Evaluation methods in legal procedures concerning digital accessibility in Brazil: an analysis of cases investigated by the federal public ministry


Numerous research studies have reported accessibility problems in public and private-owned digital interactive applications. Recent studies have advocated for a policy-based approach to improving accessibility beyond technical aspects. The involvement of official surveillance bodies, such as the Federal Public Ministry (MPF - Ministério Público Federal) in Brazil, is essential to enacting legislation that safeguards people with disabilities rights. Appropriate evaluation methods are essential for adequately addressing the problems people with disabilities encounter in systems about which they make formal complaints. Despite the increase in legal procedures involving digital accessibility, there is little knowledge about the types of evaluation methods used to assess the accessibility of interactive systems during legal procedures. This paper presents an in-depth analysis of publicly-available concluded legal procedures processed by the Brazilian Federal Public Ministry and the evaluation methods used to subsidise the analyses and settlement of the cases. The analysis covered 46 complaints related to 26 legal cases related to public and private interactive systems. The results from the analysis revealed that in 16 cases, MPF ruled for archiving the cases without performing accessibility evaluations on the systems. Of the 11 cases in which MPF performed some accessibility evaluation, nine cases counted solely on a numerical result from an automated accessibility tool. Only one case had its ruling based on manual accessibility inspections with specialists, and one case counted on some user evaluation. The paper describes the arguments used by the accused parties and the MPF. The findings in the paper provide important implications for the employment of accessibility evaluation methods in legal procedures to improve the accessibility of digital applications for people with disabilities.

Palavras-chave: Digital Accessibility, Evaluation Methods, Legal Procedures


Julio Abascal, Myriam Arrue, and Xabier Valencia. 2019. Tools for web accessibility evaluation. In Web Accessibility. Springer, 479--503.

Tania Acosta, Patricia Acosta-Vargas, and Sergio Lujan-Mora. 2018. Accessibility of eGovernment services in Latin America. In 2018 International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG). IEEE, 67--74.

Patricia Acosta-Vargas, Sergio Luján-Mora, and Luis Salvador-Ullauri. 2017. Web accessibility polices of higher education institutions. In 2017 16th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET). IEEE, 1--7.

Patricia Acosta-Vargas, Luis Antonio Salvador-Ullauri, and Sergio Luján-Mora. 2019. A heuristic method to evaluate web accessibility for users with low vision. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 125634--125648.

Aleksander Bai, Heidi Camilla Mork, Trenton Schulz, and Kristin Skeide Fuglerud. 2016. Evaluation of accessibility testing methods. which methods uncover what type of problems? In Universal Design 2016: Learning from the Past, Designing for the Future. IOS Press, 506--516.

Giorgio Brajnik. 2004. Comparing accessibility evaluation tools: a method for tool effectiveness. Universal access in the information society 3, 3 (2004), 252--263.

Giorgio Brajnik, Yeliz Yesilada, and Simon Harper. 2011. The expertise effect on web accessibility evaluation methods. Human-Computer Interaction 26, 3 (2011), 246--283.

Clarisse Sieckenius de Souza, Carla Faria Leitão, Raquel Oliveira Prates, Silvia Amélia Bim, and Elton José da Silva. 2010. Can inspection methods generate valid new knowledge in HCI? The case of semiotic inspection. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 68, 1--2 (2010), 22--40.

I Doush and Zainab AlMeraj. 2019. Evaluating the Accessibility of Kuwaiti E-government Websites. Jordanian Journal of Computers and Information Technology (JJCIT) 5, 03 (2019).

European Commission. 2022. Web Accessibility. [link] Retrieved May 19, 2022.

André Pimenta Freire. 2012. Disabled people and the Web: User-based measurement of accessibility. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of York.

Milda Galkute, Luis A. Rojas P., and Victor A. Sagal M. 2020. Improving the Web Accessibility of a University Library for People with Visual Disabilities Through a Mixed Evaluation Approach. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 56--71.

Governo Brasileiro. 2004. Decreto N° 5.296 DE 2 de Dezembro de 2004. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2004-2006/2004/Decreto/D5296.htm Retrieved May 19, 2022.

Governo Brasileiro. 2007. Portaria N° 3, de 7 de maio de 2007. https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/legislacao/portaria3_eMAG.pdf Retrieved May 19, 2022.

Governo Brasileiro. 2014. eMAG - Modelo de Acessibilidade em Governo Eletrônico. http://emag.governoeletronico.gov.br/ Retrieved May 30, 2022.

Governo Brasileiro. 2015. Lei N° 13.146, DE 6 de Julho de 2015. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2015/lei/l13146.htm Retrieved May 19, 2022.

Governo Brasileiro. 2022. Acessibilidade Digital. https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/acessibilidade-digital Retrieved May 14, 2022.

Gov.UK. 2021. Accessibility monitoring of public sector websites and mobile apps 2020--2021. [link]. Retrieved May 27, 2022.

Chandra Harrison and Helen Petrie. 2007. Severity of usability and accessibility problems in eCommerce and eGovernment websites. In People and Computers XX---Engage. Springer, 255--262.

European Telecommunications Standards Institute. [n.d.]. ETSI EN 301 549 - V3.2.1 - Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services. Available online at [link]. last accessed 30 May 2022

Rita Ismailova and Yavuz Inal. 2022. Comparison of Online Accessibility Evaluation Tools: An Analysis of Tool Effectiveness. IEEE Access (2022).

ISO. 2018. ISO 9241-11. Usability: Definitions and concepts. International Organization for Standardization. Retrieved April 23, 2020 from https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-11:ed-2:v1:en.

Paul T Jaeger. 2006. Assessing Section 508 compliance on federal e-government Web sites: A multi-method, user-centered evaluation of accessibility for persons with disabilities. Government Information Quarterly 23, 2 (2006), 169--190.

Reuben Kirkham. 2016. How disability discrimination law can enable new assistive technologies. ACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing 116 (2016), 22--31.

Andrew Kirkpatrick, Joshue O Connor, Alastair Campbell, and Michael Cooper. 2018. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#background-on-wcag-2

Lorraine Kisselburgh, Michel Beaudouin-Lafon, Lorrie Cranor, Jonathan Lazar, and Vicki L Hanson. 2020. HCI Ethics, Privacy, Accessibility, and the Environment: A Town Hall Forum on Global Policy Issues. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--6.

Shashank Kumar, Jeevitha Shree DV, and Pradipta Biswas. 2021. Comparing ten WCAG tools for accessibility evaluation of websites. Technology and Disability Preprint (2021), 1--23.

Jonathan Lazar. 2018. Due Process and Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine: A Threat to Accessibility Research and Practice?. In Proceedings of the 20th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 404--406.

Jonathan Lazar. 2019. The potential role of US consumer protection laws in improving digital accessibility for people with disabilities. U. Pa. JL & Soc. Change 22 (2019), 185.

Jonathan Lazar. 2019. Web accessibility policy and law. In Web Accessibility. Springer, 247--261.

Jonathan Lazar, Julio Abascal, Simone Barbosa, Jeremy Barksdale, Batya Friedman, Jens Grossklags, Jan Gulliksen, Jeff Johnson, Tom McEwan, Loïc Martínez-Normand, et al. 2016. Human-computer interaction and international public policymaking: a framework for understanding and taking future actions. now publishers.

Jonathan Lazar, Jinjuan Heidi Feng, and Harry Hochheiser. 2017. Research methods in human-computer interaction. Morgan Kaufmann.

Jonathan Lazar, Daniel Goldstein, and Anne Taylor. 2015. Ensuring digital accessibility through process and policy. Morgan kaufmann.

Jonathan Lazar, Victoria Williams, Jon Gunderson, and Thomas Foltz. 2017. Investigating the potential of a dashboard for monitoring US federal website accessibility. In Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii international conference on system sciences.

Sergio Luján-Mora, Rosa Navarrete, and Myriam Peñafiel. 2014. Egovernment and web accessibility in South America. In 2014 First International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG). IEEE, 77--82.

Delvani Antônio Mateus, Carlos Alberto Silva, Arthur FBA de Oliveira, Heitor Costa, and André Pimenta Freire. 2021. A Systematic Mapping of Accessibility Problems Encountered on Websites and Mobile Apps: A Comparison Between Automated Tests, Manual Inspections and User Evaluations. Journal on Interactive Systems 12, 1 (2021), 145--171.

Julie Moroney. 2020. Reviving Negotiated Rulemaking for an Accessible Internet. Mich. L. Rev. 119 (2020), 1581.

P Mounika, Deval Karia, Kshitij Sharma, and Pradipta Biswas. 2019. Accessibility Evaluation of Three Important Indian Websites. In Research into Design for a Connected World. Springer, 243--254.

Aline Couto Oliveira, Leonardo Filipe da Silva, Marcelo Medeiros Eler, and André Pimenta Freire. 2020. Do Brazilian Federal Agencies Specify Accessibility Requirements for the Development of their Mobile Apps?. In XVI Brazilian Symposium on. 1--8.

Aline Couto Oliveira, Leonardo Filipe da Silva, Marcelo Medeiros Eler, and André Pimenta Freire. 2021. Accessibility of Brazilian Federal Agencies' Mobile Apps: Requirements, Conformance and Response to Complaints. iSys-Brazilian Journal of Information Systems 14, 4 (2021), 45--72.

Humberto S Pacheco, Patricia F Amorim, Priscyla GF Barbosa, and Simone BL Ferreira. 2016. Comparative Analysis of Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools. In Proceedings of the 15th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--4.

Parvaneh Parvin, Vanessa Palumbo, Marco Manca, and Fabio Paternò. 2021. The transparency of automatic accessibility evaluation tools. In Proceedings of the 18th International Web for All Conference. 1--5.

Helen Petrie and Nigel Bevan. 2009. The Evaluation of Accessibility, Usability, and User Experience. In The Universal Access Handbook, Constantine Stephanidis (Ed.). CRC Press, 1--16.

Christopher Power, André Freire, Helen Petrie, and David Swallow. 2012. Guidelines are only half of the story: accessibility problems encountered by blind users on the web. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 433--442.

Jennifer Preece, Helen Sharp, and Yvonne Rogers. 2015. Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction. John Wiley & Sons.

Prefeitura do Município de São Paulo. 2018. Comissão Permanente de Acessibilidade. [link]. Retrieved May 30, 2022.

Dagfinn Rømen and Dag Svanæs. 2012. Validating WCAG versions 1.0 and 2.0 through usability testing with disabled users. Universal Access in the Information Society 11, 4 (2012), 375--385.

Carlos Alberto Silva, Arthur FBA de Oliveira, Delvani Antônio Mateus, Heitor Augustus Xavier Costa, and André Pimenta Freire. 2019. Types of problems encountered by automated tool accessibility assessments, expert inspections and user testing: a systematic literature mapping. In Proceedings of the 18th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--11.

Monique S. S. Siqueira, Felipe S. Dias, Silvia H. Rigatto, Michael C. N. Carvalho, Thiago A. M. Marques, and André P. Freire. 2022. Who Watches the Watchers? Accessibility of the Public Prosecutor's Office's Websites in Brazil and Implications for E-government Accessibility Surveillance Policies. Electronic Government, an International Journal (2022), (in print).

Monique Scalco Soares Siqueira, Priscilla Oliveira Nascimento, and André Pimenta Freire. 2022. Reporting Behaviour of People with Disabilities in relation to the Lack of Accessibility on Government Websites: Analysis in the light of the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Disability, CBR & Inclusive Development 33, 1 (2022).

Constantine Stephanidis. 2009. The universal access handbook. CRC Press.

Markel Vigo, Justin Brown, and Vivienne Conway. 2013. Benchmarking web accessibility evaluation tools: measuring the harm of sole reliance on automated tests. In Proceedings of the 10th International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility. 1--10.

Brian Wentz, Dung Pham, Erin Feaser, Dylan Smith, James Smith, and Allison Wilson. 2019. Documenting the accessibility of 100 US bank and finance websites. Universal Access in the Information Society 18, 4 (2019), 871--880.

Web Accessibility Initiative World Wide Web Consortium. 2021. W3C. Inacessibilidade do CAPTCHA. Retrieved May 26, 2022 from https://www.w3.org/TR/turingtest/.

Yong Jeong Yi. 2020. Web accessibility of healthcare Web sites of Korean government and public agencies: a user test for persons with visual impairment. Universal Access in the Information Society 19, 1 (2020), 41--56.
Como Citar

Selecione um Formato
MATEUS, Delvani Antônio; DA SILVA, Fábio Aparecido Cândido; DA SILVA, Tiago Silva; FREIRE, André Pimenta. Evaluation methods in legal procedures concerning digital accessibility in Brazil: an analysis of cases investigated by the federal public ministry. In: SIMPÓSIO BRASILEIRO SOBRE FATORES HUMANOS EM SISTEMAS COMPUTACIONAIS (IHC), 21. , 2022, Diamantina. Anais [...]. Porto Alegre: Sociedade Brasileira de Computação, 2022 .