Condensed: The right to be free from hunger entails the obligation on States to ensure that people do not starve when they lack access to adequate food for reasons beyond their control, for example where they are not in a position to grow their own food or procure it in other ways. Starvation was used as a political weapon in armed conflicts, and is considered a war crime when used against civilian populations. Even in situations and regions where there are enormous food stocks starvation can occur - for a number of governmental policy failures such as failure of implementation of programmes which provide for access to productive resources, to basic food income or basic food transfers. Such programmes are necessary and hence obligatory to prevent starvation. Breaches of such obligations leading to starvation are violations of the right to food. . Comprehensive: The right to be free from hunger entails the obligation on States to ensure that people do not starve when they have no way of helping themselves, for example where they are unable to grow their own food or procure it in other ways.[1] Starvation is sometimes used as a political weapon in armed conflicts.[2] Starvation of civilian populations during armed conflict is considered a war crime.[3] (See *starvation of civilians and denial of humanitarian assistance (including restrictions on transport of food and medicines)*. The Special Rapporteur on the right to food on a mission to India noted the paradox of ‘hunger amidst plenty’ where deaths from starvation and widespread malnutrition were reported in the midst of enormous food grain stocks.[4] Most of the allegations of starvation deaths concerned mainly women and children from Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes as a result of discrimination in access to food and productive resources, evictions or lack of the implementation of the food based schemes.[5] (See *arbitrary or discriminatory exclusion from access to adequate food; discrimination based on birth, descent or social origin*). In the right to food case of PUCL v Union of India and Others, the Supreme Court of India noted that the Government was under an obligation to prevent starvation deaths.[6] The Court then issued detailed orders through which the Government was to ensure that food stocks reached those most in need. Some of these measures included mid-day meals for school-going children and the effective distribution of food to persons and families in need. In order to prevent starvation, States are under an obligation to introduce income programmes (in cash or kind) providing vulnerable groups with income to buy food or directly with food (obligation to fulfil-provide).[7] States that fail to introduce such programmes or commit irregularities in such programmes leading to starvation violate the right to food. Examples of inadequate programmes and irregularities are: - The income provided by income programmes (in cash or kind) is insufficient to access food; - Retrogressive steps in the coverage of income programmes leading to hunger and malnutrition; - Persons in prisons or state custody are not provided with food; - Persons are excluded from income programmes; - The international community in situations of emergency has failed to provide emergency funds (or food) to secure physical access to food for each person in the territory of the state affected by the food emergency. Moreover States are obliged to fulfill-facilitate[8] the right to food by strengthening people’s access to and utilization of resources and means to ensure their livelihood, including food security. Violations in this context include irregularities in resource programmes to provide vulnerable groups with access to natural and other resources or the absence of such programmes; the failure to introduce and implement policies strengthening peoples access to resources (such as agrarian reform programmes and pro-peasant agrarian policies); failure to provide pro-poor agrarian services; failure to provide self-employment or wage employment to each interested person, or irregularities in such programmes so that they do not provide sustainable access to adequate food. Violations are also implied if minimum wages programmes do not exist, are not implemented, or if the corresponding minimum wages do not provide – even in the context of social transfer payments - adequate food or other basic needs of a family. (See *fair remuneration*). . Additional references A Eide ‘The right to an adequate standard of living including the right to food’ in A Eide et al (eds) Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (2001) 133-148 J Ziegler et al The fight for the right to food: Lessons learned (2011) OHCHR/FAO ‘The right to adequate food’ Fact Sheet No 34
[1] Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food UN Doc A/56/210 (2001) para 29. [2]Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) art 54; Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II) art 14. [3] Art 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. [4] Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food: Mission to India E/CN.4/2006/44/Add.2 (2006) para 5. [5] Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food: Mission to India para 42-43 [6]People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India & Ors, Writ Petition (Civil) 196 of 2001 (PUCL Case) Interim Order of 2 May 2003 available: http://www.escr-net.org/caselaw/caselaw_show.htm?doc_id=401033 [7]CESCR, General Comment 12, para 15 [8]CESCR, General Comment 12, para 15
The right to be free from hunger entails the obligation on States to ensure that people do not starve when they lack access to adequate food for reasons beyond their control, for example where they are not in a position to grow their own food or procure it in other ways. Starvation was used as a political weapon in armed conflicts, and is considered a war crime when used against civilian populations. Even in situations and regions where there are enormous food stocks starvation can occur - for a number of governmental policy failures such as failure of implementation of programmes which provide for access to productive resources, to basic food income or basic food transfers. Such programmes are necessary and hence obligatory to prevent starvation. Breaches of such obligations leading to starvation are violations of the right to food.
.
Comprehensive:
The right to be free from hunger entails the obligation on States to ensure that people do not starve when they have no way of helping themselves, for example where they are unable to grow their own food or procure it in other ways.[1] Starvation is sometimes used as a political weapon in armed conflicts.[2] Starvation of civilian populations during armed conflict is considered a war crime.[3] (See *starvation of civilians and denial of humanitarian assistance (including restrictions on transport of food and medicines)*.
The Special Rapporteur on the right to food on a mission to India noted the paradox of ‘hunger amidst plenty’ where deaths from starvation and widespread malnutrition were reported in the midst of enormous food grain stocks.[4] Most of the allegations of starvation deaths concerned mainly women and children from Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes as a result of discrimination in access to food and productive resources, evictions or lack of the implementation of the food based schemes.[5] (See *arbitrary or discriminatory exclusion from access to adequate food; discrimination based on birth, descent or social origin*).
In the right to food case of PUCL v Union of India and Others, the Supreme Court of India noted that the Government was under an obligation to prevent starvation deaths.[6] The Court then issued detailed orders through which the Government was to ensure that food stocks reached those most in need. Some of these measures included mid-day meals for school-going children and the effective distribution of food to persons and families in need.
In order to prevent starvation, States are under an obligation to introduce income programmes (in cash or kind) providing vulnerable groups with income to buy food or directly with food (obligation to fulfil-provide).[7] States that fail to introduce such programmes or commit irregularities in such programmes leading to starvation violate the right to food. Examples of inadequate programmes and irregularities are:
- The income provided by income programmes (in cash or kind) is insufficient to access food;
- Retrogressive steps in the coverage of income programmes leading to hunger and malnutrition;
- Persons in prisons or state custody are not provided with food;
- Persons are excluded from income programmes;
- The international community in situations of emergency has failed to provide emergency funds (or food) to secure physical access to food for each person in the territory of the state affected by the food emergency.
Moreover States are obliged to fulfill-facilitate[8] the right to food by strengthening people’s access to and utilization of resources and means to ensure their livelihood, including food security. Violations in this context include irregularities in resource programmes to provide vulnerable groups with access to natural and other resources or the absence of such programmes; the failure to introduce and implement policies strengthening peoples access to resources (such as agrarian reform programmes and pro-peasant agrarian policies); failure to provide pro-poor agrarian services; failure to provide self-employment or wage employment to each interested person, or irregularities in such programmes so that they do not provide sustainable access to adequate food. Violations are also implied if minimum wages programmes do not exist, are not implemented, or if the corresponding minimum wages do not provide – even in the context of social transfer payments - adequate food or other basic needs of a family. (See *fair remuneration*).
.
Additional references
A Eide ‘The right to an adequate standard of living including the right to food’ in A Eide et al (eds) Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (2001) 133-148
J Ziegler et al The fight for the right to food: Lessons learned (2011)
OHCHR/FAO ‘The right to adequate food’ Fact Sheet No 34
[1] Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food UN Doc A/56/210 (2001) para 29.
[2]Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) art 54; Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II) art 14.
[3] Art 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
[4] Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food: Mission to India E/CN.4/2006/44/Add.2 (2006) para 5.
[5] Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food: Mission to India para 42-43
[6]People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India & Ors, Writ Petition (Civil) 196 of 2001 (PUCL Case) Interim Order of 2 May 2003 available: http://www.escr-net.org/caselaw/caselaw_show.htm?doc_id=401033
[7]CESCR, General Comment 12, para 15
[8]CESCR, General Comment 12, para 15