The European Accessibility Act
Bridging Gaps and Advancing Inclusive Consumer Growth
**Ayush Bajpai
Introduction
In 2019, the European Accessibility Act (EAA) was introduced with the pursuit of harmonizing accessibility laws across all European Union member states and advancing the objectives of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006. All the European Member states were required to transpose its provisions into their domestic legal frameworks by June 2022, while the full implementation was mandated by June 2025.
One of the most significant shifts introduced by EAA is the direct imposition of accountability on private entities, including manufacturers and service providers, to ensure accessibility. This marks a departure from traditional models where the responsibility for accessibility rested largely with the state, transforming it into a shared legal obligation. For the specially abled, this shift means that accessibility must now be embedded into the design of products and services from the outset, rather than treated as an afterthought. As India approaches the ten-year milestone of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPWDA) the EAA offers valuable insights into how accessibility can become a shared societal responsibility, fostering a more inclusive future.
In India, while the RPWDA and the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (CPA) offer some safeguards for consumers with disabilities, both fall short of ensuring true accessibility of goods and services. Their general provisions often lack effective implementation, leaving significant gaps in consumer protection. The EAA, by contrast, establishes a robust and comprehensive framework that strengthens consumer rights by mandating proactive accessibility measures.
Addressing accessibility in this manner not only tackles a critical rights issue but also unlocks significant economic potential, as approximately 1.3 billion people—about 16% of the global population experience significant disabilities. By ensuring that products and services are accessible, businesses can tap into this vast, underserved market. Henceforth, EAA serves as a powerful model offering a pathway to bridge these gaps and demonstrate how accessibility can advance both consumer rights and economic opportunities.
Indian Scenario
Although the rights of consumers with disabilities are not explicitly recognized in Indian law, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Vikash Kumar v. Union Public Service Commission, affirmed that they are protected under the fundamental rights framework of Articles 14, 19, and 21. Additionally, the Directive Principles of State Policy emphasize the State’s duty to create a just and inclusive society, ensuring equal opportunities for all, including persons with disabilities.
Despite these constitutional principles, India lacks a dedicated legal framework that effectively safeguards these rights and ensures the accessibility of products and services. This overlooks the fact that persons with disabilities are also consumers who deserve the same rights and protections as every other consumer. While RPWDA addresses certain aspects of accessibility, it do not go far enough in ensuring full and meaningful inclusion in everyday consumer experiences.
I. RPWDA:
The RPWDA is the primary legislation safeguarding the rights and dignity of PwDs. It includes provisions to ensure accessibility for consumers, as Section 43 & 46 emphasizes the need for accessible consumer goods and services, while Section 40 read with Rule 15 of RPWDA Rules, 2017, specifically outlines accessibility standards for information and communication technology (ICT). Furthermore, in Vikash, the Apex Court affirmed that private entities are also obligated to provide reasonable accommodation. Nevertheless, compliance with these obligations remains minimal, as enforcement mechanisms are weak and the burden of ensuring accessibility continues to fall on the state rather than private entities.
When rights of persons with disabilities are violated, they can file complaints with Disability Commissioner, i.e. Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (CCPD) and State Commissioners (SCPDs) under the RPWDA. While the orders issued by these commissioners are binding on the parties they are directed at, they can often be disregarded by providing reasons, which frequently undermines the effectiveness of the remedies. As a result, directions issued under Section 75(b) often fail to yield effective legal consequences. Hence, the RPWDA remains largely toothless in enforcing accessibility obligations on private entities, leaving consumers with disabilities without effective legal recourse and making inclusivity more of an aspiration than a guaranteed right.
II. CPA:
While both the CPA and the RPWDA allow complaints against private entities, the CPA is distinguished by its relatively stronger and more accessible enforcement mechanisms through dedicated consumer commissions. However, it lacks specific provisions safeguarding the rights of consumers with disabilities, which may discourage them from seeking redress. After analyzing the RPWDA and CPA in relation to accessibility rights, it is evident that aligning the CPA with the RPWDA is essential to creating a unified and effective framework that ensures both accessibility and comprehensive consumer protection.
Examining the EAA Provisions – Comparative Analysis
The following comparative analysis of the EAA provisions highlights gaps in specific Indian laws concerning the rights of consumers with disabilities. It also provides insights into how these provisions can be adapted in line with the EAA to strengthen accessibility laws and ensure their effective implementation in India.
| Key Provision EAA | Detail list | Indian Scenario |
| 1. Scope (Article 2) | The EAA primarily focuses on the accessibility of digital products & services. Below-mentioned are list of products and services that must comply with accessibility standards. | RPWDA, 2017 Rules & sector specific guidelines outline for accessible products and services. |
| Products | Consumer general purpose computer hardware systems and their operating systems (e.g. computer, laptops, tablets with operating systems, etc.)Payment terminalsSelf-service terminals for services covered by the Act (e.g., ATMs, ticketing machines etc.). Consumer terminal equipment with interactive computing capabilities for e-communication services & audiovisual media services (e.g., smartphones and tablets with calling capabilities, smart TV).E-readers (e.g., Amazon Kindle, etc.). | Section 2(ze) of the RPWDA emphasizes the universal design of products and services to ensure inclusivity.Rule 15 of the 2017 Rules specifies accessibility requirements, particularly for information and communication technology (ICT).Additionally, various sectors such as banking (ATMs, accessibility options, guardian certificates etc.), UIDAI, FSSAI, education etc.. have issued sector-specific guidelines for accessible services through their respective departments.However, these guidelines remain broad and fragmented in scope. In contrast, the EAA delineates specific products and services that must meet defined accessibility standards. This level of specificity, achieved through centralized and coherent regulation, enhances enforceability and reduces the scope for manufacturers and service providers to circumvent their obligations. |
| Services | Electronic communication services (e.g., telephony services). Services providing access to audiovisual media (e.g., websites or apps of TV channels). Passenger Transport Services: 1. Websites 2. Mobile apps 3. Electronic ticketing 4. Real-time travel information 5. Interactive self-service terminals.Consumer banking servicesE-books & E-commerce platforms Emergency communication with the single European emergency number (112). | |
| 3. Article 7 (Obligations of economic operators dealing with products) &Article 13 (Obligations of Service Providers) | The Service Provider/ Economic Operators (Manufacturer) shall ensure that: The products are designed and manufactured to comply with the accessibility requirements as outlined in Annex I of the Act.Prepare comprehensive technical documentation in line with the guidelines provided in Annex IV.Retain all documentation related to technical specifications for at least five years.Clearly display the manufacturer’s name, trademark, and address on the product or its packaging.Implement procedures to ensure continuous compliance with accessibility standards.In case of non-compliance, take corrective action promptly and notify the competent national authority in the relevant Member State. | Neither RPWDA nor CPA imposes ex-ante specific obligations on manufacturers and service providers to ensure accessibility.The issuance of general & different guidelines by various sectors further complicates compliance, as manufacturers and service providers have to navigate disparate standards for making goods and services accessible. This lack of uniformity makes enforcement exceedingly challenging, cumbersome, and non-serious. |
| 4. Conformity of Products and CE Marking (Chapter VII) | Products must carry the CE (Conformité Européene) label, signifying that they meet all relevant accessibility standards. By placing this mark, the manufacturer confirms compliance and takes full responsibility for ensuring the product adheres to the required regulations. | The CPA and the Consumer Protection (General) Rules, 2020, recognize the consumer’s right to be informed about product characteristics, including quality, quantity, and purity. However, they do not mandate any mark or label on the products to verify accessibility. |
| 5. Compliance of Services (Chapter IX & X) | Member States must have a Market Surveillance Authority i.e. responsible for monitoring compliance with the Act and enforcing its provisions. Procedure for dealing with non-compliance:If a product or service is found to be non-compliant, the authority must, without undue delay, require the manufacturer or service provider to take all necessary corrective measures to ensure compliance within a reasonable timeframe.If the manufacturer or provider fails to comply, the authority may order the withdrawal of the product or service from the market.Appropriate penalties may be imposed, as specified under the national laws implementing the European Accessibility Act (EAA). | The monitoring authority under RPWDA i.e. CCPD & SCPD possesses more recommendatory powers rather than binding ones. Illustration: If a manufacturer fails to produce a product that is accessible to persons with disabilities (PWDs), an affected individual may file a complaint on the grounds of discrimination. However, unlike a Market Surveillance Authority, the monitoring authority does not have the power to mandate the redesign of the product or remove it from the market due to non-compliance. Its role is limited to investigating the complaint, recommending necessary changes, and, in rare cases, imposing a penalty. |
| 6. Accessibility in Public Procurement (Chapter X) | The EAA requires public administrations to comply with accessibility standards when procuring public products or services covered by the Directive of the EAA. For instance, if a public entity purchases an ATM, then it must ensure that the same meets all relevant accessibility requirements under the EAA. | Section 1.8.3 of the Manual for Public Procurement emphasizes that the state will adhere to accessibility provisions when procuring public goods or delivering services. However, neither CPA nor RPDWA explicitly mandates such a policy. |
Insights from the EAA – Policy and Legal Reforms for India
The above-discussed comparative analysis outlines certain lacunae in the current Indian Laws when measured against the EAA and gives us the following insights to modify our policies to make accessibility a reality for all.
I. Proactive approach in enforcement mechanism:
It is evident that neither the RPWDA, CPA, nor any sector-specific guidelines provide a robust enforcement mechanism to ensure accessibility, particularly for consumers with disabilities. The existing legal & policy framework in India follows a reactive, ex-post approach, placing the onus on the aggrieved individuals to seek redress through legal forums, rather than proactively ensuring compliance and inclusivity by the surveillance authority.
In contrast, the EAA adopts a proactive enforcement model, requiring Member States to designate a Market Surveillance Authority, to conduct regular compliance checks, investigate violations, and impose penalties. For example, Ireland’s European Union (Accessibility Requirements of Products and Services) Regulations 2023 impose fines of up to €60,000 or imprisonment for up to 18 months for non-compliance. Further, Article 20 of the EAA mandates that penalties must be “effective, proportionate, and dissuasive.”
Henceforth, by shifting the policy from a reactive to a preventive enforcement mechanism, the EAA compels businesses to prioritize accessibility to avoid penalties, rather than relying on consumers to fight for their rights. Hence, in the Indian scenario, there is an urgent need for this policy shift as it fosters greater accountability and ensures that accessibility is embedded into products and services from the outset.
II. Shift from sector-specific approach:
Ensuring accessibility has been a mammoth task due to multiple & different sector-specific regulations. While it may not be feasible to apply a single set of guidelines to all goods and services, there is a pressing need to ensure that sector-specific accessibility standards are uniform, coherent, and integrated within a centralized framework. The EAA offers a valuable model in this regard as it establishes a harmonized structure and a Market Surveillance Authority to ensure consistent accessibility standards across sectors. Likewise, India should develop an integrated mechanism that brings together sectoral guidelines under a common framework, making them easier to access and more effective.
III. Exceptions for business feasibility:
It is important to recognize that imposing strict accessibility compliance on manufacturers and service providers in any developing country could create a significant burden on businesses. However, policymakers must strike a balance between accessibility and business feasibility. The EAA offers a useful model in this regard, as it exempts small businesses and allows others to demonstrate if compliance would impose a disproportionate burden and then granting temporary exemptions until the burden is reduced. Similarly, India’s policy framework should also consider business viability while ensuring the consumer accessibility.
Conclusion and Way Forward
India’s legislative framework on accessibility for products and services remains at a nascent stage, characterized by fragmented and general provisions. In contrast, the EAA offers a comprehensive and structured model that India can draw upon to strengthen its policy approach. A critical reform imperative is the transition from a reactive, ex-post compliance model to a proactive, ex-ante regulatory framework, thereby shifting the responsibility of compliance to manufacturers and service providers.
Furthermore, legislation must prioritize specificity over generality, ensuring that obligations are clearly defined to minimize interpretative ambiguities and enhance enforceability. India must also revise its current sector-specific approach by aligning it with a centralized & cohesive regulatory framework that allows for context-specific exceptions. Establishing a central surveillance authority, as envisaged under the EAA, is essential to ensure effective oversight and accountability. Without these structural reforms, accessibility standards risk remaining non-binding guidelines rather than enforceable legal mandates. The EAA thus offers a critical blueprint for inclusive policy development.
**Ayush Bajpai is a fourth-year law student at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University, Lucknow. His interests lie at the intersection of law, governance, and policy, with a focus on disability rights and commercial law. He has interned with the Disability Inclusion and Access team at the Vidhi.
**Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog do not necessarily align with the views of the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy.