View previous stories
	Extreme inequality as the antithesis of human rights by Philip Alston, Magdalena Sepulveda Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights   A world in which the richest 1% owns 48% of global wealth, and in which this imbalance continues to accelerate, is obscene. Radical inequality inevitably sustains extreme poverty just as surely as it sustains extreme wealth.   And extreme poverty is best defined as a condition in which the vast majority of human rights cannot possibly be realized.   In other words, inequality is not just as an economic issue, but also one of human rights.   International economic actors like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have begun to speak about the negative economic consequences of such inequalities.   Yet it is no coincidence that these are the very same organizations that steadfastly resist policies that will factor human rights into their policies and programs. Of course, it is not so much the organizations themselves that are to blame, but the governments that control them.   It is telling that, when economic and financial issues are raised in the Human Rights Council, someone invariably makes the argument that it is not the appropriate forum and these matters should be dealt with elsewhere.   And when efforts are made to raise human rights in the economic forums, the same governments insist that these issues be addressed in the Human Rights Council. They seek, in other words, to silo off issues that are deeply intertwined.   Extreme inequality should also be seen as a cause for shame on the part of the international human rights movement.   Just as global economic institutions have eschewed human rights, so too have the major human rights groups avoided tackling the economics of rights. These lop-sided and counter-productive institutional choices should not, however, be conflated with the actual structure of human rights law.   Economic and social rights are a core part of human rights and we should be careful not to equate the effort made by the United States over several decades to deny and undermine the status of these rights with the realities outside the US.   Human rights bodies interpreting the norm of equality have long emphasized that formal equality is not an adequate substitute for the kinds of substantive equality that is required by human rights principles, even if there is no freestanding right to equality, as such, in human rights law.   Even in the realm of civil and political rights, there is a growing realization that the capture of the political process by the extreme rich, a trend that has long been frowned upon when it occurs blatantly in developing countries, is now a very real threat in developed countries, including the United States.   Questions of resources and redistribution cannot be ignored in human rights advocacy. The deeper structures and systems that sustain extreme poverty and ignore extreme inequalities cannot be left in place, otherwise the status quo will remain.   Linked to this is the need for human rights proponents to reflect more deeply on the relationship between resources and the nature of the obligation to ensure respect for civil and political rights.   Existing approaches have all too often been premised on the delusion that resource considerations are not relevant in evaluating governmental compliance with the relevant international obligations.   As a result, questions of the availability of resources and equality of access to those resources have largely been eliminated from the most vibrant parts of the international human rights system, and relegated instead to the minor league discussions about economic, social and cultural rights.   In the latter context, ironically, they were given overwhelming importance, such that the qualification contained in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, that a state's obligations extended only to the maximum of its available resources is often invoked to excuse abusive instances of non-compliance.   More generally, the human rights community needs to address directly the extent to which extreme inequality undermines human rights.   One starting point is to clearly recognize that there are limits to the degree of inequality that can be reconciled with notions of equality, dignity and commitments to human rights for everyone.   Governments should formally commit to policies explicitly designed to eliminate extreme inequality. Economic and social rights must become an integral part of human rights programs.   A concerted campaign to ensure that every state has a social protection floor in place would signal a transformation in this regard.   That concept initially elaborated by the International Labour Organization, subsequently endorsed by the UN and now even by the World Bank draws upon the experience of a range of countries around the world that have successfully tackled poverty in terms of programs with universal coverage, formulated in terms of human rights and of domestic legal entitlements.   Finally, the realization that tax policy is, in many respects, human rights policy - a concept long championed by vanguard organizations such as the Center for Economic and Social Rights needs to be embraced by the human rights community at large.   The regressive or progressive nature of a state's tax structure, and the groups and purposes for which it gives exemptions or deductions, shapes the allocation of income and assets across the population. This unavoidably affects levels of inequality and human rights enjoyment.   Appropriate redistributive measures through fiscal policies are indispensable for ensuring full respect for human rights.   Far from having little to say about economic inequality, human rights demand that states reject extreme inequality and formally commit themselves to policies explicitly designed to reduce if not eliminate it.   Such policies must take economic, social and cultural rights into account as seriously as civil and political rights. They must ensure social protection floors and fiscal regimes aimed at reducing inequality and realizing rights for all.   If the human rights movement is to spur states to adopt such an agenda for equality, it needs to revitalize normative understandings of equality, and put questions of resources and redistribution back into the human rights equation.   * Philip Alston is Professor of Law at New York University School of Law, co-Chair of the law school's Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights.   Guiding Principles on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, by Magdalena Sepulveda - Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights   People living in extreme poverty are often neglected or overlooked by politicians, service providers and policy-makers due to their lack of political voice, financial and social capital and their chronic social exclusion.   They are disproportionately affected by many human rights violations. Discrimination against people living in poverty is widespread and widely tolerated.   The Guiding Principles on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights are the first global policy guidelines focused specifically on the human rights of people living in poverty.   They are intended for use by governments to ensure that public policies, including poverty eradication efforts, reach the poorest members of society, respect and uphold their rights, and take into account the significant social, cultural, economic and structural obstacles to human rights enjoyment faced by persons living in poverty.   The United Nations Human Rights Council adopted the Guiding Principles on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights by consensus through its resolution 21/11, in September 2012.   The development of the Guiding Principles was initiated by the former Commission on Human Rights in 2001, and their content was discussed and refined over more than a decade of consultations with States, civil society organisations, United Nations agencies and communities living in poverty.   The final draft was prepared by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Magdalena Sepulveda Carmona, and presented in her report to the Human Rights Council's 21st session (A/HRC/21/39).   http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/OHCHR_ExtremePovertyandHumanRights_EN.pdf   http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Poverty/Pages/SRExtremePovertyIndex.aspx http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Poverty/Pages/AnnualReports.aspx http://www.srpoverty.org/thematic-reports/ http://www.srpoverty.org/press-releases/ Visit the related web page
	Key messages on hunger and malnutrition by Cara Flowers Eldis, Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN)   Cara Flowers a senior adviser with the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) civil society network reflects on the Committee on World Food Security which took placin October in Italy.   On World Food Day, United Nations (UN) Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon said we need everyone from mayors to rock stars to UN agencies and governments to engage in the fight against hunger. I couldn't agree more.   Governments have committed to eradicating hunger by 2030 through the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) but to achieve this we desperately need new alliances and partnerships that are inclusive and most importantly put communities at the centre of their work.   Despite its recurrence as a trend in global development and some notable gains outlined in the 2015 Global Nutrition Report, 2 billion people still experience micronutrient malnutrition (such as a lack of adequate iron, zinc, vitamin A or iodine), 161 million children under five are too short for their age and 51 million weigh less than they should.   The Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) civil society network believes that we must be united across sectors and silos if we are to get anywhere to close to eliminating malnutrition. This means bold steps and radical actions. It might mean testing out new technologies and ways of working. For example, in Myanmar the SUN Civil Society Alliance (SUN CSA) and Save the Children UK are piloting mobile technologies for monitoring violations of the breastmilk substitute marketing code.   In Sierra Leone, the SUN CSA is also a platform for the Global Alliance for Vaccines Initiative and is currently campaigning for the right to food and nutrition to be included in the national constitution. While in Ghana the SUN CSA has enlisted the support of a pop star Nobel Nketsiah who will donate 20 per cent of the proceeds of his next album to the SUN CSA and their 1000 Days campaign.   We will need to work with unlikely partners, be innovative and be open to dialogue and debate. However, we cannot shy away from accountability and changing course if things just aren't working as is emphasised by the 2015 Global Nutrition Report's theme of accountability.   I attended the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) this week I took away several additional key messages on how we might start to achieve more in the food and nutrition community:   1. We cannot ignore climate change. Mary Robinson, the former president of Ireland and former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights emphasised this. Politicians have been complacent about the link between food, nutrition, agriculture, water and climate change. We need to ensure that the UN Conference of the Parties (COP 21) negotiations and agreement in Paris reflect this reality.   2. Women are vital. As Ertharin Cousin, Executive Director of the World Food Programme stated, 55 per cent of hunger gains are attributable to women. Let's make sure they are not just included but central to our work.   3. Communities must be at the centre. They should be allowed to lead the way through designing, monitoring and implementing the actions that will support them most effectively. Data is often centrally controlled and monitored, while this is important local communities must be given freedom to own data and collect their own. Accountability for the SDGs will only be real if led by those the goals are trying to reach.   4. Conflict and war could exacerbate the current situation of food insecurity and malnutrition. How do we respond more effectively to crises and prevent food being used as a political tool? The new Committee On World Food Security framework for action in protracted crises could be one step.   5. Hunger and malnutrition are social justice issues which need more than technical responses. We must participate in and support social movements who work on the right to food and nutrition and celebrate the role of right to food and nutrition activists in this arena.   6. Malnutrition affects everyone and we must all work together if we are to tackle this. We need to make partnerships, alliances and work in cooperation.   http://www.eldis.org/blog#.VkU10V6pUd9 http://www.fao.org/cfs/en/ http://scalingupnutrition.org/ Visit the related web page
	View more stories