PHA-Exch> FIAN Position on the global food price crisis

[Claudio Schuftan]

Time for a Human Right to Food Framework of Action

FIAN Position on the Comprehensive Framework of Action of

the High Level Task Force on the Global Food Crisis
September 2008

Executive Summary

FIAN International welcomes the high priority given to resolving the food
crisis. We

share the declared objective to give greater attention to agriculture in
public policies and

to increase support especially to smallholder farmers. The call of the CFA
on developing

countries to increase public spending in agricultural and rural development
to at least 10

percent, and to increase the percentage of Overseas Development Aid (ODA) to
be

invested in food and agricultural development from currently 3 percent to at
least 10

within the next five years, points in the right direction. We also share the
view that social

protection systems must be strengthened, particularly in times of soaring
food prices.

However, FIAN has considerable doubts as to whether the analysis and the

recommended actions provided in the CFA are sufficient and adequate to
address the

huge immediate problems we are facing. Lessons learned through many years of

struggle for the human right to food, have led to the conclusion that the
majority of

actions suggested in the CFA will not contribute to the realisation of the
human right to

food for all, required by international law. They will rather contribute to
cementing

existing power structures which are the source of violations of the human
right to food

worldwide. In our analysis of the CFA, we identify severe errors and
shortcomings

mainly in four areas:

1. Although the CFA repeatedly mentions that *adequate food is an
internationally

recognized human right*, it fails to draw the necessary conclusions. It
lacks any

reference to legal remedies for the victims to claim the realization of this
right. It

fails to recognize that not only states but also IGOs and therefore the
members of

the HLTF, have obligations under the right to food. It neglects basic human
rights

principles, such as accountability, non-discrimination, participation and

empowerment. And instead of recognizing demonstrations by hungry people as a

legitimate means to claim the right to food, the CFA conflates social
movements

with criminal groups "ready to harness popular frustrations into a challenge

against the state and its authority". The disregard of basic democratic
principles

is underlined by the fact that the decision on the CFA has not been taken by

governments, let alone parliaments, and relevant CSOs have never been

consulted in a meaningful way. And finally, the CFA fails to apply a human
rights

approach in its recommendations for the proposed fields of action, such as
social

protection, the promotion of agriculture and international trade.

2. Although the CFA recommends strengthening *social protection systems*,
the

concrete proposals have a very narrow and exclusive focus, which implies a
high

risk that many of those most in need will be excluded. By recommending a

narrow targeting and regular screening "to filter out those who have
graduated

beyond the eligibility threshold", it fails to recognise that the ultimate
goal of any

social protection system is to guarantee the human right to food for all.
The

approach taken by the CFA sacrifices effectiveness to the altar of
efficiency.

Universal programmes or basic income programmes, which would avoid such

pitfalls and still provide reasonably targeted cash transfers without
selection, are

not even mentioned. By proposing food for work programmes and other

alternatives to unconditional assistance, the CFA tries to ensure that even
the

poorest have to "pay" in one way or another for transfers which are a matter
of

life or death.

3. Although the CFA claims to provide targeted support to *smallholder
farmers*, it

does not recommend any convincing action to remedy existing and avoid future

discrimination of this very group which is especially vulnerable to hunger.
It fails

to address gender issues as well as the question of how disempowered

segments of society gain the right to be heard in the formulation of
national

policies. The CFA does not mention the ongoing worldwide process of land

grabbing and massive violent dispossession of rural communities due to heavy

investments in extractive industries, tourism, large infrastructure
projects,

industrial development projects and last but not least agrofuels. The need
for

comprehensive and redistributive agrarian reforms in order to fulfil the
right to

food of the poor is completely ignored. Neither does the CFA address the

discrimination against smallholder farmers arising from the domination of
the

whole food supply chain by a few transnational companies (TNCs) which have

considerably increased their profits during the last year, often at the
expense of

their suppliers.

4. Although the CFA suggests a review of *trade and taxation policies*, it
already

foresees the result: more liberalisation at all levels. Past experience with
the

impacts of trade liberalisation on small scale farmers provides ample ground
for

expecting that the proposed tariff reductions and financial support,
especially for

imports, will suffocate any efforts in developing countries to revive
domestic small

scale food production. The CFA condemns export restrictions as one of the
main

reasons for the food crisis, without distinction or consideration of
circumstances

which might justify the use of such instruments in a given country in order
to

secure stable domestic food prices for the poor. The announcement of the
HLTF

of a general lobbying for trade liberalisation, under the leadership of the
World

Bank and the IMF, raises high concern that the CFA might even lead to
further

violations of the right to food instead of avoiding them.

Based on this analysis and its experience in the struggle for the right to
food, *FIAN

recommends to the HLTF members*:

• To enable a broad consultation process on the CFA at the international and
national

level prior to its implementation, involving all sectors of the society
affected by the

food crisis, and to ensure a human rights based monitoring of the
implementation of

the adapted CFA.

• Not to use the CFA as a reference document for food policies prior to such
broad

and truly participatory consultation process at the international level.

• To assess the impact of their current policies and activities,
particularly those of the

World Bank and the IMF, on the human right to food and report on an annual
basis to

the UN Human Rights Council.

• To respect the role of social movements in defending the right to food and
in policy

formulation and to counter any attempts to criminalise social movements.

• To make sure that their work on social transfers is from now on based on
human

rights and to stop propagating narrow selection mechanisms and
conditionalities for

cash transfers.

• To promote the introduction of nation wide food indexed social cash
transfers and

pilot projects on universal social cash transfers in all countries affected
by the food

crisis.

• To identify, in consultation with the affected groups, immediate measures
to protect

rural communities' access to land and natural resources and to assist
governments

in implementing these measures.

• Not to support any production of agrofuels on large plantations. A
moratorium on

agrofuels production should be considered to allow time for regulatory
structures to

be put in place to safeguard economic, social and environmental rights.

• To support national land planning processes which are truly participatory
in order to

facilitate redistribution of land to small-scale food producers.

• To subject all new large-scale development projects to a human rights
assessment

following the "Basic principles and guidelines on development-based
evictions and

displacement" submitted by the former UN Special Rapporteur on the Human
Right

to Housing in 2006.

• To support the transition from an agriculture that heavily depends on
fossil energy

and chemical inputs, to an agriculture based on agro-ecology and improved
local

knowledge.

• To support the work of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) and its special

procedures, particularly the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, in
investigating

the role of the private sector in the current food crisis.

• To support the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights (UNHCHR) to commission

Human Rights Impact Assessments on trade policies and agreements and on the

role of speculation.

• Not to make any trade related recommendations without prior Human Rights
Impact

Assessment and broad consultation with CSOs in the affected countries. Under
no

circumstances shall trade liberalisation be a condition for international
support for

developing countries.

• To submit food aid and financial support for imports to human rights
criteria in order

to make sure that they do not endanger market access of local food
producers.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phm.phmovement.org/pipermail/phm-exchange-phmovement.org/attachments/20081006/d47736ba/attachment-0001.html>