View previous stories
	It is too easy for States to use food and water as weapons of war by Hilal Elver Global Rights Compliance, World Peace Foundation - Starvation Accountability   Apr. 2019   Interview with Hilal Elver, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food.   Q1: Please can you explain your role as UN Special Rapporteur for Food, when you were appointed and the duration of your term and mandate?   My role as Special Rapporteur (SR) on the right to food is to promote and monitor the implementation of Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights (ICESCR) at the global level. I was appointed as SR in July of 2014 and will complete my term in Spring of 2020.   As the SR, I have issued nine thematic reports addressing current and emerging issues in relation to right to adequate food.   I have conducted eight mission trips to States of interest to investigate the right to food at national level, and have reported on whether those countries are respecting, protecting and fulfilling their responsibilities derived from the ICESCR.   Twice a year, I have presented the latest reports to the Human Rights Council in Geneva, and to the UN General Assembly 3rd committee in New York. Besides these responsibilities, I am an Advisory Group member of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS), the most comprehensive global governing body on food policy, and work closely with the CFS on its policy-making activities.   Moreover, I cooperate and work with other UN institutions, especially Rome-based Agencies (FAO, WFP and IFAD), several governments that are friendly with the right to food mandate, as well as Civil Society Organizations and Universities to advise, cooperate, and participate in their events relevant to the right to food.   Q2: Your tenure as SR has witnessed the re-emergence of famines and severe food insecurity globally, how has this shaped your mandate and missions?   Yes, unfortunately, in my time as SR, the amount of people who are suffering from hunger and malnutrition has increased rather than decreased. As of today, this figure has reached approximately 821 Million, an 11 % increase since 2005. This is an alarming development, to say the least. One of the major reasons for this trajectory is conflicts and extreme weather events.   Often, these two factors converge, with one triggering the other, creating serious levels of hunger and malnutrition in the affected areas.   Undoubtedly, this pattern has influenced my work as SR and as a result, I issued reports on climate change, conflict situations, as well as natural disasters and emergency assistance, all in the context of the right to food.   Regrettably, UN rules prohibit me from visiting countries in conflict zones in my capacity as SR, and our missions require an invitation from the hosting countries, so I have not been able to visit countries experiencing ongoing conflict.   Q3: Do you encounter in your work with States and relevant stakeholders any confusion between the obligations enshrined in the right to food and the crime of starvation, and if so how do you tackle this problem?   Yes, of course. Unfortunately, some States and stakeholders erroneously consider the right to food as an obligation that exists only during times of peace, but not in emergencies. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), however, makes no distinction between times of peace and emergency or conflict situations.   The rights contained in the ICESCR, including the right to food, are applicable at all times, and States are primarily responsible for realizing these rights.   Moreover, States have a positive responsibility to act in order to help people in times of difficulties, with priority to the most vulnerable.   International human rights law and international humanitarian law (IHL) do not place limits on these responsibilities or allow States to derogate from the ICESCR, even in times of conflict.   Although IHL does not specifically mention the right to food, its principles clearly protect people from hunger, protect productive resources necessary to maintain food stuff, etc., and prohibit any attacks on areas that are important for food production.   Nevertheless, most of the time, you feel that there is a disconnect between IHL and the right to food, and a lack of understanding about State responsibilities during times of conflict or emergency continues.   Arguably, this disconnect is often more of a deliberate refusal to uphold obligations than a simple misunderstanding.   During times of conflict and emergency, States are also unable to easily execute responsibilities, or their capabilities are significantly reduced.   It is too easy for States to use food and water as weapons of war, especially if animosity towards people is very high, and weaponizing such essentials to survival has historically been effective at causing tremendous harm.   Despite condemning this practice as a severe criminal act, Special Rapporteurs, as part of the UN human rights system, have no power to intervene beyond 'naming and shaming' those responsible.   Therefore, I believe that our reports and actions should be empowered by the UN's security apparatus. This is the only way to remind States that their human rights obligations do not end in times of emergency, and that if they deliberately use food as a weapon, or siege innocent civilians to gain political benefits, they have committed a crime and they should be punished. This applies not just to States but to armed resistance groups as well.   Thus far, we have not seen a single State or armed group punished for the deliberate starvation of innocent people. This needs to change.   Special Rapporteurs should send communications and allegations letters to governments when there is evidence of deliberate starvation. Though this action would not immediately bring those responsible to justice, it would make the atrocity publicly known within the international community and it might help stop further harm.   Q4: You were on a panel during UN Human Rights Council 39th session in Geneva which looked at man-made famines and deliberate starvation, here you talked about how the crime of starvation has been neglected, an area we focus on in our 'Mass Starvation' Project with the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, can you identify what political or perceived blockages you have encountered which have contributed to this neglect?   As I mentioned above, the current design and mechanisms of the UN human rights system are not strong enough to change the behaviours of States. The field of International Criminal Law, however, after many years of stalling in its development and application, along with the establishment of International Criminal Court, has been significantly advanced.   Deliberate starvation is widely accepted as a crime by the international law community, either as a war crime or a crime against humanity, but there has not been a single case brought before courts, domestic or international.   There are technical reasons for this inaction; for example, it is considered extremely difficult to prove intent, and starvation or famine is a slow and silent onset that the international community ignores until it results in mass death.   Also, starvation generally occurs in conjunction with other grave crimes that are more likely to be the focus of a case. More importantly, there does not seem to be enough political will to stop such impunity among important States that have veto power in the UN Security Council.   This wide impunity encourages States and armed militias to use starvation as a very cheap weapon without hesitation. The international community should stop this impunity and the recent Resolution of the UN Security Council resolution 2417 is an important step forward.   We need to encourage States to build political will necessary to articulate a clear law for the crime of starvation, and to politically commit themselves to prosecute it in the event of a violation.   Q5: You also talked about how 'contrary to popular belief, casualties resulting directly from combat usually make up only a small proportion of deaths in conflict zones, with most individuals in fact perishing from hunger and diseases'. Global Rights Compliance has explored with our partner organisation The World Peace Foundation, the fact that those that die from these non-violent means are often treated as 'second-class victims' and often lack the recognition of war fatalities. Can you discuss this further?   This is a very important point. The real victims of conflict are not only the people who take up arms and go to battle, but women, children and the elderly who stay at home in their villages and struggle with a shortage of food, water, and medicine.   Women and girls are exposed to sexual or other violence, sometimes in an attempt to secure food and water for their families. Infectious diseases and malnutrition; the lasting impacts of which continue from generation to generation do not cause immediate noise within the context of a louder conflict.   Still, the impact of malnutrition destroys human capacity if it strikes children within the first 2 years of life, even for only a short period of time. It is our role to give the afflicted a voice, and to amplify their calls.   As human rights defender, I believe that we have obligation to express these issues on international platforms, not only by writing long UN reports, but also by using media, films, pictures, and conferences to show the world that the impact of conflict is far deeper than the lines of soldiers killed in battle.   The negative impact of conflict extends for decades, generations even when it comes to protracted crises, and may cause waves of forced migration and internal displacement.   Q6: You recently recommended a global convention to prevent famine, could you outline why?   In my conflict report, I recommended that States and relevant stakeholders in the international community work towards a global convention to prevent famine. Such an instrument may not be necessary if we lived in perfect world. There are enough laws and principles that could be easily interpreted as defining famine is a severe crime, punishable by international courts or in domestic courts by applying universal jurisdiction against perpetrators.   However, from the positivist law perspective, having a clear definition of the crime through a specific convention may help to stop impunity. Criminal law tends to be more strictly implemented than other areas of international law, it is important to make a clear-cut legal definition of the crime of famine that will make it more justiciable.   Also we can consider some of the actions that will not rise to the level of criminality, but which are dangerous in the long run. So, having a convention that has teeth to prevent famine before it occurs is a vital step.   As I mentioned in my report, the convention should include other important remedies to prevent and punish famine, similar to the Genocide Convention or Apartheid Convention.   A draft convention also raises the argument of whether the international community has enough political will to come together and discuss such an instrument. As a first step, the International Law Commission should start to work with the Human Rights Council and international law experts. We need to further articulate this idea.   Q7: What information concerning the law or practice would better equip you to successfully deliver upon your mandate and raise awareness of the right to food and starvation crimes?   It is very important to follow reports and findings from various UN organizations, humanitarian agencies, international law experts and civil society mechanisms to warn us about potential dangers before they arrive. Because most of the time, due to delay, it is difficult to reverse course, and to effectively intervene.   We need to rely on and to further develop early warning systems that will help us act timely and protect against violations of the right to food.   It is also important for my mandate to have sufficient information about ongoing conflicts so that I may increase the awareness and respond accurately and swiftly within my capacity. So, cooperated action among all stakeholders is necessary and vital.   Keeping the issue of the right to food and starvation crimes alive and active in the international agenda is also important for progressing the conversation and enacting change in years to come.   The international community should be ready, politically and financially, to tackle this issue, because at the end of the day, conflict affects all of us, no matter where we live.   http://hilalelver.org/ http://starvationaccountability.org/news-and-events/story-in-focus-interview-with-hilal-elver-un-special-rapporteur-on-the-right-to-food http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Food/Pages/FoodIndex.aspx Visit the related web page
	Deprivation of liberty for people with disabilities a massive global rights violation by Catalina Devandas UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities   Mar. 2019   Millions of people worldwide are deprived of their liberty because they have a disability, and this must stop now, says a UN human rights expert.   'People with disabilities are overrepresented in prisons, involuntarily hospitalised in mental health facilities, placed in institutions, interned in forensic psychiatric wards, forced to undergo treatment in prayer camps and subjected to home confinement', says UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities Catalina Devandas.   'Deprivation of liberty on the basis of disability is a human rights violation on a massive global scale. It is not a 'necessary evil', but a consequence of the failure of States to ensure their obligations towards people with disabilities', the expert said, presenting a report to the Human Rights Council in Geneva.   Often without access to justice to challenge their detention, people with disabilities in these settings become extremely vulnerable to sexual and physical violence, sterilisation, human trafficking, involuntary treatment and other forms of abuse, ill treatment and torture.   Children with disabilities are at higher risk of being confined in institutions, segregated from their families and communities. They are routinely locked up, forced to take medication and often exposed to violence, abuse and neglect.   'In many countries, health and social care professionals encourage parents to place their children with disabilities in institutions under the wrong assumption that they will receive better care than at home, but the detrimental effects of institutionalisation on their development, even when placed in small residential homes or 'family-like' institutions, is widely documented', the expert said.   'Without legal avenues to challenge their situation, people with disabilities become invisible and forgotten by the wider community. In addition, because of the mistaken belief that those practices are well intentioned and beneficial, their situation and well-being is hardly monitored by national preventive mechanisms against torture or national human rights institutions'.   Devandas called for States to take action including legal reform to repeal all legislation allowing deprivation of liberty on the basis of disability. She also said admissions to institutions must be stopped, and steps taken to deinstitutionalise people with disabilities currently being held in them, including in psychiatric settings. Coercion in mental health services, home confinement and shackling must be stopped without delay.   'States must invest instead in community-based responses and support; provide access to justice, reparation and redress to those arbitrarily deprived of their liberty; provide people with disabilities with inclusive and accessible services in the community for education, health care, employment and housing', she said.   http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disability/SRDisabilities/Pages/SRDisabilitiesIndex.aspx http://www.driadvocacy.org/ http://www.internationaldisabilityalliance.org/   Oct. 2020   Living in Chains: Shackling of People with Psychosocial Disabilities Worldwide, report from Human Rights Watch   Hundreds of thousands of people with mental health conditions are shackled around the world, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.   Men, women, and children, some as young as 10, are chained or locked in confined spaces for weeks, months, and even years, in about 60 countries across Asia, Africa, Europe, the Middle East, and the Americas.   The 56-page report, “Living in Chains: Shackling of People with Psychosocial Disabilities Worldwide,” examines how people with mental health conditions are often shackled by families in their own homes or in overcrowded and unsanitary institutions, against their will, due to widespread stigma and a lack of mental health services.   Many are forced to eat, sleep, urinate, and defecate in the same tiny area. In state-run or private institutions, as well as traditional or religious healing centers, they are often forced to fast, take medications or herbal concoctions, and face physical and sexual violence.   The report includes field research and testimonies from Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, China, Ghana, Indonesia, Kenya, Liberia, Mexico, Mozambique, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Palestine, the self-declared independent state of Somaliland, South Sudan, and Yemen.   “Shackling people with mental health conditions is a widespread brutal practice that is an open secret in many communities,” said Kriti Sharma, senior disability rights researcher at Human Rights Watch and author of the report.   “People can spend years chained to a tree, locked in a cage or sheep shed because families struggle to cope and governments fail to provide adequate mental health services.”   While a number of countries are paying greater attention to the issue of mental health, shackling remains largely out of sight. There are no data or coordinated international or regional efforts to eradicate shackling.   In response, Human Rights Watch has been working with mental health advocates with lived experience, and human rights and anti-torture organizations around the world to launch a global #BreakTheChains campaign to end shackling of people with mental health conditions, ahead of World Mental Health Day on October 10.   Human Rights Watch interviewed over 350 people with psychosocial disabilities, including children, and 430 family members, staff working in institutions, mental health professionals, faith healers, government officials, and disability rights advocates.   Based on a study of 110 countries, Human Rights Watch found evidence of shackling of people with mental health conditions across age groups, ethnicities, religions, socioeconomic strata, and urban and rural areas in about 60 countries.   Globally, an estimated 792 million people, or 1 in 10, including 1 in 5 children, have a mental health condition. Yet governments spend less than two percent of their health budgets on mental health.   More than two-thirds of countries do not reimburse people for mental health services in national health insurance systems. Even when mental health services are free or subsidized, distance and transport costs are a significant barrier.   In the absence of proper mental health support and lack of awareness, many families feel they have no option but to shackle their relatives. They are often worried that the person might run away or hurt themselves or others.   Shackling is typically practiced by families who believe that mental health conditions are the result of evil spirits or having sinned.   People often first consult faith or traditional healers and only seek mental health services as a last resort. Mura, a 56-year-old man in Bali, Indonesia, was taken to 103 faith healers and when that did not work, locked in a room for several years.   In many countries, families take relatives – including children as young as 10 – to traditional or faith healing centers where they are shackled for restraint or punishment.   Shackled people live in extremely degrading conditions. They are also routinely forced to take medication or subjected to alternative “treatments” such as concoctions of “magical” herbs, fasting, vigorous massages by traditional healers, Quranic recitation in the person’s ear, Gospel hymns, and special baths.'   Shackling impacts both mental and physical health. A person who is shackled can be affected by post-traumatic stress, malnutrition, infections, nerve damage, muscular atrophy, and cardio-vascular problems.   Shackling also forces people to live in very restrictive conditions that reduce their ability to stand or move. Some people are even shackled to another person, forcing them to go to the toilet and sleep together.   One man from Kenya who is currently living in chains said, “It’s not how a human being is supposed to be. A human being should be free.”   “In many of these institutions, the level of personal hygiene is atrocious because people are not allowed to bathe or change their clothes, and live in a two-meter radius,” Sharma said. “Dignity is denied.”   Without proper access to sanitation, soap, or even basic health care, people who are shackled are at greater risk of Covid-19. And in countries where the Covid-19 pandemic has disrupted access to mental health services, people with mental health conditions may be at greater risk of being shackled.   National governments should act urgently to ban shackling, reduce stigma, and develop quality, accessible, and affordable community mental health services.   Governments should immediately order inspections and regular monitoring of state-run and private institutions and take appropriate action against abusive facilities, Human Rights Watch said.   “It’s horrifying that hundreds of thousands of people around the world are living in chains, isolated, abused, and alone,” Sharma said. “Governments should stop brushing this problem under the rug and take real action now.”   Additional Accounts:   “I’ve been chained for five years. The chain is so heavy. It doesn’t feel right; it makes me sad. I stay in a small room with seven men. I’m not allowed to wear clothes, only underwear. I eat porridge in the morning and if I’m lucky, I find bread at night, but not every night.”   —Paul, a man with a mental health condition in Kisumu, Kenya, February 2020   “The chaining of people with mental health conditions needs to stop – it needs to stop.”   —Tina Mensah, Ghana’s deputy health minister, Accra, Ghana, November 8, 2019   “I feel sad, locked in this cell. I want to look around outside, go to work, plant rice in the paddy fields. Please open the door. Please open the door. Don’t put a lock on it.”   —Made, a man with a psychosocial disability locked in a purpose-built cell on his father’s land for two years, Bali, Indonesia, November 2019   “I was fearful that someone would attack me during the nights, without being able to defend myself because of being shackled.”   —Felipe, a man with mental health conditions who was shackled with a padlock, naked in a psychiatric hospital in Puebla, Mexico, 2018   “I go to the toilet in nylon bags, until they take it away at night. I last took a bath days ago. I eat here once a day. I am not free to walk about. At night I sleep inside the house. I stay in a different place from the men. I hate the shackles.”   —Mudinat, a woman with a psychosocial disability chained at a church, Abeokuta, Nigeria, September 2019   “All through my childhood, my aunt was locked in a wooden shed and I was forbidden to have contact with her. My family believed her mental health condition would stigmatize the whole family. I really wanted to help my aunty but couldn’t. It was heartbreaking.”   —Ying (not her real name), young woman who grew up in Guangdong province, China, November 2019   “People in the neighborhood say that I’m mad [maluca or n’lhanyi]. I was taken to a traditional healing center where they cut my wrists to introduce medicine and another one where a witch doctor made me take baths with chicken blood.”   —Fiera, 42, woman with a psychosocial disability, Maputo, Mozambique, November 2019   “It’s heartbreaking that two of my cousins who have mental health conditions have been locked away together in a room for many years. My aunt has tried her best to support them but she struggles with stigma and the lack of robust mental health services in Oman. It’s time for governments to step up so that families aren’t left to cope on their own.”   —Ridha, family member with relatives shackled in Oman, September 2020   “I was chained, beaten, and given devil incense. They feel you’re possessed and put liquid down your nose to drive out the devil.”   —Benjamin, 40, mental health advocate who was chained at a church in Monteserrado, Liberia, February 2020   “Families tie them [people with mental health conditions] up regularly. We can tell by the physical signs on their bodies. They have scars.”   —A Mexican official from the Office of the Prosecutor for Protection of People with Disabilities   http://www.hrw.org/news/2020/10/06/people-mental-health-conditions-living-chains Visit the related web page
	View more stories