View previous stories
	Don’t put Monsanto in charge of ending hunger in Africa by Yifat Susskind USA   May 2012   This past weekend, President Obama hosted the leaders of the world’s eight wealthiest economies, known as the G8. Where Mr Obama put forward his New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition.   This occasion gave Rajiv Shah, the administrator of the US Agency for International Development, the chance to make an astonishing statement:   “We are never going to end hunger in Africa without private investment. There are things that only companies can do, like building silos for storage and developing seeds and fertilizers.”   That’s news to millions of women farmers in Africa. Their harvests feed their families and generate income that sustains local economies. For generations, they have been doing just those things: storing their harvests, protecting and developing seeds, using natural fertilizers.   Smallholder women farmers save and exchange seeds that help keep local crops viable. They demonstrate how to adapt to climate change by adjusting planting cycles, experimenting with new drought-resistant crops and more. They produce crucial food supplies using the small-scale, organic methods that are increasingly recognized as vital to the health of the planet—and everyone who lives on it.   There are differences, of course. Unlike big companies, small-scale women farmers do not grab millions of acres of land for monoculture plantations that destroy local biodiversity. They do not develop the terminator seeds that hold farmers hostage to the seed patent rights of corporations. They are not the inventors of chemical fertilizers that worsen climate change.   Those honors belong to the very companies that President Obama is inviting to oversee Africa’s food security. We know that their primary goal is not anybody’s food security but their own bottom line. That’s why it’s governments, and not corporations like Monsanto, that should bear responsibility for funding and developing agriculture. It is simply not true that only companies can build silos and develop seeds and fertilizers.   President Obama anticipated these criticisms when he addressed “whether this New Alliance is just a way for governments to shift the burden onto somebody else.” He was quick to assure that, even in hard economic times, his administration would continue to make investments in development aid. Let’s make sure that those investments work to prioritize the right to food over corporate profits. Because here’s the truth: we’re never going to end hunger in Africa without upholding the rights of smallholder women farmers who feed the continent and care for its ecosystems.   Food sovereignty (War on Want)   For the first time in human history, over a billion people have been officially classified as living in hunger. This record total is not a consequence of poor global harvests or natural disasters. Hunger on this scale is the result of a global economy in which hundreds of millions of small farmers, fisherfolk, pastoralists and indigenous people have faced ruin through the hijacking of the global food system by large agribusiness and food retailers.   The global food system is in crisis. Decisions about what is produced, what is consumed and who has access to food are defined by multinational corporations that control the entire food chain. These companies have continued to make billions even as record numbers of people go hungry. In the midst of the food crisis, companies such as Cargill, Unilever and supermarket chain Tesco have reported record profits.   The dominant model for dealing with the food crisis is to address the ‘food security’ needs of countries and peoples. This model - backed by the UK government and many British NGOs - is based on market solutions to the problems of world hunger, with food treated as just another commodity to be traded on global markets. It is a model based on free trade in agricultural commodities, on corporate-owned technology and on greater private sector control of food production and distribution. It is a model that has failed.   Together with its partners in Brazil, Sri Lanka and Mozambique, and in the wider movement of La Via Campesina, War on Want is committed to the alternative model of ''food sovereignty'', an approach to the food crisis that prioritises people''s right to food, agro-ecology and a global food system free of corporate control. These pages provide an introduction to the concept of food sovereignty, as well as many examples of how it has enabled local communities to fight off hunger.   http://waronwant.org/overseas-work/food-sovereignty Visit the related web page
	Australian Refugee Detention Policy continue to attract criticism by ABC News, Refugee Council, agencies   New Mothers on Suicide Watch at Christmas Island Detention Facility. (Australia)   The Australian Human Rights Commission holds grave concerns for the welfare of asylum seekers, particularly mothers and children on Christmas Island after visiting detainees for a second time as part of its National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention (2014).   The inquiry team led by Commission President, Professor Gillian Triggs and accompanied by internationally respected paediatrician Professor Elizabeth Elliott visited the Island to obtain objective evidence of the conditions there and to verify the numbers of people who had self-harmed or were on suicide watch.   “In the four months since we visited Christmas Island, the situation for asylum seekers has significantly deteriorated,” said Professor Triggs.   The inquiry team’s visit coincided with the first anniversary of the 19 July 2013 - the date after which, under Government policy, no asylum seeker arriving by boat can settle in Australia. All 1,102 asylum seekers currently in detention on Christmas Island – including 174 children - arrived after 19 July last year.   Commission staff arrived on Christmas Island on the 14th of July, at a time when there were 13 women on high-level risk monitoring with 10 of these women requiring 24 hour watch. Women on 24 hour watch are monitored by a guard who sits outside their room with the door open. Women are observed at all times, including when they breast feed and sleep.   The numbers of women on 24 hour watch constitute a spike in serious cases of self-harm or suicide attempts – a fact that the Commission has only been able to confirm by visiting Christmas Island and speaking with the asylum seekers and staff there.   The mothers were concerned that there are no places for babies to learn to crawl or walk in the 3x3 metal containers where they are confined in the extreme heat.   “Christmas Island is no place for infants and young children. Most were ill with chest or gut infections - reflecting the large number of families living in unacceptably cramped and high density accommodation intended for ‘temporary’ use.”   Data from the Department of Immigration and Border Protection reveals that 128 children self-harmed in the period from January 2013 to March 31st 2014. In this same 15 month period, 89 adults self-harmed.   Professor Elliott said: “Of greatest concern was the high rate of distress - anxiety, depression and self-harm amongst otherwise healthy young mothers with young children… Many mothers are depressed after giving birth and suffering health problems related to childbirth and the unhygienic conditions in the camps. This maternal distress has the added impact of disrupting the mother-child bond and will potentially have lasting adverse effects on the mental health of their children”.   Christmas Island has almost no open, clean or safe areas for babies to learn to crawl.   According to Professor Elliott: “The physical environment is totally unsuitable and children suffer from recurrent asthma and irritation of the eyes and skin is common, reflecting the dirty environment and raising questions about the causal effect of atmospheric phosphate dust from the local mine.   Professor Triggs commented on a distinct deterioration in the children and their families since her previous visit.   “They are plagued by despair and helplessness at the seemingly endless period of detention. While I am encouraged that the Department intends to set up a school for children, for the past year, children have had no education or structured physical activity. Parents are asking for their children to be moved to the mainland where they will be safe and have access to medical facilities.”   Most of the asylum seekers on Christmas Island have now spent close to a year waiting for their removal to Nauru or Manus Island. Nearly all are yet to have their claim to refugee status assessed.   “To deny the right to claim refugee status for nearly a year”, said Professor Triggs “is to strip away all human dignity. These asylum seekers are trapped in a legal twilight zone.”   These conditions raise concerns that Australia risks serious violation of its fundamental obligations at international law to protect asylum seekers without discrimination and to consider their claims to refugee status expeditiously.   The Commission calls on the Government to consider moving all children and their families to mainland Australia where they can be treated with humanity and their claims to refugee status can be assessed according to law.   http://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/forgotten-children-national-inquiry-children-immigration-detention-2014 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/31/immigration-department-detention-child-mental-health-inquiry http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-31/detention-centre-inquiry-hears-claims-of-immigration-cover-up/5637654 http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2014/s4069804.htm http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/11/high-court-verdict-spells-the-end-for-australian-immigration-detention-as-we-know-it http://www.savethechildren.org.au/about-us/media-and-publications/media-releases/save-the-children-reaction-to-news-ltds-story-on-nauru   July 2014   Sri Lankan asylum seekers facing criminal investigation after being handed back by Australian authorities.   Forty-one asylum seekers returned to Sri Lanka by Australian authorities are being handed over to criminal investigators in the port city of Galle.   Sri Lanka"s navy has confirmed it received the asylum seekers from Australia in a mid-sea transfer in waters south of the island nation.   Immigration Minister Scott Morrison gave details on the case for the first time today, after more than a week of silence on the fate of two boats which were believed to have been intercepted north-west of Australia late last month.   In a statement, Mr Morrison said the 41 people on board were scanned by teleconference at sea before being transferred to the Sri Lankan navy.   A Sri Lankan navy spokesman said the asylum seekers, all men, would be taken to the port of Galle today and handed over to the Criminal Investigation Division.   Senator Sarah Hanson-Young has criticised the screening process, which reportedly involved just four questions via teleconference.   "A telephone conference of four questions - really, if it wasn"t so serious, if it wasn"t about life and death, it"d be laughable," Senator Hanson-Young said.   Shadow minister for immigration Richard Marles has also questioned the operation.   "Australia"s international obligations are reliant upon a credible processing system and we have deep concerns about how that could have been performed by video link at sea in a way which gave an individual assessment, when all the time the boat was steaming towards Sri Lanka," Mr Marles said.   Legal scholars say transfer may have violated international law   Fifty-three legal scholars from 17 Australian universities have said they are "profoundly concerned" the asylum seekers were subjected to "rapid and inadequate screening interviews at sea" before being returned to Sri Lanka.   In a statement, the academics say the Government"s actions in returning the asylum seekers to their country of origin "raises a real risk of refoulement."   Refoulement is an international law term that refers to the involuntarily return of refugees to their country of origin in cases where they may face severe human rights abuse or persecution.   The scholars said returning the asylum seekers would breach Australia"s obligations under international refugee and human rights law, including the 1951 Refugees Convention, 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.   http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/international/2014-07-07/high-court-injunction-blocks-handover-of-153-asylum-seekers-to-sri-lanka/1339408 http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49da0e466.html http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/08/sri-lanka-is-a-refugee-producing-country-heres-why http://hrlc.org.au/australias-hasty-return-of-sri-lankan-asylum-seekers-puts-them-at-risk-of-torture-rape-and-other-mistreatment/   January 2014   The United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) confirmed that it is seeking details from Australian authorities about recent media reports of the navy forcing boats, presumed to be carrying asylum-seekers on their way to Australia, back to Indonesian territorial waters, as well as reports of plans to buy and provide vessels for future “push-backs.”   Briefing reporters in Geneva, UNHCR spokesperson Adrian Edwards said the agency would be concerned by any policy or practice that involved pushing asylum-seeker boats back at sea without a proper consideration of individual needs for protection.   “Any such approach would raise significant issues and potentially place Australia in breach of its obligations under the [1951] Refugee Convention and other international law obligations,” said Mr. Edwards.   As past experience had shown, such practices were also operationally difficult and potentially dangerous for all concerned, he added.   Instead of a policy of push-backs, UNHCR continues to recommend that efforts be made to strengthen regional cooperation on the basis of solidarity and responsibility-sharing which build on national asylum systems.   “UNHCR supports investment in a regional cooperation framework in South East Asia, and recognizes the work of the Bali Process States in addressing protection and humanitarian needs in mixed migration flows in the Asia-Pacific region,” he said.   http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/ http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2014/jan/06/manus-detention-reports-four-months http://www.chilout.org/ http://www.ajustaustralia.com/ http://idcoalition.org/children/ http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=46596&Cr=Asylum&Cr1=
	View more stories