Cresswell Riol

...As laid out in General Comment No. 12: The Right to Adequate Food (Art. 11),113 which has been recognised as the “most authoritative interpretation of the right to food,” 114 this human right is not a right to a minimum number of calories or nutrients: it is a right to all the nutritional components required to live a healthy and active life. It also does not equate to the right to be fed or to food aid: it is not defined by charity. It advocates the capacity to feed oneself, which includes possessing the autonomy to make choices as to what, how, and when to eat. In this respect, an approach founded on this human right “moves away from the benevolence model of food aid and instead emphasizes enabling environments that support people in feeding themselves.”115 And it is the state that is obligated to ensure such enabling environments by guaranteeing that its citizens have an adequate standard of living and public assistance when needed,116 and also that they understand that they have a right to live their lives in dignity, i.e., with autonomy, free from discrimination, and in a society in which their voice and worth are recognised. As Kent explains, “[h]uman rights are not a benevolent gift from elites, but the legal expression of every individual’s entitlement to dignity,”117and to live in dignity is a far cry from being handed a pre-packaged bag of donated goods, the contents of which one has no say.

Katharine Cresswell Riol