Inclusion International (2015) found this factor prevalent in Kenya, for instance.
У. Negative Attitudes/Perceptions: The negative attitudes and perceptions which people often hold concerning PLWDs in Africa, has a way of affecting their political participation and representation (NDI, 2019; Virendrakumar et al. 2018). Virendrakumar et al. (2018) found this factor prominent in Ghana and Kenya, where there are many instances where polling and registration officers showed unfriendly attitudes towards PLWDs.
vi. Unfavourable Political Participation and Representation Laws, Policies, and Institutions: In Africa, while there are some countries with legislations protecting the rights of PLWDs to political participation and representation, implementation of these laws/policies to the latter has been a major challenge. Some African countries do not even have such legislations. Virendrakumar et al. (2018, p.529) found "discriminatory election laws," which systematically excludes PLWDs in many African countries. The laws and policies which discriminate against PLWDs, including those policies that do not completely address the special needs of PLWDs, often prohibit their participation and deliberately promotes their exclusion (NDI, 2019). Opukua et al. (2016) observed that in Cameroon, the absence of laws/policies to protect PLWDs and ensure their political participation and representation, often excludes them from the political process.
Virendrakumar et al. (2017, p. 20) present a Venn diagram to illustrate the various factors hindering PLWDs in political participation, and their intersections.
Conclusion
The article has analysed the status of democratic inclusion in Africa, focussing on the political engagement and representation of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) in the democratic process. Research indicates that although several African nations are signatories to the UNCRPD and possess domestic legislation aimed at ensuring the political participation and representation rights of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs), substantial obstacles persist in their efforts to engage in politics and represent others in governance. This is due to the fact that many African governments frequently offer mere verbal support for the enforcement of these rules, while others lack such laws or policies altogether. Consequently, the degree of political engagement and representation of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) in Africa's democratic process remains comparatively low, exacerbating the democratic instability on the continent. This is apparent, for example, in the inability of most African nations to enforce the 5 percent reservation of parliamentary seats at the national, sub-national, and local levels for persons living with disabilities, as stipulated by Protocol II. Factors including inadequate technologies utilised for elections, low educational attainment among persons living with disabilities (PLWDs), inaccessible physical and natural environments, weak relationships and support for PLWDs, negative attitudes and perceptions towards PLWDs, and unfavourable political participation laws, policies, and institutions are identified as obstacles to the political participation and representation of PLWDs in Africa. Despite the existence of numerous inclusion criteria for persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) on the continent, there are no discernible positive effects of such legislation on the political participation and representation of PLWDs in Africa. It is thus reasonable to conclude that Africa has not yet fulfilled the concept of political and democratic inclusion regarding the substantial and unobstructed participation of persons living with disabilities in the continent's democratic processes, which clearly indicates democratic instability. The significant exclusion of persons living with disabilities (PLWDs) poses a threat to the prospects of attaining democratic stability and prosperity in Africa. The paper therefore makes some recommendations towards enhancing the political participation and representation of PLWDs in the democratic process, and give a boost to democratic stability in Africa:
i. African governments must stop paying lip service to the implementation of the UNCRPD and other national legislations protecting the rights of PLWDs to political participation and representation;
il. There is the need for African governments to embark on the empowerment of PLWDs in the areas of smart skills acquisition, and education, in order to enable them compete favourably with other people; and
iil. All such laws and policies still excluding, and/or placing certain restrictions on the rights to political participation and representation of PLWDs in Africa, must be abolished by African governments, wherever they exist.
Acknowledgement
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Author Contributions: Conceptualisation, writing of original manuscript, A.A., Review and editing, N. M.
Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was reviewed and approved by the University of South Africa, College of Human Sciences CREC with approval number Rec-240816-052.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy.
Funding: This research did not receive any external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
Akwetey, E. O. and Mutangi, T. (2022). Enhancing inclusive political participation and representation in Africa. International IDEA.
Aremu, S. E. and Abiodun, T. A. (2023). Inclusion of persons with disabilities in Nigeria: A pre-requisite for national sustainable development. Saudi Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 8(11), 342-350.
Baffoe, M. (2013). Stigmatisation, discrimination and marginalisation: Gateway to oppression of persons with disabilities in Ghana, West Africa. Journal of Education and Social Research, 3(1), 187-198.
Beckman, L. (2008).Democratic inclusion, law and causes. Ratio Juris, 21(3), 348-364.
Beckman, L. (2023). The boundaries of democracy: A theory of inclusion. Routledge.
Christensen, H. (2011). Political activities on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means? First Monday, 16(2). http://firstnonday.org/ojs/index-php/fm/article/view/3356/2767.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative approaches and mixed methods. Sage Publications.
Dahl, R. (1970). After the revolution: Authority in good society. Yale University Press.
Dahl, R. (1989). Democracy and its critics. Yale University Press.
Dryzek, J. (2002). A post-positivist policy analytic travelogue. The Good Society, 11, 32-36.
EISA (2007). EISA observer mission report: DR Congo. https://www.africaportal.org/publications/eisa-observer-mission-reportdemocratic-republic-of-the-congo-presidential-parliementary-and-provincial-elections-national-assembly-and-first-roundpresidential-elections-30-jily-2006-provincial-assembly-and-second-round-presidential-elections-29-oc/.
EISA (2012). EISA technical assessment team and election observer mission report, Liberia. https://www.eisa.org.za/pdf/1ib2011eom.pdf.
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2014). Are people with disabilities elected to national parliament? http://fra.curopa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/data-and-maps/comparative-data/political-participation/national-mps.
Hall, T. E. and Alvarez, M. R. (2012). Defining the barriers to political participation for individuals with disabilities. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. http://elections.itif.org/reports/AVTI-001-Hall-Alvarez-2012.pdf.
Human Rights Watch (2012). 7 want to be a citizen just like any other: Barriers to political participation for people with disabilities in Pem. HRW. https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/pem0512.pdf.
IFES (2013). Elections in Zimbabwe: July 31 general elections: Frequently asked questions. IFES.
IFES (2014). Equal access: How to include persons with disabilities in elections and political processes. IFES. https://www .ndi.org/files/Equal-Access-How-to-include-PWD-in-elections-political-processes.pdf.
IFES (2015).Elections in Burundi: 2015 general elections: Frequently asked questions. IFES.
Inclusion International (2015). CRPD compliance analysis: Kenya: A country level review of compliance with CRPD Article 29. Inclusion International.
International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) (2012). The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol. IFES.
International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) (2023). Political participation and representation of persons with disabilities in Sudan: Situation analysis during democratic transition. International IDEA.
Koroli, У. (2015). Participation of people with disability from Moldova in political and public life. http://www .uniteit.eu/profiles/blogs/participation-of-people-with-disability-from-moldova-in-political.
Krishna, A. (2013). Enhancing political participation in democracies: What is the role of social capital? Comparative Political Studies, 35(4), 437-460.
Lord, J. E., Stein, M. A. and Fiala-Butora, J. N. (2014). Facilitating an equal right to vote for persons with disabilities. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 6(1), 115-139.
Meekosha, H. (1999). Political activism and identity making: The involvement of women in the disability rights movement in Australia (WWDA). http://Www.wwda.org.au/meekosha1999.pdf.
Munene, I., Shisanya, C., Obando, J. and Doctoral Scholars (2019). Brief description of qualitative research methods. In Bangura, A. K., Obando, J. A. and Shisanya, С. (Eds.), Conducting research and mentoring students in Africa: CODESRIA college of mentors handbook (pp. 59-116). CODESRIA.
National Democratic Institute (2012). Civic update: Mainstreaming persons with disabilities. NDI.
NDI (2019). Civic update - Disability inclusion. Citizen Participation and Inclusion Team, NDI.
Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) (2019). Guidelines on promoting the political participation of persons with disabilities. ODIHR.
OHCHR (2011). Thematic study of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on participation in political and public life by persons with disabilities. Human Rights Council/OHCHR.
Oluchina, W. A. (2015). The right to political participation for people with disabilities in Africa. In Open Society Foundations, African disability rights year book (pp. 309-327). Pretoria University Law Press.
Open Society Foundations (2015). African disability rights yearbook. Pretoria University Law Press.
Opukua, M. P., Mprah, W. K. and Saka, B. N. (2016). Participation of persons with disabilities in political activities in Cameroon. Disability and Global South, 3(2), 980-999.
Organisation of African Unity (1981). African charter on human and people's rights. OAU.
Permanent Mission of the Republic of Mauritius to the United Nations (2011). Submission to the thematic study by the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on participation in political and public life by persons with disabilities: Mauritius. OHCHR.
Republique de Cameroon (2011). Response du gouvernement surla mise enOeuvre et L Application de la Resolution 16/15 du Conseil des Droits de L'Homme Relative aux Driots des personnes Handicapees. OHCHR.
Sackey, E. (2014). Disability and political participation in Ghana: An alternative perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Disability, 17(4), 366-381.
Schur, L., Kruse, D. and Blanck, P. (2013). People with disabilities: Sidelined or mainstreamed? Cambridge University Press.
Schur, L., Shields, T., Kruse, D. and Schriner, К. (2002). Enabling democracy: Disability and voter turnout. Political Research Quarterly, 55(1), 167-190.
Shenhav, Y. (1999). Manufacturing rationality: The engineering foundations of the managerial revolution. Oxford Un. Pr.
Strengthening Transparency Accountability and Responsiveness in Ghana (2015). STAR Ghana election call roundtable discussion: Summary report. STAR.
Suping, K. and Moswela, E. (2019). Political participation of persons with disabilities in Botswana. Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa.
Tanzania Persons with Disabilities Act (2010). Key issues.
The Commonwealth (2015). Nigerian presidential and National Assembly elections. The Commonwealth.
The World Bank Group (2024). Challenges facing persons with disabilities in Sub-Saharan Africa - т 5 charts. https://www.worldbank.org/rn/topic/poverty/brief/challenges-facing-people-with-disabilities-in-sub-saharan-africa-in-5charts.
United Nations (2006). Convwention of the Rights of Persons with Disability. https://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf.
United Nations (2011). Thematic study of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights on participation in political and public life by persons with disabilities. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
United Nations (2012). Declaration of global principles for non-partisan election observation and monitoring by citizen organisations and code of conduct for non-partisan citizen election observers and monitors. http://www.eods.eu/library/Declaration_of Global Principles 0.pdf.
United Nations (2016). CRPD latest development. UN.
United Nations (2017). CRPD latest developments. UN.
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Right (2015). Equal participation in political and public affairs. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/EqualParticipation.aspx.
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (2014). Factors that impede equal political participation and steps to overcome those challenges. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/RegularSessions/Session27/Documents/A_HRC_27_ 29 ENG.doc.
Virendrakumar, B., Jolley, E., Badu, E. and Schmidt, E. (2018). Disability inclusive elections in Africa: A systematic review of published and unpublished literature. Sight Savers.
Virendrakumar, B., Jolley, E., Badu, E. Murphy, R. and Schmidt, E. (2017). Disability inclusive elections in Africa: A qualitative systematic review. Sight Savers.
Wanambisi, L. (2015). MPs representing persons with disability demand 22 seats. Capital News. http://www .capitalfm.com.ke/news/2015/05/mps-representing-persons-with-disability-demand-22-seats.
WHO (1990). International classification of impairment, disabilities and handicaps: A manual of classification relating to the consequences of disease. WHO.
WHO (2023). Disability and health. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/disability-and-health.
World Bank Group (2020). Disability inclusion in Nigeria: A rapid assessment. World Bank.
World Health Organisation and World Bank (2011). World report on disability. WHO and World Bank.
Copyright Society for the Study of Business and Finance 2025