Applicant BlindSA says the law limits or prevents those with visual and print disabilities from accessing information. (Photo by Abid Katib/Getty Images)
It takes roughly three months for a book to be translated into Braille and the easing of this laborious process now lies in the hands of the constitutional court.
On Thursday, people living with visual disabilities chanted “Zizojika izinto! [Things will change]” outside the constitutional court in Johannesburg, as the court heard an application to confirm the unconstitutionality of the Copyright Act of 1978.
Blind SA, supported by advocacy group Section27, brought the application and organised Thursday’s protest to highlight the plight of visually impaired people who struggle to get information.
Blind SA asked the concourt to confirm an order by the Pretoria high court last year, which declared the 1978 Act unconstitutional because it limits or prevents those with visual and print disabilities from accessing works under copyright that people without such disabilities are able to read.
The case comes amid an ongoing legislative process to amend the Copyright Act to, among other things, align it with the Marrakesh Treaty, which makes the production and international transfer of specially-adapted books for people with blindness or visual impairments easier by establishing a set of limitations and exceptions to traditional copyright law.
South Africa’s parliament passed the Copyright Amendment Bill in March 2019, introducing section 19D, which sought to allow prescribed people, without the authorisation of copyright owners, to provide an accessible format copy for the benefit of a person with a disability including the blind and visually impaired.
In June 2020, President Cyril Ramaphosa referred the bill back to the national assembly for reconsideration. As of now, parliament’s decision to pass the bill has been rescinded.
In March 2021, Blind SA initiated proceedings before the high court, arguing that the Copyright Act impedes access to works under copyright for people with visual and print disabilities.
In December, the high court declared the Copyright Act to be unconstitutional and ordered a reading-in of the new proposed section 19D. The declaration of unconstitutionality was suspended for 24 months to give parliament an opportunity to remedy the defect.
As the legal case goes on, people such as Thandile Butana, who is blind and participated in Thursday’s march, continue to face difficulties finding information because the pool of available books is small. According to Butana, requesting permission to translate a book can take longer than three months and, most times, copyright holders refuse to allow their texts to be translated.
Students struggle to meet deadlines because they cannot get texts converted in time. “You can’t use the so-called normal strings, which is you would just go to a store and buy a book then you can just read, But unfortunately with us it doesn’t work like that, we need to convert the text into an accessible format for you as a blind person,” Butana said.
“Without books my life is like an unsharpened pencil, it has no point,” read one placard held up by the protesters as they made their way to Constitutional Hill where the case was heard.
Julia Chaskalson, the research and advocacy officer at Section27, told the Mail & Guardian that the organisation hoped to get confirmation on the unconstitutionality of the 1978 Act and adopt provisions, which would allow blind people to convert books while parliament deliberated on the amendment bill.
“The copyright Act indeed is unconstitutional and violates blind persons rights to equality, dignity, basic and further education and the right to participation and cultural life of one’s choice,” she said.
According to the World Intellectual Property Organisation, less than 7% of published books are in formats that visually impaired persons can understand.
Chaskalson said BlindSA had worked on the issue for more than 20 years and the right to information and education for blind people in South Africa could not continue to be ignored.
“What Section27 and BlindSA have been saying is that we can’t wait for parliament to conclude its proceedings and that blind people need access to accessible formatted books now,” she said.
Judgment was reserved.
[/membership]