National Perspective on the Right to Food

ABSTRACT

Food is a basic human requirement which everyone needs to survive.The right to food is often called the most
basic human right and has been universally accepted as such. The realization of all other rights depends on the
right to food. The right to food finds a place of importance in the Constitution. The Supreme Court of India has
observed that it forms an integral part of the right to life, guaranteed under the Article 21. Besides Part IV of
the Constitution stress on public health and nutrition which embodies within its ambit the right to food. Despite
favourable case law from India’s Supreme Court, and an intensive Court-run programme designed to force
Indian States to distribute food according to the welfare schemes in place, and to legitimizing the right to food
and securing it as a legal entitlement by enacting National Food Security Act, there are bothering gaps between
laws and commitments on paper and implementing these commitments in practice.

India being touted as one of the fastest growing economies in the world, it is still lagging behind most of the
other developing countries in the radar of the Global Hunger Index. Yet the pervasiveness of human hunger
unambiguously illustrates the ongoing failure to fulfil the "right to food." It has become a truism in human-
rights circles to describe the human right to food as the right which is most often proclaimed and most often
violated.

The aim of this paper is to provide an analysis of the current legal and institutional governance structure of the
India’s human right to food.

INTRODUCTION

Food security is a multi-faceted concept, variously defined and interpreted. Concisely food
security may be defined as freedom from hunger and malnutrition. Food security was defined in
the 1974 World Food Summit as: “availability at all times of adequate world food supplies of
basic foodstuffs to sustain a steady expansion of food consumption and to offset fluctuations

in production and prices”1 The concept of food security itself is not a legal concept per se and
does not impose obligations on stakeholders nor does it provide entitlements to them whereas
the right to food places legal obligations on States to overcome hunger and malnutrition and
realize food security for all. Food security is a precondition for the full enjoyment of the
right to food.

Throughout history, Indians have prioritized abundant food production, but the distribution of
foodgrains has typically been the responsibility of rulers or the state. British India
experienced famines due to inadequate foodgrain distribution, leading to imbalances in the

1
United Nations. 1975. Report of the World Food Conference, Rome 5-16 November 1974. New York

Page | 1
system. Since gaining independence, India has made significant progress in preventing
famines compared to many other developing countries.

However, millions of Indians still suffer from chronic hunger and malnutrition, with some
regions facing worse conditions than Sub-Saharan Africa, where intermittent famines still
occur. India faced major food crises in 1972-74 and 2006-07/2008-10, responding by
increasing its foodgrain stocks. The Food Corporation of India (FCI) was established to
implement the objectives of the National Food Policy of 1964.Despite progress, India
continues to grapple with food security challenges, including malnutrition and food
distribution issues.

The passage outlines the objectives and stocking norms related to foodgrain management in
India:

LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE RIGHT TO FOOD

INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENT

Before beginning our discussion on India’s specific jurisprudential progression towards

finding and founding a constitutional human right to food, it is important to note that adequate
legal guarantees to the right to food existed prior to the establishment of a right to food in
India. Indeed, the right to food has been enshrined in international legal documents for over
half a century and is a part of the modern international human rights agenda that has both
influenced and been influenced by India. The international human rights law regarding the
right to food relies largely on national action for implementation. That being said, the national
and the international human right to food interact and inform each other. Progress at one level
can be translated into progress at the other, and so it is important to understand the larger
international framework in which the Supreme Court case exists.

The right to food has been part of the international human rights regime since its inception.

Access to food was first declared a right in Article 258 of the Universal Declaration of

Page | 2
Human Rights (UDHR), 1948, and the right was subsequently codified by Article 112 of the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which
encompasses two separate but related norms: the right to adequate food and the right to be
free from hunger. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has further
defined the right to food provided for in the ICESCR in its General Comment 12. Other
international legal instruments that India has ratified and that further articulate the right to

food in Article 273 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Article 12(2)4 of the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. In addition to
these legal obligations, India has signed up to such political declarations as the 1996 Rome
Declaration of the World Food Summit, thereby pledging its political commitment to ensuring
its citizens access to adequate food. Despite declaring that such a right exists, none of these
legal texts is particularly specific in defining what a state party must do in order to ensure
the right to food. Thus it is particularly important for states, such as India, to give shape to
this right through national programmes.

INDIA’S COMMITMENT

The Constitution of India both explicitly and implicitly provides for a right to food, thereby
offering healthy national protection that is likely more accessible to Indian citizens than similar
safeguards provided by international bodies. Explicitly, Article 47, found in the Directive
Principles division of the Constitution, creates a “duty of the State to raise the level of
nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health.” Given the aspirational and
non-justiciable nature of the Directive Principles, however, most of the development of the
2
Article 11 of the ICESCR reads: 1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of
everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including ad equate food, clothing and
housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate
steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international co-
operation based on free consent. 2. The States Parties to the present Covenant, recognizing the
fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger, shall take, individually and through international co -
operation, the measures, including specific programmes, which are needed: (a) To improve methods of
production, conservation and distribution of food by making full use of technical and scientific
knowledge, by disseminating knowledge of the principles of nutrition and by developing or reforming
agrarian systems in such a way as to achieve the most efficient development and utilization of natural
resources; (b) Taking into account the problems of both food-importing and food-exporting countries, to
ensure an equitable distribution of world food supplies in relation to need.
3
Article 27(1) of the CRC recognizes “the right of every child to a standard of living adequate for
the child’s physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development”. The States Parties to the
Convention have the duty to “take appropriate measures” to assist parents in fulfilling their primary
responsibility to implement such right, “particularly with regard to nutrition” (art. 27(3)). Moreover,
article 24(2)(c) of the CRC commits States to combat child malnutrition.
4
Articles 12(2) of the CEDAW, States have to ensure to women “adequate nutrition during pregnancy and
lactation”.

Page | 3
right to food has occurred within the context of Article 21, which includes a right to life and is
located within the enforceable and justiciable Fundamental Rights section of the
Constitution.

Indeed, the Supreme Court has explicitly stated in various cases that the right to life should be
interpreted as a right to “live with human dignity”, which includes the right to food and other
basic necessities.5 Certain directive principles such as right to an adequate means of
livelihood under Article 39, right to work, education and public assistance in cases of
unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement and in other cases of undeserved want
under Article 41, living wages for workers under Article 43, and the principle relating to the
duty of the state to secure social order for the promotion of welfare under Article 38 are
thought to be sufficient to ensure right to food

According to the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, twenty-two
national constitutions explicitly mention a right to food that applies to the entire national
population, while several other Constitutions provide for a right to food through a right to life
with dignity or related social welfare rights6

JUDICIAL COMMITMENT

The right to food is a vital human right that, if denied, renders human life stunted, painful, or
null. A magnificent step was taken by the Supreme Court in expanding the scope of Article
21 when it observed that ‘right to life does not merely mean ‘animal existence’ but living
with ‘human dignity’ which include the right to the basic necessities of life and also the
right to carry on such functions and activities as constitute the bare minimum expression of
the human self.’7 Another broad promulgation of the right to life with dignity is found in

BandhuaMuktiMorcha v. Union of India.8 The Court observed- “to live with human dignity,

5
For instance, in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India AIR 1978 SC 597, the Supreme Court stated: “Right to
life enshrined in Article 21 means something more than animal instinct and includes the right to live with
human dignity, it would include all these aspects which would make life meaningful, complete and
living.” Similarly, in Shantistar Builders v. Narayan KhimalalTotame(1990) 1 SCC 520, the Supreme
Court stated: “The right to life is guaranteed in any civilized society. That would take within its sweep
the right to food…”
6
FAO, Intergovernmental Working Group for the Elaboration of a Set of Voluntary Guidelines to Support
the Progressive Realization of the Right to Adequate Food in the Context of National Food Security,
Information Paper: Recognition of the Right to Food at the National Level, 25-26, IGWG RTFT INF/2 (Feb.
2004), available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/ docrep/fao/meeting/007/j0574e.pdf.
7
Francis Coralie v. Union of Territory, Delhi AIR1981 SC 746.
8
AIR 1984 SC 802.

Page | 4
free from exploitation. It includes protection of health and strength of workers, men and
women, and of the tender age of the children against abuse, opportunities and facilities for
children to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity, educational
facilities, just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief. These are the minimum
conditions which must exist in order to enable a person to live with human dignity. No
government can take any action to deprive a person of the enjoyment of these basic rights.

The Supreme Court in Chameli Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh9 held that the need for a
decent and civilized life includes the right to food, water and decent environment. The
court has observed in this connection: “In any organized society, right to live as a human
being is not ensured by meeting only the animal needs of man. It is secured only when he is
assured of all facilities to develop himself and is freed from restrictions which inhibit his
growth. All human rights are designed to achieve this object. In KishenPattnayak and ors.v.
State of Orrisa10, It was alleged that the people of Kalahandi, Koraput and other districts of
Orissa, there are many people dying there due to hunger. Justice P.N Bhagavathi observed
that ‘No one in this country can be allowed to suffer deprivation and exploitation particularly
when social justice is the watchword of our Constitution’.

The Supreme Court of India has established itself as a champion of food security and
committed itself to the realization of the right to food in India. Through its landmark decision
in the public interest litigation Petition, People’s Union for Civil Liberties(PUCL)v. Union
of India &Others11, explicitly established a constitutional human right to food and determined
a basic nutritional floor for India’s impoverished millions.

PROGRAMMES INITIATED BY CENTRAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS

Various important policy initiatives and programs implemented by the Central Government of
India to address chronic hunger and improve food distribution. Here's a summary of the key
points:

1. Public Distribution System (PDS):

The PDS is a critical component of India's food supply management, consisting of both
private and public distribution channels. It began during World War II and evolved into a

9
AIR 1996 SC1051
10
AIR 1989 AIR 677.
11
Writ Petition(Civil) No.196 of 2001

Page | 5
significant tool for food distribution.12 The PDS is jointly managed by the Central and State
Governments and provides commodities like wheat, rice, sugar, and kerosene through a
network of ration shops (FPSs).

The PDS in India has faced criticism due to various defects and challenges. These include
leakages, corruption, diversion of foodgrains to the black market, inferior quality supplies,
and problems with the identification of beneficiaries. The absence of clear criteria for
classifying families as Below Poverty Line (BPL) or Above Poverty Line (APL) has led to
corruption and exclusion of deserving families13.

To enhance the PDS, various suggestions have been proposed. These include the use of
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), strengthening vigilance squads,
choosing personnel locally, ensuring quality checks, promoting transparency, and increasing
the profit margins for FPS dealers. Automation and computerization of the PDS chain are
also recommended.

In 1997, the TPDS was introduced, emphasizing targeted subsidies for the poor. It required
the identification of Below Poverty Line (BPL) families, and a more transparent and
accountable distribution system. The TPDS aimed to benefit about 6 crore poor families 14.

2. Mid-Day Meal scheme

The Mid-Day Meal scheme in India has a long history, dating back to the pre-independence
era when the British administration and the French administration in Puducherry initiated
similar programs to provide lunchtime meals to disadvantaged children in schools.

The National Programme of Nutritional Support to Primary Education (NP-NSPE) was

launched by the Indian government in 1995 to enhance enrollment, retention, attendance, and
nutrition levels among children. It provided free foodgrains and financial assistance to
states15.

The cost of the Mid Day Meal Scheme is shared between the Central and State Governments,
with special provisions for Special Category States, where the Central Government bears a
12
Arvind Gupta, Public Distribution of foodgrains in India, p. 21 (Centre for Management in Agriculture, Indian
Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, 1977).
13
Utsa Patnaik, The Republic of Hunger and Other Essays, pp 116-121 (Merlin Press, London, 2007).
14
Planning Commission (Government of India), Report of The Expert Group on Estimation of Proportion and
Number of Poor, Chapter 3, pp 22-26 (New Delhi, July 1993).).
15
Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Human Resources Development (Government of
India), National Programme of Mid Day Meal in Schools - Annual Work Plan and Budget 2011-12: Union
Territory of Puducherry (New Delhi, 2012).

Page | 6
higher percentage of the cost. The program was revised several times to improve its
effectiveness, including increasing the nutritional content of meals and providing assistance
for cooking costs.

Two main models for running the scheme are decentralized, where local administrations and
Self-Help Groups (SHGs) are involved in cooking and delivering meals, and centralized,
where external organizations provide cooked meals, often through Public-Private
Partnerships (PPPs). Monitoring mechanisms involve various committees at different levels
of government to review and ensure the proper functioning of the program.

While the Mid-Day Meal scheme has brought many benefits, including increased school
attendance and socialization, it has also faced challenges, such as corruption, meal quality
issues, and instances of foodborne illnesses. Child hunger remains a significant issue in India
despite the program's efforts16.

3. ICDS scheme

The Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) scheme in India was launched in 1975
and is a flagship program aimed at providing early childhood care and development for
children aged 0-6 years. It is a massive outreach program with a substantial budget, jointly
funded by the Central and State Governments.

The ICDS scheme offers six key services: supplementary nutrition, pre-school non-formal
education, nutrition and health education, immunization, health check-ups, and referral
services. The nutritional aspect aims to provide specific calorie and protein requirements to
children and adolescent girls. The scheme has made significant progress in reaching millions
of Indian children and is implemented by approximately 14 lakh Anganwadi workers across
the country. It has positively impacted child development and nutrition, with notable
improvements in mental and social development. 17. The ICDS scheme is a crucial initiative in
India for child development and nutrition, but it faces both successes and challenges in
achieving its goals and improving the well-being of children and mothers18.

4. MGNREGA

16
"Teacher blows whistle on scam: School Authorities Pocket Money In The Name Of Mid-Day Meal Scheme",
The Times of India, Bangalore, December 2, 2006.
17
Monica Jain, "Has the ICDS helped reduce stunting in India?", The Hindu, New Delhi, October 10, 2015.
18
Aarti Dhar, "Infant mortality rate shows decline", The Hindu, New Delhi, January 27, 2011.

Page | 7
The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) is an Indian
government scheme initiated in 2006. Its primary objective is to provide at least 100 days of
wage employment per year to every rural household whose adult members volunteer for
unskilled manual work.

MGNREGA was inspired by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right
to life and personal liberty, and Article 16, which guarantees equality of opportunity in public
employment. The program is implemented at the grassroots level through Gram Panchayats,
emphasizing transparency and accountability19.

The program provides legal entitlement to employment within a 5-kilometer radius of the
applicant's village and guarantees minimum wages for unskilled labor. If work is not
provided within 15 days of application, an unemployment allowance is granted.MGNREGA
has shown several positive impacts, including increased rural wages, empowering women
through reserved jobs, reducing migration, and creating durable community assets such as
roads, ponds, and wells.

However, the program has faced criticism due to issues like leakages, corruption, and
concerns that it might discourage agricultural labor. Various amendments and proposed
changes, including restricting the program to specific areas, have generated debates and
discussions20.

In recent years, the program has come under scrutiny, with efforts to evaluate its effectiveness
and address its shortcomings, all while maintaining its goal of providing employment and
improving the lives of rural households.

5. AAY

The Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) is a government scheme in India aimed at providing
highly subsidized food grains (wheat, rice, and coarse grains) to the "poorest of the poor."
The term "Antyodaya" signifies the upliftment of the weakest sections of society, in line with
Mahatma Gandhi's philosophy of "Sarvodaya through Antyodaya."

The scheme was launched on December 25, 2000, and was initially implemented in
Rajasthan. It was designed to provide 25 kg of food grains per month to identified households

19
9 Ministry of Rural Development (Government of India), National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005
(MGNREGA): Report of the Second Year April 2006-March 2007, p. 2 (New Delhi, 2008).
20
"11 Years of NREGA: Surjit Bhalla on the Failure of the Scheme", The Quint, February 12, 2016.

Page | 8
belonging to the poorest strata of society. The beneficiaries are given distinctive ration cards
(usually light green or yellow) to facilitate easy identification21.

Under the Annapurna scheme, eligible individuals are entitled to receive 10 kg of food grains
per month free of cost. These beneficiaries are typically senior citizens who qualify for old
age pensions under the Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension Scheme (IGNOAPS) but are
not receiving it for various reasons. The scheme restricts the number of beneficiaries to 20%
of the total old age pensioners within each state or union territory. Gram Panchayats are
responsible for identifying and preparing a list of eligible individuals, with a focus on
creating awareness about the program.

In its initial year (2000-01), the Annapurna scheme covered 6.64 lakh individuals out of a
maximum potential beneficiary pool of 13.76 lakh based on IGNOAPS data22.

Overall, the Annapurna scheme is designed to provide essential food security to vulnerable
senior citizens who would otherwise go without support, aligning with the broader objectives
of social welfare and poverty alleviation programs in India.

CONCLUSION

India is home to a huge proportion of people suffering from hunger, malnutrition and food
insecurity in the world today. Nevertheless, there are substantial and ample government
schemes and programmes which involve crores and crores of rupees, they are not able to
achieve the requisite result and the dream to convert India into a country free from hunger
and starvation remains a utopian dream. The reason may be for the same is corruption
flowing through the veins of each and every one of these schemes. The food security act
plays an important role – that of providing subsidized food grains to approximately two thirds
of India’s population of 1,428,627,663 people – but ensuring the right to food requires
action on multiple fronts.

The right to food is not just a moral imperative but a legally binding human right. Ensuring
food security and addressing the root causes of hunger and malnutrition should be a priority
for governments and the international community. By recognizing and upholding this right,
we can work towards a world where everyone has access to adequate and nutritious food.

21
Planning Commission (Government of India), Report of the Expert Group to Review the Methodology for
Measurement of Poverty, pp 51-52 (New Delhi, June 2014).
22
Ministry of Finance (Government of India), Speech of Shri Yashwant Sinha, Minister of Finance, Paragraph
17 (New Delhi, February 27, 1999).

Page | 9
Page | 10