117. The Applicants further argue that owing to the restrictive and discriminatory environment within which PWA find themselves, many are forced to flee from their homes due to fear of attacks. 118. The Applicants aver that the discrimination suffered by PWA fundamentally translates into life-threatening attacks, and exclusion from family and community care structures. Furthermore, due to their apprehension, they are unable to properly benefit from the right to education because of dropping out of school in order to avoid stigma. The PWA according to the Applicants, also face challenges in education with regards to failure of the Respondent State to reasonably accommodate them, by not catering for their congenital vision problems. 119. The Applicants allege that the Respondent State has not done enough in relation to policy and legislation, stressing that the stigma and discrimination is structurally embedded and the social exclusion is worrisome. * 120. The Respondent State contends that its laws abhor discrimination. It also submits that it has taken affirmative action towards eliminating negative perceptions towards PWA, which include: formulating the National Policy on Disabilities, employment of PWA in private and public sector, including them in development projects for their well-being, and inclusion of PWA in government activities. 121. The Respondent State contends that out of the 71, 631 PWA living in its territory,33 44,144 are gainfully employed. Furthermore, the Respondent State argues that as part of affirmative action, PWA have allocation of special seats in parliament. As illustration, the Respondent State named the following PWA who are Members of Parliament: Hon. Barwan Salum, Hon. Al Shaymaa Kwegyr, and Hon. Khadija Taya. In addition, the Respondent 33 United Republic of Tanzania, Population and Housing Census, 2022. 29