3. Governance of the right to food
Despite the recognition of the right to food by the majority
of States, its implementation in regional and national practices and
regulations as well as its application are subject to differences according to
the States and the degree of importance given to it in the documents that
recognize it.
a. Monitoring mechanisms
Monitoring mechanisms give people who have been the victim of
a violation of their right to food a way to have their rights recognized and
enforced and to seek redress. In the case of fisheries, communities driven out
of their traditional and customary land and fishing sites can appeal to the
authorities in charge. Practically speaking, chances of reparations are slim
and depend largely on the quality of the monitoring mechanism and sometimes
also on the will of the authorities in charge to pursue the case. Generally,
the violation of the right to food is perpetrated by the government or a
foreign firm. Either way, it's the government's will that leads or not to an
investigation. An investigation also depends on the government's willingness to
act as an intermediary between foreign companies and complainants, especially
when the government feels that it has more to gain than to lose by being
relatively lenient with offenders. Indeed, in some cases the government will
prefer to 'let it go', driven by economic interests, as a significant amount of
revenue comes from fishing licences from international countries and firms.
67
Two types of monitoring mechanisms exist: judicial and
extra-judicial monitoring mechanisms. When judicial monitoring mechanisms are
involved it is a local who takes up the case. On the other hand, the
involvement of extra-judicial monitoring mechanisms represents the last resort,
when local authorities could not find a solution. extra-judicial monitoring
mechanisms consist of negotiating reparation or compensation with State power.
The main monitoring mechanisms are the National Human Rights Institutions
that represent a real bridge between local and international
authorities.
b. Regional and international monitoring mechanisms
Every citizen of the African continent can, when faced with
the violation of their fundamental rights, address the African Court on Human
and Peoples' Rights. Citizens of Sierra Leone have the possibility to appeal to
the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights on two conditions. First, Sierra
Leone has to be party to the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and
Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of the African Court on Human and Peoples'
Rights (PACHPR) and second they must have had exhausted all domestic
remedies. While Sierra Leone has signed the PACHPR in 1998 it never ratified
it. Both the non-ratification of the protocol and the non-explicit recognition
of the right to food represent a form of denial of citizens' fundamental
rights. This means that in addition to being the victim of the violation of
their rights they are deprived from the possibility to petition their
government and regional authorities for a redress.
As of 2018, no international judicial remedy exists because
the CESCR in charge of monitoring the realization of the right to food still
does not possess the required legal instruments that could enable it to be
seized and presented with a request if a violation were to occur. The CESCR
remains confined to a role of recommendation despite the fact that its position
within the United Nations could give it a significant power. The last resort is
the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, a monitoring mechanism created by
the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) in 2000. The Special
Rapporteur is tasked with the promotion of the right to food and can exercise
its power in 3 was. The current Special Rapporteur, Hilal Elver has the power
to present report at the UNCHR, go on the field to control the realization of
the right to food and last she can denounce countries that violate the right to
food. It is the monitoring mechanisms that is most accessible to people.
68
As SSF find themselves with few legal remedies to assert their
rights, some have decided to assemble into organizations. This way of
empowerment allows them to regroup and form a more powerful force giving them a
reinforced bargaining power over local and national authorities. In this way
the hope to challenge the government and improve their socioeconomic situation.
Small autonomous groups like cooperatives have great potential in contributing
to the improvement of the socioeconomically situation of fisherfolks, including
food security. The only challenge that such cooperatives are faced with is the
sometimes fluctuating commitment (FAO 2014).
***
Although initiatives are in place to enforce the right to
food, Sierra Leone is still hesitant in its practices and the implementation of
the right to food is rather weak. The violation of the right to food is
therefore associated with ocean grabbing as is participates in the logic of
deriving communities of their most fundamental rights.
69
| 
