„We have no reason to look down on others.”

Mister Dusel, why there is a need for a Global Disability Summit?

Because there are around 1.3 billion people with disabilities in the world. And because they are citizens of this globe, this earth. They got the same rights as all other humans. Human Rights. But we know that we are relatively far away from realizing these rights, from equal participation. Not just in Germany, but as a wohle.  

Does it also address a certain pent-up demand in development cooperation?

This means that we basically have to implement an obligation from the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Germany as well, namely Article 32, which regulates international cooperation. But not just because we have to, but because it makes sence! We must design our development cooperation more inclusive.

When the Federal Republic of Germany concludes, as many people as possible, for example in the global South, must be able to benefit from them.

Structures must also be strengthened to ensure that people with disabilities are also involved in these cooperation scenarios. This is a fundamental democratic Principe.

How inclusive is German development cooperation?

It has improved, but it is not yet inclusive enough. This is not only taxpayers’ money, but a principle that should enable Nations to develop further. And we very often see that people with disabilities are not able to participate to the same extent. If I look at Syria, for example: There, too, the situation of people with disabilities, especially women and girls with disabilities, is quite desolate. And we also know that many people with disabilities in the global south live below the poverty line. In this respect, there is still a lot to be done. I don’t believe that all this is being forgotten out of bad intensions, but there must be an awareness that people with disabilities are a part of civilization and also belong to marginalised sections.

And why is there not yet enough awareness of this in Germany?

Because, in my view, we are still very exclusive in Germany. Because many people with political responsibility, many decision-makers, hardly know or have any contact with people with disabilities and therefore don't have this perspective on their radar. And secondly, because the political participation of people with disabilities is really inadequate. We have far too few people with disabilities in parliaments. This is a completely underrepresented section. As a result, their perspective is not as visible. It's about creating encounters, creating access and creating dialogue in Germany too. We only learn through exchange and there are certainly countries that are better positioned. The debate about cooperation often gives the impression that only Germany has something to offer. In Jordan, the co-organiser of the GDS, I see activities and resources that we can learn from.

You mentioned a lack of encounters. For me that’s hard to imagine, because ten per cent of German population live with a disability.

There are even more, namely one in six of us. Only three per cent are born with a disability, like me. The rest acquire their disability in the course of life. Through an accident, through an illness. If we only ever discuss inclusion in education sector, then it is irrelevant for 95 per cent of people with disabilities – because they didn’t have a disability when they went to school. We have parallel structures here. That can be school, but it can also be the world of work, the workshops for people with disabilities. It can be the training sector, vocational training centres. And that courses that we tend to have fewer encounters.
Another problem is accessibility. Try visiting the theatre in a wheelchair, or the cinema, or the restaurant, travelling on the Deutsche Bahn. Some people have a disability that is not immediately obvious. All of this courses that we have fewer encounters.

That means in Germany accessibility is more a right of grace than a human right?

It is not regulated by law in private departments. If you want to go to the town hall in a wheelchair, it should be barrier-free. If you are blind, you are also entitled to receive a notice in Braille. But the big step that the federal government intended to take, namely to oblige private providers of products and services to provide accessibility, in accordance with the coalition agreement, was not implemented. This means that, in my view, we really do have a quality problem. And this was not only criticised by me, but also by the United Nations. We had a state review the year before last.

If you look at the concluding remarks, you realise that we have no reason to look down on others. On the contrary, we should walk around with a bit of humility and do our homework.

What can we learn from other countries?

To lose our fear and actually understand that accessibility not only has a deep social dimension because it enables encounters. Accessibility is a quality criterion for a modern country. When I think of the sector of digitalisation we can learn from Baltic states. When I think of the realisation of human rights, I also think about Great Britain. And I sometimes get the feeling that it is still accepted in Germany that people with disabilities are structurally disadvantaged. In this respect, I hope that the GDS will reflect our self-image. We need commitments.  

The GDS wants to strengthen the disability rights movement. How should this be done?

By taking seriously this wonderful phrase that everyone says: Nothing about us without us. People with disabilities are experts in their own right.

I sometimes remark a paternalistic view along the lines of: well, we already know what's good for people with disabilities. And that is grossly wrong. It must be a participatory process. At the GDS, there are not just two hosts, i.e. Germany and Jordan, but a third: This is the International Disability Alliance, which brings in the perspective of people with disabilities.

I take it from your words that you are a little tired of the term 'care'.

Yes, because it always implies care. And I'm not interested in care, I'm actually interested in participation. And that also applies to international cooperation: if we know that women and girls with disabilities, for example, are three times more at risk of becoming victims of violence, including sexualised violence, than women without disabilities, then we have to react. We cannot simply accept this.

What risks are people with disabilities particularly exposed to in regions with lower incomes?

Firstly, the major challenges: Climate change and armed conflict. If a family has a child with a severe disability, they can't easily get from A to B in the event of flooding. In armed conflicts, shelters are often not accessible without barriers. A study by the World Health Organisation has shown that the life expectancy of people with disabilities worldwide is 20 years shorter than that of people without disabilities - but not because of their disability, but because they have no access to the healthcare system. We have relatively little data, and this will also be important for the GDS: that we act on the basis of data.

What specifically do you expect from the Global Disability Summit?

I expect clear measures to be described. That we don't just agree on declarations of intent, but that there are measurable results. It will be important that we talk about education, healthcare, digitalisation and armed conflicts.

The GDS is embedded in the UN Sustainable Development Goals process. German Development Institutes are supposed to be fulfilled by 2030, which is highly unlikely to happen. What do you think is part of the so-called post-2030 Agenda, which should be formulated slowly?

We need to realise that inclusion is a process. It is a question of attitude. Because it is a human rights issue. It's about the question of which country, which world we want to live in. If we work inclusively, people in their home countries will develop better, there will be better opportunities - and the pressure to flee will also be reduced.