• Disabled people – like all citizens – need to be willing to confront injustice resulting from the unfair and unreasonable and illegal exercise of power. Rights for disabled people – like other citizens – had to be fought for. Those who confront power now are following in a rich tradition. Nothing ever changed without people pushing for it.

• This is easier said than done - it can be daunting to challenge authority, particularly where – as is the case for many disabled people - one relies on the authority you are complaining about for the provision of essential support and services.

• Experience has shown that support with a challenge improves the prospects of success. That support can come from our family and friends, neighbours, representatives such as councillors and MPs, and campaigning organisations in the local community and the voluntary sector, such as RADAR.

• Photo: Ravi at the RADAR Awards with members of HAFCAC and Trevor Philips, Chair of the EHRC.

• Lawyers can also play a part. But there can be problems with lawyers. The main ones are that lawyers are usually expensive - affordable ones with expertise in campaigning on social justice issues are hard to find. And, of course, lawyers are not renowned for their approachability. But it is in providing support to community groups and activists that PLP has an important role to play.

• Community support, including the support of lawyers, can give complainants strength to question what is being done to them, and make a case for what is fair and reasonable. Experience has shown the importance of articulating complaints in a way that is principled but does not destroy relationships. Attacking individuals in authority, rather than the particular injustice - whilst seductive - can lead to a breakdown in relationships, which may not advance the prospect of a just outcome in the long term.

• I have been nominated for my work with disability activists in using the Disability Equality Duties to challenge reductions in services. This work has involved a number of challenges to decisions to cut services that are vital for disabled people, or to charge for them. Many cases have been settled by a firm letter setting out the law and what PLP considers has gone wrong with the decision-making process. In a few cases, this has not led to a settlement, and cases have had to be brought to court.

• Over the last 15 years, PLP (especially my predecessors at PLP) has successfully brought a number of groundbreaking cases before the courts. But the case that has personally inspired me, and to which I would dedicate this nomination is one that we lost.

• That was a case brought by three disabled people with the support of a community campaigning group called Hammersmith and Fulham Coalition Against Community Care Cuts (HAFCAC). My clients, Debbie Domb, Dulce Sobral and Moses Bushiza, sought to challenge a decision by Hammersmith and Fulham Council to introduce charges for essential home care services for disabled people (a decision which was implemented at the same time as the council reduced Council Tax by 3%). The case was lost in the High Court and again in the Court of Appeal, despite two of the Court of Appeal judges expressing misgivings, “the sacrifice of free home care on the altar of a council tax reduction for which there was no legal requirement”.

• HAFCAC epitomise to me all that is best in community activism, and it is to them that the nomination is dedicated –

• they are fearless and principled in their engagement with local disability issues, particularly issues affecting disabled people who need support to be a part of their local community.

• they have worked with all members of the community, disabled and non-disabled people alike. As a self-funding body, they are beholden to nobody but their members.

• they use the law as part of a wider struggle, recognising the potential of lawyers, but also their limitations;

• the spirit of HAFCAC’s campaign work has been constructive – it is not often that a Lord Justice of Appeal expresses himself “full of admiration” for a group that has lost the case. But Lord Justice Rix did just that.

• Having spoken at length with members of HAFCAC about the unsuccessful litigation, I think it is important to stress to other disabled people, and to all involved with, and interested in, the RADAR event, that

• in spite of the frustration and disappointment at the result;

• in spite of the seriousness of the issues for the whole community, and the resulting responsibility and stress for those bringing the case, and the time they gave to the process, unpaid;

• in spite of everything, the process of challenge – providing done responsibly - can be empowering. For example, here:

• A local authority has been forced to open itself up to scrutiny – the judges were clearly concerned by some of what was revealed, and their observations will doubtless help to improve the authority’s performance of its duties in future.

• Disabled people have been given a voice in a way that would not have happened without the court case. They have kept the profile of an important social issue, often overlooked, in the spotlight and prevented the rubber stamping of a policy that disabled and older people – and I believe the community at large - had good reason to be concerned about.

• Even though we lost, HAFCAC are still there, still campaigning and stronger than ever. And they have managed to maintain a working relationship with the council they challenged, no mean feat in the febrile and cut-throat atmosphere of litigation.

• I believe the litigation was a warning and a wake-up call to all local authorities. It showed what can be achieved by disabled people working in partnership with their community and lawyers like PLP.

• Working with PLP and with HAFCAC and with all concerned in that case (including the barrister, David Wolfe, and other colleagues) has been an important learning experience for me, and an inspiration. This nomination will have served some good if some of that inspiration can be transferred to others to make our world better and fairer for disabled people. Such a place will undoubtedly be better and fairer for us all.

Ravi Low-Beer

Public Law Project

November 2009