The Namibian policies and legislative framework were reviewed to determine the extent to which the needs of persons with disabilities were met and aligned with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). Further, the disability legislative framework of Namibia is compared with that of other southern African countries.
We conducted a retrospective analysis of policy and legal framework which addresses the needs and rights of persons with disabilities in Namibia from 1990 to 2016. A qualitative approach employing a case study design was used. Furthermore, a comparative analysis of the policies and legislation for alignment with the UNCRPD and how Namibia compares with other southern African countries is discussed.
Four policies, one piece of legislation and one international instrument were identified as directly related to disability. Community-based rehabilitation was adopted as the main strategy for rehabilitation. Alignment of the policy and legal framework with the UNCRPD was found to be minimal. Furthermore, most of the legislation in southern Africa was formulated before the existence of the UNCRPD in 2006.
Although much progress has been made in meeting the needs of persons with disabilities, key implementation issues to be addressed include central coordination, overlapping strategies, disability models and gender differences. There is a need for the policy and legal framework of Namibia and other southern African countries to be more responsive to the human rights needs of persons with disabilities.
The study offers insights in reviewing disability policy and legal frameworks in southern Africa for influencing disability service delivery. Future studies can investigate the progress of implementation of disability policy and legal framework from the perspectives of implementers and recipients of services.
The United Nations (UN) General Assembly of 1993 (UN
Along with the adoption of various disability policies, Namibia ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) in 2007 (UN
Although Namibia has made much progress in establishing policies and legislation, there is no evidence of a study conducted to assess the policy and legislative framework and the extent to which this framework is aligned to the UNCRPD.
This review sets out to identify and assess the policy and legislative framework that addresses the needs of persons with disabilities in Namibia and the extent to which these are aligned (similarities and differences) with all articles of the UNCRPD. Further, the disability legislative framework of Namibia is compared with that of other southern African countries including Zimbabwe, Malawi and Zambia.
We conducted a retrospective analysis of the policy and legal framework which addresses the needs and rights of persons with disabilities in Namibia from 1990 to 2016. A qualitative approach employing a case study design was used.
All national policies or legislation developed post-independence from 1991 and any international conventions that were ratified by the national government were identified. The Namibian government websites were searched for relevant policies and legislation for disability-related subject matter, and manual searching within line ministries was undertaken. Only policies or legislation that directly addresses disability issues were included. The search was conducted in October 2016. Where hard copies of the policy or legislation were not available, reprints were requested from the line ministry responsible for overall coordination of the policy.
Review and analysis of the policy and legal framework was conducted in three steps. Firstly, the key contents of each document were thematically analysed utilising the Walt and Gilson (
Policy triangle framework.
Secondly, a comparative analysis was undertaken to determine alignment of the NPD and
Finally, a comparative analysis was conducted of the purposes and disability models adopted by the
Ethical approval was obtained from the Human Sciences Research Ethics Committee at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (Ref No. HSS/0646/015D) and approval to collect data was obtained from the Research Committee at the Ministry of Health and Social Services in Namibia (Ref No. 17/3/3).
The findings are presented in four parts. The first part outlines the progression of formulation and ratification of policies and legislative framework. The second part analyses the four components of policy: the context within which it was developed; the content and objectives; the actors involved in this policy; and the process of how the policy was initiated, formulated, implemented and evaluated (
Prior to the development of any formalised approach to delivery of services for persons with disabilities in Namibia, a community-based rehabilitation (CBR) programme was adopted in 1992 which allowed steps to be taken to formalise and integrate the process for the provision of care and support for persons with disabilities within the primary health care network. In 1997, the NPD (Government Republic of Namibia
Progression of formulation and ratification of policies and legislative framework.
Policy or legislation | Year developed or ratified |
---|---|
National Policy on Disability | 1997 |
National Policy on Orthopaedic Technical Services | 2001 |
2004 | |
National Policy for Mental Health | 2005 |
United Nations Conventions of Persons with Disabilities | 2007 (ratification) |
Sector Policy on Inclusive Education | 2013 |
A summary of the context, content, actors and process in the development policy and legal framework in Namibia is displayed in
Context, content, actors and process in the development of policy and legal framework in Namibia.
Policy or legislation | Context | Content | Actors | Process |
---|---|---|---|---|
National Policy on Disability ( |
Need to create a ‘Society for All’ based on the principles of the Standard Rules on the Equalisation of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities to achieve a full social integration of persons with disabilities |
CBR adopted as the main strategy for rehabilitation Special target groups are: women, children and elderly with disabilities particularly in rural areas Four cornerstones on which key concern areas were built. However they are broad and ambiguous Guided by the principles of the Standard Rules on the Equalisation of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities Adopt a medical and social model |
Coordinators: Ministry of Lands (1997–2005), Ministry of Health and Social Services (2005–2015), Department of Disability Affairs, Office of Vice President (2015 to date) Stakeholders: All line ministries, persons with disabilities |
The principles of the Standard Rules on the Equalisation of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities served as leading guidelines and also formed the basis for implementation The policy represented Article 2 of ILO Convention No. 159 on the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment of Disabled Persons Literature review but no evidence of use of operational research in formulation No evidence of extensive stakeholder consultation in development |
National Policy on Orthopaedic Technical Services ( |
To overcome the physical and social barriers faced by persons with physical disabilities when it comes to accessibility to public and private facilities The need for orthoses and prostheses was approximately 0.5% of the population which comprised 8500 persons |
No monitoring and evaluation framework proposed leads to lack of accountability Used the WHO classifications of impairments, disability and handicap (WHO-A29/INF.Doc/1,1996) and that is using a medical model of disability Policy principles guided by the Standard Rules on the Equalisation of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities and the National Policy on Disability Implementation plan in place CBR facilitates identification, screening and referral for orthopaedic services |
Coordinator: Ministry of Health and Social Services Stakeholders: Ministry of Education, Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, Ministry of Works, Transport and Communication, persons with disabilities |
Use of evidence in formulation (rapid assessments, operational research) The 1991 Cabinet approval of a working document on integration of persons with disabilities initiated process In 1994 Ministry of Health and Social Services realised the need to reach rural population The National Development Plan 1 (NDP1 1995/1996–1999/2000) was initiated and formed establishment of nationwide Orthopaedic Technical Services Development guided by the concepts of the Standard Rules on the Equalisation of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities and the National Policy on Disability Stakeholder consultation was limited to targeted concerned parties Key indicators set that are supposed to be annually reviewed through work plans |
Need to establish a National Disability Council as a monitoring body |
To provide for the functions, powers and composition of National Disability Council National Disability Council may gather information, disseminate information and raise awareness regarding persons with disabilities Line ministries to report annually, no monitoring and evaluation framework proposed leads to lack of accountability No regulations in place |
Coordinator: National Disability Council Stakeholders: All line ministries, Organisations of Persons with Disabilities, persons with disabilities |
National Disability Council to monitor implementation of the National Policy on Disability All line ministries to report annually to the National Disability Council and the minister responsible for rehabilitation then reports to cabinet |
|
National Policy on Mental Health ( |
Need for the extension of mental health services to communities The need to protect the rights of people with mental disorders Lack of evidence-based mental health services |
Guided by national and international legal frameworks Outlines strategies and institutional framework for implementation Proposed formulation of a strategic plan and guidelines to enhance implementation. Policy targets set but no monitoring and evaluation framework proposed leads to lack of accountability Adopts both a medical and human rights model of disability CBR facilitates identification, screening and referral for mental health services |
Coordinator: Ministry of Health and Social Services Stakeholders: Mental Health Action Group (representatives from line ministries), University of Namibia, representatives of non-governmental organisations, faith-based organisations, private sector and communities |
Internal reviews of activities are done annually
Use of evidence in formulation (rapid assessments, benchmark tours) but lacks operational research |
Sector Policy on Inclusive Education ( |
Need to pave the way for all children in Namibia to learn and participate fully in the education system particularly in ‘mainstream schools’ Need to educate learners in least-restrictive environments near their neighbourhood |
Outlines strategies and their specific outcomes Monitoring and evaluation framework proposed leads to accountability Implementation plan proposed leads to accountability CBR facilitates identification, screening and referral for education |
Coordinator: Ministry of Education Stakeholders: Inter-ministerial committee (consists of senior government officials), NGOs, Regional Councils, University of Namibia |
Guided by national and international legal frameworks Extensive literature review and stakeholder consultation in development leads to clear objectives Key indicators set that are supposed to be annually reviewed through work plans |
CBR, community-based rehabilitation; NGOs, non-governmental organisations.
Findings revealed that the development of the policy and legal framework in Namibia was triggered by the need to address the barriers faced by persons with disabilities. The NPD (Government Republic of Namibia
The
The NPD stipulates that CBR is the main strategy to drive the implementation for disability and rehabilitation services in the country. The National Policy on Orthopaedic Technical Services, National Policy for Mental Health and Sector Policy on Inclusive Education use CBR services to assist CBR in early identification and screening.
Notably, all the policies have an implementation plan that potentially assists with easy execution. Notwithstanding the value of monitoring and evaluation frameworks, all policies with the exception of the Sector Policy on Inclusive Education have no monitoring and evaluation framework.
The implementation of disability policies and legal framework is also guided by the model of disability adopted. All disability policies identified adopted different models of disability. The NPD and the Sector Policy on Inclusive Education adopt a medical and social model, whereas the National Policy on Orthopaedic Technical Services adopts a medical model and the National Policy for Mental Health adopts both a medical and human rights model of disability. Further, the
Notably, the main purpose of the
The implementation of policies is fragmented and resides in various line ministries. The NDC has the mandate for coordinating the NPD. However, the coordination of both the National Policy on Orthopaedic Technical Services and the National Policy for Mental Health falls under the MoHSS and that of the Sector Policy on Inclusive Education under the Ministry of Education.
Although the mandate of coordinating individual policies is with a specific government ministry, the mandate for coordinating the activities of the NDC rests with the minister responsible for rehabilitation. No evidence identifying which entity is responsible for ensuring compliance with the UNCRPD could be found. Further, there is no formal overarching coordination of the policies and programmes to ensure seamless implementation.
Both the
Although policies have been in place for over 10 years (except the Sector Policy on Inclusive Education), none has been reviewed or updated. Only the Sector Policy on Inclusive Education has a clearly laid out monitoring and evaluation framework that stipulates the outcomes, implementers, budget, time frames and recommendations. The other policies (NPD, National Policy on Orthopaedic Technical Services and National Policy for Mental Health) simply suggested annual internal reviews. It is noteworthy that the mandate for reviewing the policies is placed on the coordinating ministry except the NPD where the mandate is on the NDC.
The
It is critical for policy formulation to be underpinned by the use of evidence in formulation (operational research, literature reviews, rapid assessments, benchmark tours). The National Policy on Orthopaedic Technical Services, the National Policy on Mental Health and the Sector Policy on Inclusive Education indicate the use of extensive evidence during formulation, whereas the NPD and
The policy and legal framework in Namibia predates the UNCRPD. It was therefore critical to investigate the extent of alignment of the NPD and
Comparison of United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Article 1–50) with National Policy on Disability and
UNCRPD articles | Alignment of |
Alignment of NPD Sections to UNCRPD Articles |
---|---|---|
1. Purpose: purpose and definition of disability | Section 1 | Section 1.1 |
2. Definitions: definition of key terms | Section 1 | Section 1.1, 1.2 |
3. General principles: respect for dignity and individual autonomy, non-discrimination, full and effective participation, respect for difference and acceptance, equality of opportunity, accessibility, equality between men and women, respect for the evolving capacities of children with disabilities | Not aligned | Section 2.4 |
4. General obligations: promoting conforming legislation, eliminating discrimination, promoting research, best practices, training; providing accessible information | Not aligned | Section 3.1.2;3.2.4;3.1.5;3.2.16; 3.2.17;3.2.18 |
5. Equality and non-discrimination: affirm equality, prohibit discrimination | Section 22 | Section 2.1; 3.1.2; 3.2.5; 3.2.16; 3.2.17; 3.2.17;3.2.19 |
6. Disabled women: advance and empower women | Not aligned | Section 2.5.1; 3.2.19 |
7. Disabled children: ensure that children with disabilities experience human rights and fundamental freedoms | Not aligned | Section 2.5.2 |
8. Awareness raising: promote awareness of disabilities, dispel stereotypes, highlight contributions of people with disabilities | Section 16 | Section3.2.1 |
9. Accessibility: promote independent living and full participation, accessible environment | Not aligned | Section 3.2.4 |
10. Right to life: affirm right to life for all persons, including people with disabilities | Not aligned | Not aligned |
11. Risk and humanitarian emergencies: ensure protection and safety in armed conflict, humanitarian emergencies, natural disasters | Not aligned | Not aligned |
12. Equal recognition before the law: support exercise of legal capacity on an equal basis with others | Section 15; 22 | Section3.2.16 |
13. Equal access to justice: provide for access to justice – reasonable accommodations, training in justice system | Not aligned | Section 3.2.16 |
14. Liberty and security of person: not justify deprivation of liberty solely on basis of disability | Not aligned | Not aligned |
15. Freedom from torture: protect from medical or scientific experimentation without consent and from inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Not aligned | Not aligned |
16. Freedom from exploitation: protect within and outside home, provide gender and age-sensitive assistance, monitor disability programmes | Not aligned | Section 3.2.19 |
17. Protecting the integrity of the person: respect physical and mental integrity. | Not aligned | Section 3.2.19 |
18. Liberty of movement and nationality: recognise right to choose residence, change nationality, have right to identification or to travel, register children after birth, ensure right to a name and nationality and parental care | Not aligned | Not aligned |
19. Independent living and community participation: recognise right to community living, choices in their place of residence, access to a range of support services, and equality of access to community services and facilities | Not aligned | Section 3.1.1; 3.2.2 |
20. Personal mobility: promote access to mobility services and supports; provide training in mobility skills | Not aligned | Not aligned |
21. Freedom of expression and opinion; access to information: ensure communication in form of their choice | Not aligned | Section 3.2.5; 3.2.10 |
22. Respect for privacy: protect the privacy of personal communications and health and rehabilitation information | Not aligned | Not aligned |
23. Respect for home and family: eliminate discrimination in marriage, family, parenthood, and relationships; ensure non-discrimination in fertility | Not aligned | Section 3.2.19 |
24. Education: promote inclusive and equal education; provide support for academic and social development | Not aligned | Section 3.2.6; 3.2.7 |
25. Health: promote access to gender-sensitive health, reproductive services in community and on non-discriminatory basis; prevent denial of health care and food or liquids on the basis of disability | Not aligned | Section 3.1.1; 3.2.2;3.2.3 |
26. Habilitation and rehabilitation: provide community and strengthen need-based services | Not aligned | Section 3.1.1; 3.2.3 |
27. Work and employment: prohibit discrimination, promote safe and equal working conditions and equal work for equal value; ensure reasonable accommodations; develop employment supports | Not aligned | Section 3.2.8; 3.2.9 |
28. Adequate standard of living and social protection: ensure right to adequate food, clean water, clothing, housing and social programmes | Not aligned | Section 3.2.13; 3.2.15 |
29. Participation in political and public life: ensure right to vote or be elected, accessible voting procedures and materials, free expression | Not aligned | Not aligned |
30. Participation in cultural life: ensure accessible cultural materials and locations, encourage participation in mainstream sporting activities, ensure access to activities in the school system | Not aligned | Section 3.2.11; 3.2.12 |
31. Statistics and data collection | Section 15 | Section 3.2.18 |
32 to 50 – responsibilities of countries that ratified on implementing, monitoring and reporting on the UNCRPD on its effect | UN reporting system (Both documents developed before UNCRPD, thus no alignment) |
UNCRPD, United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; NDC, National Disability Council; NPD, National Policy on Disability.
The findings revealed that there is some alignment of the UNCRPD Articles with sections of the NPD with the exception of UNCRPD Articles 10 (Right to life), 11 (Risk and humanitarian emergencies), 14 (Liberty and security of person), 15 (Freedom from torture), 18 (Liberty of movement and nationality), 20 (Personal mobility), 22 (Freedom of expression and opinion; access to information), which are not reflected in either the NPD or the
Minimal alignment is shown between the UNCRPD Articles and the sections in the
Identification of the gaps in alignment of policy and legislation with the UNCRPD can provide an opportunity for areas of amendment. The UNCRPD is the foundation upon which Namibia needs to build and revise its national policies and laws. This will further facilitate disability being addressed as a human rights issue and thus stimulate all sectors in Namibia to mainstream disability into their activities.
Despite the misalignment of the
This review identified that CBR underpins all policies and legislation as a key strategy for providing rehabilitation services in Namibia. Thus, the CBR programme plays a central role in the implementation process of disability services in Namibia.
Key to the development of any policy is the ‘actor power’ which is explained by Shiffman and Smith (
One of the key issues identified in the review was coordination. It appears that all the policies and legislation pertaining to disability are coordinated separately, often by different government ministries or entities as is the case with NDC. The potential for confusion and duplication is created when there is lack of a central mechanism for policy coordination leading to implementers being required to report to several coordinators from different departments (Percy
Within sections of the policies reviewed, there are multiple strategies and this creates a multiplicity of tasks and responsibilities by a number of implementing ministries. For example, the NPD presents 22 strategies to be implemented by all ministries. The high number of role players involved in the NPD can create multiple decision points that may be in conflict with each other. This can cause inertia in implementation and policy analysis when coordination is spread over many actors and resources are spread over multiple competing actors with opposing directives (Percy
Findings from this study revealed that the policy and legal framework in most instances was not guided by adequate use of evidence (rapid assessments, benchmark tours, literature reviews, operational research) in formulation. This may have been attributed to the demand for quick answers and remedies by policymakers which can lead to reductionism (Walt et al.
A lack of guidelines was apparent in most policies with the
Another crucial issue that was not addressed adequately by the policies and legal framework is gender differences. Although the NPD mentions women as a special focus group, it does not pay sufficient attention to gender differences that should be addressed such as the role of women as a wife or mother. The role of women and men in the house can ultimately affect their career paths. Men with disabilities are expected to have a caregiver who does household chores, yet a woman with a disability is expected to do all this by herself (Percy
The policy and legal framework adopted varying models of disability and definitions. This might have been because of the different stages when the policies and legislation were adopted as the disability models have evolved over time. Therefore, a lack of a uniform countrywide model on disability creates challenges with issues of eligibility for social protection, as there are no consistently applied assessments of disability. Furthermore, this inconsistency leads to difficulties in the provision of disability service delivery and evaluation.
Reflection on the alignment of the NPD and the
It is worth noting that Article 144 of the Constitution of Namibia (Government Republic of Namibia
Since independence in 1990, Namibia has made significant progress in developing policies and legislation to address the needs of persons with disabilities. This review identified the CBR programme as underpinning all policies and legislation as a key strategy for providing rehabilitation services in Namibia. The critical issues that could hamper the implementation process include among others the lack of a central mechanism for coordination, overlapping strategies, formulation not grounded in evidence, lack of regulations and guidelines, different disability models adopted and failure to address gender differences.
The NPD and the
The finding of this study can be utilised to review the policy and legal framework of Namibia as well as offer insights into disability legislation in southern Africa. To strengthen the insights shared in this review, it is therefore important for future studies to investigate the progress of implementation of the policy and legal framework in Namibia from the point of view of the actual implementers and recipients of services. The diversity in disability groups potentially creates varying needs.
The authors would like to thank the government officials for availing the relevant documents and Mr David Hughes, a disability consultant in Namibia, for his invaluable contributions. This project was funded by the University of KwaZulu-Natal, Discipline of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing and Public Health.
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
T.W.S. was the project leader responsible for project design and data collection. I.M. made conceptual contributions and contributed to the preparation of the final report.