[Reader-list] RTF (Right to Food) Articles - 5

[Rakesh Iyer]

 ------------------------------
 [image: Frontline]  *Volume 21 - Issue 14, Jul. 03 - 16, 2004*
India's National Magazine
from the publishers of THE HINDU

Home <http://www.flonnet.com/index.htm> *•*
Contents<http://hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2114/index.htm>

 <http://hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2114/index.htm>
------------------------------


  [image: Printer Friendly
Page]<http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/thscrip/print.pl?file=20040716006012500.htm&date=fl2114/&prd=fline&>
[image:
Send this Article to a
Friend]<http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/thscrip/pgemail.pl?date=fl2114/&prd=fline&>

*EVENTS*

* An unconventional convention *

JEAN DREZE

* A convention in Bhopal offers an opportunity to share the experiences of
the struggle for the right to food and work, and to explore possibilities of
further action. *



* At a rally on June 13, the concluding day of the convention. The placard
reads: "Freedom from Hunger." *

 THIS is a preliminary, informal and somewhat personal account of a recent
convention on the right to food and work, held in Bhopal on June 11-13,
2004. It is preliminary and informal because the proceedings are not
available at the time of writing. It is somewhat personal because, as a
member of the "programme committee", my experience of the convention is
bound to be quite subjective. Making a virtue out of necessity, I shall try
to share, as openly as possible, my perception of the achievements and
limitations of this convention.

The convention was facilitated by the support group of the "right to food
campaign", in collaboration with a dozen like-minded networks.1 The decision
to call the convention was taken at a meeting held in Mumbai in January
2004, on the sidelines of the World Social Forum and Mumbai Resistance. A
common need was felt, at that time, for an opportunity to share the
experiences of the struggle for the right to food and work, and to explore
possibilities of further action.

As it turned out, the convention was timely, coming as it did in the wake of
the 2004 parliamentary elections. With the dramatic rout of the National
Democratic Alliance (NDA) government, deeply hostile to democratic rights
and responsible for gross violations of the right to food (such as the
accumulation of 70 million tonnes of grain in public warehouses at a time of
widespread hunger), the air felt cleaner and there was a new sense of
possibility. It would be naive to expect sweeping changes in social policy
from the new government since the real masters (the corporate sector and
other privileged groups) are more or less the same. Nevertheless, there are
new opportunities at this time that deserve to be pursued, such as the
government's interest in an "Employment Guarantee Act" (EGA), expressed (in
a limited form) in the Common Minimum Programme (CMP).

Initially perceived as a daunting challenge, the organisation of the
convention turned out to be a reasonably smooth affair. Two preparatory
meetings were held in Delhi (on April 11 and May 16, 2004) to forge a
consensus on the basic parameters of the convention. Two committees (a
"programme committee" and a "logistics committee") were formed at the first
meeting, which went about their tasks from then on. The programme committee
invited different persons to coordinate parallel workshops on each of the 12
main themes identified at the preparatory meetings. In Bhopal, a local
organising committee (initially convened by the Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti)
took charge of the logistics. After the nuts and bolts were in place, things
unfolded in a fairly orderly fashion. And in spite of the odd skirmish,
inevitable in this kind of work, the whole operation was remarkably free of
acrimony. This I attribute largely to the shared commitment that united all
the participants, in spite of their differences.

 A.M. FARUQUI

* Artists performing the Hindi play 'Khazan', based on the theme of right to
information, during the convention. *

 Having said this, there was much scope for better preparation. The
convention was held at relatively short notice (the date was fixed on April
11, just three months in advance of the event), and time was short on all
fronts. Further, despite the pressure of time, many of the participating
organisations did not swing into action until late May or even early June.
In activist circles, there is a funny habit of doing everything in crisis
mode at the last minute. Invitations for a demonstration or meeting are
typically circulated a few days before the event, if not the day after.
Prior information is scarce and advance preparations are kept to the
minimum. To some extent, the convention on the right to food and work fell
into this trap, despite individual efforts to get things moving early on.
For instance, while early announcements were circulated by e-mail, the
written invitation in Hindi was despatched as late as the third week of May.
One unfortunate consequence of this delay is that many grassroots
organisations outside the e-mail circuit were informed at the last minute,
if at all. As a result, these organisations were somewhat under-represented
at the convention.

The Bhopal convention was held in Gandhi Bhavan, a fine venue with all the
basic facilities: a large hall with a good sound system, plenty of meeting
rooms, breezy rooftops, open spaces with natural shade, a typing centre, and
more. The managers were good enough to make the premises available for a
song. About 500 participants turned up from far and wide, and most of them
stayed at Gandhi Bhavan itself. Staying together for three days (stacked
like sardines at night, all over the halls and rooftops) was a great
experience. The only drawback was an acute shortage of bathrooms, forcing
some participants to wake up in the middle of the night for a quick bath, or
to settle for a dip in Bhopal's magnificent lake, just down the road.
Fortunately we enjoyed blissfully cool weather (if such a thing is possible
in the middle of June) throughout the convention.

RIGHTLY or wrongly, the convention started on a relatively high-profile
note, with an opening plenary starring Nusrat Bano Ruhi (local organising
committee), Kavita Srivastava (PUCL), Colin Gonsalvez (HRLN), Paul Divakar
(NCDHR), Brinda Karat (AIDWA), M.P. Parameswaran (BGVS), Aruna Roy (MKSS)
and Kuar Bhai of Jagrit Adivasi Dalit Sangathan. The speakers' brief was
mainly to introduce the thematic workshops. For instance, Colin Gonsalvez
spoke on the legal aspects of the right to food, Paul Divakar on Dalit
perspectives as well as land rights, and Aruna Roy on the connections
between the right to food, the right to work and the right to information.
It is impossible to summarise the speeches in a few lines, especially Brinda
Karat's masala-packed appeal to link the campaign with the larger struggle
against sensex-driven economic policies. Beyond the details, what I retain
from them is a strong sense of the interlinked nature of different aspects
of the right to food, and of the willingness of activists from diverse
backgrounds to join forces on this issue, in spite of their differences on
specific points.

Dalit activists and organisations were quite well represented and their
active participation greatly enriched the whole event. Indeed, Dalit
perspectives often differ from other activist perspectives on crucial
issues, and I believe that there is a need for much greater sensitivity to
Dalit voices in India's social movements. In this case, Dalit activists
helped to put land rights issues on the agenda of the right to food
campaign. Also, there was an interesting note of dissent from NACDOR on the
question of "universalisation" of food entitlements (initially with
reference to the public distribution system).

The concern, as I understand it, is that universalisation is sometimes a
threat to the special entitlements of Dalits and other marginalised groups.
Personally, I believe that this concern does not undermine the case for
universalisation, since universalisation does not mean uniformity (that is,
universal coverage can be combined with special facilities for disadvantaged
groups). However, this note of dissent was quite helpful in drawing
attention to the need for a deeper and more critical understanding of the
case for universalisation of basic entitlements.

The programme of the convention was built around 12 thematic workshops, held
in three sessions of four parallel workshops (with cultural and other
activities in between). The themes were: (1) the right to work and
livelihood; (2) the public distribution system; (3) agriculture and trade;
(4) land rights and food sovereignty; (5) children's right to food; (6)
Dalit perspectives; (7) perspectives of indigenous communities; (8) drought
and survival; (9) women's perspectives; (10) legal action for the right to
food and work; (11) marginalised people and state responsibility; and (12)
right to food and right to information. Since I attended only three
workshops (one in each session), and since the proceedings of other
workshops are not available at the time of writing, it is not possible to
present a full-fledged account of the discussions in this article. However,
a brief account of the three workshops I did attend may help to convey the
flavour of these discussions.

AS a starter, I attended the workshop on "the right to work and livelihood",
coordinated by Shiraz of Kashtkari Sangathan. The bulk of the discussions
actually focussed on the prospects for a national EGA. Clearly, employment
guarantee is only one aspect of the right to work, and the right to
livelihood can be seen as an even larger notion. Aside from employment
guarantee, typically offered in the form of wage labour, the right to work
also encompasses other issues such as minimum wages, the need for
employment-oriented economic policies and the rights of self-employed
workers. The right to livelihood, for its part, is concerned not just with
labour rights but also with the dignified survival of those who are unable
to work, such as elderly widows and the chronically ill. There was broad
agreement at the workshop that bringing about an EGA was a burning issue at
this time, but also that a sound campaign for the right to work and
livelihood needs to go beyond this particular demand. Further, an EGA itself
should encompass, as far as possible, some of the larger livelihood issues;
for instance, the rights of unorganised workers and migrants labourers.

As far as the EGA issue itself was concerned, the discussions began with
presentations of Maharashtra's experience in this respect. Maharashtra
passed an Employment Guarantee Act in 1977, which laid the basis of its
well-known "employment guarantee scheme" (EGS). During the 1970s and 1980s,
the scheme did relatively well, with about half a million persons (mainly
women) employed on an average day, and much larger numbers during periods of
drought. In the 1990s, however, employment generation under the EGS declined
sharply and the principle of guaranteed employment seems to have been
quietly buried. Meanwhile, enormous amounts of money (more than Rs.9,000
crores at the time of writing) have accumulated in Maharashtra's "employment
guarantee fund", which is meant to be earmarked for EGS. The unused funds
are effectively diverted for other purposes, ostensibly as a "loan" but with
no assurance that they will ever be returned and utilised for the purpose of
employment generation. This gradual undermining of the Act fits in a general
pattern of dismantling of many social services in recent years.

On a more positive note, the CMP of the new government includes a commitment
to "immediately enact a National Employment Guarantee Act". The proposed
guarantee is limited to 100 days of employment, for one person per
household, and in this respect it falls far short of the right to work in
the full sense of the term. Nevertheless, there was a strong sense that a
concerted effort should be made to hold the government accountable to this
promise. Following on this, the participants shared ideas of possible ways
to step up the campaign for an EGA.

THE second workshop on my list focussed on "children's right to food". Few
participants were expected, as children's issues often take the back seat in
public debates (with the consequences that we know). However, the workshop
turned out to be jam-packed, to the extent that focussed discussion became
quite difficult as most of the 100-odd participants had one point or another
to make. The workshop took off from M.P. Parameswaran's crystal-clear
assertion (in the opening plenary of the convention) that "every child has a
right to a full life", and his observation that "this right cannot be
enforced by children themselves". Following on this, Shantha Sinha made a
very enlightening presentation on children's right to food, with special
reference to children under six - the most important and most neglected age
group. Drawing on many years of experience on the ground, she described how
prevailing social policies constantly overlook and undermine children's
health and nutrition rights. She argued that the best way to protect these
rights was to ensure that every child under six attended an active
anganwadi. Shantha Sinha also explained how taking children's rights
seriously paved the way for far-reaching political change, as those working
for children's rights were inevitably led to challenge the system in all
sorts of ways.

This opening presentation led to a flood of interventions as the
participants shared their own experiences of working for children's right to
food in different parts of the country. There was also much discussion of
recent Supreme Court orders, calling *inter alia* for the provision of
cooked mid-day meals in primary schools, and also for the universalisation
of Integrated Child Development Services (that is, extending it to all
children under six and other eligible groups). While some progress has been
made with mid-day meals, with prospects of further expansion and improvement
of mid-day meal programmes in the near future, the Supreme Court order on
the ICDS has been blissfully ignored by the government. The main reason for
this contrast seems to be that court orders on mid-day meals were
supplemented with active public pressure, while the ICDS remained out of
focus. There was wide agreement on the need for a joint campaign on the
universalisation of the ICDS. The discussions also helped to identify a wide
range of other issues on which effective advocacy is possible.

 A.M. FARUQUI

* Kavita Srivastava, Aruna Roy, M.P. Parameswaran, Nusrat Bano Ruhi, Brinda
Karat and Paul Divaker at a session. *

 The third workshop I attended was concerned with "marginalised people and
state responsibility". This one unfolded in a different mode: it consisted
mainly of testimonies of affected persons, including destitute widows,
street children, members of so-called "primitive tribes", persons with
disabilities and victims of the Bhopal gas tragedy. It was quite moving to
feel the spirit of solidarity that ran through the audience, in spite of the
widely divergent social backgrounds of the participants. The testimonies
were a telling reminder of the fact that the right to food is nowhere near
being realised in India, in spite of a fair amount of agitation on this
issue in recent years. Even the most basic directions of the Supreme Court
are routinely violated. Destitute widows, for instance, told us how they are
made to run from pillar to post when they apply for pensions or Antyodaya
cards, in spite of being entitled to public support as a matter of right.
There were also some signs of hope, such as the mobilisation of Pahari
Korwas (a so-called "primitive tribe") in Surguja district in Chhattisgarh
district on food security issues, leading not only to the distribution of
Antyodaya cards to all members of this community but also to a new sense of
confidence.

Brief reports from the workshops were presented at plenary sessions on June
12. Some workshops were mainly of an "educational" nature, but many ended
with some sort of agenda for action, or at least with a list of issues that
could be taken up by the participating organisations. For instance, the
workshop on "agriculture and trade" articulated specific positions on key
issues such as World Trade Organisation (WTO) regulations and genetically
modified crops. Similarly, the workshop on "drought and survival"
recommended that the so-called Famine Codes (also known as Relief Codes in
some States) should be radically revised and made legally binding. Detailed
suggestions for revision were made and, if all goes well, this agenda will
be taken forward by the participants in the near future.

THE main recommendations were consolidated at the concluding plenary on June
13, with a special focus on joint activities involving broad coalitions of
the participating organisations. For instance, there was unanimous agreement
on the need to launch a broad-based campaign for a national EGA. As a first
step, a decision was taken to organise a "day of action for the right to
work" on October 16, (World Food Day). In advance of this event, a draft EGA
will be prepared and discussions will be held with representatives of the
new government as well as with the left parties. Similarly, the
participating organisations agreed to join forces for a week to assert
children's right to food, with a special emphasis on the universalisation of
ICDS. This week of action is due to start on November 14 (Children's Day in
India), and to culminate on November 20 (Universal Children's Day). A
proposal was also made that *kala jatha*s on the right to work and
children's right to food should be held across the country during the period
separating these two activities - from October 16 to November 20.

Land rights is another issue on which a strong need was felt for coordinated
action. Various proposals were made at the workshop on "land rights and food
sovereignty" and concrete decisions on this are likely to be taken quite
soon at follow-up gatherings.

The concluding plenary also took up some crucial organisational matters,
particularly the decision-making structures of the campaign in the months
ahead. These matters had been discussed in some detail at two preparatory
meetings held on June 11 and 12, respectively. Unfortunately, wider
discussion was relegated to the end of the closing plenary and by then
little time was left for this important topic. Briefly, the plenary endorsed
a proposal to constitute a provisional "steering group" for a period of one
year or so (until the next convention). The basic role of this steering
group is not to "lead" the campaign, or even to get directly involved in
organising activities, but rather to facilitate the process of mutual
support among the participating organisations. Specifically, the proposed
responsibilities of the group are: (1) to facilitate the next convention;
(2) to ensure the smooth flow of information within the network; (3) to
initiate a process of wider discussion of the organisational aspects of the
campaign, and prepare a proposal on this for the next convention; and
possibly (4) advocacy with the Central government. For the rest, the
campaign is expected to continue in the informal, decentralised mode in
which it has operated so far - at least for now. No doubt, the
organisational aspects of the campaign would have benefited from further
discussion. A sound organisational base is essential for the sustainability
and long-term effectiveness of the whole effort.

The achievements of a convention of this kind are best assessed in the light
of the various roles it is expected to play. At least four roles can be
envisaged. First, a convention is an opportunity for the participants to
educate themselves, as they share their insights and experiences. Second, a
convention can act as a springboard for further action, particularly
collaborative action involving a wide range of like-minded organisations
that are otherwise very loosely connected if at all. Third, this convention
was an opportunity to review and consolidate the organisational basis of the
right to food campaign. Last but not least, a convention has an important
social dimension: it fosters personal interaction between people who share a
strong commitment to particular issues, in this case the right to food and
work.

In my view, the convention was most successful in its educational and social
roles. The depth of the discussions was impressive, at least in the sessions
I attended. And the level of motivation of most participants was very high.
Further, the convention created (or strengthened) many personal bonds. Aside
from their intrinsic value, these personal bonds are perhaps the greatest
strength of the campaign.

The convention was also reasonably effective as a springboard for further
action. I was hoping for more in this respect, and left Bhopal with a sharp
awareness of our timidity in seizing the opportunities in front of us.
Nevertheless, some solid groundwork was done, and there are good prospects
of lively activity in the months ahead. Much depends on the initiative and
imagination of the participating individuals and organisations.

Finally, the convention did not go very far in terms of clarifying the
organisational aspects of the campaign for the right to food and work. The
campaign's informal and decentralised mode of functioning is both a strength
and a weakness. On the positive side, it fosters initiative and enables
diverse individuals and organisations to work together on the basis of
voluntary association and shared concerns, with few institutional shackles.
On the other side, the present approach is not always conducive to
coordinated action. Further, the process of voluntary association requires
some basic safeguards against arbitrariness and abuses of power, if it is to
remain participatory and democratic.

Let me try to explain why I consider this a very important issue. If one
looks around at India's "social movements", and specifically at their
organisational aspects, three problems stand out. One is that there is a lot
of quarrelling and factionalism within these movements, with devastating
effects on their ability to have a real impact. The second is that they are
largely personality-based. Indeed, leadership (formal or informal) is
typically the means through which infighting is resolved or suppressed. The
third issue is that the "leaders" almost invariably come from a privileged
social background. However sensitive they may be to the viewpoint of the
underprivileged, they cannot but carry a certain baggage associated with
their own position. The bottom line is that, with few exceptions, social
movements in India (or for that matter elsewhere) are far from democratic.
This lack of internal democracy jars with the values we claim to stand for,
and creates a deep inconsistency between means and ends.

The central organisational challenge for the right to food campaign is to
develop ways of working together that are both effective and consistent with
our basic values - including democracy, equality and transparency.

I would like to think that this is possible, but it requires an explicit and
collective engagement with this challenge. Hopefully, the next convention
will be an opportunity to take up this unfinished agenda.

------------------------------

1. These include the Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti (BGVS), the Jan Swasthya
Abhiyan (JSA), the National Alliance of People's Movements (NAPM), the
National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW), the Human Rights Law Network
(HRLN), the National Conference of Dalit Organisations (NACDOR), the All
India Democratic Women's Association (AIDWA), the National Campaign
Committee for Rural Workers (NCCRW), the People's Union for Civil Liberties
(PUCL), the National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights (NCDHR) and the National
Campaign for the People's Right to Information (NCPRI). About 120
organisations participated in the convention.

 * *

Printer friendly
page<http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/thscrip/print.pl?file=20040716006012500.htm&date=fl2114/&prd=fline&>

Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail<http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/thscrip/pgemail.pl?date=fl2114/&prd=fline&>

 ------------------------------
 Subscribe <http://hinduonnet.com/thehindu/fline/flnsub.htm> | Contact
Us<frontline at thehindu.co.in?Subject=%27Frontline%20Feedback%27>|
Archives <http://hinduonnet.com/thehindu/fline/archives.htm> |
Contents<http://hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2114/index.htm>
(Letters to the Editor should carry the full postal address)
------------------------------
[ Home <http://www.flonnet.com/> | The Hindu
<http://www.hinduonnet.com/> | Business
Line <http://www.blonnet.com/> | Sportstar <http://www.tssonnet.com/>
------------------------------
Copyright © 2004, Frontline.

 Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are
expressly prohibited
without the written consent of Frontline
------------------------------