Disabled Public Services That Are Held Hostage

In December there were at least two important warnings. December 3 as world disability day (disability / disability) and December 10 as international human rights day. At this moment it is necessary to reflect on the extent to which the treatment of the state provides public facilities for persons with disabilities as a consistency in protecting human rights equality.
The enforcement of human rights in the corridor of implementing democracy is an urgent agenda that must be realized by the state (read: the government). The state should ideally be able to maintain harmony in relations with all components of society, especially at the level of civil society. One of the interrelations provided by the state is the optimal actuation of public services to all groups, without any party being discriminated against. Like the principle of running a democracy that prioritizes opportunities and equality of opportunities that are equitable for all parties, human rights accent citizenship participation which also does not differentiate from one another.
Reforms have included fundamental changes to national and local regulations. Regulations that were previously deemed not pro-human rights and negate the participation of civil society must be subject to the flow of regulatory reforms that open up legal protection space for the implementation of human rights and empower civil society. One of the regulations that was born was Law Number 39 of 1999 concerning Human Rights.
The human rights conception of this law is seen as a set of rights inherent in the nature and existence of human beings as God's creatures and gifts that must be respected, upheld and protected by the state, law, government, and everyone, for the honor and protection of human dignity. From this conception the commitment which is emphasized is the equality of the rights of fellow human beings with the demand for the treatment of equal rights without differentiating physical or mental deficiencies.
In the span of more than a decade since its period of validation, the implementation of this law should be able to guarantee equal rights for the physically and mentally deficient. Disability groups should ideally be protected by human rights regulations, especially in the mandate of TAP MPR No. XVII / MPR / 1998 concerning Human Rights, especially Chapter VIII article 30, emphasized that "Everyone has the right to obtain special facilities and privileges in childhood, in old age, ... including persons with disabilities".
From the normative point of view, our country has indeed realized pro human rights regulations and the protection of civil society. It's just that the problem is, the implementation of the measure of protection of human rights equality as reflected in the regulation is difficult to translate into everyday reality. The new set of human rights regulations "sounds" or can be meaningful if there are lawsuits, advocacy efforts and not as an act of human rights protection that is empowering or accommodating the provision of pro-HAM public service facilities.
The state has actually provided space for the protection of persons with disabilities, but the level is limited to the stipulation of regulations / legal basis. Some of these regulations include, Law No. 4 of 1997 concerning Disabled People, Republic of Indonesia Government Regulation No. 43 of 1998 concerning Efforts to Improve Social Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, Minister of Transportation Decree No. 71 of 1999 and RI Minister of Public Works Decree No. 468 / KPTS / 1998 concerning Technical Requirements for Accessibility in Public Buildings and the Environment.
Several movements on the implementation of this regulation were recorded as having been initiated by former President Abdurrahman Wahid through the National Public Accessibility Movement (GAUN). This movement is an effort to provide accessible facilities for people with disabilities especially in public transportation facilities. This idea only resonated for a moment because it was held hostage when there was a change of national leadership. A similar commitment was shown by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono through instructions to the governors to provide adequate facilities for the disabled. This commitment also did not bring significant change and was only answered by the tears of emotion when Vice President Budiono faced the disabled people on the commemoration of 2009 disability day.
This is what implies the impression of pessimism of many circles on the realization of the state towards the accessibility of disabled people on inclusive public services. The attention of the state is considered merely ceremonial. This impression is further strengthened by the absence of local government response, where many have not formulated explicitly the protection of people with disabilities. The Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta had formulated regulations relating to persons with disabilities, including Perda No 7 of 1991 concerning Buildings in the DKI Jakarta Region which emphasized the availability of access for people with disabilities as one of the requirements for obtaining a IMB. The DKI Regional Government had threatened to make it difficult to permit the construction of government and private buildings that did not have access for the disabled.