Magistrate Muhammed Krubally has presided over more than 1,000 civil and criminal cases since becoming the Gambia’s first visually impaired magistrate in 2016. At his position in the Banjul Magistrates’ Court, Krubally relies on a combination of assistive technologies and courtroom sensory awareness to perform his judicial duties. He uses JAWS, a screen reader software, to navigate documents and access information through his computer, and employs AI-enabled smart glasses to complete tasks independently. Beyond technology, Krubally listens carefully to courtroom proceedings, relies on his clerk for support when needed, and builds understanding of cases through auditory cues and procedural rhythm.
Krubally’s path to the judiciary was shaped by early ambitions to become a lawyer and advocate for people with disabilities. Growing up in the Central River Region as one of nine children, he faced significant obstacles throughout his education, including discouragement from peers and educators. Rather than deterring him, these challenges strengthened his resolve. He pursued his legal career with the explicit goal of transforming institutions to be more inclusive, particularly for people with disabilities.
Despite the Gambia’s 2021 Persons with Disabilities Act establishing principles of independence, non-discrimination, and accessibility, implementation remains incomplete. The National Human Rights Commission has documented ongoing barriers affecting people with disabilities in employment, education, and service access. At the Resource Centre for the Blind, which serves 49 pupils aged four to 14, administrators note that limited government funding and stretched special-needs teacher resources constrain support for students transitioning into mainstream education.
Krubally now serves as president of the Gambia Federation of the Disabled, advocating internationally for disability rights and inclusion. Ndey Yassin Secka-Sallah, the country’s only visually impaired parliamentarian, similarly works to advance accessibility in public institutions. Both emphasize that genuine inclusion requires not merely physical access but the tools and support necessary for independent participation. Their experiences underscore that individual achievement, while significant, does not automatically address systemic barriers facing people with disabilities throughout the country.
Article Attribution | Read More at Article Source
Article summary produced by Claude AI