CRPD
Rights Tracker
Government Action
(Art. 31-33) Specific Obligations
Committee Recommendation
The Committee recommends that the State Party:
Strengthen the data collection system to comprehensively gather segregated data on persons with disabilities at the national, provincial, city, regency, and sub-district levels, using uniform methodology and interpretation, including the Washington Group Short Set of Questions for the national census;
Expand disability data collection to include segregated fields, such as age, sex, race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, and indigenous status;
Develop a comprehensive research program to facilitate quantitative and qualitative research on the situation of persons with disabilities and promote the use of disability-inclusive research methodologies;
Ensure that all data collection systems and procedures respect the confidentiality and privacy of persons with disabilities.
ⓘ Indicators
Data collecting system; Segregated data for persons with disabilities; and Comprehensive research
Update on implementing CRPD recommendations
2025
Law 8/2016 on Persons with Disabilities
Article 22 Data Collection Rights for Persons with Disabilities include the right to:
Be registered as a resident with a disability in population registration and civil records activities;
Obtain population documents; and
Obtain a Disability Card.
Articles 117-121 Data collection, concerning Persons with Disabilities is carried out by the ministry responsible for governmental affairs in the social sector independently or jointly with the institution responsible for statistics.
The existence of the One Data and One Map Policy has not fully met disability data needs at both the central and regional levels.
The One Map Policy is implemented based on Presidential Regulation (Perpres) Number 23 of 2021 concerning Amendments to Presidential Regulation Number 9 of 2016 concerning the Acceleration of the Implementation of the One Map Policy at a Map Accuracy Level of 1:50,000.
The One Data Policy, Perpres 39/2019
The existence of Law 14/2008 on Public Information Disclosure
Proccess
The dissemination of various authoritative data developed by various Ministries and Institutions shows the construction of each data set according to its interests: Integrated Social Welfare Data (DTKS), Village SDGs, Extreme Poverty Eradication Acceleration Targeting Data (P3KE) coordinated by the Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs (Kemenko PMK), and Social Economic Registration (Regsosek) coordinated by Bappenas, in addition to many other procurements coordinated by BPS through SUSENAS or Inter-Census Surveys (SURPAS).
There is no involvement of civil society and citizens in the provision of disability data; BPS is evaluating the business process that allows for the involvement of non-government actors so that citizen involvement can address the capacity for data collection (data acquisition).
The absence of data gap analysis which would allow the evaluation of various data gaps based on international standard references such as the Washington Group on Disability Statistics.
There is no geospatial-based thematic map showing the geospatial distribution and characteristics of disabilities.
Limited capacity of data organizing institutions both at the central and regional levels (Ministry of Social Affairs/BPS) and related agencies.
Some efforts being made to develop comprehensive data models at the local level include: Pangandaran Regency and Cirebon City (BPS/Unicef), DILANS Indonesia in collaboration with the Directorate General of Regional Development (Ditjen Bangda), and related agencies in Sumur Bandung Sub-district, Bandung City.
Results
The estimates are low (underestimate), inaccurate, and do not yet cover all types of disabilities, resulting in un-identified persons with disabilities (hidden disabled).
The lack of accurate data often causes persons with disabilities to be discriminated against in disaster risk management.
Take the example of West Java, which has almost 50 million people. WHO estimates around 10-15% in every country. There should be around 5 million. The authoritative data circulated to the public is around one hundred thousand, including those in the KPU DPT (Final Voters List) of 146,751 people out of approximately 36 million eligible voters.
Critical Points
There is still no complete data (segregated data) on Persons with Disabilities.
The existence of sectoral ego causes there to be no integrated data on Persons with Disabilities.
As of now, there is no Disability Card.
Empirical experience; population registration officers for Persons with Disabilities do not understand the variety of disabilities, and are unaware of personal data.
Regsosek census officers do not understand the Washington Group Short Set of Questions (not maximized for intellectual disabilities).
Specific Points
Existing disability data is PMKS (Social Welfare Problem Bearers) data which does not use the WGQ (Washington Group Questions) approach. The existing data does not mention the barriers faced or the assistive devices needed.
Data collection officers lack knowledge about disabilities, cannot identify persons with disabilities and their barriers, thus the data obtained is potentially invalid.