Why Law, Dignity, and Accountability Must Anchor Food Systems Transformation
This article stems from my intervention at the launch of the FAO Right to Food Thematic Dialogue Series on 16 April 2025 in Geneva — but it is not a summary of a presentation. It is a reflection on the deeper meaning, legal grounding, and transformative power of the human right to adequate food.
What follows is not a briefing but a call to reimagine how we think about food, justice, and governance in our time.
What is the Right to Food? It is one of the clearest, most operational rights in international law. Defined by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in General Comment No. 12 (1999), it states:
"The right to food is realized when every man, woman and child, alone or in community with others, has physical and economic access at all times to adequate food or the means for its procurement."
Every word in that sentence matters — and every one has practical, measurable implications. "Every man, woman and child" means universality: this right applies everywhere, from a favela in Brazil to a refugee camp in Chad. “Alone or in community” recognizes that food is accessed both individually and collectively.
“Physical access” asks whether infrastructure exists to reach food; “economic access” asks whether people can afford it. “At all times” refers to sustainability across seasons and shocks.
“Adequate” means not just calories, but nutrition, safety, and cultural appropriateness. And "the means for its procurement" can mean employment, land, or social protection — like India’s Public Distribution System.
The Right to Food is not the same as food security. Food security is a status — a condition. The right to food is a legal entitlement. It answers different questions: not only do people have food, but why don’t they? Who is responsible? What legal recourse exists?
At its core, this right is about dignity and entitlement. It is about respecting people’s agency to access food with autonomy, not as a favor. It recognizes individuals as rights-holders — and governments as duty-bearers, legally bound to act.
A rights-based approach to food systems is structured by the PANTHER principles, which stand for Participation, Accountability, Non-discrimination, Transparency, Human dignity, Empowerment, and Rule of law. These are not abstract ideals — they are principles grounded in action.
Participation means communities must have a say in shaping policy, as in Nepal’s Right to Food Act. Accountability implies people must be able to file complaints or seek justice — like India's grievance systems.
Non-discrimination has been reinforced by courts in Colombia, which upheld the rights of Indigenous children to adequate food.
Transparency is exemplified by Mexico’s front-of-pack labeling law that empowers consumers.
Human dignity underpins elder care in Scotland, which includes food access that respects autonomy.
Empowerment takes form in Brazil’s CONSEA, which involves civil society in food policy decisions.
And rule of law is evident in South Africa, where courts upheld school meal programs during COVID-19.
Everyone is a rights-holder, but particular protection is owed to vulnerable groups: women, youth, children, Indigenous Peoples, persons with disabilities, and the elderly.
Duty-bearers include States at all levels, but also international donors, trade actors, and the private sector. Each actor bears responsibilities to respect, protect, and fulfil this right.
Respect means not interfering — for example, not evicting communities from land where they grow food. Protect means regulating third parties, like preventing corporate land grabs or environmental harm. Fulfil means ensuring that laws, social protections, and services are in place to enable food access for all.
Beyond these, States must also eliminate discrimination in food systems; use their maximum available resources to realize this right; prevent violations before they occur; prioritize the elimination of hunger as a non-negotiable, immediate obligation; and cooperate internationally to support realization abroad and avoid harm through foreign policy.
When the right is violated, there must be remedies — at national, regional, and international levels. People should be able to turn to courts, ombudspersons, and human rights bodies to claim justice. These mechanisms are real, and they have delivered change.
Let us also confront the myths. The Right to Food is not vague — it is precisely defined. It is not about handing out food — it is about enabling access and equity. It is not just law — it is policy, practice, and transformation. It is not the same as food security — it is a legal framework. And it is not one issue among many — it is cross-cutting, touching health, climate, trade, gender, and more.
The Right to Food offers a coherent framework to repair fragmented policy and restore agency to those most affected by food insecurity. It is a tool for systems change, grounded in law and animated by justice.
We must act not out of charity, but obligation. Not out of policy convenience, but legal duty. And not in silos, but through integrated, participatory, and accountable systems.
Because food is not just about survival. It is about freedom, dignity, and power. And the right to food is the path toward realizing them all.
--------------
The views expressed in this article are solely my own and do not necessarily reflect those of the FAO or any other organization.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario