What international law has to say about hunger & starvation

Published
0

THE 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (“Genocide Convention”), a UN multilateral treaty, criminalises genocide and obligates states party to ensure its prohibition. Under Article II(c), one of the actions that constitute genocide is “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.” Hence, under the Genocide Convention, starvation is a possible method of genocide if committed with genocidal intent — that is, to destroy a group.

Starvation has also been prohibited under the First Additional Protocol to the Geneva Convention, 1977 which provides as follows:

Article 54(1):

“Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is prohibited.”

Article 54(2):

“It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas … drinking water installations and supplies, and irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value … whatever the motive …”

Under the Geneva Convention, starvation of civilians is also a war crime, prohibited regardless of intent to destroy a group.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, in The Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, while interpreting identical language (As Article II(c)) in the Statute of the International Tribunal for Rwanda as part of the first international judgment on the issue of genocide, held genocide to include “subjecting a group of people to a subsistence diet, systematic expulsion from homes and the reduction of essential medical services below minimum requirement”.

Similarly, the International Court of Justice, in Bosnia & Herzegovina v. Serbia & Montenegro, in the main Judgment dated February 27, 2007, examined whether various acts alleged to have been committed, satisfied as meeting the threshold of genocide under Article II(c). The Court recognised that various acts such as encirclement, shelling and starvation could constitute acts violating the prohibition set in Article II(c) i.e., deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about destruction. However, in this case, the Court held that the evidence did not prove genocidal intent beyond what was required for genocide under the Genocide Convention.

More recently, the International Court of Justice has passed two Provisional Orders in the matter of South Africa v. Israel which explicitly address starvation and famine. In its order dated 26.01.2024, the Court noted that, “many Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have no access to the most basic foodstuffs, potable water, electricity, essential medicines or heating.” In the operative part of the order, the Court directed Israel to “take all measures within its power to to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular: (a) killing members of the group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.

In its Order dated March 28, 2024, the Court noted the “unprecedented levels of food insecurity experienced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip” and observed that the situation had deteriorated with famine setting in and reaffirmed its provisional measures of January 26, 2024. Israel was directed to take all necessary and effective measures in view of the worsening conditions of life in particular the spread of famine and starvation to enable humanitarian assistance, food, etc., including opening of land crossings without delay. The Court also held that these measures are required “in conformity with [Israel]’s obligations under the Genocide Convention”. In stating so, the Court is treating starvation/the deprivation of basic necessities as falling under Israel’s obligations under genocide law and not just international human rights law.

Published in Dawn, October 7th, 2025

Opinion

Editorial

Kashmir unresolved
Updated 30 Sep, 2026

Kashmir unresolved

The just solution lies in India addressing the issue through a trilateral dialogue involving the legitimate representatives of the Kashmiri people and Pakistan.
Water shortage
30 Sep, 2026

Water shortage

THAT the country is entering the Rabi season with an anticipated water shortage of nearly 25pc, the lowest carryover...
Young hearts
30 Sep, 2026

Young hearts

THE observance may have passed, but the message of World Heart Day should not fade with it. The occasion is a useful...
Terror and politics
Updated 29 Sep, 2026

Terror and politics

There is an urgent need to tone down the rhetoric and tackle terrorism as a collective challenge for both the affected provinces and the federation.
Watching the glaciers
29 Sep, 2026

Watching the glaciers

THE latest signs from Pakistan’s mountains are worrying. Suparco says the number of unfrozen glacial lakes it...
Dangerous agenda
29 Sep, 2026

Dangerous agenda

AS the world remains fixated on the US-Iran conflict, elsewhere in the Middle East, Israel is consolidating its grip...