European Humanitarian Forum: Ensuring inclusion of persons with disabilities throughout the humanitarian cycle is essential



European Humanitarian Forum: Ensuring inclusion of persons with disabilities throughout the humanitarian cycle is essential

EDF participated in the third edition of the European Humanitarian Forum (EHF) on 18 and 19 March in Brussels.

The Forum, co-organised by the European Commission (DG ECHO) and Belgium in the framework of its Presidency of the Council of the EU, explored and addressed the implications of the most pressing humanitarian crises and brought together actors with the objective to propose innovative, more sustainable solutions to contemporary humanitarian challenges.

Our participation in the Forum

The Forum kicked off with strong political commitments from high-level policy-makers representing the EU and its Member States. However, there was no clear political commitment to dedicate a budget for accessible and participatory humanitarian aid. Until this is addressed, people who are most at risk, including persons with disabilities, will continue to be forgotten.

The disproportionate impact of humanitarian crises on persons with disabilities was mentioned only by the representative of Bulgaria.

EDF Vice-President, Gunta Anča, joined as a panellist in the session on participation of local responders in designing humanitarian response. She described how friends in Ukraine could not evacuate due to an accessible shelter and described how persons with disabilities face extra risks in humanitarian contexts. She explained how SUSTENTO, her organisation of persons with disabilities in Latvia, is responding to the war in Ukraine. She concluded by stressing how localisation must address the specific requirements of individuals.

Conclusions from the Forum and lack of accessibility

The forum was a great opportunity to raise public awareness of the need to include persons with disabilities in the whole humanitarian cycle.

Unfortunately, a negative note concerned the lack of accessibility of the venue and the lack of consideration for accessibility during the planning of the event in general. The venue had steps from the main entrance to many of the meeting rooms. While temporary mobile ramps were available, these were steep, narrow and dangerous. There was no signage to step-free routes through the building, and even the main plenary event had no official wheelchair)accessible seating. To our knowledge, there was no sign interpretation or live captioning during sessions, nor any example of background material in plain language or easy-to-read format. In short, the inadequate planning of the event excluded a large proportion of the potential audience.