parallel reporting before the un cescr

Transcrição

D: 5 2
PARALLEL REPORTI N G
B E F ORE THE UN CESCR
Writing a parallel report
on the situation of the Right to Adequate Food in co-operation with FIAN International
FI AN I N T E R N AT I O N A L
Willy-Brandt-Platz 5
69115 Heidelberg, Germany
Tel.:+49-6221-6530030
Fax:+49-6221-830545
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.fian.org
Impressum
Written by Sandra Epal-Ratjen
October 2003
Revised version Sandra Ratjen
May 2007
Editor: FIAN International, Heidelberg
Printed on Recycled Paper
In co-operation and with financial suppport of 11.11.11, the
Belgian Coalition of the North-South Movement
With the support of the FAO, Right to Food Unit
D: 5 2
PARALLEL REPORTI N G
B EF ORE T HE UN COMMITT EE
ON ESC RIGHTS
Writing a parallel report
on the situation of the Right to Adequate Food in co-operation with FIAN International
Contents
1 Introduction
2 Monitoring the Right to
Adequate Food 05
06
2.1 The Right to Adequate Food
2.1.1States obligations
2.1.2States’ violations of the Right to
Adequate Food
2.1.3The FAO Voluntary Guidelines
on the Right to Food 2.2 Human rights based monitoring 2.2.1Monitoring mechanisms
and the Voluntary Guidelines
2.2.2The way ahead: human
rights-based monitoring
3Using the UN Human Rights System 3.1 UN system and Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights
3.1.1What are parallel reports?
3.1.2Who is entitled to present
a parallel report?
3.1.3Purpose of a parallel report
3.1.4Indirect benefits arising from
the reporting procedure
3.2 Interaction NGOs /CESCR
3.2.1Procedure before the Committee
3.2.2The review step-by-step
3.2.3Making best use of the
CESCR mechanisms
4 Writing a Parallel Report with
the support of FIAN
4.1 Gathering information
4.1.1The sort of information
you require
4.1.2Obtaining the information
4.2 Writing the report
4.2.1Structure and Content
4.2.2Useful additional
references and contact
5 Annex
13
18
5.1
5.2
5.3
General Comment No. 12
of the UN CESCR E/C.12/1999/5
Clearance Sheet
Example of Questions and
Checklists related to
FIAN Monitoring Tool
Guideline 3: Strategies
22
1 Introduction
The purpose of this dossier is to provide a helpful tool
for individuals or organisations who are writing Parallel
Reports on the Right to Adequate Food under the coordination of, or with support of FIAN International. It
gives some background information on parallel reports
as a key output of civil society monitoring processes
in favour of the right to food as it is guaranteed in
international human rights law. It is also designed to
give an indication of the sort of information that such
a parallel report should include and how it should be
presented.
The present revised version of the dossier is published
in addition to a series of various manuals to come out
under a project of FIAN International with the support of
the FAO and the German Agro Action. The other
manuals are entitled: “How to Use the Voluntary
Guidelines on the Right to Food? An NGO Manual” ;
“How to Document Right to Food Violations?” ; “Access
to land and the Right to Food” and “The Voluntary
Guidelines on the Right to Food as a Human Rights
Based Monitoring Tool”.
In the second Section, the concept of the Right to
Adequate Food as well as of human rights based
monitoring are presented. The third Section then
proceeds to discuss the international enforcement and
monitoring mechanisms in relation to the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and
the purpose of Parallel Reports.
The fourth Section is more practical and deals with the
actual process of writing a Parallel Report. It describes
not only what sort of information is required, but also
how you can access it. The second part within this
section deals with the actual writing of the report and
the perspective which should be taken.
An additional Manual was published by Rolf Künnemann
and Sandra Epal-Ratjen within a research project in
collaboration with AAAS/HURIDOCS.1 This NGO Manual
on the Right to Food can be of help in understanding
and using the Human Right to Adequate Food as an
instrument to fight the roots and patterns of hunger
and chronic malnutrition in particular, and poverty in
general.
1 Accessible at http://www.fian.org/live/index.php?option=com_doclight&Itemid
=100&task=details&dl_docID=53
5
2 Monitoring the Right to
Adequate Food
2.1 The Right to Adequate Food
The Right to Adequate Food is a fundamental human right
firmly established in international law. The predominant
body of law surrounding the Right to Adequate Food
centres around the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights (hereafter the ICESCR or the
Covenant). This treaty states in article 11 that “The States
parties to the present Covenant recognise the right of
everyone to an adequate standard for himself and his
family including adequate food... The States parties to
the present Covenant recognising the fundamental right
of everyone to be free from hunger (...)”.
The Right to Adequate Food is realised when every
man, woman and child, alone or in community with
others, has physical and economic access at all times to
adequate food or means for its procurement. The core
content of the Right to Adequate Food implies:
•
The availability of food in a quantity and quality
sufficient to satisfy the dietary needs of individuals,
free from adverse substances, and acceptable within
a given culture
•
The accessibility of such food in ways that are
sustainable and that do not interfere with the
enjoyment of other human rights.2
The ICESCR was adopted and opened for signature in
1966 and entered into force ten years later in 1976. It
is the “twin” treaty of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which entered into
force in the same year as the ICESCR. The two sets of
rights were anchered in two dinstinct Covenants since
the two political blocks in the Cold War used them in
their ideological opposition. The ICESCR faced from
the beginning on an unequal enforcement status. Two
very concrete signs of unequal treatment of human
rights are the facts that the ICESCR failed to create a
body to supervise the application of the ICESCR, as the
ICCPR did; and that no optional protocol to the ICESCR
provide a body with the ability to receive complaints by
individuals on violations of their rights, as it is the case
for the ICCPR.3
2.1.1 States obligations
The nature of the general legal obligations of States
parties is set out in Article 2 of the ICESCR. The principal
obligation is to take steps to achieve progressively
the full realisation of the Right to Adequate Food.
This imposes an obligation to move as expeditiously
as possible towards that goal, without discrimination
of any kind and within the framework of international
cooperation. The State is obligated to ensure for
everyone under its jurisdiction access to the minimum
level of essential food which is sufficient, nutritionally
adequate and safe, to ensure their freedom from
hunger.
The Right to Adequate Food, like any other human right,
imposes three types or levels of specific obligations on
States parties: the obligations to respect, to protect
and to fulfil. In turn the obligation to fulfil incorporates
both an obligation to facilitate and an obligation to
provide.
•
The obligation to respect existing access to adequate
food requires States parties not to take any measures
that result in preventing such access.
•
The obligation to protect requires the States parties
to protect individuals’ access to adequate food from
the actions of third parties, for instance by creating
and implementing relevant domestic legislation.
•
The obligation to fulfil (facilitate) means the
States must pro-actively engage in activities
intended to strengthen people’s access to, and
utilisation of resources and means to ensure their
livelihood, including food security. This is usually
done by administrative measures and the creation
of a legal framework, such as the drafting and
implementation of laws on land ownership and
agrarian reform, employment guarantee measures
and minimum wages. This also implies that the state
facilitate access of beneficiaries to programmes and
information on these programmes. Furthermore,
States are obligated to fulfil (provide) this right
directly whenever an individual or group is unable
for reasons beyond their control to enjoy the Right to
Adequate Food by the means at their disposal. This
obligation also applies to persons who are victims of
natural or other disasters.
•
The principle of “maximum of available
resources” and “progressive realization”
Art. 2 of the ICESCR states that each Member State
to the Covenant commits itself to adopt “measures
to the maximum of its available resources to reach
progressively the full realisation of the rights enshrined in
the Covenant”. The principle of ‘maximum of available
resources’ requires that governments co-operate
internationally and make all possible efforts to realise the
Right to Food. The principle of ‘progressiveness’ implies
the State obligation to show significant developments
in relation to the realisation of Economic, Social and
Cultural rights (ESC-Rights). When the incidence of
chronic malnutrition increases the State is violating its
obligation vis-à-vis the Right to Food.
•
2 See General Comment on the Right to Adequate Food (GC12), UN Doc.
E/C.12/1999/5, Para. 6 & 8. Document annexed.
3 More on the current debate on both the standing of the CESCR as treaty-body
and on the optional protocol providing for complaint mechanisms under the ICESCR
in Section 3.1.
6
Parallel Reporting before the CESCR
The principle of non-discrimination
Art. 2.2 ICESCR establishes the principle of nondiscrimination. One of the categorical obligations in
all human rights related-work is non-discrimination of
religion, ethnic group or sex. Within the provisions of
the ICESCR, this principle has special relevance in terms
of transcending sexual discrimination against women
and invoking equality of rights concerning property
and equal wages for equal work. This is also true for
all indigenous groups who have long been deprived of
their land. The restoration of indigenous groups’ rights
to ancestral land is part of the commitment by the State
to overcome historical discrimination.
as at the national level.
From the perspective of the Special Rapporteur, to
fully comply with their obligations under the right to
food, States must respect, protect and support the
fulfilment of the right to food of people living in other
territories. The obligation to respect is a minimum
obligation which requires States to ensure that their
policies and practices do not lead to violations of
the right to food in other countries. The obligation
to protect requires States to ensure that their own
citizens and companies, as well as other third parties
subject to their jurisdiction, including transnational
corporations, do not violate the right to food in other
countries. The obligation to support the fulfilment of
the right to food requires States, depending on the
availability of resources, to facilitate the realization
of the right to food in other countries and to provide
the necessary aid when required.5
General Comment 12 (1999)4 on the Right to
Adequate Food stipulates:
“(...) any discrimination in access to food, as well as to
means and entitlements for its procurement, on the
grounds of race, colour, sex, language, age, religion,
political or other opinion, national or social origin,
property, birth or other status with the purpose or
effect of nullifying or impairing the equal enjoyment
or exercise of economic, social and cultural rights
constitutes a violation of the Covenant.”
•
States obligations at the international level
In addition to their obligations vis-à-vis their own
population, states parties to the ICESCR also have
obligations at the international level. The work of
defining what these international obligations exactly
consist of has started but is still quite recent.
Indeed, the debate and the development in international
law on international or extraterritorial obligations
of states goes hand in hand with the deepening of
globalization. The human rights community (UN, experts
and NGOs) have increasingly tried to give a human rights
response to the more and more interdependent and
complex relationships of states which exist nowadays.
The „extraterritorial obligations“ of states concern
human rights commitments undertaken by states
by ratifying the International Covenants on Human
Rights, and in particular the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. They try to address
the legal loopholes generated by the acceleration
and intensification of international economic, social
and cultural relationships due to globalization. These
obligations are of course still the subject of intense
discussions. Civil society and academics try to get states
to recognize these obligations. However, despite the
solid argumentation in favour of the recognition by
states of these obligations towards people outside their
territories, there is still an enormous reluctance by states
to cluster their international responsibility into human
rights categories. However, the ICESCR itself stipulates
that states should internationally co-operate to enable
the enjoyment of the rights it enshrines for all human
beings.
Furthermore, as the UN Special Rappporteur on the Right
to Adequate Food, Mr. Jean Ziegler, himself, stated, at
the international or extraterritorial level, state have the
same threefold obligation concerning the right to food
Despite the reluctance of states to recognise their
obligations vis-à-vis people outside their territory and
jurisdiction, civil society has already started to monitor
the activities of states under international cooperation
in general. Several parallel reports have been presented
to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights (hereafter referred to as the Committee or the
CESCR) in charge of supervising the implementation of
the ICESCR.6
2.1.2 States’ violations of the Right to
Adequate Food
Violations of the Right to Adequate Food occur when a
state fails to comply with its national and international
obligations and through its action or inaction threatens
or destroys people’s means of livelihood.7
•
Respect bound obligation
A breach of the respect bound obligation occurs
when a state (or the community of states through its
specialised agencies or financial institutions) obstructs
a person’s access to food. A state induced dismantling
of current access to food is only permitted if adequate
compensation and rehabilitation to the affected
individuals is provided. Examples of this type of violation
include situations where states have forcibly evicted
families without the provision of adequate compensation
and rehabilitation.
5 See Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Mr. Jean Ziegler
to the 61st session of the UN Commission on Human Rights, 2005, UN Doc.
E/CN.4/2005/47, Para 48
6 See for instance FIAN parallel reports on extraterritorial obligations of Austria,
Germany and Norway, accessible at www.fian.org; see also Section 4.1.1
4 See General Comment on the Right to Adequate Food (GC12), UN Doc
E/C.12/1999/5, Para 18. in Annex 5.1.
7 See FIAN Handbook “How to Document Right to Food Violations?”, available
on the FIAN web site, www.fian.org
7
Example of FIAN case:
Ecuador fails to respect the right to food and
water of thousands of peasant families by
promoting a dam project
May 2007
The livelihood of 30,000 peasants who use the
waters of the Baba river for fishing and agriculture
is threatened by the dam project which is promoted
by the government in the province Los Ríos.
In October 2004, the Baba Project was declared a
national priority. In January 2006, the project was
awarded to Consorcio Hidroenergético del Litoral
(CHL). Even though this project has been qualified
as “multipurpose”, its sole objective is to transfer
85% of the Baba basin waters to the dam Daule –
Peripa, in order to enable powerful groups to have
at their disposal the water and energy generated.
In December 2006, the Minister of Environment,
Ana Albán, awarded the environment license to
CHL, even though the environment impact study
submitted was incomplete and contradictory. It
highlights the fact that CHL is not allowed to transfer
the water from the Baba basin and that according
to the Law of Water Resources this permission can
only be given by the National Water Resources
Board. The organizations opposing the project
predict serious environmental and social impacts in
the Baba basin. In fact, the construction of the dam
entails the risk that the river Baba and the wells,
the only sweet water source partially apt for human
consumption, will dry up for ever. The decrease of
water levels and the subsequent pollution of rivers
and wells, as well as the disappearance of the fish
species will directly affect the populations living in
the basin, that is, the ancestral users of this river.
The Inter-American Development Bank intends to
approve soon a loan, even though the project does
not comply with the policies on environmental and
social protection established by this Institution.
The State of Ecuador is a State Party to the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights and is therefore duty-bound under
international law to respect the human right to food
and water. Allowing the construction of this project
without the agreement of the affected population
and without a solid and complete study on the social
and environmental impacts, the State fails to comply
with its obligations to respect the right to food and
to water.
•
Protect bound obligation
A breach of the protect bound obligation occurs if a
state fails to prevent the obstruction of a person’s access
to food by a third party. Once again an individual’s
current access to food can only be dismantled if
adequate compensation and rehabilitation is provided.
8
Examples of this type of violation include situations
where governments allow large corporations to get
hold of peasants’ land by illegitimate means and
without the provision of adequate compensation
and rehabilitation.
Ghana fails to protect the right to food and water
of rural communities against adverse activities of
Gold Mining Companies
March 2007
Mining giant AngloGold Ashanti, Iduapriem Limited
prevents access and use of land by hundreds of
subsistence farmers in Teberebie.
The South African mining company AngloGold
Ashanti is one of the biggest internationally. At
Teberebie, where AngloGold Ashanti operates the
Iduapriem mine, the intense blasting, vibrations,
noise, dust, the increasing waste dumps and the
loss of access to land and water, are taking a toll on
community members. The waste rock dumps of the
Iduapriem mine which are steadily growing in size
are fast taking over lands that were previously used
for farming, especially traditional and subsistence
agriculture. For most people access to their farm
lands is now an uphill task since almost all the
routes to their farms have been blocked by tonnes
of waste rock dumped in the area. Others also
have to walk between six and nine kilometres to
search for new farmlands. Neither the company
nor the responsible state institutions have acted to
guarantee access to land for farmers. The absence
of replacement farmlands is affecting food security
in the area. Furthermore, the people of Teberebie
report that all nearby streams are contaminated
with toxic substances that run off from the waste
rock dumps.
This massive blockade to fertile land and the
failure to provide replacement land or adequate
compensation violates the community’s right to
food. In addition, the failure of the state authorities
to mitigate the loss of access to surface water
sources and break down of boreholes constitutes a
violation of the right to water.
Ghana is a State Party to the International Covenant
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as well as
the African Charter on Human Rights and therefore
is obliged by international law to respect and
protect the rights of the communities in the Western
region. The state of Ghana has to protect the
Right to Food and Water of the communities
affected by the activities of AngloGold Ashanti in its
Iduapriem mine.
•
Fulfilment-bound-obligation
A breach of the fulfilment bound obligation occurs
when the government fails to implement policies which
are designed to secure vulnerable groups’ access to
adequate food. More specifically the obligation to fulfil
(facilitate) means that the States must pro-actively
engage in activities intended to strengthen people’s
access to productive resources or to sufficient income so
that they can feed themselves.
India fails to fulfil the right to adequate food of
unorganised workers by not guaranteeing the
payment of minimum wage
March 2007
Women working in the informal sector of traditional
handicraft are victims of exploitation, not being
able to adequately feed themselves, in the state of
Uttar Pradesh.
Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) is highly populated with nearly
170 million people with a low per capita income
under the Indian average of $330. 80 percent of
the state population are settled in rural areas. 60
percent of the inhabitants depend on service with
government departments and private enterprises,
35 percent depend on agriculture while 5 percent
depend on the local handicraft called Chikan Kari.
This activity, mainly undertaken by women, belongs
to the informal sector and is very time-demanding.
Women Chikan Kari workers generally earn INR
30 per day. They get work from stores through
middlemen with no fixed rate for one piece. This
arrangement reduces their bargaining capacity to
get a better price for the handicraft and makes
them vulnerable to exploitation. Due to illiteracy
and lack of awareness the women are unable to
demand their entitlement of a minimum wage of
INR 58.50 under the Minimum Wage Act of 1948.
(1 Euro = 55 INR).
On September 17, 2004, the Government of
India established a “national commission for
the unorganized sector”. This is an advisory
organ, which should monitor the situation in the
unorganised sector and send periodic reports to
the government. However, presently this organ is
not functioning. A labour inspector was in place to
monitor workers conditions. But this position was
abolished in 2003 although it is very important in
order to safeguard and ensure the rights of the
workers in the unorganised sector like Chikan Kari.
As a state party to the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, India and
therefore the state of Uttar Pradesh is duty bound
to fulfil the Chikan Kari workers right to adequate
food, by ensuring that they are paid according to the
minimum wage with a fixed piece rate. An income
below the minimum wage excludes the Chikan
workers from accessing adequate food.
9
2.1.3 The FAO Voluntary Guidelines on the
Right to Food
Policy sectors in which guidance is provided
for in the Voluntary Guidelines:
After the ICESCR and General Comment 12, the FAO
Voluntary Guidelines on the Right to Food represent the
most recent international instrument concerning this
human right at the UN level.
GUIDELINE 1 Democracy, good governance,
human rights and the rule of law
GUIDELINE 2 Economic development policies
GUIDELINE 3 Strategies
GUIDELINE 4 Market systems
GUIDELINE 5 Institutions
GUIDELINE 6 Stakeholders
GUIDELINE 7 Legal framework
GUIDELINE 8 Access to resources and assets
GUIDELINE 8A Labour
GUIDELINE 8B Land
GUIDELINE 8C Water
GUIDELINE 8D Genetic resources for food and
agriculture
GUIDELINE 8E Sustainability
GUIDELINE 8F Services
GUIDELINE 9 Food safety and consumer protection
GUIDELINE 10 Nutrition
GUIDELINE 11 Education and awareness raising
GUIDELINE 12 National financial resources
GUIDELINE 13 Support for vulnerable groups
GUIDELINE 14 Safety nets
GUIDELINE 15 International food aid
GUIDELINE 16 Natural and human-made disasters
GUIDELINE 17 Monitoring, indicators and
benchmarks
GUIDELINE 18 National human rights institutions
GUIDELINE 19 International dimension
As a response to the 1996 World Food Summit’s call for
clarification of the content of the right to food, FIAN
International, WANAHR (the World Alliance for Nutrition
And Human Rights) and the Institute Jacques Maritain
elaborated the Draft Code of Conduct on the Right to
Adequate Food in 1997. The text was discussed among
experts and civil society actors and enabled to mobilise
close to 1000 organisations and associations all over the
world. This civil society mobilisation has been crucial
throughout the process which led to the adoption in
1999 of the General Comment Nr. 12 on the right to
adequate food by the UN Committee on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and eventually to the
adoption of the Voluntary Guidelines by the 187 FAO
member states in November 2004 in Rome 8.
These “voluntary guidelines to support the progressive
realization of the right to adequate food in the context
of national food security” (hereafter the Voluntary
Guidelines or the Guidelines) recall the standards
under the right to adequate food as it is enshrined in
international human rights law and interpreted by the
CESCR in GC12. They then proceed with giving a list
of recommendations and strategies in different sectors
relevant for right to food policies. Under the title
“Enabling environment, assistance and accountability”,
the Guidelines shall help states complying with their
obligations under the right to food and realize this right
as expeditiously as possible. They finally tackle the issue
of international measures, actions and commitments,
which are relevant for the progessive realization of the
right to adequate food.
8 See Voluntary Guidelines to support states in the progressive realization of
the right to adequate food in the context of national food security, accessible at
http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/009/y9825e/y9825e00.htm
10
•
Elements of a national strategy to implement
the Voluntary Guidelines
The Voluntary Guidelines are specific in describing the
five necessary elements of national strategies, which are
a precondition for an effective implementation of the
right to adequate food. Such a strategy has to start (1)
with a careful analysis of the causes of hunger and be
followed by (2) an assessment of the existing legislative
and policy framework and identification of problematic
legislation or areas in which adequate legislation is
missing. Another element of the national strategy
is that (3) all policy measures taken by governments
need to be screened in order to make sure that they
do not contribute to violations of the right to adequate
food and ensure that the state is using the maximum
of available resources to progressively implement the
right and to direct its implementation particularly to
those groups, which are extremely marginalized in
the country. The next element (4) is that governments
install a functioning monitoring mechanism which will
help to identify victims of violations as well as progress
over time. Finally (5) governments have to have in place
effective recourse procedures which allow victims of
violations of the right to adequate food to claim their
rights and ask for meaningful remedies.
2.2 Human rights based monitoring
The last two steps of the strategy proposed by the
Voluntary Guidelines are of utmost importance to the
purpose of the present handbook. Indeed, parallel
reports should entail both information emerging from
the monitoring of state policies relevant to the right
to food, as well as concrete cases of violations of this
right.9
In an empirical approach, documenting violations is
a means (and probably the best and most convincing
one) to identify patterns of violations and state policies
which are not adequate to enable people to realize their
right to food. Furthermore, and in a mutually reinforcing
manner, violations of the right to adequate food can
often been identified in the course of monitoring
public policies. Civil society should thus undertake a
“watchdog” function and evaluate state performance
vis-à-vis the right to adequate food through monitoring
state policies.
2.2.1 Monitoring mechanisms and the
Voluntary Guidelines
Monitoring mechanisms refer to all available tools
and procedures in institutions in order to check
the implementation or non-implementation of the
commitments states (or other relevant actors) have
agreed upon. Monitoring activities are key to holding
states accountable. Furthermore, strong monitoring
mechanisms are indispensable to achieve an effective
implementation of the right to food. Civil society is
called upon most urgently when states do not comply
with their obligations under the right to food. Making
cases of right to food violations public, naming the
responsible institutions, identifying the inactive part
of governments etc. are tools to move states to stop
violations and to act in favour of victims of human rights
violations. With the Voluntary Guidelines, civil society
now has a strong instrument at its disposal to monitor
state performance.
The Guidelines can be used as a checklist to
monitor whether the proposals made in the various
subparagraphs are being followed by governments, and
to assess if the policy measures taken are adequate to
meet the objective of the respective paragraph. The five
steps that the Guidelines set out can be framed in terms
of the following questions:
1 Do governments assess the hunger situation and
the problems of the different vulnerable groups?
(Guideline 13.2, 17.5)
2 Do
they check if their own legislation,
administrative routines policies, programmes
and projects contribute to violations? (Guideline
3.2, 17.2)
and policy measures to better implement the
right to food?
4 How are governments monitoring the impact of
such measures?
5 Do states offer access to recourse mechanisms?
In addition to providing a valuable frame of reference for
the monitoring activities of civil society, the Guidelines
themselves (17.1.-17.6.) explicitly mention monitoring as
an integral part of a national strategy to realize the right
to food.10 As for the institutional framework, Guideline
18.1 encourages states to establish independent human
rights institutions or ombudspersons and give them
the mandate to monitor the right to food. Civil society
should push for the implementation of these provisions,
and, in countries where such institutions exist, should
seek cooperation and even when relevant bring cases
of violations of the right to food to their attention. In
this last case, the Guidelines can be very useful in order
to appreciate to which extent right to food obligations
have been breached.
2.2.2 The way ahead: human rights-based
monitoring
The international community of states has, in close
cooperation with civil society, established necessary
norms and legal instruments to promote and guarantee
the right to food. Currently, there is a clear attempt at
national and international levels to design provisions
and tools for a proper monitoring of all those standards
and commitments endorsed by states. The main step
forward today is to find the right monitoring system.
In this perspective, human rights-based monitoring
is very promising and aims at controlling state
performance in the light of the contracted obligations in
human rights law. It goes beyond traditional monitoring
exercises done by states through the statistical units
within different ministries. Furthermore, the monitoring
efforts per se belong to human rights obligations.
General Comment 12 requires proper monitoring in its
paragraph 31. Human Rights Based Monitoring is thus
a monitoring process which analyses the government
response to a given situation of the implementation of
a human right.11
Concretely and as already mentioned, the government
first needs to know which the particularly affected
segments in the society are, where they are located,
and what the causes are for these people suffering from
human rights violations or the non-fulfilment of certain
rights.
3 Do they plan to update and improve legislation
10 See Guidelines 5.2, 10.3, 17, 18.1, 13.2.
9 See FIAN Handbook “How to Document Right to Food Violations?”, available
on the FIAN web site, www.fian.org
11 “Rights based Monitoring – Lessons to be learned for the work on Indicators
for the right to adequate food”, 2006, Michael Windfuhr, FIAN & University of
Mannheim, Heidelberg/Mannheim.
11
The identification is the first step in the set up of a right
based monitoring :
(1) Identification of marginalized and disadvantaged
groups and the causes of the problems.
(2) Measure progress: Monitoring is also needed to
check if the measures taken by governments do have
the intended effects or not. Such monitoring of progress
in the implementation must be done by governments
themselves in order to identify areas where corrective
action must be taken.
(3) Process monitoring: Evaluate if the implementation
process itself is respecting human rights principles (which
include participation, transparency, non-discrimination,
etc.)
(4) Monitoring as a precondition for accountability:
Monitoring of the problems and the progress in
implementation of a right should also be done by
independent (human rights) institutions, such as national
human rights commissions or ombudspersons, as well
as by civil society actors in order to hold governments
accountable.
Various projects and initiatives have been developed
over the last years which aim at developing and applying
right based monitoring around the key elements which
represent the set of indicators on the right to adequate
food. Three projects (namely the IBSA project of FIAN
and the Mannheim University12; the FAO/Oslo University
project in Brazil13 and the project of the Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights14) have started
simultaneously and are now carried out in close
collaboration by the three teams. A set of indicators
have thus been established which now will have to be
tested in specific national contexts.
Besides the set of indicators on the right to food, civil
society organisations including FIAN and the German
Agro Action as well as many national and local CSOs are
developing and applying a Monitoring Tool based on
the Guidelines.15 Indeed, if the Voluntary Guidelines offer
an interesting framework to monitor state perfomence
towards the progressive realization of the right to food,
they are not themselves shaped as a monitoring tool, but
rather as a collection of ideas for “good governance” in
the areas of nutrition and agrarian regimes.
The Voluntary Guidelines on the Right to Food as a
Human Rights Based Monitoring Tool
The Monitoring Tool developed by FIAN with the
support of the FAO and the German Agro Action
follows the structure of the FAO Voluntary Guidelines
on the Right to Food and addresses fundamental
questions for each policy sector concerned in the
progressive realization of the right to food. Under
each Guideline two to three key questions are
formulated to analyse whether scruntinised states
design and implement their policies in the most
conducive way for the progressive realization fo
the right to adequate food. This means that the
proposed questions address structures, processes
and results related to each policy field, be it the
institutional framework, the market system or the
access to assets and resources among other fields.
Under each of those key questions, checklists and
text boxes are proposed in order to provide concrete
guidance to answer the questions. Finally, crossreference are provided whenever cross-cutting issues
are concerned such as gender or participation.16
Finally, one of the outputs which should definitively
emerge from these current initiatives is a new type of
national reports to monitor the status of implementation
of the right to adequate food. These reports can in turn
be submitted to the CESCR as parallel reports to state
official reports when the latter are on the agenda of this
UN supervisory body. The CESCR is in fact in a process
of revising its own reporting guidelines and much
will happen in the next months and years in terms of
international monitoring mechanisms and opportunities
in the UN Human Rights system.17
12 More information at http://www.fian.org/fian/index.php?option=content&task
=view&id=227&Itemid=132
13 Right to Food Unit /Economic and Social Department of the FAO in
collaboration with International Project on the Right to Food in Development
– IPRFD, University of Oslo/Akershus University College.
14 More information in “Quantitative Human Rights Indicators – A Survey of
Major Initiatives”, 2005, Rajeev Malhotra and Nicolas Fasel.
15 See FIAN Handbook “The Voluntary Guidelines on the Right to Food as a
Human Rights Based Monitoring Tool”, available on the FIAN web site, www.fian.
org
12
16 See example of questions and checklists related to Guideline 3 of the Tool in
Annex 5.3
17 See CESCR “Revised guidelines regarding the form and contents of reports to
be submitted by states parties (...)” UN Doc.: E/C.12/1991/1, please note that these
Guidelines are being currently revised. To follow the debate,
consult http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/index.htm
3 Using the UN Human Rights
System
3.1 UN system and Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights
At the universal level, the main piece of legislation
governing economic, social and cultural rights is the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights.
In 1987 the Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights was established by the UN ECOSOC as
the monitoring body of the Covenant. It seeks to achieve
three principal objectives, namely:
a) Development of the normative content of the
rights recognised in the Covenant
b) Acting as a catalyst to state action in developing
national ”benchmarks” and devising appropriate
mechanisms for establishing accountability, and
providing means of vindication to aggrieved
individuals and groups at the national level
c) Holding states accountable at the international
level through the examination of states’ periodic
reports.
Two actual debates within the UN Human Rights
System are of particular relevance for the status
of the ICESCR and for the supervision of its
implementation:
-The standing of the CESCR is being discussed by
Member States of the United Nations through the
debate intiated at the Human Rights Council with
the resolution adopted by the Council on 28 March
2007. The resolution A/HRC/4/L.17 aims at revising
the standing of the CESCR and to place it on the
same footing as other treaty bodies in charge of
supervising the implementation of other human
rights treaties in the UN system.18
-The Optional Protocol providing for complaint
and inquiry procedures to enforce the ICESCR has
been debated since the early 1990s and is finally
entering a concrete phase with a UN working group
mandated with the drafting of such an optional
protocol. Such a protocol would eventually allow to
bring complaints to the UN level against violations
of ESC-Rights. A broad civil society coalition works
to ensure that the new complaint mechanism to
be adopted will be useful to the victims of such
violations.19
3.1.1 What are parallel reports?
As an international non-governmental organisation
with consultative status with the United Nations, FIAN
International is able to assist both the Committee
and national civil society organisations to hold states
accountable for violations of economic, social and
cultural rights.
Under the Covenant states are required to submit an
initial report within two years of their ratification of the
Covenant, periodic reports are required every five years
thereafter. These reports are supposed to document
the measures that state parties have adopted and the
progress they have made in order to guarantee the
realisation of all the rights included in the International
Covenant. These reports, due to political bias, are unlikely
to illustrate the whole picture. Governments are often
reluctant to portray the exact situation regarding human
rights in their own country. In order for the Committee
to obtain a more comprehensive picture of the human
rights situation in a country, more independent sources
of information are required.
In the best of cases, a state report should follow the
guidelines issued by the CESCR.20 However, more
common, is that states provide either very brief and
weak or very long but vague reports.
CSOs and NGOs are able to provide the Committee
with independent information through the submission
of parallel reports (also called alternative or “shadow”
reports). As such an international non-governmental
organisation, FIAN is able to contribute in this manner
to the Covenant’s implementation procedure.
3.1.2 Who is entitled to present a
parallel report?
Articles 16 and 17 of the ICESCR introduce the
supervision mechanism of the ICESCR which consists
in the examination by the Committee of states' regular
reports. In parallel to the submission of states' reports,
national and international NGOs as well as UN agencies
are invited to provide the Committee with additional
information. The CESCR has even been the first
treaty supervising body to allow NGOs to make oral
submissions and to submit written statements regarding
the situation of economic, social and cultural rights in
the different states.
Any individual on behalf of an NGO, national or
international NGOs are welcomed to contribute to the
works of the CESCR. There are various ways to participate
in the monitoring activities of the Committee. You will
find more details about this variety of means of action
and interaction in section 3.2 below. The major rule to
keep in mind is that everybody can send information
to the CESCR and make oral submissions during the
CESCR sessions, provided one has registered with the
18 See http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/4session/index.htm
19 See http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/index.htm and www.opicescrcoalition.org
Guidelines are being currently revised. To follow the debate, consult
http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/index.htm
13
CESCR secretariat. Only the written statements on the
state report will have to be co-sponsored by a NGO with
ECOSOC consultative status. FIAN International benefits
from this status and has helped many NGOs to submit
such written statements to the CESCR.
3.1.3 Purpose of a parallel report
The submission of parallel report enables the UN
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
to obtain a more comprehensive picture of a State’s
compliance with economic, social and cultural rights. It
gives an NGO the possibility to monitor and if necessary
challenge government policy as well as present concrete
cases of human rights violations to an intergovernmental
organisation.
These reports are able to provide a clear illustration of
a government policy orientation towards the realisation
of these rights. Moreover, they can be used to draw
international and national attention to specific violations
of human rights, and can influence the Committee’s
recommendations and pronouncements concerning a
particular country.
3.1.4 Indirect benefits arising from the
reporting procedure
The impact these parallel reports can have on the work
of the Committee is, however, only one aspect of
the contribution they can make to the work towards
the universal realisation of human rights. Using the
monitoring mechanisms, offered by the CESCR at the
international level, should be considered being part of
the national strategy for the promotion of ESC-Rights.
•
Unifying force
The elaboration of this report can be undertaken in
conjunction with other NGOs (local and national). It can
therefore provide a unifying activity which will strengthen
existing, as well as build new, alliances amongst nongovernmental and community based organisations.
•
Human Rights education
The elaboration of the report can be used as a means
of educating local groups about economic, social
and cultural rights. Workshops can be held. As well
as useful for gathering information they will further
educate people and raise awareness on the existence of
economic, social and cultural rights.
•
actively working for the implementation of the Right to
Adequate Food, the more effective it can become.
Secondly the publishing of the report will increase
awareness of economic, social and cultural rights
amongst the local population. Awareness of these
rights is an important factor in creating individual
empowerment and an important ingredient in the
realisation of economic, social and cultural rights.
•
Policy dialogue with national governments
The parallel report and the Committee’s concluding
observations can be important reference tools when
participating in dialogue with, or lobbying, the national
government. The parallel report provides a clear
documentation of the State’s behaviour on the Right
to Adequate Food, while the concluding observations
contain the Committee’s recommendations concerning
the future behaviour of the State.
Example from FIAN work:
Parallel Report Honduras, from November 2000
onwards
The parallel report submitted by FIAN to the CESCR
during its 24th session in November 2000 is a good
example of how the Committee’s concluding
observations, addressed to the State Party, can
be influenced by NGOs. On the basis of concrete
cases and FIAN interventions, the parallel report
listed violations of the Right to Food in Honduras.
These violations were classified into four categories,
corresponding to four areas in which the Honduran
government needed to take action. FIAN first
documented cases of forcible evictions of peasant
groups. FIAN then denounced discrimination against
women and indigenous people with regard to the
realisation of ESC-Rights, as well as violations of
labour Rights, as a result of a minimum wage that
did not allow people to satisfy their basic needs.
The parallel report also called on the government to
carry out agrarian reform in order to comply with its
obligations under the Right to Food. The Committee
took careful note of FIAN’s concerns. In May 2001,
the CESCR presented its concluding observations
on Honduras’s report, in which it recommended
inter alia:
•
better awareness and education concerning
human rights, and especially ESC rights, among
civil servants in the judiciary and the police force
•
adoption of legislative and administrative
measures to overcome discrimination against
indigenous people as a vulnerable minority, and
against women, particularly with respect to their
work in the informal sector, working conditions,
and representation in public services
•
an increase in the number of labour inspectors
•
pursuit of all necessary measures to carry out
agrarian reform, and resolutions of land ownership
Public relations (PR)
This report documents the government’s human rights
abuses and is presented at the United Nations. This
document therefore has an important PR purpose.
Press releases can be launched before and after the
report is presented at the UN. Press conferences can
also be held.
The publicity generated can be useful on two counts.
Firstly it is useful in terms of the organisation itself. The
more well known an NGO becomes as an organisation
14
problems, taking into account the needs and rights
of peasants and indigenous people.
Following the release of the Committee’s concluding
observations, FIAN-Honduras carried out successful
press work, highlighting the Committee’s support
of the Right to Food in Honduras, which helped
to draw significant public attention in Honduras
to the plight of victims. Furthermore, in April
2003, FIAN has carried out follow-up activities
on the basis of the first recommendation of the
concluding observations by organising a seminar
for judges and lawyers in Honduras. Under the title
"The Right to Food as a challenge for justice", this
seminar enabled to raise awareness and trained key
actors on the Right to Food within the judiciary.
Other initiatives of the same kind took place in the
following years.
Finally, as a result of this long-term and coherent
effort by civil society groups, the latter are drawing
from the provisions of the Voluntary Guidelines
to elaborate national framework legislation. Such
a national legal framework should enshrine the
right to food and specify state obligations. In the
case of Honduras, it should, inter alia, be based on
the human rights principle of non-discrimination,
in particular of women, it should assure policy
coherence, provide access to resources and assets,
and recognize the traditional rights of indigenous
people and communities regarding their natural
resources.
To summarise, the procedure of states reporting before
the CESCR provides an excellent opportunity for
NGOs to comment on a government official version
of its economic rights record and to provide parallel
information. Local NGOs and CBOs (community based
organisations) can expect the following benefits form
the reporting procedure:
•
Drawing international attention to specific violations
of economic, social and cultural rights
•
Obtaining pronouncements of the CESCR on these
violations and the government general economic,
social and cultural rights performance
•
Using the UN attention and the CESCR
pronouncements to create awareness in the national
media
•
Using this to promote solutions to economic,
social and cultural rights problems in a national or
international dialogue.
3.2 Interaction NGOs /CESCR 21
The major focus of this dossier is to give indications
on all elements necessary to write a parallel report.
However, there are various types of NGO interaction
with the CESCR. Be it to submit questions to be
officially directed by the Committee to the state or a
long and comprehensive parallel report to the periodic
state report, there are ways for all to get involved in the
monitoring process as offered by the CESCR.
3.2.1 Procedure before the Committee
The examination of a state report by the CESCR implies
different procedural steps.
The CESCR consists of 18 members who are independent
experts, which means that they do not represent their
government or the UN but are chosen according to their
expertise in the field of economic, social and cultural
rights and to a regional balance within the Committee.
In addition to the lack of states political will, the CESCR´s
task to encourage states to meet their obligations faces
a general lack of capacity and resources. It is therefore
all the more crucial for NGOs to support and help its
most active and inventive members and to feed the
monitoring process with alternative, relevant and precise
information.
The Committee holds its sessions twice a year, a spring
session (April-May) and an autumn session (NovemberDecember). It is the occasion to review the situation of
ESC-Rights in about five states per session. Every session
lasts three weeks and follows the following scheme :
•
On the first Monday, NGOs are given the opportunity
to make oral submissions to the Committee.
•
Then, during the two first weeks, the CESCR
undertakes the review of the report of each state
on the agenda and questions state representatives
on the report. This part of the session is also open to
the NGOs but they are not allowed to intervene.
•
In the last week of the session, the Committee holds
closed meetings to write its comments on the reports
it has examined during the session. These comments
are called concluding observations.
•
After the closure of the session, a restricted
number of CESCR members meets in a so-called
pre-sessional working group. This working group
has the task to start the reviewing process of the
received periodic reports which will be on the agenda
for the next two sessions. The working group has
one week to study the reports,and name for each a
rapporteur among its members who will co-ordinate
the review. The rapporteur will collect information
on the state he or she is in charge of and will draft
the documents the Committee will issue concerning
the state. He or she is the main contact person for
NGOs at the CESCR.
21 This section is based on FIAN ´s long years of experience with the CESCR and
on the remarkable work of Allan McChesney (AAAS Handbook, Promoting and
Defending Economic, Social and Cultural Rights).
15
3.2.2 The review step-by-step
•
•
The pre-sessional working group and especially
the rapporteur drafts a so-called list of issues. This
list gathers the questions and demands of further
information and additional clarification after having
read the state periodic report and information from
other sources. Once completed and approved, this
list is sent to the State. The State is then expected
to send written answers back well before the CESCR
session during which the Committee members and
the state representatives will meet in Geneva.
Generally speaking there is a period of one to three
years between the reception of a state report and its
review at a CESCR session. This gives time to prepare
NGO contributions at different levels.
•
The CESCR holds a so-called country file, which is
a file in which all information on a specific state
are gathered. Out of this file, the Secretariat of the
CESCR prepares a country profile for the Committee
members to provide them with a broader perspective
on the national situation before reviewing the state
report.
•
The last step in the review of a state report occurs
during a CESCR session. The first two weeks of
the session are open to observers. This time is the
opportunity for the CESCR members to listen to an
opening speech by the state delegates and to ask
their questions to these delegates. These questions
are either driven from the list of issues prepared by
the pre-sessional working group or can concern new
and follow-up issues. During the whole session there
is time for the Committee to dialogue with the state
representatives.
•
review of the state report and when this report will be
examined at a CESCR session.
Note!
All this information can be found either directly
on the internet on the web site of the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights (www.ohchr.
org), or can be asked for by mail at the Secretariat
of the CESCR (see address at the end among the
references). You can also ask for FIAN support at
the FIAN International Secretariat.
•
NGOs have the possibility to send the pre-sessional
working group various relevant information on the
situation of the economic, social and cultural rights in
the country. Moreover, a very effective and interesting
way to contribute to the CESCR work at this stage is to
suggest questions to be asked to the state. The CESCR
has often included questions suggested by NGOs onto
the “List of Issues” (see above section 2.3.1). Information
and questions can be sent as a letter to the Secretariat
of the CESCR by mail or Email.
NGOs can also make a written submission to the presessional working group and more particularly to the
country rapporteur by addressing the information
(including related questions) to the secretariat of the
CESCR. Finally, NGOs can make oral submissions in
plenary during public hearing just before the working
group meeting. Oral submissions should not last more
than 10-15 minutes.
At the end of the session, the CESCR issues its
concluding observations in a closed meeting.
These observations can point out violations of
economic, social and cultural rights as well as make
recommendations how the state can improve the
situation of these rights.
Logistics !
Communication, registration with the Secretariat
of the Committee is quite uncomplicated and non
bureaucratic. FIAN International normally ensures
the co-ordination with the Secretariat and can,
if needed, help organising accommodation and
logistical matters around a stay in Geneva.
3.2.3 Making best use of the CESCR
mechanisms
•
16
As far as the submissions (especially oral)
are concerned, the official languages of the
Committee are Chinese, English, French, Spanish,
and Russian. During the sessions, interpretation
in these five languages is provided.
Preliminary steps
The first information you need is the status of the
country you want to report on. You should get informed
on whether and when the state has ratified the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights (it may also be important to know with which
interpretations and reservations). Moreover, information
should be collected concerning the reporting status of
the country. It is important to know whether and how
many times the state has reported, and to read these
reports and the concluding observations the CESCR
already issued after the review of those reports. Last
preliminary information you need is of course when
the pre-sessional working group will meet to start the
Possibility of action around the pre-sessional
working group
•
Possibility of action around the formal review
of state reports
During the session, NGOs have three “means of action”
at their disposal.
First, NGOs can make oral submissions during the
first day of the session (on the first Monday). These
submissions should be kept brief and “to the point”.
Either they should present the main issues of the written
submissions or insist on specific cases of violations or
other concrete and important information. It is essential
to suggest questions or clarifications which should be
expected by the CESCR members from the reporting
state.
Second, during the formal review of the state report, i.e
during the direct dialogue between state delegates and
Committee members, NGOs are mere observers and not
allowed to intervene during the meeting. Nevertheless,
it is always possible to suggest questions at breaks or
at any other appropriate time. The CESCR´s country
rapporteur should always be a target member to be
approached for this more spontaneous and indirect
NGO intervention. NGOs had always found ways to
collaborate with the CESCR making best use of the
short time of a session. For instance, lunch meetings
(i.e. out of the official session) have been organised
by FIAN International and Franciscans International to
present the Brazilian civil society report in the absence of
the overdue state report. More recently, lunch briefings
have been organised by international NGOs in order to
give the CESCR members more time to dialogue with
national civil society actors present in Geneva to follow
the review of their country.
Finally, an NGO can hand over written submissions.
These submissions can take various forms. It can be a
statement on the state report of two or three pages, or
it can be a parallel report, which is much longer and
more elaborated. The latter is based on the state official
report. It is very important that the parallel reports
contains a summary to make sure that every CESCR
member will take note of the essential information you
would like to provide the Committee with.
3.2.4 What can be expected and achieved ?
Whenever working with the Committee, one should
keep a simple rule in mind: the mechanisms are not
only what the texts say but also what one makes out
of them.
All information you can send to the CESCR, if relevant,
can be gathered in the country file. Like for any other
steps or activities of the Committee, it is up to civil society
to become inventive and take initiatives to make optimal
use of the monitoring mechanisms. For instance, videos
have been presented to the Committee.
FIAN has repeatedly made oral and written submissions
on “overdue” countries (i.e. which have not reported for
more than 5 years) or even “non reporting” countries
(i.e. which have never complied with their obligation
to report). When the situation makes it necessary
and is justified, FIAN has, for instance, provided the
Committee with Fact-Finding Mission Reports or asked
the Committee to encourage once again the state to
report. Furthermore, so-called lunch briefings can be
organised as “side-events” to the official review session
by the CESCR on a specific country. These briefings take
place during the lunch break of the Committee session
and allow civil society to have more time to share their
information and concerns with CESCR members who
wish to participate.
These activities, accompanied by a dynamic press work
in Geneva and in the concerned country, have proved to
be quite fruitful.
Written submissions shall be sent as early as possible and
shall be sent in advance to the secretariat of the CESCR
(see contact details at the end of this dossier). They can
be handed over directly to the CESCR members at the
beginning of the session - and it is generally good to
have some 30 copies to give to the members on the first
day of the session. If you however want the document to
be inserted in the UN archives and to be translated and
distributed by the Secretariat of the CESCR, you should
send your submissions three months before the session.
The written submissions can be co-sponsored by FIAN,
as an NGO with UN consultative status (ECOSOC).
17
4 Writing a Parallel Report with the
support of FIAN
As we have seen in the preceding section, although
writing a parallel report is time consuming, it still
commands importance as a crucial means of interaction
with the CESCR. FIAN has not only helped in writing
parallel reports solely on the situation of the Right to
Food with its national sections and NGO/CSO partners,
but has also supported parallel reports of national NGO
coalitions concerning all economic, social and cultural
rights. In both cases, the following paragraphs should
give guidance to parallel report writers.
adverse legislation which directly jeopardises people’s
access to productive resources. Finally, the situation of
NGOs and civil society as a whole can be assessed (is
there real freedom of assembly and association or is it
impossible for people to organise themselves to defend
their interests?).
Lastly, and most importantly, information is needed
concerning concrete examples of where peoples’ Right
to Adequate Food is being, or has been, threatened or
violated.
The Committee does not examine individual
cases or “complaints” concerning violations of the
rights enshrined in the ICESCR. However, concrete
situations in which the Right to Food or another
right is grossly violated for groups and communities
shall be used to illustrate states' failures.
4.1 Gathering information
4.1.1 The sort of information you require
Although the following paragraphs should provide a
good indication of the sort of information you require
when writing a Parallel Report, they are by no means
exhaustive.
First, provide background information. Data is necessary
on the country’s economic situation, (growth rates,
export/import orientation, debt ratios), political structure,
geography and population (aggregate population,
minority groups, illiteracy rate, etc.). Additionally, other
unusual features should also be researched on, for
instance whether the country is in a State of Emergency
or civil war.
Secondly, information is required concerning the state
of the realisation of the Right to Adequate Food in the
country (or of any other ESC Rights). The information
required can typically be divided into two categories:
information regarding the standard of living in the
country; and information concerning how the Right to
Adequate Food is legislated for.
Information on the standard of living in the country
should include among other things: growth rates; per
capita income; figures indicating access to safe water;
the level of malnutrition present; mortality rates; and
the proportion of individuals living below the poverty
line. It is important not just to aggregate figures,
but to also establish the distribution of income both
geographically and ethnically, and who the vulnerable
groups are. At this stage, the issue of discrimination and
more especially gender discrimination should receive
particular attention.
The second part of this information on the realisation
of the Rights should first of all refer to the relevant
international human rights treaties the State has
ratified. Information on how the State has brought its
domestic law into conformity with its validly contracted
international obligations also needs to be assessed. The
relevant information includes not only the constitutional
situation but also other existing legislation and
information concerning individuals’ access to courts,
their adequacy, enforcement procedures, the ability of
individuals to participate in political processes and any
Frequent examples of concrete cases include small
peasants being evicted from their homes without the
provision of adequate compensation or rehabilitation,
the destruction of people’s means of subsistence.
FIAN is action based (intervening in cases of violations
of the Right to Food), and the parallel report should
reflect this position by describing concrete cases of
violation. Among cases of interest are those in which
international institutions’ or foreign governments’ acts
or omissions have essentially contributed to the reporting
government’s failure to respect, protect or fulfil their
citizens’ right to feed themselves. This especially applies
to the Southern countries and issues such as the World
Trade Organisation’s trade policies or the imposition of
Structural Adjustment Programmes by the World Bank.
When the reporting nation is a Northern country it is
particularly relevant to gain information on action
or inaction on the part of the reporting government
that has resulted in a foreign government’s inability
to respect, protect or fulfil their citizens right to feed
themselves. In 2001, FIAN, Bread for the World and EED
(Protestant Development Service of Germany) jointly
presented a parallel report on Germany specifically
concerning international obligations. This was quite
innovative since this type of state obligations remains
largely unknown. In the future, different NGOs intend
to intensify the work in this field.22
The information required about concrete cases is most
specific. It is necessary to know:
•
the number of people affected
•
how their means of livelihood are being threatened
or destroyed
•
the role the state plays
•
whether there are any adequate compensation or
rehabilitation measures being provided.
If necessary and relevant, you can update the situation
concerning the concrete cases of violations since the last
periodic report.
22 See Section 2.1.1
18
4.1.2 Obtaining the information
4.2 Writing the report
The information can be obtained from a variety of
sources.
The report should be written in a clear and concise
manner, with distinct and frequent reference to the
Right to Adequate Food (or any other ESC Right). Since
the purpose of a parallel report is to bring international
attention to a country’s policy orientation concerning
the Right to Adequate Food, explicit reference to this
Right must be made throughout the report. It is not
enough to just specify how many people are hungry, or
do not have access to productive resources. The report
must also examine the processes that are responsible for
peoples’ inability to feed themselves or that deprive them
from their access to basic productive resources, and the
states’ role in creating or prolonging the situation.
The internet is invaluable in obtaining background
information, not just about the country’s economy, but
also about its human rights situation. Good web sites
include Amnesty International (www.amnesty.org) or
Human Rights Watch (www.hrw.org).
For statistics and figures you can also usefully consult
web sites of international organisations like UN
agencies (UNICEF, World Health Organisation, Food and
Agriculture Organisation, UNDP, etc.) or International
Financial Institutions. Do not forget to consult the web
site of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights!
Moreover, the internet can be used to get a good
overview about the different local as well as international
NGOs working in and on the relevant country, who
might be worth contacting. Local NGOs could include
community based organisations, trade unions and
farmers’ associations.
It is usually not only worth contacting international
human rights NGOs but also environmental and
developmental NGOs.
When contacting the NGOs it is necessary to clearly
state what a parallel report is. Effective replies are
generally more forthcoming once it is understood that
the information being requested has a clear purpose. In
addition to asking for general information, a few specific
questions should be asked to facilitate clarification and
to ensure that the reply is relevant.
In order to do so the report must identify the following:
•
who the vulnerable groups are
•
the most important processes that are depriving them
of access to productive resources and threatening
their ability to feed themselves
•
what can be done by the State
•
and what State actions are missing.
As already evoked, the human rights analysis (in
terms of states obligations and violations) is crucial.
The accuracy of information for such a human
rights analysis shall be facilitated by both using the
Monitoring Tool developed on the basis of the FAO
Voluntary Guidelines23 and by a proper documentation
of specific cases of violations24 which mainly reflect
failures and ill-functioning in public policies and
institutions.
Local newspapers should also be consulted. Again this
can usually be done via the internet.
Universities can also provide a good source of information.
Often there are various specialists within the politics,
international law or anthropological departments. At
human rights institutes and law faculties, you can find
highly valuable support to make sure that the cases
and information you want to provide the CESCR with
have a pertinent human rights analysis. International
law specialists may help you gain basic information on
national legislation and eventually jurisprudence.
Focus on vulnerable groups:
Writing a parallel report and researching concrete cases
of violations of the right to food, you should focus on
certain groups of the population who are particularly
affected by these violations:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Women
Indigenous people
Small and landless peasants
Fisherfolks
Minorities
Unemployed
Rural Poor
Children
Elderly
23 See Section 2.2.2 and FIAN Handbook “The Voluntary Guidelines on the Right
to Food as a Human Rights Based Monitoring Tool”, available on the FIAN web site,
www.fian.org
24 See Section 2.1.2 and FIAN Handbook “How to Document Right to Food
Violations?”, available on the FIAN web site, www.fian.org
19
4.2.1 Structure and Content
The structure hinges upon 6 core elements.
1 At first a presentation of the background of
the country has to be made. This element of
the report should consist of a description of
the country’s general characteristics including
geography, economy, politics and population.
2 The second element to be included in the report
concerns the situation regarding the state of
the realisation of the Right to Adequate Food
in the country. This element is made up of two
parts. The first part concerns the standard of
living present in the country and must include the
clear identification of who the most vulnerable
groups of society are. The importance of this has
been documented in the Committee’s guidelines
to state reporting.25
3 The second part of this second element must
provide the legal framework for the right to
adequate food and illustrate how the Right
to Adequate Food is legislated for within the
country. The relevant international treaties
which the State has ratified must, therefore, first
be referred to. The report must then proceed to
examine how the state has brought its domestic
law into conformity with its international
obligations. Such an examination must include
an evaluation of existing legislation, as well as
the ability of individuals to demand redress for
violations of their human rights. There already,
the key questions and the checklists entailed in
the Monitoring Tool concerning Guideline 7 can
be of help.
4 The third element of the parallel report should
entail an analysis of specific policy sectors
relevant for the realization of the right to
adequate food in the given country. In order
5 Element 4 is a crucial element since the report
shall not remain an abstract analysis exercise.
This element should be concerned with clearly
documenting concrete violations of the Right
to Adequate Food. This section should be
structured around how the State is failing to
observe its obligations to respect, to protect
and to fulfil the Right to Adequate Food for all
parts of its population. Reference, however,
can also be made to situations where an action
or inaction of the reporting government has
resulted in a foreign government’s inability,
or unwillingness, to respect, protect or fulfil
their citizens’ Right to Adequate Food. This
is particularly relevant when the reporting
government belongs to an industrialised country.
In each example it must be made clear how the
situation constitutes a violation of the Right to
Adequate Food. The threat to peoples’ livelihoods
has to be clearly pointed out, as does the State’s
role in promoting the situation. It is also useful
to clearly document any external factors which
have contributed to a violation.26
6 The last two elements are the general conclusion
and
7 a
suggested
questions
and
list
of
recommendations to the reporting State. Both
should, as much as possible, reflect the content
and structure of element 3 and 4 of the report.
In order to have as much impact as possible, they
should be relevant and concise.
For an example piece of documentation, please
see FIAN parallel reports on Cameroon, Honduras,
Guatemala, Spain, Norway, Mexico, El Salvador, etc.
Please contact FIAN International Secretariat for a
copy. You can also download parallel reports under
www.fian.org.
to better structure the information concerning
the environment in which the right to food has
to progressively realized and violations take
place, the Monitoring Tool can be very useful.
It is structured along the policy fields which
are addressed in the Voluntary Guidelines
and proposes key questions to monitor state
performance in those fields. The Monitoring Tool
is a rather long and comprehensive catalogue
of questions and checklists and might be only
used partially depending on the relevance of the
tackled issues in the given country. However, the
ideal case would be to systematically use the
Tool and look for alliances and networks which
could allow to address many or all fields of public
policies at stake.
Guidelines are being currently revised. To follow the debate, consult
http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/index.htm
20
26 See FIAN clearance Sheet for the documentation of cases in Annex 5.2
4.2.2 Useful additional references and
contact
•
General Comments
The General Comment number 12 on the Right to
Adequate Food (UN Doc. E/C.12/1999/5) was formulated
by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights as a better definition of the rights relating to food
in article 11 of the Covenant. It is currently the most
authoritative interpretation of the Right to Adequate
Food and therefore provides an invaluable reference tool
when examining how the State is failing to comply with
its international obligations under this right. All general
comments entail important elements which can be used
in the parallel reporting process.27
•
•
Contact the Secretariat of the UN Committee
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Mrs. Wan Hea-Lee, Secretary of the CESCR
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais Wilson 1-025, Geneva, Switzerland
mailing address:
UNOG-OHCHR, 1211 Geneva,Switzerland
tel. 41.22.917.9154
fax. 41.22.917.9022
email: [email protected]
website: www.ohchr.ch
Reports by the UN Special Rapporteur on the
Right to Adequate Food, Jean Ziegler
You can find the different reports (including reports of
country visits) of the Special Rapporteur Mr. Jean Ziegler
under the following reference at www.ohchr.org:
E/CN.4/2001/53 + A/56/210
E/CN.4/2002/58 + E/CN.4/2002/58/Add.1 + A/57/356
E/CN.4/2003/54 + E/CN.4/2003/54/Add.1 + A/58/330
E/CN.4/2004/10 + E/CN.4/2004/10/Add.1 + E/
CN.4/2004/10/Add.2 + A/59/385
E/CN.4/2005/47 + E/CN.4/2005/47/Add.1 + E/
CN.4/2005/47/Add.2 + A/60/350
E/CN.4/2006/44 + E/CN.4/2006/44/Add.1 + E/
CN.4/2006/44/Add.2
A/HRC/4/30
•
Right to Adequate Food as a Human Right (UN
Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1987/23)
Although not as recent, this study also provides a valuable
reference tool. On the basis of a recommendation by the
Sub-Commission (resolution 1982/7) approved by the
Commission on Human Rights (resolution 1983/16), the
Economic and Social Council by its decision 1983/140
of 27th May 1983 authorised the Sub-Commission to
entrust Asbjorn Eide with the preparation of a study
on the Right to Adequate Food as a human right. The
report produced pays special attention to the normative
content of the Right to Food and its significance in
relation to the establishment of a new economic order.
27 See General comments, CESCR, accessible at http://www.ohchr.org/english/
bodies/cescr/comments.htm
21
5 Annex
5.1 General Comment No. 12 of the UN
CESCR E/C.12/1999/5
COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND
CULTURAL RIGHTS
Twentieth session
Geneva, 26 April-14 May 1999
Agenda item 7
SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES ARISING IN THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC,
SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS:
The right to adequate food (art. 11)
Introduction and basic premises
1. The human right to adequate food is recognized
in several instruments under international law. The
International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights deals more comprehensively than any
other instrument with this right. Pursuant to article 11.1
of the Covenant, States parties recognize “the right of
everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself
and his family, including adequate food, clothing and
housing, and to the continuous improvement of living
conditions”, while pursuant to article 11.2 they recognize
that more immediate and urgent steps may be needed to
ensure “the fundamental right to freedom from hunger
and malnutrition”. The human right to adequate food is
of crucial importance for the enjoyment of all rights. It
applies to everyone; thus the reference in Article 11.1 to
“himself and his family” does not imply any limitation
upon the applicability of this right to individuals or to
female-headed households.
2. The Committee has accumulated significant
information pertaining to the right to adequate food
through examination of State parties’ reports over the
years since 1979. The Committee has noted that while
reporting guidelines are available relating to the right to
adequate food, only few States parties have provided
information sufficient and precise enough to enable
the Committee to determine the prevailing situation in
the countries concerned with respect to this right and
to identify the obstacles to its realization. This General
Comment aims to identify some of the principal issues
which the Committee considers to be important in
relation to the right to adequate food. Its preparation
was triggered by the request of Member States during
the 1996 World Food Summit, for a better definition of
the rights relating to food in article 11 of the Covenant,
and by a special request to the Committee to give
particular attention to the Summit Plan of Action in
monitoring the implementation of the specific measures
provided for in article 11 of the Covenant.
3. In response to these requests, the Committee
reviewed the relevant reports and documentation of
22
the Commission on Human Rights and of the SubCommission on Prevention of Discrimination and
Protection of Minorities on the right to adequate food
as a human right; devoted a day of general discussion
to this issue at its seventh session in 1997, taking into
consideration the draft international code of conduct
on the human right to adequate food prepared
by international non-governmental organizations;
participated in two expert consultations on the right
to adequate food as a human right organized by the
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights (OHCHR), in Geneva in December 1997,
and in Rome in November 1998 co-hosted by the Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
(FAO), and noted their final reports. In April 1999
the Committee participated in a symposium on “The
substance and politics of a human rights approach to
food and nutrition policies and programmes”, organized
by the Administrative Committee on Co-ordination/SubCommittee on Nutrition of the United Nations at its
twenty-sixth session in Geneva and hosted by OHCHR.
4. The Committee affirms that the right to adequate
food is indivisibly linked to the inherent dignity of the
human person and is indispensable for the fulfilment
of other human rights enshrined in the International
Bill of Human Rights. It is also inseparable from social
justice, requiring the adoption of appropriate economic,
environmental and social policies, at both the national
and international levels, oriented to the eradication of
poverty and the fulfilment of all human rights for all.
5. Despite the fact that the international community has
frequently reaffirmed the importance of full respect for
the right to adequate food, a disturbing gap still exists
between the standards set in article 11 of the Covenant
and the situation prevailing in many parts of the world.
More than 840 million people throughout the world,
most of them in developing countries, are chronically
hungry; millions of people are suffering from famine as
the result of natural disasters, the increasing incidence
of civil strife and wars in some regions and the use of
food as a political weapon. The Committee observes
that while the problems of hunger and malnutrition
are often particularly acute in developing countries,
malnutrition, under-nutrition and other problems which
relate to the right to adequate food and the right to
freedom from hunger, also exist in some of the most
economically developed countries. Fundamentally, the
roots of the problem of hunger and malnutrition are not
lack of food but lack of access to available food, inter
alia because of poverty, by large segments of the world’s
population
Normative content of article 11,
paragraphs 1 and 2
6. The right to adequate 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 means for its procurement. The right
to adequate food shall therefore not be interpreted
in a narrow or restrictive sense which equates it with
a minimum package of calories, proteins and other
specific nutrients. The right to adequate food will have
to be realized progressively. However, States have a core
obligation to take the necessary action to mitigate and
alleviate hunger as provided for in paragraph 2 of article
11, even in times of natural or other disasters.
Adequacy and sustainability of food availability and
access
7. The concept of adequacy is particularly significant in
relation to the right to food since it serves to underline
a number of factors which must be taken into account
in determining whether particular foods or diets that
are accessible can be considered the most appropriate
under given circumstances for the purposes of article
11 of the Covenant. The notion of sustainability is
intrinsically linked to the notion of adequate food or
food security, implying food being accessible for both
present and future generations. The precise meaning of
“adequacy” is to a large extent determined by prevailing
social, economic, cultural, climatic, ecological and other
conditions, while “sustainability” incorporates the
notion of long-term availability and accessibility.
8. The Committee considers that the core content of the
right to adequate food implies:
The availability of food in a quantity and quality
sufficient to satisfy the dietary needs of individuals, free
from adverse substances, and acceptable within a given
culture;
The accessibility of such food in ways that are sustainable
and that do not interfere with the enjoyment of other
human rights.
12. Availability refers to the possibilities either for
feeding oneself directly from productive land or other
natural resources, or for well functioning distribution,
processing and market systems that can move food
from the site of production to where it is needed in
accordance with demand.
13. Accessibility encompasses both economic and
physical accessibility:
Economic accessibility implies that personal or household
financial costs associated with the acquisition of food
for an adequate diet should be at a level such that the
attainment and satisfaction of other basic needs are
not threatened or compromised. Economic accessibility
applies to any acquisition pattern or entitlement through
which people procure their food and is a measure of the
extent to which it is satisfactory for the enjoyment of the
right to adequate food. Socially vulnerable groups such
as landless persons and other particularly impoverished
segments of the population may need attention through
special programmes.
Physical accessibility implies that adequate food must be
accessible to everyone, including physically vulnerable
individuals, such as infants and young children, elderly
people, the physically disabled, the terminally ill and
persons with persistent medical problems, including the
mentally ill. Victims of natural disasters, people living in
disaster-prone areas and other specially disadvantaged
groups may need special attention and sometimes
priority consideration with respect to accessibility of
food. A particular vulnerability is that of many indigenous
population groups whose access to their ancestral lands
may be threatened.
9. Dietary needs implies that the diet as a whole contains
a mix of nutrients for physical and mental growth,
development and maintenance, and physical activity
that are in compliance with human physiological needs
at all stages throughout the life cycle and according to
gender and occupation. Measures may therefore need
to be taken to maintain, adapt or strengthen dietary
diversity and appropriate consumption and feeding
patterns, including breast-feeding, while ensuring that
changes in availability and access to food supply as a
minimum do not negatively affect dietary composition
and intake.
Obligations and violations
10. Free from adverse substances sets requirements for
food safety and for a range of protective measures by
both public and private means to prevent contamination
of foodstuffs through adulteration and/or through bad
environmental hygiene or inappropriate handling at
different stages throughout the food chain; care must
also be taken to identify and avoid or destroy naturally
occurring toxins.
15. The right to adequate food, like any other human
right, imposes three types or levels of obligations on
States parties: the obligations to respect, to protect and
to fulfil. In turn, the obligation to fulfil incorporates both
an obligation to facilitate and an obligation to provide.
/ Originally three levels of obligations were proposed: to
respect, protect and assist/fulfil. (See Right to adequate
food as a human right, Study Series No. 1, New York,
1989 (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.89.
XIV.2).) The intermediate level of “to facilitate” has been
proposed as a Committee category, but the Committee
decided to maintain the three levels of obligation./
The obligation to respect existing access to adequate
11. Cultural or consumer acceptability implies the need
also to take into account, as far as possible, perceived
non nutrient-based values attached to food and
food consumption and informed consumer concerns
regarding the nature of accessible food supplies.
14. The nature of the legal obligations of States parties
are set out in article 2 of the Covenant and has been
dealt with in the Committee’s General Comment No.
3 (1990). The principal obligation is to take steps to
achieve progressively the full realization of the right to
adequate food. This imposes an obligation to move as
expeditiously as possible towards that goal. Every State
is obliged to ensure for everyone under its jurisdiction
access to the minimum essential food which is sufficient,
nutritionally adequate and safe, to ensure their freedom
from hunger.
23
food requires States parties not to take any measures
that result in preventing such access. The obligation to
protect requires measures by the State to ensure that
enterprises or individuals do not deprive individuals of
their access to adequate food. The obligation to fulfil
(facilitate) means the State must pro-actively engage
in activities intended to strengthen people’s access to
and utilization of resources and means to ensure their
livelihood, including food security. Finally, whenever
an individual or group is unable, for reasons beyond
their control, to enjoy the right to adequate food by
the means at their disposal, States have the obligation
to fulfil (provide) that right directly. This obligation also
applies for persons who are victims of natural or other
disasters.
16. Some measures at these different levels of obligations
of States parties are of a more immediate nature, while
other measures are more of a long-term character, to
achieve progressively the full realization of the right to
food.
17. Violations of the Covenant occur when a State
fails to ensure the satisfaction of, at the very least,
the minimum essential level required to be free from
hunger. In determining which actions or omissions
amount to a violation of the right to food, it is important
to distinguish the inability from the unwillingness of a
State party to comply. Should a State party argue that
resource constraints make it impossible to provide
access to food for those who are unable by themselves
to secure such access, the State has to demonstrate that
every effort has been made to use all the resources at
its disposal in an effort to satisfy, as a matter of priority,
those minimum obligations. This follows from Article
2.1 of the Covenant, which obliges a State party to
take the necessary steps to the maximum of its available
resources, as previously pointed out by the Committee
in its General Comment No. 3, paragraph 10. A State
claiming that it is unable to carry out its obligation for
reasons beyond its control therefore has the burden of
proving that this is the case and that it has unsuccessfully
sought to obtain international support to ensure the
availability and accessibility of the necessary food.
18. Furthermore, any discrimination in access to food, as
well as to means and entitlements for its procurement,
on the grounds of race, colour, sex, language, age,
religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status with the purpose
or effect of nullifying or impairing the equal enjoyment
or exercise of economic, social and cultural rights
constitutes a violation of the Covenant.
19. Violations of the right to food can occur through
the direct action of States or other entities insufficiently
regulated by States. These include: the formal repeal or
suspension of legislation necessary for the continued
enjoyment of the right to food; denial of access to
food to particular individuals or groups, whether the
discrimination is based on legislation or is pro-active; the
prevention of access to humanitarian food aid in internal
conflicts or other emergency situations; adoption of
24
legislation or policies which are manifestly incompatible
with pre-existing legal obligations relating to the right
to food; and failure to regulate activities of individuals
or groups so as to prevent them from violating the right
to food of others, or the failure of a State to take into
account its international legal obligations regarding the
right to food when entering into agreements with other
States or with international organizations.
20. While only States are parties to the Covenant and
are thus ultimately accountable for compliance with
it, all members of society - individuals, families, local
communities, non-governmental organizations, civil
society organizations, as well as the private business
sector - have responsibilities in the realization of the
right to adequate food. The State should provide an
environment that facilitates implementation of these
responsibilities. The private business sector - national
and transnational - should pursue its activities within the
framework of a code of conduct conducive to respect of
the right to adequate food, agreed upon jointly with the
Government and civil society.
Implementation at the national level
21. The most appropriate ways and means of
implementing the right to adequate food will inevitably
vary significantly from one State party to another. Every
State will have a margin of discretion in choosing its
own approaches, but the Covenant clearly requires that
each State party take whatever steps are necessary to
ensure that everyone is free from hunger and as soon as
possible can enjoy the right to adequate food. This will
require the adoption of a national strategy to ensure
food and nutrition security for all, based on human
rights principles that define the objectives, and the
formulation of policies and corresponding benchmarks.
It should also identify the resources available to meet
the objectives and the most cost-effective way of using
them.
22. The strategy should be based on a systematic
identification of policy measures and activities relevant to
the situation and context, as derived from the normative
content of the right to adequate food and spelled out
in relation to the levels and nature of State parties’
obligations referred to in paragraph 15 of the present
general comment. This will facilitate coordination
between ministries and regional and local authorities
and ensure that related policies and administrative
decisions are in compliance with the obligations under
article 11 of the Covenant.
23. The formulation and implementation of national
strategies for the right to food requires full compliance
with the principles of accountability, transparency,
people’s participation, decentralization, legislative
capacity and the independence of the judiciary. Good
governance is essential to the realization of all human
rights, including the elimination of poverty and ensuring
a satisfactory livelihood for all.
24. Appropriate institutional mechanisms should be
devised to secure a representative process towards
the formulation of a strategy, drawing on all available
domestic expertise relevant to food and nutrition.
The strategy should set out the responsibilities and
time-frame for the implementation of the necessary
measures.
25. The strategy should address critical issues and
measures in regard to all aspects of the food system,
including the production, processing, distribution,
marketing and consumption of safe food, as well as
parallel measures in the fields of health, education,
employment and social security. Care should be taken
to ensure the most sustainable management and use
of natural and other resources for food at the national,
regional, local and household levels.
26. The strategy should give particular attention to
the need to prevent discrimination in access to food or
resources for food. This should include: guarantees of
full and equal access to economic resources, particularly
for women, including the right to inheritance and the
ownership of land and other property, credit, natural
resources and appropriate technology; measures to
respect and protect self-employment and work which
provides a remuneration ensuring a decent living for
wage earners and their families (as stipulated in article 7
(a) (ii) of the Covenant); maintaining registries on rights
in land (including forests).
27. As part of their obligations to protect people’s
resource base for food, States parties should take
appropriate steps to ensure that activities of the private
business sector and civil society are in conformity with
the right to food.
28. Even where a State faces severe resource constraints,
whether caused by a process of economic adjustment,
economic recession, climatic conditions or other factors,
measures should be undertaken to ensure that the right
to adequate food is especially fulfilled for vulnerable
population groups and individuals.
Benchmarks and framework legislation
29. In implementing the country-specific strategies
referred to above, States should set verifiable
benchmarks for subsequent national and international
monitoring. In this connection, States should consider
the adoption of a framework law as a major instrument
in the implementation of the national strategy
concerning the right to food. The framework law
should include provisions on its purpose; the targets or
goals to be achieved and the time-frame to be set for
the achievement of those targets; the means by which
the purpose could be achieved described in broad
terms, in particular the intended collaboration with civil
society and the private sector and with international
organizations; institutional responsibility for the process;
and the national mechanisms for its monitoring, as
well as possible recourse procedures. In developing the
benchmarks and framework legislation, States parties
should actively involve civil society organizations.
30. Appropriate United Nations programmes and
agencies should assist, upon request, in drafting the
framework legislation and in reviewing the sectoral
legislation. FAO, for example, has considerable expertise
and accumulated knowledge concerning legislation in
the field of food and agriculture. The United Nations
Children’s Fund (UNICEF) has equivalent expertise
concerning legislation with regard to the right to
adequate food for infants and young children through
maternal and child protection including legislation to
enable breast-feeding, and with regard to the regulation
of marketing of breast milk substitutes.
Monitoring
31. States parties shall develop and maintain mechanisms
to monitor progress towards the realization of the
right to adequate food for all, to identify the factors
and difficulties affecting the degree of implementation
of their obligations, and to facilitate the adoption of
corrective legislation and administrative measures,
including measures to implement their obligations under
articles 2.1 and 23 of the Covenant.
Remedies and accountability
32. Any person or group who is a victim of a violation
of the right to adequate food should have access to
effective judicial or other appropriate remedies at both
national and international levels. All victims of such
violations are entitled to adequate reparation, which may
take the form of restitution, compensation, satisfaction
or guarantees of non-repetition. National Ombudsmen
and human rights commissions should address violations
of the right to food.
33. The incorporation in the domestic legal order of
international instruments recognizing the right to food,
or recognition of their applicability, can significantly
enhance the scope and effectiveness of remedial
measures and should be encouraged in all cases. Courts
would then be empowered to adjudicate violations of
the core content of the right to food by direct reference
to obligations under the Covenant.
34. Judges and other members of the legal profession
are invited to pay greater attention to violations of the
right to food in the exercise of their functions.
35. States parties should respect and protect the work
of human rights advocates and other members of civil
society who assist vulnerable groups in the realization of
their right to adequate food.
International obligations
States parties
36. In the spirit of article 56 of the Charter of the United
Nations, the specific provisions contained in articles 11,
2.1, and 23 of the Covenant and the Rome Declaration
of the World Food Summit, States parties should
recognize the essential role of international cooperation
and comply with their commitment to take joint and
25
separate action to achieve the full realization of the right
to adequate food. In implementing this commitment,
States parties should take steps to respect the enjoyment
of the right to food in other countries, to protect that
right, to facilitate access to food and to provide the
necessary aid when required. States parties should, in
international agreements whenever relevant, ensure
that the right to adequate food is given due attention
and consider the development of further international
legal instruments to that end.
37. States parties should refrain at all times from
food embargoes or similar measures which endanger
conditions for food production and access to food
in other countries. Food should never be used as an
instrument of political and economic pressure. In this
regard, the Committee recalls its position, stated in its
General Comment No. 8, on the relationship between
economic sanctions and respect for economic, social
and cultural rights.
States and international organizations
38. States have a joint and individual responsibility, in
accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, to
cooperate in providing disaster relief and humanitarian
assistance in times of emergency, including assistance
to refugees and internally displaced persons. Each State
should contribute to this task in accordance with its
ability. The role of the World Food Programme (WFP)
and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees (UNHCR), and increasingly that of UNICEF
and FAO is of particular importance in this respect and
should be strengthened. Priority in food aid should be
given to the most vulnerable populations.
39. Food aid should, as far as possible, be provided
in ways which do not adversely affect local producers
and local markets, and should be organized in ways
that facilitate the return to food self-reliance of the
beneficiaries. Such aid should be based on the needs
of the intended beneficiaries. Products included in
international food trade or aid programmes must be safe
and culturally acceptable to the recipient population.
The United
organizations
Nations
and
other
international
40. The role of the United Nations agencies, including
through the United Nations Development Assistance
Framework (UNDAF) at the country level, in promoting
the realization of the right to food is of special importance.
Coordinated efforts for the realization of the right to
food should be maintained to enhance coherence and
interaction among all the actors concerned, including
the various components of civil society. The food
organizations, FAO, WFP and the International Fund
for Agricultural Development (IFAD) in conjunction with
the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),
UNICEF, the World Bank and the regional development
banks, should cooperate more effectively, building on
their respective expertise, on the implementation of the
right to food at the national level, with due respect to
their individual mandates.
26
41. The international financial institutions, notably
the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World
Bank, should pay greater attention to the protection
of the right to food in their lending policies and credit
agreements and in international measures to deal with
the debt crisis. Care should be taken, in line with the
Committee’s General Comment No. 2, paragraph 9, in
any structural adjustment programme to ensure that the
right to food is protected.
Copyright 1999
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights
Geneva, Switzerland
5.1 Clearance Sheet
for FIAN interventions in conflicts (cases, ua, IS intervention)
Send by mail to the International Secretariat of FIAN, P.O.Box 10 22 43, 69012 Heidelberg,
Germany or to FAX +49-6221-830545
1. Address of group or person proposing this case:
2. Country and exact location of case: District, Town or Village
3. Description of case (Please give a short description of the events including date of events. If there were several
incidents, please indicate this. If there is a conflict, please describe the background e.g. cause and development of the
conflict, political, social, economic, ethnical and legal aspects of the situation. Please indicate the urgency of the case,
be as concise as possible (Please use a separate sheet for the details.)
4. Is there a direct contact to a support group or victim group? (Please include address if possible?). Give a short
description of the level and type of organisation of the local victim and/or support group in this case.
5. If there are sources of information or reference different from 4, please include address if possible.
6. Do the victims, the victim group or the respective support group(s) wish an international intervention of the FIAN
type? How did they express their agreement?
7. Are women especially affected in this case? If "yes": How are they affected, and who can be contacted to give
further details about their situation?
8. What are the demands of the victim and or support groups? Please indicate three major demands.
9. Indicate the addresses to which to target FIAN action
10.Please send copies of any documents available which may serve as proof for your information e.g. newsletter
clippings or orders of courts or any other state authorities involved in the case.
27
Guidelines for the use of the
FIAN Clearance Sheet
1 It is crucial for FIAN to know exactly with
whom it can communicate in the future on this
situation. FIAN must be able to rely on a stable
communication net concerning the case. Give the
precise address and name of the person/group
proposing the situation for FIANintervention.
2 Once again it proves essential that FIAN benefits
from preciseinformation about thelocation of the
case. On the one hand FIAN may have already
worked in the area and may have contacts
there. On the other hand the credibility and
the efficiency of an international intervention
also depend on the ability to locate the events
as precisely as possible and to give names of
villages, of districts, etc...
3 As far as the third question is concerned, it is
important to remain concise but precise. FIAN
has to know the facts, i.e.which acts of violence
have been committed for example, whether it is
a matter of eviction, of destruction of resources,
etc. Please explain as well to what extent the right
to feed oneself is concerned and endangered.
Please indicate the legal background if possible
which laws are affected, if there is a^court case
pending, etc... Numbers are also important:
how many families/persons are approximatively
affected; how much land (hectares/acres) is
involved. Indicate the current nutritional and
health status of the persons/community affected.
Try to right up the events in chronological order.
4 Please write all information you have about
the groups involved in the situation to defend
the victims rights; have the victims (peasants,
landless or indigenous people ...) founded a
group? Do organizations, unions, NGOs support
the victims? If you yourself feel unable to provide
the permanent link, this is the place to suggest
other groups.
5 All useful addresses you can find are welcome.
FIAN is eager to get in touch with as many
supporters and partners as possible. These
addresses can be used to obtain further
information or to follow up on the situation.
Please also mention the groups with whom you
do not cooperate, and indicate why?
6 It is crucial for FIAN to be sure that its intervention
is welcome by the victims. Indeed FIAN refuses to
act without the consent of the people directly
affected by the case. The victims must be able to
give their agreement and to decide for themselves
if an international intervention would be useful
for them or counterproductive. For instance FIAN
does not want to endanger the security of the
victims who are already in a serious situation.
FIAN wants as well to take into consideration the
demands of the victims. FIAN refuses to replace
28
the people as actors in the case. In this view, it is
essential that FIAN can be sure that the victims
agree with the international intervention.
7 Women are a group that is particularily affected
by human rights violations. They must be
especially protected against these violations. For
this reason FIAN wants to stress the situation
of women in each case and give them special
attention. Please indicate to what extent
women rights are concerned and which person/
organisation FIAN can getin touch with to act
efficiently in favour of this vulnerable group in
the specific situation.
8 Please highlight the demands of the victims.
Draw up a list of these demands so that FIAN
can have a better understanding of the situation
and can take these demands into account in its
intervention.
9 Who should be most effectively addressed by an
international intervention and lobby work? Give
us the names and the complete addresses of the
persons to be addressed by FIAN s intervention
(President, Ministers, managing directors of a
company...). Please include the fax number if
possible. Don’t give more than three addresses!
10 Please indicate documents that are available with
you upon request and could be sent to FIAN.
Make a note of those documents that you have
already included with the clearance sheet.
The international intervention and its expeditious and
effective implementation depend on the answers you
will give. Do not forget : the more precise and complete
the information, the faster FIAN can react!
5.3 Example of questions and checklists
related to FIAN monitoring tool
Guideline 3:
Strategies
1. Is the national strategy for the realisation of the
right to food (if such a strategy exists) a top priority
within the State’s activities?
Let us not forget that the States must take
measures to realise the human right to food by
using their maximum available resources. The
right to be free from hunger is a fundamental
human right; it is a condition (along with the right
to life and right to water) for all other human rights.
Therefore, it is of absolute priority.
– Which indicators show that the national strategy for
the realisation of the right to food is a top priority?
– Which proportion of the gross national product has
been allocated for the implementation of the national
strategy? What is the proportion designated for the
national strategy compared to other parts of the national
budget? And compared to other countries?
A more specific explanation on the analysis of the
national budget is included in guideline no. 12.
– Does the strategy foresee any measures particularly
aimed at improving the situation of the poorest and
most defenceless people (children, elderly, women,
indigenous people)?
2. Do the State institutions effectively implement
this strategy?
– Do the State authorities that are responsible for the
right to food know and accept the strategy?
The question is whether authorities such as
the ministries of agriculture, social justice,
development, commerce and economy as well
as institutions attending to minors and women,
institutions for agricultural funding, and others,
beyond simply knowing about the strategy, accept
it as a part of their duties and responsibilities
and integrate elements of it into their work. Or,
whether, on the other hand, they regard it merely
as a written document that it is not necessarily
part of their responsibilities.
– Are citizens able to participate in the implementation
of the strategy from the moment it is adopted?
It could be analysed whether there are round
table discussions, channels of information
on how someone can register for specialized
programmes, whether mechanisms are in place
to complain about inefficient implementation or for
proposing changes and whether the media report
on the ways the strategy is being implemented.
– Are mechanisms available to citizens to demand
the implementation of the strategy? What type of
mechanisms are these?
It needs to be determined whether those involved
in the implementation of the strategy can request
that it be enforced or that at least nothing works
against the strategy. The complaint mechanisms
can be on an administrative and/or legal level
or launched before national human rights
institutions such as ombudsmen or human rights
commissions.
3. Has the strategy had effective results?
– Has the number or percentage of those suffering
from hunger or undernourishment decreased since the
implementation of the strategy?
This indicator can be even more useful if the data
is disaggregated by rural and urban areas or
according to vulnerable groups or regions.
– For people in the most vulnerable groups, has their
access to resources and social transfer programmes
improved since the strategy was adopted?
– Has the strategy made a positive impact on the
access to food and resources?
If the strategy has set out specific goals through
benchmarks, it can be verified if these goals have
been realised. For example, if it proposes to cut
the number of undernourished in half within 5
years or if the government’s proposal is to reduce
the number of farmers without land by 25% in the
next two years, the data can show if the goal is
being achieved or if, on the contrary, the strategy
has not served to meet the goal.
– Since the strategy was adopted, has the media
reported on obstacles or progressive measures
with regard to the realisation of the right to food?
Alternatively, is there opposition to showing real
violations of the right to food?
29
30
FI AN I N T E R N AT I O N A L
Willy-Brandt-Platz 5
69115 Heidelberg, Germany
Tel.:+49-6221-6530030
Fax:+49-6221-830545
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.fian.org

parallel reporting before the un cescr

Transcrição

Documentos relacionados

0511HBRA-Río Tocantins-e

Protection of buildings against wind damage

Report on recommendations by experts at ethnic minority NGOs and

Fire safety in apartment buildings

Comment - Network of Concerned Historians

Human Rights Priorities A Human Rights Agenda for the next United

Evidence-based Guideline on Prevention of Skin Cancer

Our Top News - Die Johanniter

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

environmental financial accounting and reporting at the