A PLATFORM TO UNIFY STRUGGLES FOR ALL HUMAN RIGHTS

• Anti-discrimination laws at national level

  Read more

  The Brazilian Constitution prohibits all forms of discrimination (age, race, color, national origin, disability, religion, sex, marital status, political affiliation, pregnancy, citizenship, etc.) by federal and state governments and the country’s population.

  Brazilian Constitution:

  Article 3: The fundamental objectives of the Federation Republic of Brazil are: I. to build a free, just and solidarity society; II. to guarantee national development; III. to eradicate poverty and marginal living conditions and to reduce social and regional inequalities; IV. to promote the well being of all, without prejudice as to origin, race, sex, color, age, and any other forms of discrimination.

  Article 5: All persons are equal before the law, without any distinction whatsoever, and Brazilians and foreigners resident in Brazil are assured of inviolability of the right of life, liberty, equality, security, and property.

  Brazilian Labor Law:

  Article 1: It is prohibited the adoption of discriminatory practices and for the purpose of limiting access to the employment relationship, or its maintenance by reason of sex, origin, race, color, marital status, family status or age, except in this case the chances of child protection provided for in paragraph XXXIII art. 7 of the Federal Constitution.

  Brazilian Child and Adolescent Law:

  Article 5: No child or adolescent will be subject to any form of neglect, discrimination, exploitation, violence, cruelty and oppression,  be punished as any violation of law, by act or omission, their fundamental rights.

  Brazilian Ageing Law:

  Article 4: The No subject shall be subjected to any kind of negligence, discrimination, violence, cruelty, or oppression, and any violation of their rights by action or omission, shall be punished as provided by law.

  *Main group missing protection—LGTB community (discrimination based on sexual orientation)

  -The federal legislation PLC (Bill) 122/06 proposes to add sexual orientation to the categories to which anti-discrimination laws in Brazil apply

  -Lack of information surrounding fate of this bill

  -General ambiguity in protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation

• Stunting

  
  Stunting prevalence in children under 5 Read more
  7%
• Political Participation

  
  Rating on consensus building and civil society participation Read more
  8.2/10
• To what extent are rural communities shrinking

  
  % of population living in rural areas Read more

  1960: 54%

  2015: 14%
• Child marriage

  
  Rates of child marriage Read more

  11% by aged 15;

  36% by age 18

  (PNDS 2006)

• Are there Intellectual Property Rights on seeds?

  Read more

  Law on IPRS was issued in 1997, Lei nº 9.456, de 25 de abril de 1997, regulamentada pelo Decreto nº 2.366, de 5 de novembro de 1997 see:  http://www.agencia.cnptia.embrapa.br/gestor/feijao/arvore/CONTAG01_118_131120039558.html

  -Farmers may keep, exchange, or give as a gift their own local seeds (but may not sell uncertified seeds)

  -Farmers not required to use only certified/registered/catalogued seeds

  -National Policy for Agroecology and Organic Production adopted in 2012, explicitly recognizing the role of peasants’ own “creole” seeds

  -2003 National Program for Food Acquisition has allowed farmers and peasant organizations to develop their own seed systems

   Law on IPRS was issued in 1997, Lei nº 9.456, de 25 de abril de 1997, regulamentada pelo Decreto nº 2.366, de 5 de novembro de 1997 see:  http://www.agencia.cnptia.embrapa.br/gestor/feijao/arvore/CONTAG01_118_131120039558.html

  -Farmers may keep, exchange, or give as a gift their own local seeds (but may not sell uncertified seeds)

  -Farmers not required to use only certified/registered/catalogued seeds

  -National Policy for Agroecology and Organic Production adopted in 2012, explicitly recognizing the role of peasants’ own “creole” seeds

  -2003 National Program for Food Acquisition has allowed farmers and peasant organizations to develop their own seed systems
• Are there Intellectual Property Rights on seeds?

  Read more

  Law on IPRS was issued in 1997, Lei nº 9.456, de 25 de abril de 1997, regulamentada pelo Decreto nº 2.366, de 5 de novembro de 1997 see:  http://www.agencia.cnptia.embrapa.br/gestor/feijao/arvore/CONTAG01_118_131120039558.html

  -Farmers may keep, exchange, or give as a gift their own local seeds (but may not sell uncertified seeds)

  -Farmers not required to use only certified/registered/catalogued seeds

  -National Policy for Agroecology and Organic Production adopted in 2012, explicitly recognizing the role of peasants’ own “creole” seeds

  -2003 National Program for Food Acquisition has allowed farmers and peasant organizations to develop their own seed systems

   Law on IPRS was issued in 1997, Lei nº 9.456, de 25 de abril de 1997, regulamentada pelo Decreto nº 2.366, de 5 de novembro de 1997 see:  http://www.agencia.cnptia.embrapa.br/gestor/feijao/arvore/CONTAG01_118_131120039558.html

  -Farmers may keep, exchange, or give as a gift their own local seeds (but may not sell uncertified seeds)

  -Farmers not required to use only certified/registered/catalogued seeds

  -National Policy for Agroecology and Organic Production adopted in 2012, explicitly recognizing the role of peasants’ own “creole” seeds

  -2003 National Program for Food Acquisition has allowed farmers and peasant organizations to develop their own seed systems
• Laws protecting industrial seeds

  Read more

  -Upon (suspected) infringement, seeds can be seized, farmed can be fined or sent to jail, and homes/businesses can be searched
• Pesticide use by volume and by expenditure

  Read more

  Fungicides and Bactericides: 44,310 tonnes; slight increase

  Herbicides: 239,657 tonnes; significant increase over last decade and a half (amount in 1999 was less than half)

  Insecticides: 70,424 tonnes; slight increase

  (2013)

  Note:

  In 2013/2014 Brazil became the largest consumer of agrochemicals in the world, with 1 billion liters, i.e., 5 liters per inhabitant. See more in; http://cartamaior.com.br/?/Editoria/Meio-Ambiente/Agrotoxicos-proibidos-em-varios-paises-sao-usados-no-Brasil/3/34320

Participation is one of the fundamental human rights principles, requiring that everyone has the right to participate in making decisions that affect them. In order to ensure that those most affected by violations to the right to food and nutrition participate in political processes, it is essential to have the legal and policy infrastructure within national frameworks, as well as the participatory spaces that give meaningful space for participation.

• Legal Recognition of the Right to Food and Nutrition

  
  Is Right to Food recognized in the legal system Read more
  • Ratification of ICESCR – 1992
  • LOSAN – SISAN (2006)- Comprehensive federal framework law on food and nutrition security (LOSAN) establishes the National Food and Nutritional Security System, with the objective of meeting State obligations toward realizing the human right to adequate food and nutrition for all. 2006. (copy oflaw in English annex)
  • CAISAN – Decree 6272 creates Food and Nutrition Security Interministerial Commission 2007

  RTFN is explicitly protected in the Brazilian Constitution through Constitutional amendment EC 64 2010, which updated Article 6 to read:

  “Education, health, food, work, housing, leisure, security, social security, protection of motherhood and childhood, and assistance to the destitute are social rights, as set forth by this Constitution. (CA No. 26, 2000; CA No. 64, 2010).”

  Other mentions include:

  Article 7: “The following are rights of urban and rural workers, among others that aim to improve their social conditions: (CA No. 20, 1998; CA No. 28, 2000; CA No. 53, 2006).
  IV

  –Nationally unified minimum monthly wage, established by law, capable of satisfying their basic living needs and those of their families with housing, food, education, health, leisure, clothing, hygiene, transportation, and social security, with periodical adjustments to maintain its purchasing power, it being forbidden to use it as an index for any purpose;”

  Article 227: “It is the duty of the family, the society and the State to ensure children and adolescents, with absolute priority, the right to life, health, nourishment (…).”

  Implicit protection of the right to adequate food:

  Article 208: “The duty of the State towards education shall be fulfilled by ensuring the following: (CA No. 14, 1996; CA No. 59, 2009)
  VII – assistance to students in all grades of basic education, by means of supplementary programmes providing school materials, transportation, food and health care.”

  Degree to which persons perceive the action a violation of the RtFN: Number of cases of violations of the right to food (and water) documented.

  • The population, in general, is aware of the existence of the human right to food. However, the population at large is not adequately informed about what effectively the RTAFN entails, and what steps individual, groups and communities can take in case they identify that their RTAFN is not being fulfilled.
  • A significant part of civil society organizations and social movements is well aware of this right and a smaller proportion is also informed what steps must be taken to claim the RTFAN at local and national level. An even smaller number of CSOs, but still significant, is aware of regional and international recourse mechanisms.
  • Federal and state public officials are in general aware of the RTAFN but not necessarily informed of the respective state obligations, and the possible obligations under his/her governance.
  • Despite the increased recognition by the Brazilian State of its obligation in face of human rights, there isn’t yet a clear institutional culture of human rights accountability.
  • The national food and nutritional security plan, approved in 2011, included specific activities aimed at the institution and strengthening of recourse mechanisms.

  Since 2000, dozens of cases alleging violations of the RTAFN were brought to the attention of different human rights recourse mechanisms at national, regional and international level.

  Courts: Reparation and redress of right to adequate food and water alleged violation cases.

  • In Brazil, there are several recourse mechanisms which mandate includes the analysis of human right to adequate food violation allegations, but without a clear mandate to repair and redress when needed
    • National Rapporteurship on the Rights to food, land and territory, linked to the Brazilian Platform for Economic,, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights.
    • State PublicMinistry Prosecutors
    • Federal Public Ministry Prosecutors
    • National Commission for the Monitoring of Right to Adequate Food Violations – linked to the National Human Rights Council.
  • Several cases were brought to the attention of public officials through the joint action of the National Rapporteurship and the State and Federal Public Ministries. Some conflicts and situations were object of negotiations and advocacy and there were some advances. But no effective reparation of documented violations took place, only quasi judicial conflict resolution.
  • One case was taken to court , through a Public Civil Action developed by the State Public Ministry of Alagoas. The case dealt with the proposal of the municipality to evict a set of communities of fisherfolkfrom the margins of a lagoon, in downtown Maceio, capital of the State of Alagoas/Brazil, to establish a urbanization/tourist site. The PCA demanded that the municipality should remove the communities to housing complexes which should have all the basic public services (water and sanitation, school, day care center, transportation and the fisher folk should be removed to an area close to a lagoon. The case was won in court and an appeal was also defeated. The initiative came to a stand still due to serious issues in the joint implementation by the three levels of government.(municipal, state, federal) see more in: . ftp://ftp.fao.org/upload/eims_object/Photo_library/ACP%20SURURU%20DEFINITIVA.pdf
• National Food Security Policy

  
  Is there a national food security policy with implementation/action? Read more

  YES

  Primary challenge in Brazil is access to food, not production.

  Households generally have too little income to buy adequate food

  Agricultural production concentrated in southern part of country, food insecurity greatest in north

  Small-scale, family-owned farms play an important role in food production in the country

  Lots of momentum in 1990s

  -1993, President Itamar Franco declares combatting hunger a primary priority for the government; took steps for the implementation of a National Food Security Policy

  -Drawing up of nation-wide hunger map

  -Creation of the National Food and Nutritional Security Council (CONSEA)

  -1994, first National Congress on Food Security held

  Post-1995, fight against hunger incorporated into fight against poverty (Comunidade Solidária strategy); continued but lost attention from govt

  -1998, establishment of Brazilian Forum on Food and Nutritional Security (remains important actor in Brazilian food security today)

  -1999, National Policy on Food and Nutrition approved by Ministry of Health

  -2003, President Lula assumes power, in inaugural speech declares aim for all Brazilians to have 3 meals a day by the end of him mandate, and establishes Zero Hunger (Fome Zero) program, Brazil’s national strategy on food and nutritional security

  -2004, creation of Ministério do Desenvolvimento Social e Agrário (MDSA); coordinates and executes Fome Zero program

   as well as other social welfare intitiatives

  Fome Zero:

  -Consists of 20+ initiatives in four axes of intervention

  Food access: income provided through Bolsa Família (world’s largest conditional cash transfer program); food programs in schools and for at-risk

  populations

  Strengthening of family agriculture: financial help; insurance

  Income generation: microcredit etc

  Articulation, Mobilization, and Social Control: reference centers; social committees

  Budget:

  Bolsa Família has the largest budget within Fome Zero, around 8 billion USD

  PNSAN -- Decree 7272 (2010) established the obligation to enact National Food and Nutritional Security Policy, and a Plan, in line with LOSAN and the constitution. From 2003-2010, the Food and Nutrition Security activities and programs were discussed and coordinated with the support of CONSEA

  National Food and Nutritional Security Program (adopted 2010):

  Right to food is explicitly mentioned as overall objective

  Aims to identify the factors that influence food and nutritional security

  Work across sectors, linking programs that affect this area

  Promotion of sustainable agro-ecological food production and distribution systems

  Respect for *food sovereignty

   

  The first PLANSAN (National Plan) was issued in 2011. See evaluation of achievements of 2012-2015 plan in: http://www4.planalto.gov.br/consea/publicacoes/balanco-plansan

  Results of food security policies thus far: Significant reduction in poverty rates by 2010

  Challenges that remain include:

  Further embedding the right to food and nutrition in international, national, and federal policy frameworks

  Ensuring better inclusion of marginalized groups

  Combating and mitigating the effects of climate change

  Current political instability in country…effect this will have on Fome Zero and other social welfare programs remains yet to be seen
• Existence of multiactor governing or decision making bodies for food policy at national, subnational and/or local level with diverse participation of civil society organizations

  Read more

  National level:

  • Fome Zero
  • (National Food and Nutritional Security Council) was created in 1992, and functioned until 1994. It was reinstated in 2003, and institutionalized in 2007.

  Subnational level:

  • State CONSEAs – All 26 states and the Federal District (DF) have state CONSEAs
  • There are close to 100 municipal CONSEAs

  Some legislative initiatives at district/municipal/city level; Ex: city of Belo Horizonte (http://www.futurepolicy.org/food-and-water/belo-horizontes-food-security...)

  For more information read ABRANDH, OXFAM, Brazil´s experience of building a Food and Nutrition Security System. Brasília, 2012. in: https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/rr-brazil-experience-food-nutrition-security-190214-en.pdf

  National level:

  • Fome Zero
  • (National Food and Nutritional Security Council) was created in 1992, and functioned until 1994. It was reinstated in 2003, and institutionalized in 2007.

  Subnational level:

  • State CONSEAs – All 26 states and the Federal District (DF) have state CONSEAs
  • There are close to 100 municipal CONSEAs

  Some legislative initiatives at district/municipal/city level; Ex: city of Belo Horizonte (http://www.futurepolicy.org/food-and-water/belo-horizontes-food-security...)

  For more information read ABRANDH, OXFAM, Brazil´s experience of building a Food and Nutrition Security System. Brasília, 2012. in: https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/rr-brazil-experience-food-nutrition-security-190214-en.pdf
• Existence of multiactor governing or decision making bodies for food policy at national, subnational and/or local level with diverse participation of civil society organizations

  Read more

  National level:

  • Fome Zero
  • (National Food and Nutritional Security Council) was created in 1992, and functioned until 1994. It was reinstated in 2003, and institutionalized in 2007.

  Subnational level:

  • State CONSEAs – All 26 states and the Federal District (DF) have state CONSEAs
  • There are close to 100 municipal CONSEAs

  Some legislative initiatives at district/municipal/city level; Ex: city of Belo Horizonte (http://www.futurepolicy.org/food-and-water/belo-horizontes-food-security...)

  For more information read ABRANDH, OXFAM, Brazil´s experience of building a Food and Nutrition Security System. Brasília, 2012. in: https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/rr-brazil-experience-food-nutrition-security-190214-en.pdf

  National level:

  • Fome Zero
  • (National Food and Nutritional Security Council) was created in 1992, and functioned until 1994. It was reinstated in 2003, and institutionalized in 2007.

  Subnational level:

  • State CONSEAs – All 26 states and the Federal District (DF) have state CONSEAs
  • There are close to 100 municipal CONSEAs

  Some legislative initiatives at district/municipal/city level; Ex: city of Belo Horizonte (http://www.futurepolicy.org/food-and-water/belo-horizontes-food-security...)

  For more information read ABRANDH, OXFAM, Brazil´s experience of building a Food and Nutrition Security System. Brasília, 2012. in: https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/rr-brazil-experience-food-nutrition-security-190214-en.pdf
• Degree to which persons perceive the action a violation of the RtFN

  
  Number of cases of violations of the right to food (and water) documented Read more
  • The population, in general, is aware of the existence of the human right to food. However, the population at large is not adequately informed about what effectively the RTAFN entails, and what steps individual, groups and communities can take in case they identify that their RTAFN is not being fulfilled.
  • A significant part of civil society organizations and social movements is well aware of this right and a smaller proportion is also informed what steps must be taken to claim the RTFAN at local and national level. An even smaller number of CSOs, but still significant, is aware of regional and international recourse mechanisms.
  • Federal and state public officials are in general aware of the RTAFN but not necessarily informed of the respective state obligations, and the possible obligations under his/her governance.
  • Despite the increased recognition by the Brazilian State of its obligation in face of human rights, there isn’t yet a clear institutional culture of human rights accountability.
  • The national food and nutritional security plan, approved in 2011, included specific activities aimed at the institution and strengthening of recourse mechanisms.

  Since 2000, dozens of cases alleging violations of the RTAFN were brought to the attention of different human rights recourse mechanisms at national, regional and international level. 
• Courts

  
  Reparation and redress of right to adequate food and water alleged violation cases Read more
  • In Brazil, there are several recourse mechanisms which mandate includes the analysis of human right to adequate food violation allegations, but without a clear mandate to repair and redress when needed
    • National Rapporteurship on the Rights to food, land and territory, linked to the Brazilian Platform for Economic,, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights.
    • State PublicMinistry Prosecutors
    • Federal Public Ministry Prosecutors
    • National Commission for the Monitoring of Right to Adequate Food Violations – linked to the National Human Rights Council.
  • Several cases were brought to the attention of public officials through the joint action of the National Rapporteurship and the State and Federal Public Ministries. Some conflicts and situations were object of negotiations and advocacy and there were some advances. But no effective reparation of documented violations took place, only quasi judicial conflict resolution.
  • One case was taken to court , through a Public Civil Action developed by the State Public Ministry of Alagoas. The case dealt with the proposal of the municipality to evict a set of communities of fisherfolkfrom the margins of a lagoon, in downtown Maceio, capital of the State of Alagoas/Brazil, to establish a urbanization/tourist site. The PCA demanded that the municipality should remove the communities to housing complexes which should have all the basic public services (water and sanitation, school, day care center, transportation and the fisher folk should be removed to an area close to a lagoon. The case was won in court and an appeal was also defeated. The initiative came to a stand still due to serious issues in the joint implementation by the three levels of government.(municipal, state, federal) see more in: . ftp://ftp.fao.org/upload/eims_object/Photo_library/ACP%20SURURU%20DEFINITIVA.pdf