A member of a farming cooperative working in a field near Divo, Ivory Coast. Most of the world’s food is still raised by small farmers
Hundreds of civil society groups, academics and social movements are boycotting the first UN global food summit amid growing anger that the agenda has been hijacked by an opaque web of corporate interests.
Called the people’s summit by UN organisers, groups representing thousands of small-scale farmers and Indigenous communities, which produce 70% of the world’s food through sustainable agriculture, are among those to withdraw from Thursday’s event saying their knowledge and experience has been ignored.
The declaration, signed by about 600 groups and individuals, states: “[We] reject the ongoing corporate colonization of food systems and food governance under the facade of the United Nations Food Systems Summit … The struggle for sustainable, just and healthy food systems cannot be unhooked from the realities of the peoples whose rights, knowledge and livelihoods have gone unrecognized and disrespected.”
Some have criticized the prominence of corporations, such as Nestlé, Tyson and Bayer, in the summit’s efforts to identify food system solutions.
About 90 world leaders are expected to attend the summit in New York, with at least 130 countries making pledges on issues like free school meals, reducing food waste, healthy eating, biodata and carbon capture.
The summit, which has taken two years and millions of dollars to organise, was convened ostensibly to garner political commitment to help deliver the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) amid growing public criticism of the food industry’s contribution to hunger, malnutrition and obesity, as well as environmental destruction, biodiversity loss and climate chaos.
It was billed as a landmark initiative in which the UN would act as the broker gathering views from a wide range of experts – academics, NGOs, philanthropic donors, farmers, community and Indigenous groups, corporations and business associations – to generate sustainable and equitable solutions.
Yet critics say the role and responsibility of transnational corporations – which dominate every part of the food system, from seeds and pesticides to slaughterhouses, breweries and supermarkets – has not been adequately addressed. Nor have human rights or the pandemic, despite the fact it led to a huge rise in global food insecurity and exposed severe vulnerabilities in the global supply chain.
The Covid-19 pandemic led to a shortage of essential foods in Sri Lanka. People formed long lines to buy food at a state-run store in Colombo. Photograph: Chamila Karunarathne/EPA
“The audacity of the UN to keep calling this a people’s summit even as it continues to lose support is arrogant, [as is] pointing to my participation without listening to any of the substantive things I’ve said,” said Michael Fakhri, the UN special rapporteur on the right to food and adviser to the summit.
Fakhri and those boycotting the summit say the UN has given the private sector a dominant role in almost every part of the summit, which will lead to transnational corporations and their allies in the non-profit and philanthropy sectors having greater scope to direct food policies, financing and governance.
As a result, they say solutions will be market-led, piecemeal, voluntary and heavily weighted towards increasing food production through capital investments, big data and proprietary technologies. Critics say that this approach will enable a handful of corporations and individuals to expand control over the global food system to the further detriment of the vast majority of people and the planet.
“The UN has provided a cover of legitimacy for corporations to capture the narrative and deflate public pressure – it has not been an honest broker,” said Sofia Monsalve, secretary general of the Food First Information and Action Network (FIAN), a research and advocacy organization based in Germany.
“The refusal to discuss major issues like concentration in every part of the food system, corporate land grabs, taxation and accountability for human rights means the summit will fail,” Monsalve added.
According to the special rapporteur Fakhri, it took months to persuade organizers to include human rights in discussions, and even then the right to food appears only in the margins. “We see the same corporate players who have caused irreparable damage to our health, climate and environment trying to create a new game, gain more influence and carve out new economic opportunities.”
Agnes Kalibata, special envoy to the summit, vehemently rejected the criticisms. She told the Guardian that farmers, youth groups and academics have been represented in unprecedented numbers, and that those boycotting the event spoke for issues not people. “The summit is not about corporates [sic], it’s about working together to transform the food system and deliver on the SDGs, which are built on human rights … every country has engaged, people were invited and listened to,” she said. “If Michael Fakhri really disagreed, why did he stay?”
But a new analysis published on the eve of the summit suggests non-corporate participants have been sidelined in favour of big corporations represented by and allied with business associations, non-profits and philanthropy groups.
For instance, the summit is broken down into five areas known as action tracks. Those tasked with coming up with solutions to “boost nature positive production”(action track 3) include a single Indigenous group but 26 private sector corporations such as Nestlé, Tyson, Bayer and the International Fertilizer Association, according to the research commissioned by a global grassroots campaign opposing the corporate focus.
Yet about 80% of the planet’s remaining biodiversity is located on the territories on Indigenous peoples, who have practised sustainable agriculture for millennia and who along with small-scale farmers are at the forefront in developing agroecology – sustainable modern farming practices that work with nature and communities rather than exploiting them.
Nettie Wiebe from La Via Campesina, a global peasant movement representing small farmers, rural workers and Indigenous farmers, said her organisation withdrew and started organising against the summit because it was “deeply undemocratic, unaccountable and dismissive of those without wealth and power”.
“The big ag solutions being promoted undermine what the vast majority of the world’s food producers are trying to do to protect the environment and cool down the climate so that there is hope for the future.”
The analysis also found that influential business associations, thinktanks and philanthropies which represent, finance and promote corporate interests in sectors like agriculture, retail and finance, were given important leadership roles.
The World Economic Forum, a corporate-funded transnational organization of business, political, intellectual and civil society leaders (popularly known as Davos), has played a driving role in the summit while working to unlock $90tn in new investments and infrastructure.So has the World Business Council on Sustainable Development – an international CEO-led coalition promoting the idea that corporations and wealthy elites can solve climate change and environmental degradation caused by extractivism.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a strong advocate of biotech-based solutions for food insecurity, is linked to several summit participants with corporate ties. It co-founded and helps fund the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (Agra), which promotes the spread of industrialized agriculture in the continent. The president of Agra, which has close ties to the agrochemical industry, is the summit’s special envoy, Kalibata.
“This corporate juggernaut must be stopped, or we risk deepening environmental injustice and human rights violations,” said Kirtana Chandrasekaran, co-author of the report and food sovereignty programme coordinator at Friends of the Earth International. “Hiding behind their associations and business platforms, powerful corporate actors are directing policymaking, financing, narratives and science in the summit … agribusiness, fossil fuel and tech giants are promoting market-led false solutions that are designed to increase profits and tighten their stranglehold on food systems.”
Kalibata denied that grassroots groups and poor countries have struggled to be heard and said the private sector was vital to solving the crises in the food system. “I want them to fix the problems they are causing – we need their help with solutions.”
The hearing of a case against 20 anti-EACOP protesters has failed to take off for the third time due to the absence of the trial magistrate. According to Buganda Road Chief Magistrate Court, Her Worship Jalia Basajjabalaba was on official leave, and the case was adjourned to April 7, 2025.
The same trial, which was set for January, was stalled when the prosecution team failed to appear in court.
On August 27, 2024, the 20 activists, including Pitua Robert, Okwai Stephen, Kothurach Margret, Omirambe Moses, Owonda Rogers, Alimange Joseph, and Wabiyona Wicklyf, among others, were charged by the Buganda Road Magistrate Court with common nuisance.
These activists were arrested on August 26, 2024, while peacefully marching to the Ministry of Energy to deliver a petition opposing EACOP and other oil projects. The activists demanded justice, the upholding of their rights, and a halt to the oil industry’s violations of human rights and the environment.
The prosecution alleges that the accused marched through Kampala’s streets carrying placards and banners, causing annoyance, obstruction, or inconvenience to the public.
Section 160 of the Penal Code states that a person convicted of common nuisance faces a one-year imprisonment.
In their press conference held on Thursday, February 20, the accused activists demanded that the judiciary should stop delaying hearings of their case related to the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project and called for the dismissal of their case if the court lacks sufficient evidence to prosecute them.
Despite the repeated delays, the activists remain resolute, viewing the postponements as a form of judicial harassment. They stand firm in their demand for a fair and expedited trial, emphasizing the importance of upholding human rights in the judicial process.
“The courts of law should not be used as tools of oppression. They should not waste any time. If we have a case to answer, let them prosecute us on April 7, which they have scheduled. If they fail again, they should dismiss the case instead of wasting our time and resources,” Barigye emphasized.
The activists stress that these delays not only cause emotional distress but also impose a significant financial burden. Many of them, hailing from rural areas, have to raise funds for transportation to attend court sessions in Kampala, only to be disappointed by repeated adjournments.
“These continuous adjournments have cost us a lot. Many activists live in rural areas and have to raise money for transport, only to be present in court, but are often grieved when the cases are adjourned again and again,” said Bob Barigye, one of the accused, in an interview with Witness Radio.
The Buganda Road Magistrates Court was expected to begin hearing prosecution witnesses against the activists on February 18. However, the session was adjourned to April 7.
The activists also voice their strong condemnation of the police’s unlawful arrests of demonstrators exercising their constitutional rights. They call for an immediate halt to these actions, asserting that such detentions do not address the real concerns of the communities affected by oil and gas projects.
“We strongly condemn these arrests. Detaining demonstrators does not address the concerns affecting grassroots communities that oil and gas projects impact. We also warn individual police officers involved in these rights violations to perform their duties professionally, or they will be held personally accountable,” the activists stated.
The demands come amidst a deteriorating human rights situation in Uganda, where civic space is shrinking, and opponents of the EACOP project face increasing repression. Defending communities and the environment from the negative impacts of oil projects have effectively been criminalized. Community land and environment defenders and communities continue to face arbitrary arrests, detentions, and excessive delays in court proceedings.
The East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) is a 1,443-kilometer heated pipeline transporting crude oil from Hoima, Uganda, to Tanga, Tanzania. The first 296 kilometers run through Uganda, while the remaining 1,147 kilometers pass through Tanzania. The project is a joint venture between TotalEnergies, the Uganda National Oil Company (UNOC), the Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation (TPDC), and the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC).
The Magistrate at Buganda Road Court has granted non-cash bail to 15 stop EACOP activists from Kyambogo and Makerere University Business School (MUBS) Universities. They spent 30 days in detention at Luzira Maximum Security Prison on charges of common nuisance.
After the defense lawyers successfully applied for bail, on 10th December, the trial magistrate, Her Worship Nankya Winnie, granted a non-cash bail of 500,000 Uganda Shillings (approximately 136.50 USD) for each activist and their sureties.
The hearing of the bail application for the EACOP activists flopped yesterday. It was adjourned after it was reported that the then-presiding magistrate, Her Worship Sanula Nambozo, had been transferred to another duty station and replaced by Her Worship Nankya Winnie.
The accused activists are all young students from the universities mentioned above. The students include Simon Peter Wafula, Gary Wettaka, Martin Sserwambala, Erick Ssekandi, Arafat Mawanda, Akram Katende, Dedo Sean Kevin, Noah Katiti, Oscar Nuwagaba, Oundo Hamphrance, Bernard Mutenyo, Nicholas Pele, Shadiah Nabukenya, Shafiq Kalyango, and Makose Mark.
They were arrested in early November 2024 for protesting the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project in Kampala, Uganda’s capital. The EACOP project, a major oil pipeline, has been controversial due to its potential environmental impact, including the risk of oil spills and deforestation, and the alleged human rights violations associated with its construction, such as forced evictions and land grabbing.
Despite the risks, the activists marched to Uganda’s Parliament to meet the Speaker and raise concerns about the EACOP project. The peaceful march reiterated numerous concerns raised by civil societies and the European Parliament about the project’s negative impacts.
The EACOP project, which will transport crude oil from Uganda’s Albertine region to Tanzania’s Tanga seaport, has been criticized for delayed compensation for affected persons and secretive agreements. The potential impact on the environment and human rights is a cause for concern.
On 11th November, the accused were charged with common nuisance. Section 160 (1) of the Penal Code Act states that anyone charged with common nuisance is liable to one-year imprisonment on conviction. This charge, frequently imposed against individuals peacefully protesting in Uganda, has notably been used against Stop EACOP activists. While common nuisance addresses acts causing inconvenience or disruption to the public, it is crucial to emphasize that the accused were engaged in peaceful protest, causing no harm or disturbance.
The prosecution alleges that on 11th November 2024, the accused gathered at Parliamentary Avenue, peacefully expressing their dissent and causing no harm. Yet, they were charged with common nuisance, which seems unjust given their peaceful protest. It’s important to note that their protest was non-violent and aimed at raising awareness about the potential negative impacts of the EACOP project.
The court has adjourned the case to 16th January 2025 for a hearing.
A bail application for the 15 EACOP activists from Kyambogo and Makerere University Business School (MUBS) Universities currently on remand at Luzira Maximum Prison on charges of common nuisance has flopped for the second time due to the absence of the presiding magistrate.
The prosecution stated that the bail application could not proceed because the presiding magistrate, Her Worship Sanula Nambozo, had been transferred to another court. As a result, the case file was allocated to a new magistrate, Her Worship Nankya Winnie. She rescheduled to hear the bail application for today, October 10th, 2024, at 9 a.m. EAT.
The bail application for the 15 activists has faced yet another setback, marking the second failed attempt.
This delay in the bail application process means that these young students continue to be held in remand at Luzira Maximum Prison, a situation that is undoubtedly taking a toll on them. On November 16th, 2024, the bail hearing was disrupted due to the absence of two student activists, Wafula Simon and Kalyango Shafik. During that court session, the prosecution informed the court that both individuals were unwell, suffering from red eyes, and had been placed in isolation at the prison hospital.
The activists on remand, all young students, include Simon Peter Wafula, Gary Wettaka, Martin Sserwambala, Erick Ssekandi, Arafat Mawanda, Akram Katende, Dedo Sean Kevin, Noah Katiti, Oscar Nuwagaba, Oundo Hamphrance, Bernard Mutenyo, Nicholas Pele, Shadiah Nabukenya, Shafiq Kalyango, and Makose Mark.
The 15 were arrested in early November 2024 for protesting against the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project in Kampala, Uganda’s capital. The EACOP project, a major oil pipeline, has been a subject of controversy due to its potential environmental impact and the alleged human rights violations associated with its construction.
Despite the risks, the activists marched to Uganda’s Parliament to meet the Speaker of Parliament and raise concerns about the EACOP project. Their persistence in the face of adversity is truly inspiring.
The EACOP project, which will transport crude oil from Uganda’s Albertine region to Tanzania’s Tanga seaport, has been criticized for delayed compensation for affected persons and secretive agreements. The potential impact on the environment and human rights is a cause for concern.
On November 11th, the accused were charged with common nuisance. Section 160 (1) of the Penal Code Act states that anyone charged with common nuisance is liable to one-year imprisonment on conviction. The charge of common nuisance is often used in cases where individuals are accused of causing inconvenience or disruption to the public, but it is important to note that the accused were peacefully protesting and causing no harm.
The prosecution alleges that on November 11th, 2024, the accused gathered at Parliamentary Avenue, peacefully expressing their dissent and causing no harm. Yet, they were charged with common nuisance, a charge that seems unjust given their peaceful protest.
The third attempt for the bail application of the 15 activists has been rescheduled for hearing today at 9 a.m. EAT before Her Worship Nankya Winnie of the Buganda Road Court.