Law "No wheelchair facilities means discrimination"... Despite achievements after 8 years, 'Bus Barrier-Free' still a long way to go

Supreme Court: "Transportation Operators Must Provide Wheelchair Boarding Facilities"
Disappointment Over 'Limited Scope of Anti-Discrimination' and 'Lack of Intercity Mobility Guarantee'
"Demanding Installation Only on Routes Plaintiff Uses Is Clear Discrimination"
Under Current Transport System, 'Intercity Mobility for Disabled' Is Practically Impossible
Disability Groups Criticize, "This Ruling Marks Another Setback for Disabled Mobility Rights"

On April 20, 2020, a disability activist is getting off a low-floor bus near Gwangju City Hall in Seo-gu, Gwangju.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Park Hyun-joo] The ruling that not installing wheelchair boarding facilities on city and express buses constitutes 'discriminatory acts' has strengthened discussions on the mobility rights of people with disabilities. However, disability organizations expressed regret, citing that the ruling did not acknowledge the government's responsibility and failed to guarantee 'intercity mobility rights.' Although this is an achievement gained after eight years of litigation, there is still a long way to go to ensure the 'mobility rights of people with disabilities.'

The Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice No Tae-ak) announced on the 8th that it overturned the previous ruling, which partially ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, in the appeal case filed by three disabled individuals including Mr. A against the Republic of Korea, Seoul City, Gyeonggi Province, and two bus companies, and sent the case back to the Seoul High Court.

The court stated, "Transportation operators have an obligation to provide wheelchair boarding facilities on buses," and "everyone must fulfill the duty to prevent discrimination as sincerely as possible within the scope that does not impose 'excessive burden or significantly difficult circumstances.'" It added, "The court must not lose sensitivity to view matters from the perspective of 'people with disabilities,' not 'non-disabled people,'" and "It is also necessary to be cautious not to demand excessively strict proof of the existence of specific rights or legal relationships to prevent people with disabilities from making futile efforts."

However, the ruling could not avoid criticism as a 'half-hearted judgment' because it limited the scope of discrimination relief to the parties involved in the lawsuit. This was due to the restriction that wheelchair boarding facilities should be installed mainly on routes that the plaintiffs are likely to board. Disability organizations criticize this, saying, "The Supreme Court's ruling, which guarantees freedom of movement for non-disabled people at any time but only for 'routes to be boarded in the future' for people with disabilities, is a clear form of discrimination."

The ruling also did not include provisions regarding the intercity mobility rights of people with disabilities. According to a statement released on the 22nd of last month by the Coalition for the Promotion of Disability Discrimination Prevention, as of last year, only seven vehicles on intercity and express buses were equipped to accommodate wheelchair users. Even the amendment to the Transportation Vulnerable Act, passed by the National Assembly at the end of last year, limited the mandatory introduction of low-floor buses to city and village buses. This is why disability organizations appeal that "the free movement of people with disabilities has once again been indefinitely postponed" in response to this ruling.

Regarding disability call taxis for transportation-vulnerable individuals, since they are operated mainly by local governments, traveling to other regions is not possible. Although railways such as KTX are relatively better, considering that many areas are not served by rail, disability organizations argue that intercity travel for people with disabilities is practically impossible.

Members of the National Solidarity for the Elimination of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities held a press conference on the 14th near the office of President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol, urging the transition committee to reflect the disability rights budget.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

Kim Seong-yeon, Secretary-General of the Coalition for the Promotion of Disability Discrimination Prevention, explained, "(The law) requires one vehicle per 150 people with disabilities, but due to issues such as taxi drivers' working hours, it is often difficult to actually use them."

She also criticized the Supreme Court for ruling that the government bears no responsibility for the failure to provide wheelchair boarding facilities. The court stated that the negligence of the state or local governments in supervising and guiding bus companies that did not provide wheelchair boarding facilities does not itself constitute discriminatory acts.

Secretary-General Kim pointed out, "Regarding the rights of people with disabilities and citizens, the state must clearly secure finances and prepare support measures to resolve the issues. Placing all responsibility and burden on individual companies is an act of the state neglecting the rights of its citizens." She added, "Each (bus) company also has an obligation to resolve discrimination, but they inevitably operate based on their own interests and profit structures. Therefore, the state must consider concrete solutions and propose alternatives."

Meanwhile, the struggle to guarantee the rights of people with disabilities, including mobility rights, continues. The National Solidarity for the Elimination of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities, which held 'commute-time subway protests' demanding budget guarantees for disability rights, held a press conference on the 14th in front of the Financial Supervisory Service Training Center in Tongui-dong, where the Presidential Transition Committee office is located, urging, "President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol should show responsible leadership through the transition committee."

They stated, "The core issue why disability rights are not properly guaranteed is the Ministry of Economy and Finance's discrimination in not reflecting rights budgets," and criticized, "The disability policy pledges announced by President-elect Yoon during the election period were at best a regression or mere repetition of existing disability policies."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.