MacroScan (Printable Version)

Quietly and effectively, a nationwide public campaign has built up over the past couple of years to pressure the state to address nutritional deficiencies among many groups of Indian citizens. There is much to yet achieve, but using a number of techniques this loosely knit and decentralised "Right to Food" campaign has already forced some changes on the Central and State Governments. What is unusual is that this has been entirely a citizens' effort, with mainstream political parties by and large keeping away from a campaign which, if it maintains its momentum, is likely to have a substantial impact on people's lives. The political classes may have their eyes focussed on the business and pravasi conclaves, but unbeknownst to them and without their involvement something more important is happening in the public arena. The Right to Food campaign has been the one serious attempt to deal with the obscene phenomenon of overflowing godowns of food co-existing with chronic under-nutrition in the country. In the late 1990s, more than half of Indian women suffered from anaemia, more than 45 per cent of children were malnourished and more than a third of newborn children suffered from low birth weight. Yet, the huge public food stocks — which reached a peak of 65 million tonnes in late 2001 and now stand at 55 million tonnes — have not been used by the state for a frontal attack on under-nutrition in the country. It is now being pushed by this campaign to react.

A series of events since 2001 has catalysed and given momentum to the "Right to Food" campaign. In 2001, local groups in Rajasthan began putting pressure on the State Government to use the Central stocks to deal with the effects of the drought the previous year. In May 2001, the People's Union for Civil Liberties filed what could turn out to be a landmark public interest petition in the Supreme Court, drawing attention to the accumulation of stocks. In April 2002, a nationwide day of events was organised to demand implementation of the mid-day meal scheme. In 2002, individual groups highlighted the occurrence of starvation deaths in Orissa, Rajasthan and Jharkhand. These groups have also organised "public hearings" to put pressure on local governments to respond to starvation deaths, corruption in the public distribution system (PDS) and the failure to implement welfare schemes. This culminated earlier this month in a `national' hearing in Delhi where citizens and representatives from non-governmental organisations in 12 States gathered to hear "voices of hunger" and draw up an agenda to take public action further. The Right to Food campaign has been at least partly responsible for getting the Centre to lower PDS prices in late 2001 and has been exerting pressure to expand the Antyodaya Anna Yojana, the programme which supplies subsidised grain to the destitute and which by all accounts has been, even for a government programme, reasonably successful in most parts of the country. In the campaign are a number of citizens' groups, many of whom are involved in other areas of work, who share a common interest in making the state fulfil its constitutional duties.

One leg of the Right to Food campaign is in the new tradition of drawing attention to the Constitution to make the Central and State Governments accountable for their (lack of) action. There was the right to information campaign, initially organised by the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan of Rajasthan in the late 1990s, which resulted in legislative action at the State and Central Government levels to make the administration more transparent. Then there was the right to education campaign, which led to the amendment to the Constitution to make elementary education a fundamental right. And now we have the food campaign. While the PUCL petition was based on a reading of Article 21 (the right to life), more recently the activists have focussed attention on the directive principle contained in Article 47: "The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of the public health among its primary duties..."

Since 2001 the Supreme Court has issued a number of interim orders that have prodded the Central and State Governments into action. The orders have directed the State Governments to complete identification of the beneficiaries of welfare programmes, improve implementation of food schemes such as the AAY and employment programmes such as the Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana and led to the appointment of commissioners to monitor progress in executing the court's rulings. The most important order came in November 2001 when the court directed the State Government to implement a cooked mid-day meal scheme for primary school children. This went further than the existing Central Government scheme (on paper in many States) in which only grain was supplied to the States. The follow-up by the State Governments has not been entirely satisfactory. But there has been progress. Rajasthan has complied with the court order, Karnataka and Chhattisgarh have introduced the programme in some parts of the State and more recently Andhra Pradesh has begun a cooked mid-day meal programme for children. In the meanwhile, the campaign continues to maintain pressure on the State Governments to improve implementation.

After achieving a measure of success in focussing judicial, executive and public attention on the food consumption issue, the campaign has, after the recent public hearing in Delhi, drawn up a five-point "call for action": social security for the destitute as a matter of right, revamping of the PDS, recognition of the right to work, expansion of financial allocations for food programmes and implementation of the Supreme Court's directions. As the Right to Food campaign builds up momentum, it will inevitably have to deal with three sets of issues, two of which have already cropped up in the five-point call for action. The first is that is it possible to operationalise the right to food — even `only' for the destitute — without explicit recognition of the right to work? If the right to work too moves centre stage then the question becomes one of state funding and organisation of employment guarantee programmes, to begin with for unskilled labour. It then will become imperative to pressure the state to substantially fund existing and new employment programmes. This is not impossible, but it does widen the campaign. The second and equally important issue is that the food mountain of 55 million tonnes does permit expansion of the AAY and also channel grain to expanded work programmes.

A permanent and substantial expansion of food and employment programmes will, however, require the state to commit financial resources, not to mention increase procurement to keep the programmes going once the present food mountain is run down. This too is doable, if we accept, as we should, that meeting the right to food should be a top priority for the country. The third issue is how far this public action programme can go without the support of the parliamentary political parties. Expanding the agenda and increasing its effectiveness will require involvement of the political organisations. Unfortunately, the political class has other agendas to pursue. Yet, considering the way the Right to Food campaign has grown in the past couple of years and considering the success it has had, it could turn into a mass movement that is able to force state and society to finally tackle the problem of hunger in India.



Themes > Current Issues	21.01.2003


Right to Food

C. Rammanohar Reddy

Quietly and effectively, a nationwide public campaign has built up over the past couple of years to pressure the state to address nutritional deficiencies among many groups of Indian citizens. There is much to yet achieve, but using a number of techniques this loosely knit and decentralised "Right to Food" campaign has already forced some changes on the Central and State Governments. What is unusual is that this has been entirely a citizens' effort, with mainstream political parties by and large keeping away from a campaign which, if it maintains its momentum, is likely to have a substantial impact on people's lives. The political classes may have their eyes focussed on the business and pravasi conclaves, but unbeknownst to them and without their involvement something more important is happening in the public arena. The Right to Food campaign has been the one serious attempt to deal with the obscene phenomenon of overflowing godowns of food co-existing with chronic under-nutrition in the country. In the late 1990s, more than half of Indian women suffered from anaemia, more than 45 per cent of children were malnourished and more than a third of newborn children suffered from low birth weight. Yet, the huge public food stocks — which reached a peak of 65 million tonnes in late 2001 and now stand at 55 million tonnes — have not been used by the state for a frontal attack on under-nutrition in the country. It is now being pushed by this campaign to react. A series of events since 2001 has catalysed and given momentum to the "Right to Food" campaign. In 2001, local groups in Rajasthan began putting pressure on the State Government to use the Central stocks to deal with the effects of the drought the previous year. In May 2001, the People's Union for Civil Liberties filed what could turn out to be a landmark public interest petition in the Supreme Court, drawing attention to the accumulation of stocks. In April 2002, a nationwide day of events was organised to demand implementation of the mid-day meal scheme. In 2002, individual groups highlighted the occurrence of starvation deaths in Orissa, Rajasthan and Jharkhand. These groups have also organised "public hearings" to put pressure on local governments to respond to starvation deaths, corruption in the public distribution system (PDS) and the failure to implement welfare schemes. This culminated earlier this month in a `national' hearing in Delhi where citizens and representatives from non-governmental organisations in 12 States gathered to hear "voices of hunger" and draw up an agenda to take public action further. The Right to Food campaign has been at least partly responsible for getting the Centre to lower PDS prices in late 2001 and has been exerting pressure to expand the Antyodaya Anna Yojana, the programme which supplies subsidised grain to the destitute and which by all accounts has been, even for a government programme, reasonably successful in most parts of the country. In the campaign are a number of citizens' groups, many of whom are involved in other areas of work, who share a common interest in making the state fulfil its constitutional duties. One leg of the Right to Food campaign is in the new tradition of drawing attention to the Constitution to make the Central and State Governments accountable for their (lack of) action. There was the right to information campaign, initially organised by the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan of Rajasthan in the late 1990s, which resulted in legislative action at the State and Central Government levels to make the administration more transparent. Then there was the right to education campaign, which led to the amendment to the Constitution to make elementary education a fundamental right. And now we have the food campaign. While the PUCL petition was based on a reading of Article 21 (the right to life), more recently the activists have focussed attention on the directive principle contained in Article 47: "The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of the public health among its primary duties..." Since 2001 the Supreme Court has issued a number of interim orders that have prodded the Central and State Governments into action. The orders have directed the State Governments to complete identification of the beneficiaries of welfare programmes, improve implementation of food schemes such as the AAY and employment programmes such as the Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana and led to the appointment of commissioners to monitor progress in executing the court's rulings. The most important order came in November 2001 when the court directed the State Government to implement a cooked mid-day meal scheme for primary school children. This went further than the existing Central Government scheme (on paper in many States) in which only grain was supplied to the States. The follow-up by the State Governments has not been entirely satisfactory. But there has been progress. Rajasthan has complied with the court order, Karnataka and Chhattisgarh have introduced the programme in some parts of the State and more recently Andhra Pradesh has begun a cooked mid-day meal programme for children. In the meanwhile, the campaign continues to maintain pressure on the State Governments to improve implementation. After achieving a measure of success in focussing judicial, executive and public attention on the food consumption issue, the campaign has, after the recent public hearing in Delhi, drawn up a five-point "call for action": social security for the destitute as a matter of right, revamping of the PDS, recognition of the right to work, expansion of financial allocations for food programmes and implementation of the Supreme Court's directions. As the Right to Food campaign builds up momentum, it will inevitably have to deal with three sets of issues, two of which have already cropped up in the five-point call for action. The first is that is it possible to operationalise the right to food — even `only' for the destitute — without explicit recognition of the right to work? If the right to work too moves centre stage then the question becomes one of state funding and organisation of employment guarantee programmes, to begin with for unskilled labour. It then will become imperative to pressure the state to substantially fund existing and new employment programmes. This is not impossible, but it does widen the campaign. The second and equally important issue is that the food mountain of 55 million tonnes does permit expansion of the AAY and also channel grain to expanded work programmes. A permanent and substantial expansion of food and employment programmes will, however, require the state to commit financial resources, not to mention increase procurement to keep the programmes going once the present food mountain is run down. This too is doable, if we accept, as we should, that meeting the right to food should be a top priority for the country. The third issue is how far this public action programme can go without the support of the parliamentary political parties. Expanding the agenda and increasing its effectiveness will require involvement of the political organisations. Unfortunately, the political class has other agendas to pursue. Yet, considering the way the Right to Food campaign has grown in the past couple of years and considering the success it has had, it could turn into a mass movement that is able to force state and society to finally tackle the problem of hunger in India.



© MACROSCAN 2003