Women and Girls with Disabilities in India: Understanding the Social and Legal Challenges including in the IPR Laws

I. Introduction

The disabled people often have to contend with cultural constructions marked by negativity and stigmatization. Within the Indian cultural context, disability implies a "lack" or "flaw" leading to a significantly diminished capability; images of the disabled also are associated with deceit, mischief, and devilry. Disabled people sometimes are depicted as suffering the wrath of God, and being punished for misdeeds that either they or their families have committed-a kind of penance or retribution for past misdeeds. Yet another strand of this cultural construction conceives of disability as eternal childhood, where survival is contingent upon constant care and protection. Here, the emphasis is on images of dependency, thereby reinforcing the charity/pity model.²

A girl or woman with disability faces further stigmatisation in our society. Statements like ‘Ek to ladki oopar se aapahij’ or "Wasn't it enough that we have a hand to mouth existence? Why did God have to add to punish us further by giving a Langri (crippled) daughter.”³, clearly highlight that while disability is a challenge for both men and women, for women and girls, the challenges become multi-fold and complex given their already subservient position. The impaired body of a woman/girl with disability becomes a symbol of imperfection, as unfeminine and unacceptable, stigmatized. In India, women and girls with disabilities constitute 44% of the total population with disabilities. As per the 2011 census, women with disabilities constituted nearly 54% of the ‘illiterate’ disabled population in India. Only 23% of women with disabilities are working as opposed to 47% of men with disabilities.⁴

A number of studies, as well as testimonies and field-based experience, signify that when compared to disabled men disabled women tend to suffer more from poverty and isolation. They receive less support from the family and the community and have more difficulty in obtaining services (mainstream services and rehabilitation). They are likely to be more economically dependent, mainly due to a high rate of illiteracy, and limited vocational training, making them less attractive to employers; and to endure more physical, sexual and psychological violence and abuse. ⁵

As a girl child she has to contend with both her role as a daughter, when what was desired was a son, and with her disability. When she is ‘offered’ in marriage, the disabled girl has to be compensated with more dowries. If compensation is not possible, then compromises such as being married to a widower have to be made. While disabled men may easily get ‘normal’ wives, it is unimaginable for a disabled girl to have any such choice. Further, as elaborated by Sudhir Kakar, a psychoanalyst (1978, 56), in our culture, motherhood confers upon a woman a purpose and identity that nothing else in her culture can. Each infant borne and nurtured by her safely into childhood, especially if the child is a son, is both a certification and redemption of her ability, role, and status as a woman. Disabled women are, however, denied the possibility of this fulfillment, as marriage and consequent motherhood are both difficult achievements in a socially restrictive environment. Therefore, disabled women are denied the ‘traditional roles’ that our culture imposes on ‘normal’ women. By doing so it creates what Michele Fine and Adrienne Asch (1988) term "rolelessness," a social invisibility and cancellation of femininity. Further, the assumption that sexuality and disability are mutually exclusive also denies that disabled people/ women/girls also experience sexual desires and refuses them recognition as sexually typical despite their differences.⁶

Therefore, while both men and women need to negotiate between multiple identities they carry, for the female gender, multiple identities correlate with one another in unique ways to create distinctive set of disadvantages, discrimination, subordination and exclusion. For a girl or woman with disability, these harmful experiences may not only get accentuated, disability may overshadow all other identities and may create debilitating disadvantages and discrimination over and above others.

II. Violence against women and girls with disabilities- its nature and scope

The description above highlights but a few challenges a girl or a woman with disability may face in society. Hidden behind this labyrinth of challenges is a deeply entrenched inferior position of woman in the society and consequential normality of violence against them. Female-foeticide, infanticide, malnutrition, illiteracy, honour killing, sexual harassment, early marriage, domestic violence, cruelty, rape, dowry, denial of property rights, a woman’s life is encased within the folds of subtle and obvious forms of violence- physical, sexual, economic, emotional.

The United Nations defines violence against women (vaw) as "any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual, or mental harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life."⁷ Violence against woman and girls is all pervasive and universal because it finds its roots in patriarchy a systemic domination of women by men. Its expression is also influenced by economic status, race, ethnicity, class, age, sexual orientation, disability, nationality, religion, culture, caste and race. Violence against women and girls is therefore not necessarily individual but structural in nature, based as they are on her subordination and unequal position in social hierarchy.

Violence is used a lot of times against women in order to ‘discipline’ her for transgressions of traditional female roles or when they perceive challenges to their masculinity. Customs, traditions and religious values may also often be used to justify violence against women including femicide where the community or family may believe itself to be injured by a woman’s actual or perceived behaviour. Economic inequalities, lack of access to economic resources including land, wages credit can be a causal factor for violence against women at home and in the workplace. Women’s economic inequalities and discrimination against women in areas such as employment, income, access to other economic resources and lack of economic independence reduce women’s capacity to act and take decisions, and increase their vulnerability to violence. Further, social and political acceptance of violence as a means of conflict resolution, legal doctrines protecting the privacy of the home and family and state inaction in leaving in place discriminatory laws and policies that undermine women’s human rights, further add to her disempowerment.⁸

When it comes to Disability-based violence, it means direct and indirect violence against persons with disabilities. It is linked to the social stigma associated with disability and based on the power imbalance between those with and without disabilities. Disability based violence that is perpetuated and accentuated in case of women and girls by stereotypes that infantilizes women, excludes or isolates them, and dehumanizes them. The Direct violence can include physical, psychological, and economic violence. Indirect violence refers to structural violence, characterized by norms, attitudes, and stereotypes on disability. Violence may be experienced both in public and private spaces. ⁹

Women and girls with disabilities face violence throughout their life cycle. In infancy, children with disability may face violence based on belief that disability is shameful, a curse, divine punishment or misdeed of parents. Children with disabilities may be neglected, deprived of food, care, affection, may not be immunised or registered and more so, if the child is a girl. They may also be killed or abandoned or sold off for prostitution, or trafficked for domestic labour, especially if born in poverty and other difficult circumstances. Such children may be physically, emotionally sexually brutalised by employers. ¹⁰

A girl child with disability may never go to school, especially if they are girls, and yet the household responsibilities may be similar to any other child or adult. This can be due to negative attitudes and a lack of inclusive education systems and accessible transportation. Without going to school, it is less likely that they will receive sexual and reproductive health information to manage their menstruation, prevent sexually transmitted infections and unwanted pregnancies, or make informed choices regarding their sexual and reproductive rights. Lack of education also severely limits their chances to gain skills and knowledge, which nourishes confidence and agency, and improves access to decent work. This leads to the kind of structural conditions that make it difficult to avoid or leave abusive situations. Adolescent girls with disabilities are at a high risk of violence at and around school due to discrimination based on their impairments.¹¹

With age, the girl child with disability’s risk of sexual violence increases. They are perceived as easy targets and violence against them may not be reported or difficult to prove. Other harmful practices against girls and young women with disabilities are perceived as legitimate medical care condoned by legislation. These practices include forced sterilization to prevent unwanted pregnancies or rape; coerced and invasive contraception to reduce the burden on families and carers administering oral contraceptives; and menstruation and sexual expression suppression , including through hysterectomies, to avoid having to manage menstruation, especially among adolescent girls with severe, multiple, or intellectual disabilities. ¹²

Girls with disability may be married early to ensure long term security and protection or to relieve oneself of the burden or to ‘improve/cure/ disability. Men may sometimes marry women with disabilities to access their land, receive a higher dowry, or exploit them as cheap labor. Women who become disabled after their marriage are often abandoned by their partners, as are women who bear children with disabilities. Many of these women suffer ill- treatment at the hands of their spouse and in-laws (personal communication).

The rights to marriage, to sexual and reproductive rights, and to family life are often implicitly denied to disabled women on the basis that disability has deprived them of their sexuality and they can therefore no longer fulfil the roles of sexual partner, mother and carer.

Therefore, women with disabilities are often expected to tolerate non-consensual sex and sexually abusive behavior because it is assumed that even non-consensual sex will be a favor to the women, and therefore abusive relationships are to be tolerated. This is often used as an excuse by perpetrators, as well as by community members for not acting to protect the girl or woman. Women with disabilities are often discouraged or denied the opportunity to bear or raise children. This is especially the case for women with intellectual disabilities because they are either perceived as asexual and dependent on care, or as hyper-sexual and/or promiscuous, resulting in the unmanageable reproduction of children with disabilities

Numerous studies reveal difficulty of women with disabilities to leave abusive situations because of real or perceived dependency on partners and family members, lack of knowledge about available services, and extremely limited support systems in terms of social networks, helplines, and shelters. Disability therefore tends to be an added risk factor for violence against older women, whether it is an acquired, age related disability, or a lifelong disability.

Women and girls with disability are at a greater risk of being institutionalized and may experience unique forms of neglect and abuse by other residents and staff members. They may risk losing their legal capacity to make decisions about their lives. The loss of legal capacity exposes them to a range of abuse, including prolonged detention, unsanitary conditions, neglect, involuntary treatment, and violence. Institutions often work with and understand disability based on the medical model of disability, which may be compounded by discriminatory and false beliefs, especially regarding sexual reproductive health rights. Educational institutions that house children and adults with intellectual and psycho-social disabilities have also witnessed violence against women and girls with disabilities (eg Asha Kiran- Delhi).¹³

Women with disabilities are disproportionally represented in jails and prisons. Globally, women with disabilities account for about one-fifth of the female population. However, according to two studies, female prisoners were five times more likely to have a psychosocial disability than the general population, and 80 percent of female detainees were found to have a psychosocial disability. The lack of support may result in higher rates of criminal activity, or to a common perception that people with psychosocial and intellectual impairments are dangerous to themselves or their community. Further, women with disabilities are at high risk of violence and abuse in prisons.

When it comes to access to justice violence against women and girls with disabilities is rarely reported – and even more rarely brought to justice because of attitudinal, environmental, and institutional barriers. At the most basic level, many police stations and court houses are not physically accessible, nor are sign language interpreters or facilitated communication services available to support communication between the complainant and judicial personnel. The misconception about the sexuality of women and girls with disabilities, along with the general discriminatory attitudes related to their gender and impairment, make it very difficult for this group to get support from families and communities. The survivors are often blamed, not only for provoking the sexual violence, but also for what is seen as undue punishment of “productive” men for transgressions against women who are considered useless and a burden.

Some forms of violence in care situations, such as physical abandonment or psychological cruelty are not recognized because of misconceptions that disability necessitates such cruelty. When the violence is perpetrated by a family member or personal assistant, the incident is often addressed by social services, rather than being considered as a crime and reported to the judicial system. Victims often struggle to come forward and be heard because they are dependent on their caregivers, or are perceived to be unreliable; this is especially the case for women and girls with psychosocial and intellectual disabilities.¹⁴ The negative attitudes towards women and girls with disabilities often displayed by families, communities, and law enforcement can result in perpetrators threatening to retaliate if the matter is reported. This is made worse by power dynamics when perpetrators are prominent or powerful people in the community.¹⁵

III. Law and violence against women and girls – shortcoming and improvements required

The legal framework governing the protection regime for people with disabilities in India are firstly, the United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). India ratified the UNCRPD Convention on 01-10-2007 in pursuance of Article 35 of the Convention. The corner stone of the Convention is a right based and comprehensive approach towards issues of persons with disability. With respect to violence, Article 16, UNCRPD requires States Parties to take positive measures to protect persons with disabilities from exploitation, violence and abuse, “both within and outside the home including their gender based aspects. ¹⁶

India drafted a new law in line with the UNCRPD by repealing the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and replacing it with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (RPWD) Act, 2016. In addition, India’s constitution remains the corner stone in the protection regime for persons with disability. Further, the Mental Health Care Act, 2017, National Trust for the Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 and Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992 are other laws directly concerning rights of the persons with disability.¹⁷ Further, there is also the National Policy for Persons with Disabilities, 2006 has laid down guidelines for government for better quality of life, equal opportunities and effective access to rehabilitation measures.

Article 41 of the Indian Constitution which forms part of the Directive Principles of State Policy explicitly mentions “disablement” as a condition for which the State is to strive, to provide assistance in certain matters including education, work, etc. Although disability does not figure as a prohibited ground of discrimination under Article 15 on Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution, the Supreme Court has recognised persons with disabilities (PwDs) as being a vulnerable group to whom the principles of equality and non-discrimination apply equally. There’s also a growing demand for including disability too as one of the categories of persons for whom special provisions can be made by the state under Article 15 (3) of the Constitution. Ideally, any law dealing with special measures, rights and protection for women should cover the women and girls with disabilities in their ambit, however with a noted exception of the Criminal Law amendment Act 2013, women with disabilities become ‘invisible’ in the process of interpretation and implementation of the law.¹⁸

Over the years, this invisibility and consequent neglect has resulted in many barriers to access of justice for women and girls with disability including complicated mechanisms for complaints and redressal, absence of accountability of both state and private actors and insensitivity of personnel in the police and judicial systems. The RPD Act seeks to address some of these barriers by radically changing the approach towards persons with disability from being welfare or medical to right based and by comprehensively addressing issues of discrimination, violence and recognizing the civil and political as well as economic, social and cultural rights of persons with disabilities; the enabling policies for institutionalization of these provisions however remain wanting.

It is pertinent to note here that violence against women and girls is in true sense a human rights issue and must be taken up with commensurate seriousness.¹⁹ The committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the treaty body established in 1982 to monitor implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), contributed significantly to the recognition of violence against women as a human rights issue. Its General recommendation No. 19 (1992) decisively established the link: it asserted unequivocally that violence against women constitutes a form of gender-based discrimination and that discrimination is a major cause of such violence. This analysis brought the issue of violence against women directly into the language, institutions and processes of human rights.²⁰ Fortunately the scheme of RPD Act, addresses this concern. In fact, the act incorporates one of the most comprehensive (Raha and Sengupta) definitions of discrimination. ²¹ However, when it to comes to violence against women, it fails to expressly recognize women’s vulnerability to violence and address it comprehensively. Though it recognizes specific sexual offences against women with disabilities and criminalises them under Section 92 of the act (criminalises assault or use of force on women with disability (Wwd) with the intention to outrage her modesty; sexual exploitation of a woman or child with disability by a person in a position to dominate their will; performing, conducting or directing any medical procedure that leads or is likely to lead to a termination of pregnancy of a Wwd without her express consent. Termination done in cases of severe disability and based on the opinion of a registered medical practitioner and consent of the guardian of the Wwd are exempt. These offences are punishable with fine and a minimum term of 6 months imprisonment which can extend to 5 years.), Section 7(1) of the act is generic in nature wherein the government is required to take cognizance and provide legal remedies in case of abuse violence and exploitation of persons with disabilities. ²² This provision therefore fails to comprehensively address the nature of violence against women with disability which is distinct from those faced by men and boys with disability and therefore fails on the touchstone of human rights jurisprudence.²³

There are other legal provisions addressing violence against women and girls with disability. The criminal law amendment act 2013 introduced several changes to the substantive, procedural and evidence law relevant to sexual offences against women many of which have a bearing on women with disabilities. Further POCSO has addressed violence against girls. Disability is considered an aggravating factor for offences committed under the Juvenile Justice (care and protection of children) Act, 2015; the commission of rape of a woman ‘suffering from mental or physical disability’ constitutes aggravated rape under section 376 (2) (I) of the IPC and now in BNS. If the woman is in a permanent vegetative state because of rape or aggravated rape, it is an offence punishable under Section 376-A, IPC with a minimum term of 20 years rigorous imprisonment which can extend to life imprisonment, i.e., imprisonment for the remainder of the person’s natural life, or death. This provision was introduced through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013. Penetrative sexual assault or sexual assault by “taking advantage of a child’s mental or physical disability” constitutes aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 5(k), POCSO Act and aggravated sexual assault under Section 9(k), POCSO Act, respectively. If the penetrative sexual assault or sexual assault results in physical incapacitation, mental illness, or impairment which temporarily or permanently renders the child unable to perform regular tasks, it would amount to aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 5(j)(i) and aggravated sexual assault under Section 9(j)(i) of the POCSO Act.

Certain procedural safeguards have also been introduced for women and girls with disability. For instance, if a sexual offence is allegedly committed against a woman who is temporarily or permanently, mentally or physically disabled, the police should record the information at the person’s residence or at a convenient place of the woman’s choice CrPC – section 164). An interpreter or special educator should be present during the recording of the information and the recording should be videographed. A woman or a person with mental or physical disability cannot be summoned to a police station.

Under the POCSO Act, 2012, the police, Magistrate, and Special Court can take the assistance of a special educator or person familiar with the manner of communication of the child with physical or mental disability or a qualified and experiences expert to record the child’s statement or evidence. The inclusion of a person familiar with the child’s manner of communication was deliberate, in light of the absence of standardized special education facilities and the possibility that children may not be able to communicate through any expert or special educator.

The statement of a person who is temporarily or permanently, mentally or physically disabled should be recorded by a Magistrate with the assistance of an interpreter or a special educator and should be videographed. In a significant departure from standard criminal procedures, this statement has to be considered as a statement in lieu of the examination-in-chief and the woman or girl with disability can be cross-examined on its basis. In other words, the statement will not have to be repeated before the trial court. However, the implementation of this provision has been tardy as many courts lack audio-visual facilities or the capacity to use such equipment²⁴

These changes reflect a shift towards a more sensitive and human rights based approach in criminal justice system. It must be remembered that there are important consequences that flow from categorizing violence against women as a matter of human rights. Recognizing violence against women as a human rights issue enables the human rights discourse and practice to become more inclusive by encompassing the experiences of women. It empowers women positioning them not as passive recipients of discretionary benefits but as active right holders. Human Rights approach also increases the possibility of incorporating other factors, in this case, for instance disability, into consideration in the judicial processes. Addressing violence against women as a human rights issue encourages an indivisible, holistic and multisectoral response that adds a human rights dimension to work in all sectors. It calls for strengthening and accelerating initiatives in all areas to prevent and eliminate violence against women, including in the criminal justice, health, development, humanitarian, peacebuilding and security sectors.²⁵ It is herein that efforts need to be made.

The Parallel Report CRPD Alternate Report’ February 2019, has made numerous observations for effective implementation of legal protection for persons with disabilities. This report too has identified numerous limitations in achieving the goal of effectively addressing violence against women and girls - foremost, disability inclusion is an issue spearheaded by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MSJE) but has not been addressed in a cross-sectoral manner, with only 8 out of 100 Ministries and Departments have any mention of persons with disabilities in their programs and schemes; there has been lack of enabling policies; there has been a lower estimate of incidence of disability in India; laws have not been harmonised. Though we must note that the government has recently initiated efforts to harmonise the National Trust for the Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act 1999 and the Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992; there has been low spending on cross sectoral programs and spending on programs which are not complaint with provisions of the United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD); there has been lack of monitoring of the institutions for the disabled persons; It has also been noticed that the Government of India makes Private public partnerships with NGOs mandating NGOs to raise their own funding for even basic services and scaling. Persons with high restriction of participation have access to limited schemes, such as pension/ maintenance and are not beneficiaries of general programs.²⁶ Further, the RPD Act requires a proactive role of the state in dispelling stereotyping of the disabled persons (section 39) which remains lacking. ²⁷

Additionally, there has been poor allocation of resources and underutilisation of the same; all functioning schemes are based on the erstwhile PWDA without amendments; new mainstream programs do not address disability specific requirements; Lack of disability disaggregated data and poor monitoring. Especially with respect to the criminal justice system, a glaring gap has been no disaggregation of data on the basis of disability in the crime against women statistics generated by the Indian government. It is amusing to see that a study funded by Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India named ‘Tackling Violence Against Women: A Study of State intervention Measures’ 2017, does not have a chapter on violence against women with disabilities. This writer could find only one instance, with respect to Criminal Law Amendment Act 2013, that a reference was made with respect to women with disabilities. Otherwise, the entire report fails to encompass all categories of women. ²⁸

Further, though RPDA talks about social audit of all schemes and programs concerned with persons with disabilities, this is not reflected in policy design; non-uniform coverage of entitlements - till August 2017, only 57.98% of the disabled population have been issued disability certificates. Moreover, there is a non-uniform coverage of entitlements with a stark variation across regions in fund allocation for per-capita spending in different States and union territories. Persons with disabilities living in rural areas are ignored in coverage; there is a lack of involvement of persons with disabilities in policymaking and planning by all ministries.²⁹

What are measures to be taken to rectify it ?

There must be Disaggregation of Data based on gender and disability; Stringently implement monitoring mechanisms in institutions of care and protection covering public and privately run institutions be implemented with immediate effect; Repeal of all State level policies such as those offering financial benefits to non-disabled individuals for marrying PwDs; Ensure that involuntary treatment, such as forced abortion, contraception, sterilization and incarceration are not permitted by law on WwDs; Remove from the PCPNDT Act the clauses on disability; Guidelines and laws for monitoring of religious institutions (shrines, temples, dargahs) purporting to cure certain disabilities; Ensure that no direct Electro-Convulsive Therapy (ECT) is given to anybody and under any circumstance; Ensure that the penal laws are amended to punish those who violate this requirement; Awareness creation and sensitization on a national level to remove discrimination against WwDs; Ensure participation of WwD in decision/policy making, implementation women’s policies; Need for India to pass its draft law on torture to realise its obligation under Convention against torture with a disability and gender specific approach; Inclusion in the gender budgeting process and provision of adequate funding; . Review all legislation, policies and programmes related to violence against women from a disability sensitive perspective; Put in place guidelines on the issue of identifying, addressing, redressing and rehabilitation in case of abuse of WwDs, especially in institutional settings; Special measures are taken for generating awareness regarding the Domestic Violence Act, 205 amongst WwDs; Training on women and disability issues and concerns in relation to violence is provided to all law enforcement and judicial agencies, so that functional mechanisms of redress can be established; Place accountability on State officials overseeing the functioning of privately run institutions where WwDs are housed in case of a report of violence against a WwD resident;³⁰

IV. Women and disability: examining ‘gender neutral’ law ipr

One of the important concerns for women with disability is their intellectual and artistic freedom. IPR being the law protecting creativity and inventiveness, has remained untouched by plights of women with disability and continued to carry both institutional and structural barriers inhibiting them Women with disabilities face very specific set of challenges which discourages them from benefitting from IPR laws. The structure of IPR laws are exclusionary and does not provide any mechanism to address intersectional challenges. In patents, high cost of registration of patents, lack of accessibility to formats accessible to persons with disabilities; complex documentation requirements etc make it truly discouraging for a woman with disability to seek IPR protection. Moreover systemic exclusion from education and innovation ecosystems marginalises women with disability. They generally are unable to opt for STEM subjects due to lack of guidance, training. Additionally, they lack mentorship and therefore their creativity goes un acknowledged. In addition, the Indian registration processes for instances of patent, are not inclusive in nature. In copyright too, laws donot adequately support dissemination of knowledge in accessible formats like braille or audio thereby limiting the creativity and educational opportunities for women with disability. These structural and normative barriers collectively silence the voices of women with disabilities in the IPR landscape, reinforcing cycles of invisibility and exclusion in knowledge creation and protection.³¹ A critical lack of inclusivity of such concern can be seen in how patent law treats assistive technologies. Assistive technologies are critical for equitable innovation. However these technologies remain unprotected or under protected or inaccessible due to patent regimes which donot prioritise the concerns of this section of society.

V. Conclusion

Women and girls with disabilities in India experience layered marginalization that severely limits their agency and access to rights. The invisibility of their lived experiences within the legal system—particularly in areas like violence and intellectual property—reinforces cycles of discrimination and exclusion. While legislative reforms such as the RPWD Act, 2016 signal progress, they fall short in recognizing the distinct needs of women with disabilities. Structural and normative changes are urgently required, including accessible legal mechanisms, gender-disaggregated data collection, cross-sectoral policy integration, and targeted awareness. The recognition of IPR as a human rights issue further demands inclusive innovation policies that empower women with disabilities as both creators and rights holders. Only through such intersectional and rights-based approaches can true legal empowerment be achieved for this long-neglected group.

*****