I am posting a belated report of Food Sovereignty as NAFSO joined the Food Sovereignty Net Work in Sri Lanka. Finally, the role of coordination also on NAFSO as an added responsibility.
I am posting this report as it is important work within NAFSO.
Herman
National Consultation on Food Sovereignty in Sri Lanka on 26th January 2011, at NAFSO training center, Negombo.
Hosted by NAFSO and supported by FSNSA & IMSE Kolkota –India.
List of participants: Please see below in the report.
The group agreed to the definition of Food Sovereignty as confirmed at Nyelini Declaration.
Program Process:
Geetha Lakmini of NAFSO welcome the group and set the objectives why we are gathered here today.
She mentioned the importance of International solidarity while uniting as a national body who are concern and concretely engage in food sovereignty activities in our own sectors.
Mr. Biplab Halim, the director of IMSE, India shared how the FS is important to South Asians as the worst affected region in the world on food soaring crisis. He emphasized that the solution is not with the exploiters of the mother earth and it is with the small farmers, fishers and small food producers have the prime responsibility on protection and sustain the earth.
Then the various sectoral issues in relation to the FS were presented by panelists. There were 6 Panel Presentations on agriculture, fisheries, workers, health, women in all the sectors as well as National Policies and Food Sovereignty concerns in the country.
Panelist with there topics are as follows; :
1. FS on Women's dimensions - Padma Pushpakanthi- SAVISTHRI
2. FS issues on Food Producers
a. Fisheries- Herman kumara -NAFSO
b. Farmers - Sandun Thudugala –MONLAR
3. Issues of Workers on FS – Rohini Weerasinghe, - Kantha Shakthi
4. Health issues & FS- Sirimal Peiris (PHC)
5. Current National Policy Debates on FS- Sarath Fernando- MONLAR
Emerged issues in the Panel presentations and the peoples interventions are as follows;.
Land grabbing at many parts of the country including the current issues at Panama at East and the grabbing of sea through leasing and selling of 14 islands at Kalpiiya.
Privatization of water, land and sea,
Violation of the rights of access of the food producers, as farmers, fishers and other producers.
Tourism and the mega development projects promotion and losers of livelihood.
Losers of indigenous seeds rights and MNC’s involvements.
Introduction of genetically modified seeds and the foods.
Violation of the decision making power of the productions methodologies of the farmers and fishers.
Spreading mechanized boats and the methodologies for producing fish and the agricultural foods with rice and the vegetable too. Small producers with traditional methods and knowledge’s are marginalized.
Losers of the land rights and displace people in N/E& plantation sector.
Highly increase of the food prices and all the consumers are badly affected.
Lost of the health of people and spreading deceases, people’s trust of the food security is badly losers.
Food producers are badly affected by climate change and natural disatsers.
Small producers rights on production, distribution, marketing and deciding price controlling are dominated by GO.
Lack of follow up of the international agreements by GO regarding food sovereignty rights.
Lack of acceptance of the traditional knowledge of the people for food production and the processing.
Women are badly victimized from the present context.
Follow up of the Future Work.
Build a active and strong movement with basic agreement of the national food production.
Building and the promotion on the traditional food culture.
Promote people’s unionization to raise the voice for gaining basic rights.
Building and strengthening up the people against the capitalized structure.
Promote the mechanisms for regenerating the mother earth.
Promote education and communication skills among the net work among the people.
Immediate Action of Food Sovereignty Network of Sri Lanka.
Building up against the chemical foods and the inconvenience input of the agriculture in national and the international levels,
Integrate regional and the international campaign.
To activate ongoing campaign and the activities against land and the water grabbing.
Speed up the education campaign for the concept of the FS in our Own net works.
Involve to change the policies which are detrimental to the people.
Up date and enhance the knowledge of food sovereignty by the members of FSNSL,
Building links between the consumers & producers directly.
Selected steering committee members of the FSNSL in Sri Lanka.
Committee members of the FSNSL
Geetha Lakmini, NAFSO
Sadun Thudugala.MONLAR.
Padma Pushpakanthi.-Savistri
Abdul Razak-Rural Women Front
Sriyani Pathirage- ,, ,, ,,.
Prabath Kumara.- Future in Our Hand.
Sirimal Peiris.-PHC.
Nanda Udaththawa, Women for Social Justice.
Ashoka Karunarathna. –People’s Health Protection.
Melina Kumary-Sri Vimukthi Fisher Women’s Organization.
Herman Kumara-NAFSO.
Report Prepared By Geetha and FInalized by Herman
2011 March 20
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Friday, October 22, 2010
Access to Land & the Right to Food report to UN by Olivier De Schutter
http:www.srfood.org/index.php/en/component/content/article/984-access-to-land-and-the-right-to-food">
New Report: Access to Land and the Right to Food
[21 October] NEW YORK - Today, Olivier De Schutter presented his new report on access to land and the right to food at the 65th General Assembly of the United Nations (Third Committee).
The report shows that up to 30 million hectares of farmland is lost annually due to environmental degradation, conversion to industrial use or urbanization. A trend exacerbated by the expansion of agrofuels and the speculation on farmland.
The report identifies ways to confer legal security of tenure upon farmers, fishermen and indigenous people affected by the current pressure on land. It also asks how agrarian reform can be promoted as an alternative to the global enclosure that we are currently witnessing.
“Access to Land and the Right to Food”, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food presented at the 65th General Assembly of the United Nations [A/65/281], 21 October 2010.
Background Paper, A review of submissions received (12/2009-03/2010) and of Letters of Allegation and Urgent Appeals sent between 2003 and 2009 by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, October 2010.
Statement, Presentation of the Report "Access to Land and the Right to Food" at the 65th General Assembly of the United Nations, 21 October 2010.
New Report: Access to Land and the Right to Food
[21 October] NEW YORK - Today, Olivier De Schutter presented his new report on access to land and the right to food at the 65th General Assembly of the United Nations (Third Committee).
The report shows that up to 30 million hectares of farmland is lost annually due to environmental degradation, conversion to industrial use or urbanization. A trend exacerbated by the expansion of agrofuels and the speculation on farmland.
The report identifies ways to confer legal security of tenure upon farmers, fishermen and indigenous people affected by the current pressure on land. It also asks how agrarian reform can be promoted as an alternative to the global enclosure that we are currently witnessing.
“Access to Land and the Right to Food”, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food presented at the 65th General Assembly of the United Nations [A/65/281], 21 October 2010.
Background Paper, A review of submissions received (12/2009-03/2010) and of Letters of Allegation and Urgent Appeals sent between 2003 and 2009 by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, October 2010.
Statement, Presentation of the Report "Access to Land and the Right to Food" at the 65th General Assembly of the United Nations, 21 October 2010.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
IAASTD Recommendations are Vital Importance for Agriculture & Food Security of the People
Findings from the UN-led International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development
Options for Action
The IAASTD lays out a comprehensive set of options to reorient local and global food systems towards greater social equity and sustainability. These include improvements in the sustainability of farming practices on the ground as well as overhauling the institutions and policies that determine so much of what is possible. Options for effective action
include:
Support small-scale farmers
• Strengthen small-scale farmers’, women’s, Indigenous and community-based organizations, and invest in rural areas.
• Ensure farmers have secure access to land, seeds, water, information, credit, marketing infrastructure and information.
• Build capacity in participatory agroecological research, extension and education and in biodiverse, ecologically resilient farming practices to cope with increasing environmental stress.
Re-think biotechnology
• Engage all stakeholders in open, informed, transparent and participatory debate about new and emerging biotechnologies.
• Introduce long-term environmental and health monitoring programs and conduct comparative technology assessment to better understand the respective risks, benefits and costs of different technologies and production systems.
• Use full-cost accounting to evaluate and compare the social, environmental and economic costs of different agricultural production systems, guide public policy decisions and set research priorities. (By internalizing “externalities,” this approach begins to correct the market’s failure to price goods and production systems accurately.)
• Use the precautionary approach in decision-making (e.g. as per the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety), which may entail prohibiting the transfer of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) among countries that are centers of origin or of
genetic diversity.
• Limit production of GMO plants in regions that have wild relatives and show botanical characteristics that could contaminate the gene pool. Build institutions to support social equity and sustainability
• Revise intellectual property laws to prevent misappropriation of Indigenous, women’s, and local people’s knowledge; establish IP rules that recognize farmers’ and independent researchers’ rights to save, exchange and cultivate seed, particularly for purposes of livelihood and/or public interest research.
• Strengthen the capacity of farmers, Indigenous peoples, vulnerable or marginalized communities and developing countries to engage effectively in international discussions and negotiations (for example, around intellectual property,
bilateral, regional or global trade, climate change, environment, sustainable development, etc).
• More closely regulate globalized food systems for fairness and to ensure that both rural and urban poor have secure access to food and productive resources at all times.
• Establish and enforce fair competition rules to reverse harmful effects of corporate concentration and vertical integration in the food and agriculture industry.
• Establish equitable regional and global trade arrangements that enable farmers to meet food and livelihood security goals and to diversify production.
Options for Action
The IAASTD lays out a comprehensive set of options to reorient local and global food systems towards greater social equity and sustainability. These include improvements in the sustainability of farming practices on the ground as well as overhauling the institutions and policies that determine so much of what is possible. Options for effective action
include:
Support small-scale farmers
• Strengthen small-scale farmers’, women’s, Indigenous and community-based organizations, and invest in rural areas.
• Ensure farmers have secure access to land, seeds, water, information, credit, marketing infrastructure and information.
• Build capacity in participatory agroecological research, extension and education and in biodiverse, ecologically resilient farming practices to cope with increasing environmental stress.
Re-think biotechnology
• Engage all stakeholders in open, informed, transparent and participatory debate about new and emerging biotechnologies.
• Introduce long-term environmental and health monitoring programs and conduct comparative technology assessment to better understand the respective risks, benefits and costs of different technologies and production systems.
• Use full-cost accounting to evaluate and compare the social, environmental and economic costs of different agricultural production systems, guide public policy decisions and set research priorities. (By internalizing “externalities,” this approach begins to correct the market’s failure to price goods and production systems accurately.)
• Use the precautionary approach in decision-making (e.g. as per the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety), which may entail prohibiting the transfer of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) among countries that are centers of origin or of
genetic diversity.
• Limit production of GMO plants in regions that have wild relatives and show botanical characteristics that could contaminate the gene pool. Build institutions to support social equity and sustainability
• Revise intellectual property laws to prevent misappropriation of Indigenous, women’s, and local people’s knowledge; establish IP rules that recognize farmers’ and independent researchers’ rights to save, exchange and cultivate seed, particularly for purposes of livelihood and/or public interest research.
• Strengthen the capacity of farmers, Indigenous peoples, vulnerable or marginalized communities and developing countries to engage effectively in international discussions and negotiations (for example, around intellectual property,
bilateral, regional or global trade, climate change, environment, sustainable development, etc).
• More closely regulate globalized food systems for fairness and to ensure that both rural and urban poor have secure access to food and productive resources at all times.
• Establish and enforce fair competition rules to reverse harmful effects of corporate concentration and vertical integration in the food and agriculture industry.
• Establish equitable regional and global trade arrangements that enable farmers to meet food and livelihood security goals and to diversify production.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
STOP LAND GRABBING NOW!
Say NO to the principles of “responsible” agro-enterprise
investment promoted by the World Bank
State and private investors, from Citadel Capital to Goldman Sachs, are leasing or buying
up tens of millions of hectares of farmlands in Asia, Africa and Latin America for food and
fuel production. This land grabbing is a serious threat to the food sovereignty of our
peoples and the right to food of our rural communities. In response to this new wave of
land grabbing, the World Bank (WB) is promoting a set of seven principles to guide such
investments and make them successful. The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO),
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and United Nations Conference on
Trade and Development (UNCTAD) have agreed to join the WB in collectively pushing
these principles. 1 Their starting point is the fact that the current rush of private sector
interest to buy up farmland is risky. After all, the WB has just finalised a study showing
the magnitude of this trend and its central focus on transferring rights over agricultural
land in developing countries to foreign investors. The WB seems convinced that all private
capital flows to expand global agribusiness operations where they have not yet taken
hold are good and must be allowed to proceed so that the corporate sector can extract
more wealth from the countryside. Since these investment deals are hinged on massive
privatisation and transfer of land rights, the WB wants them to meet a few criteria to
reduce the risks of social backlash: respect the rights of existing users of land, water and
other resources (by paying them off ); protect and improve livelihoods at the household
and community level (provide jobs and social services); and do no harm to the
environment. These are the core ideas behind the WB's seven principles for socially
acceptable land grabbing.
These principles will not accomplish their ostensible objectives. They are rather a move to
try to legitimize land grabbing. Facilitating the long-term corporate (foreign and
domestic) takeover of rural people's farmlands is completely unacceptable no matter
which guidelines are followed. The WB's principles, which would be entirely voluntary, aim
to distract from the fact that today's global food crisis, marked by more than 1 billion
people going hungry each day, will not be solved by large scale industrial agriculture,
which virtually all of these land acquisitions aim to promote.
1 "Principles for Responsible Agricultural Investment that Respects Rights, Livelihoods and Resources"
Available at:
http://www.donorplatform.org/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_view/gid,12802
Land grabbing has already started to intensify in many countries over the past 10-15
years with the adoption of deregulation policies, trade and investment agreements, and
market oriented governance reforms. The recent food and financial crises have provided
the impetus for a surge in land grabbing by governments and financial investors trying
to secure agricultural production capacity and future food supplies as well as assets that
are sure to fetch high returns. Wealthy governments have sought to lease agricultural
lands for long periods of time to feed their populations and industries back home. At the
same time, corporations are seeking long term economic concessions for plantation
agriculture to produce agro-fuels, rubber, oils, etc. These trends are also visible in coastal
areas, where land, marine resources and water bodies are being sold, leased, or developed
for tourism to corporate investors and local elites, at the expense of artisanal fishers and
coastal communities. One way or the other, agricultural lands and forests are being
diverted away from smallhold producers, fishers and pastoralists to commercial purposes,
and leading to displacement, hunger and poverty.
With the current farmland grab, corporate driven globalisation has reached a new phase
that will undermine peoples’ self-determination, food sovereignty and survival as never
before. The WB and many governments see land and rights to land, as a crucial asset base
for corporations seeking high returns on capital since land is not only the basis for
producing food and raw materials for the new energy economy, but also a way to capture
water. Land is being revalued on purely economic terms by the WB, governments and
corporations and in the process, the multi-functionality, and ecological, social and cultural
values of land are being negated. It is thus more important than ever that these
resources are defended from corporate and state predation and instead be made
available to those who need them to feed themselves and others sustainably, and to
survive as communities and societies.
Land grabbing – even where there are no related forced evictions - denies land for local
communities, destroys livelihoods, reduces the political space for peasant oriented
agricultural policies and distorts markets towards increasingly concentrated agribusiness
interests and global trade rather than towards sustainable peasant/smallhold production
for local and national markets. Land grabbing will accelerate eco-system destruction and
the climate crisis because of the type of monoculture oriented, industrial agricultural
production that many of these “acquired” lands will be used for. Promoting or permitting
land grabbing violates the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights and undermines the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Land
grabbing ignores the principles adopted by the International Conference on Agrarian
Reform and Rural Development (ICARRD) in 2006 and the recommendations made by the
International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development
(IAASTD).
Land grabbing must be immediately stopped. The WB’s principles attempt to create the
illusion that land grabbing can proceed without disastrous consequences to peoples,
communities, eco-systems and the climate. This illusion is false and misleading. Farmer's
and indigenous peoples organisations, social movements and civil society groups largely
agree that what we need instead is to:
1. Keep land in the hands of local communities and implement genuine agrarian
reform in order to ensure equitable access to land and natural resources.
2. Heavily support agro-ecological peasant, smallhold farming, fishing and
pastoralism, including participatory research and training programmes so that
3
small-scale food providers can produce ample, healthy and safe food for
everybody.
3. Overhaul farm and trade policies to embrace food sovereignty and support local
and regional markets that people can participate in and benefit from.
4. Promote community-oriented food and farming systems hinged on local people's
control over land, water and biodiversity. Enforce strict mandatory regulations that
curb the access of corporations and other powerful actors (state and private) to
agricultural, coastal and grazing lands, forests, and wetlands.
No principles in the world can justify land grabbing!
La Via Campesina
FIAN
Land Research Action Network (LRAN)
GRAIN
22 April 2010
Endorsed by:
AFRICA
African Biodiversity Network (ABN)
Anywaa Survival Organisation,
Ethiopia
Association Centre Ecologique
Albert Schweitzer (CEAS BURKINA),
Burkina Faso
Coordination Nationale des
Usagers des Ressources Naturelles
du Bassin du Niger au Mali, Mali
CNCR (Conseil National de
Concertation et de Coopération
des Ruraux), Sénégal
Collectif pour la Défense des
Terres Malgaches TANY
Confédération Paysanne du
Congo, Congo RDC
COPAGEN (Coalition pour la
protection du patrimoine
génétique africaine)
East African Farmers Federation
(EAFF)
Eastern and Southern Africa Small
Scale Farmers' Forum (ESAFF)
Economic Justice Network of
FOCCISA, Southern Africa
Food Security, Policy and
Advocacy Network (FoodSPAN),
Ghana
FORA/DESC, Niger
Ghana Civil Society Coalition on
Land (CICOL), Ghana
Haki Ardhi, Tanzania
Inades-Formation
IPACC (Indigenous People of Africa
Co-ordinating Committee)
London International Oromo
Workhshop Group, Ethiopia
ROPPA (Réseau des Organisations
Paysannes et des Producteurs de
l'Afrique de l'Ouest)
Synergie Paysanne, Bénin
ASIA
Aliansi Gerakan Reforma Agraria
(AGRA), Indonesia
All Nepal Peasants' Association
(ANPA), Nepal
Alternative Agriculture Network,
Thailand
Alternate Forum for Research in
Mindanao (AFRIM), Philippines
Andhra Pradesh Vyvasaya
Vruthidarula Union (APVVU), India
4
Anti Debt Coalition (KAU),
Indonesia
Aquila Ismail, Pakistan
Asian Human Rights Commission
(AHRC)
Bantad Mountain Range
Conservation Network, Thailand
Biothai (Thailand)
Bridges Across Borders Southeast
Asia, Cambodia
Centre for Agrarian Reform,
Empowerment and
Transformation, Inc., Philippines
Centro Saka, Inc., Philippines
CIDSE, Lao PDR
Daulat Institute, Indonesia
Delhi Forum, India
Focus on the Global South, India,
Thailand, Philippines
Foundation for Ecological
Recovery/TERRA, Thailand
Four Regions Slum Network,
Thailand
Friends of the Earth Indonesia
(WALHI), Indonesia
HASATIL, Timor Leste
IMSE, India
Indian Social Action Forum
(INSAF), India
Indonesian Fisher folk Union (SNI),
Indonesia
Indonesian Human Rights
Committee for Social Justice
(IHCS), Indonesia
Indonesian Peasant' Union (SPI).
Indonesia
International Collective in Support
of Fishworkers (ICSF), India
Kelompok Studi dan
Pengembangan Prakarsa
Masyarakat/Study Group for the
People Initiative Development
(KSPPM), Indonesia
KIARA-Fisheries Justice Coalition
of Indonesia, Indonesia
Klongyong and Pichaipuben Land
Cooperatives, Thailand
Land Reform Network of Thailand,
Thailand
Lokoj Institute, Bangladesh
MARAG, India
Melanesian Indigenous Land
Defense Alliance (MILDA)
My Village, Cambodia
National Fisheries Solidarity
Movement (NAFSO), Sri Lanka
National Fishworkers Forum, India
National Forum of Forest Peoples
and Forest Workers, India
Northeastern Land Reform
Network, Thailand
Northern Peasant Federation,
Thailand
NZNI, Mongolia
PARAGOS-Pilipinas, Philippines
Pastoral Peoples Movement, India
PCC, Mongolia
People's Coalition for the Rights to
Water (KruHA), Indonesia
PERMATIL (Permaculture), Timor-
Leste
Perween Rehman, Pakistan
Project for Ecological Awareness
Building (EAB),Thailand
Roots for Equity, Pakistan
Sintesa Foundation, Indonesia
Social Action for Change,
Cambodia
Solidarity Workshop, Bangladesh
Southern Farmer Federation,
Thailand
Sustainable Agriculture
Foundation, Thailand
The NGO Forum on Cambodia,
Cambodia
Village Focus Cambodia,
Cambodia
Village Focus International, Lao
PDR
World Forum of Fisher Peoples
(WFFP), Sri Lanka
LATIN AMERICA
Asamblea de Afectados
Ambientales, México
BIOS, Argentina
COECO-Ceiba (Amigos de la Tierra),
Costa Rica
FIAN Comayagua, Honduras
Grupo Semillas, Colombia
Red de Biodiversidad de Costa
Rica, Costa Rica
Red en Defensa del Maiz, México
REL-UITA
5
Sistema de la Investigación de la
Problemática Agraria del Ecuador
(SIPAE), Ecuador
EUROPE
Both Ends, Netherlands
CADTM, Belgium
Centre Tricontinental – CETRI,
Belgium
CNCD-11.11.11, Belgium
Comité belgo-brasileiro, Belgium
Entraide et Fraternité, Belgium
FIAN Austria
FIAN Belgium
FIAN France
FIAN Netherlands
FIAN Norway
FIAN Sweden
FUGEA, Belgium
Guatemala Solidarität, Austria
SOS Faim – Agir avec le Sud,
Belgium
The Slow Food Foundation for
Biodiversity, Italy
The Transnational Institute (TNI),
Netherlands
Uniterre, Switzerland
NORTH AMERICA
Agricultural Missions, Inc. (AMI),
USA
Columban Center for Advocacy
and Outreach, USA
Cumberland Countians for Peace
& Justice, USA
Grassroots International, USA
National Family Farm Coalition,
USA
Network for Environmental &
Economic Responsibility, United
Church of Christ, USA
Pete Von Christierson, USA
PLANT (Partners for the Land &
Agricultural Needs of Traditional
Peoples), USA
Raj Patel, Visiting Scholar, Center
for African Studies, University of
California at Berkeley, USA
The Institute for Food and
Development Policy (Food First),
USA
Why Hunger, USA
INTERNATIONAL
FIAN International
Friends of the Earth International
GRAIN
La Via Campesina
Land Research Action Network
(LRAN)
World Alliance of Mobile
Indigenous People (WAMIP)
World Rainforest Movement
(WRM)
investment promoted by the World Bank
State and private investors, from Citadel Capital to Goldman Sachs, are leasing or buying
up tens of millions of hectares of farmlands in Asia, Africa and Latin America for food and
fuel production. This land grabbing is a serious threat to the food sovereignty of our
peoples and the right to food of our rural communities. In response to this new wave of
land grabbing, the World Bank (WB) is promoting a set of seven principles to guide such
investments and make them successful. The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO),
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and United Nations Conference on
Trade and Development (UNCTAD) have agreed to join the WB in collectively pushing
these principles. 1 Their starting point is the fact that the current rush of private sector
interest to buy up farmland is risky. After all, the WB has just finalised a study showing
the magnitude of this trend and its central focus on transferring rights over agricultural
land in developing countries to foreign investors. The WB seems convinced that all private
capital flows to expand global agribusiness operations where they have not yet taken
hold are good and must be allowed to proceed so that the corporate sector can extract
more wealth from the countryside. Since these investment deals are hinged on massive
privatisation and transfer of land rights, the WB wants them to meet a few criteria to
reduce the risks of social backlash: respect the rights of existing users of land, water and
other resources (by paying them off ); protect and improve livelihoods at the household
and community level (provide jobs and social services); and do no harm to the
environment. These are the core ideas behind the WB's seven principles for socially
acceptable land grabbing.
These principles will not accomplish their ostensible objectives. They are rather a move to
try to legitimize land grabbing. Facilitating the long-term corporate (foreign and
domestic) takeover of rural people's farmlands is completely unacceptable no matter
which guidelines are followed. The WB's principles, which would be entirely voluntary, aim
to distract from the fact that today's global food crisis, marked by more than 1 billion
people going hungry each day, will not be solved by large scale industrial agriculture,
which virtually all of these land acquisitions aim to promote.
1 "Principles for Responsible Agricultural Investment that Respects Rights, Livelihoods and Resources"
Available at:
http://www.donorplatform.org/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_view/gid,12802
Land grabbing has already started to intensify in many countries over the past 10-15
years with the adoption of deregulation policies, trade and investment agreements, and
market oriented governance reforms. The recent food and financial crises have provided
the impetus for a surge in land grabbing by governments and financial investors trying
to secure agricultural production capacity and future food supplies as well as assets that
are sure to fetch high returns. Wealthy governments have sought to lease agricultural
lands for long periods of time to feed their populations and industries back home. At the
same time, corporations are seeking long term economic concessions for plantation
agriculture to produce agro-fuels, rubber, oils, etc. These trends are also visible in coastal
areas, where land, marine resources and water bodies are being sold, leased, or developed
for tourism to corporate investors and local elites, at the expense of artisanal fishers and
coastal communities. One way or the other, agricultural lands and forests are being
diverted away from smallhold producers, fishers and pastoralists to commercial purposes,
and leading to displacement, hunger and poverty.
With the current farmland grab, corporate driven globalisation has reached a new phase
that will undermine peoples’ self-determination, food sovereignty and survival as never
before. The WB and many governments see land and rights to land, as a crucial asset base
for corporations seeking high returns on capital since land is not only the basis for
producing food and raw materials for the new energy economy, but also a way to capture
water. Land is being revalued on purely economic terms by the WB, governments and
corporations and in the process, the multi-functionality, and ecological, social and cultural
values of land are being negated. It is thus more important than ever that these
resources are defended from corporate and state predation and instead be made
available to those who need them to feed themselves and others sustainably, and to
survive as communities and societies.
Land grabbing – even where there are no related forced evictions - denies land for local
communities, destroys livelihoods, reduces the political space for peasant oriented
agricultural policies and distorts markets towards increasingly concentrated agribusiness
interests and global trade rather than towards sustainable peasant/smallhold production
for local and national markets. Land grabbing will accelerate eco-system destruction and
the climate crisis because of the type of monoculture oriented, industrial agricultural
production that many of these “acquired” lands will be used for. Promoting or permitting
land grabbing violates the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights and undermines the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Land
grabbing ignores the principles adopted by the International Conference on Agrarian
Reform and Rural Development (ICARRD) in 2006 and the recommendations made by the
International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development
(IAASTD).
Land grabbing must be immediately stopped. The WB’s principles attempt to create the
illusion that land grabbing can proceed without disastrous consequences to peoples,
communities, eco-systems and the climate. This illusion is false and misleading. Farmer's
and indigenous peoples organisations, social movements and civil society groups largely
agree that what we need instead is to:
1. Keep land in the hands of local communities and implement genuine agrarian
reform in order to ensure equitable access to land and natural resources.
2. Heavily support agro-ecological peasant, smallhold farming, fishing and
pastoralism, including participatory research and training programmes so that
3
small-scale food providers can produce ample, healthy and safe food for
everybody.
3. Overhaul farm and trade policies to embrace food sovereignty and support local
and regional markets that people can participate in and benefit from.
4. Promote community-oriented food and farming systems hinged on local people's
control over land, water and biodiversity. Enforce strict mandatory regulations that
curb the access of corporations and other powerful actors (state and private) to
agricultural, coastal and grazing lands, forests, and wetlands.
No principles in the world can justify land grabbing!
La Via Campesina
FIAN
Land Research Action Network (LRAN)
GRAIN
22 April 2010
Endorsed by:
AFRICA
African Biodiversity Network (ABN)
Anywaa Survival Organisation,
Ethiopia
Association Centre Ecologique
Albert Schweitzer (CEAS BURKINA),
Burkina Faso
Coordination Nationale des
Usagers des Ressources Naturelles
du Bassin du Niger au Mali, Mali
CNCR (Conseil National de
Concertation et de Coopération
des Ruraux), Sénégal
Collectif pour la Défense des
Terres Malgaches TANY
Confédération Paysanne du
Congo, Congo RDC
COPAGEN (Coalition pour la
protection du patrimoine
génétique africaine)
East African Farmers Federation
(EAFF)
Eastern and Southern Africa Small
Scale Farmers' Forum (ESAFF)
Economic Justice Network of
FOCCISA, Southern Africa
Food Security, Policy and
Advocacy Network (FoodSPAN),
Ghana
FORA/DESC, Niger
Ghana Civil Society Coalition on
Land (CICOL), Ghana
Haki Ardhi, Tanzania
Inades-Formation
IPACC (Indigenous People of Africa
Co-ordinating Committee)
London International Oromo
Workhshop Group, Ethiopia
ROPPA (Réseau des Organisations
Paysannes et des Producteurs de
l'Afrique de l'Ouest)
Synergie Paysanne, Bénin
ASIA
Aliansi Gerakan Reforma Agraria
(AGRA), Indonesia
All Nepal Peasants' Association
(ANPA), Nepal
Alternative Agriculture Network,
Thailand
Alternate Forum for Research in
Mindanao (AFRIM), Philippines
Andhra Pradesh Vyvasaya
Vruthidarula Union (APVVU), India
4
Anti Debt Coalition (KAU),
Indonesia
Aquila Ismail, Pakistan
Asian Human Rights Commission
(AHRC)
Bantad Mountain Range
Conservation Network, Thailand
Biothai (Thailand)
Bridges Across Borders Southeast
Asia, Cambodia
Centre for Agrarian Reform,
Empowerment and
Transformation, Inc., Philippines
Centro Saka, Inc., Philippines
CIDSE, Lao PDR
Daulat Institute, Indonesia
Delhi Forum, India
Focus on the Global South, India,
Thailand, Philippines
Foundation for Ecological
Recovery/TERRA, Thailand
Four Regions Slum Network,
Thailand
Friends of the Earth Indonesia
(WALHI), Indonesia
HASATIL, Timor Leste
IMSE, India
Indian Social Action Forum
(INSAF), India
Indonesian Fisher folk Union (SNI),
Indonesia
Indonesian Human Rights
Committee for Social Justice
(IHCS), Indonesia
Indonesian Peasant' Union (SPI).
Indonesia
International Collective in Support
of Fishworkers (ICSF), India
Kelompok Studi dan
Pengembangan Prakarsa
Masyarakat/Study Group for the
People Initiative Development
(KSPPM), Indonesia
KIARA-Fisheries Justice Coalition
of Indonesia, Indonesia
Klongyong and Pichaipuben Land
Cooperatives, Thailand
Land Reform Network of Thailand,
Thailand
Lokoj Institute, Bangladesh
MARAG, India
Melanesian Indigenous Land
Defense Alliance (MILDA)
My Village, Cambodia
National Fisheries Solidarity
Movement (NAFSO), Sri Lanka
National Fishworkers Forum, India
National Forum of Forest Peoples
and Forest Workers, India
Northeastern Land Reform
Network, Thailand
Northern Peasant Federation,
Thailand
NZNI, Mongolia
PARAGOS-Pilipinas, Philippines
Pastoral Peoples Movement, India
PCC, Mongolia
People's Coalition for the Rights to
Water (KruHA), Indonesia
PERMATIL (Permaculture), Timor-
Leste
Perween Rehman, Pakistan
Project for Ecological Awareness
Building (EAB),Thailand
Roots for Equity, Pakistan
Sintesa Foundation, Indonesia
Social Action for Change,
Cambodia
Solidarity Workshop, Bangladesh
Southern Farmer Federation,
Thailand
Sustainable Agriculture
Foundation, Thailand
The NGO Forum on Cambodia,
Cambodia
Village Focus Cambodia,
Cambodia
Village Focus International, Lao
PDR
World Forum of Fisher Peoples
(WFFP), Sri Lanka
LATIN AMERICA
Asamblea de Afectados
Ambientales, México
BIOS, Argentina
COECO-Ceiba (Amigos de la Tierra),
Costa Rica
FIAN Comayagua, Honduras
Grupo Semillas, Colombia
Red de Biodiversidad de Costa
Rica, Costa Rica
Red en Defensa del Maiz, México
REL-UITA
5
Sistema de la Investigación de la
Problemática Agraria del Ecuador
(SIPAE), Ecuador
EUROPE
Both Ends, Netherlands
CADTM, Belgium
Centre Tricontinental – CETRI,
Belgium
CNCD-11.11.11, Belgium
Comité belgo-brasileiro, Belgium
Entraide et Fraternité, Belgium
FIAN Austria
FIAN Belgium
FIAN France
FIAN Netherlands
FIAN Norway
FIAN Sweden
FUGEA, Belgium
Guatemala Solidarität, Austria
SOS Faim – Agir avec le Sud,
Belgium
The Slow Food Foundation for
Biodiversity, Italy
The Transnational Institute (TNI),
Netherlands
Uniterre, Switzerland
NORTH AMERICA
Agricultural Missions, Inc. (AMI),
USA
Columban Center for Advocacy
and Outreach, USA
Cumberland Countians for Peace
& Justice, USA
Grassroots International, USA
National Family Farm Coalition,
USA
Network for Environmental &
Economic Responsibility, United
Church of Christ, USA
Pete Von Christierson, USA
PLANT (Partners for the Land &
Agricultural Needs of Traditional
Peoples), USA
Raj Patel, Visiting Scholar, Center
for African Studies, University of
California at Berkeley, USA
The Institute for Food and
Development Policy (Food First),
USA
Why Hunger, USA
INTERNATIONAL
FIAN International
Friends of the Earth International
GRAIN
La Via Campesina
Land Research Action Network
(LRAN)
World Alliance of Mobile
Indigenous People (WAMIP)
World Rainforest Movement
(WRM)
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Abolition of IRRI sought
IRRI has done lot harm to the traditional, local rice varieties in many part of the world, specifically in Asia. Some farmer's movements in Asia have come forward to fight against the IRRI's actions of promotion of biotechnological rice seeds and also the chemicals in the farming fields. The group has formed call YORA [Year Of Rice Action] to preserve traditional rice varieties and to protect the bio diversity.
It is important to see the struggle is extended against the multi national seed cooperations, fertilizer cooperations and also the other chemical cooporations.
We were also part of the YORA campaign which was initiated at the PANAP conference held at PENANG Malaysia last year. I would like to see how the Sri Lankan organizations, lead by VIKALPANIE and MONLAR work together on this process.
Herman Kumara,
13 04.10
By Abigail Kwok
Filed Under: Agriculture, Science & Technology, Health, Environmental Issues
MANILA, Philippines – An international group has called for the abolition of the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) 50 years after its creation, saying the agency threatened the biodiversity and indigenous rice varieties.
Citing IRRI’s campaign for genetically-engineered rice, the group, identified as Year of Rice Action (YORA), said that IRRI also allegedly exposed farmers to the dangers of agro-chemicals.
YORA, headed by the militant peasant group Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP, Peasant Movement of the Philippines), is an international campaign organization composed of the Philippines, Malaysia, India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Nepal, Laos PDR, Cambodia, Thailand, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
The group, in a statement, vowed to protect traditional and indigenous varieties of rice against genetically-engineered ones such as Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, Dow AgroSciences, and BASF.
"IRRI had enough existence and opportunities of exploiting farmers globally. It should be abolished immediately if we want to save bio-diversity of rice varieties and preserve the lives and health of farmers who have been exposed to deadly agro-chemicals it promotes," said Wilfredo Marbella, Deputy Secretary-General of KMP.
"All IRRI invented were the chain and shackles put to farmers, forcing them to use expensive and fatal agro-chemicals so that agro-chem TNCs could rake up super-profits," he added.
For his part, Erpan Faryadi, vice-chairman for Internal Affairs of APC and AGRA secretary general from Indonesia, said that IRRI should be held liable for the “significant extinction of traditional rice varieties.”
“While environmentalists are staking their lives to protect the environment and bio-diversity, IRRI, with all its multi-billion dollar funds, power and influence are consciously wiping-out natural genus of rice native to different countries. This is a ferocious crime against mother earth and against the future of mankind," he said.
URL: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/regions/view/20100413-264037/Abolition-of-IRRI-sought
It is important to see the struggle is extended against the multi national seed cooperations, fertilizer cooperations and also the other chemical cooporations.
We were also part of the YORA campaign which was initiated at the PANAP conference held at PENANG Malaysia last year. I would like to see how the Sri Lankan organizations, lead by VIKALPANIE and MONLAR work together on this process.
Herman Kumara,
13 04.10
By Abigail Kwok
Filed Under: Agriculture, Science & Technology, Health, Environmental Issues
MANILA, Philippines – An international group has called for the abolition of the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) 50 years after its creation, saying the agency threatened the biodiversity and indigenous rice varieties.
Citing IRRI’s campaign for genetically-engineered rice, the group, identified as Year of Rice Action (YORA), said that IRRI also allegedly exposed farmers to the dangers of agro-chemicals.
YORA, headed by the militant peasant group Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP, Peasant Movement of the Philippines), is an international campaign organization composed of the Philippines, Malaysia, India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Nepal, Laos PDR, Cambodia, Thailand, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
The group, in a statement, vowed to protect traditional and indigenous varieties of rice against genetically-engineered ones such as Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, Dow AgroSciences, and BASF.
"IRRI had enough existence and opportunities of exploiting farmers globally. It should be abolished immediately if we want to save bio-diversity of rice varieties and preserve the lives and health of farmers who have been exposed to deadly agro-chemicals it promotes," said Wilfredo Marbella, Deputy Secretary-General of KMP.
"All IRRI invented were the chain and shackles put to farmers, forcing them to use expensive and fatal agro-chemicals so that agro-chem TNCs could rake up super-profits," he added.
For his part, Erpan Faryadi, vice-chairman for Internal Affairs of APC and AGRA secretary general from Indonesia, said that IRRI should be held liable for the “significant extinction of traditional rice varieties.”
“While environmentalists are staking their lives to protect the environment and bio-diversity, IRRI, with all its multi-billion dollar funds, power and influence are consciously wiping-out natural genus of rice native to different countries. This is a ferocious crime against mother earth and against the future of mankind," he said.
URL: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/regions/view/20100413-264037/Abolition-of-IRRI-sought
Monday, April 12, 2010
We are committed and Determine to continue the Sustainable Agriculture in the Blue Green garden
NAFSO's ecological Agriculture Training Center, Blue Green Garden which is situated at Neela Bamma Development project at Karuwalagaswewa, Puttlam face various difficulties time to time. Once it was a drought in the area and all of our cultivation was dried up.
Next, our farm was attacked by Elephants. Almost all the cultivations, including coconut trees were destroyed by the elephants. Our enthusiasm was decreased to the work but continue with the paddy farm with organic agriculture practices.
Next time, we cultivated ground nut which was grown very well and we had lot of hopes to cover the expenses. But, this was our bad luck and wild boars were attacked the cultivation and uprooted all the ground nut plantations. What a disappointment? But, we were not disturbed too much and continue our education work with the farmers in the area and also with the agricultural members at the partner organizations.
The center was renovated and two cabanas were constructed. Farmers in the area were helped voluntarily and did an excellent work for the BGG.
What a surprize? The farmer of adjacent land was fired his land which spread upto our land and burnt our cultivation, two cabanas, one summer house,water motor, and the other properties inside the cabans. The damage when we estimated, it was around one million loss to NAFSO. ut, we did not get any compensation for the properties we lost.
We had to think what has happened to the land and why this difficulties all the time?????
At the management committee, the farmers decided to construct one cabana with their own labour and contributions, which gave us lot of hopes and high energy to continue the work among ecological agriculture towards sustainable future.
During the last season, farmers completed the construction and we were able to cultivate the paddy land again. There were 13 farmers got 400 Kg of seed paddy from Praja Shakthi Development Foundation, our parnter organization work in the area and the care taker of the BGG. Also, they have cultivated the land and collected 40 Buschells of traditional paddy [2000 Kg] call Muppamgam.
This time, the BOM of BGG met again and planned out how to develop the BGG for sustenance of the work. The main focus was to have an income which will allow NAFSO movement to continue the work even in the future.
There were Five suggestions and consensus at the BOM:
1. Cultivate traditional paddy varieties in BGG for one acre land by mid May.
2. Plant coconut as a major crop to have some sort of income to run the BGG.
3. Organize a paddy buying system at BGG, from the traditional rice farmers who cultivate local paddy varieties. NAFSO need to explore to invest some money for the same practice.
4. Organize a system for selling the paddy among the partner organizations of NAFSO.
5. Explore the possible cultivations parallel to coconut in the BGG.
So, we expect the team will work for the achieve these goals by coming months of the Yala Season.
Herman Kumara,
12.04.10
Friday, April 9, 2010
Land, Poverty and Food Security: Without Political Struggle, there is no food security Says, Mohommed Ali Sha, PFF chair person, Pakistan
Land grabbing is one of the most serious threat to the marginalized poor in many countries. However, this has become serious issue in South Asia where the poverty and food insecurity is highly prevailing among millions of poor people in our region. Pakistan is also focussing this issue and we are happy to see our brother/sister organization in WFFP, the PFF is highly engaged in this process with many other organizations such as PILER in Pakistan.
Praja Abilasha, which is also focussing the land issue in different angle need to focus our attention to the land tenure issues seriously as the share holder farmers[Anda Govi] are facing serious evictions due to introduced new laws on land tenure.
I am uploading the message I got from SAAPE list serve as it shows how our Pakistani friends engage in Land Issue as a collective manner.
Herman Kumara,
10.04.10
PRESS RELEASE
Land Reforms and Distribution of Agricultural Land Among Landless Peasants Demanded
KARACHI, Apr 09, 2010: Activists of trade unions, labour organizations and non-governmental organizations on Friday demanded to introduce land reforms and distribution of agricultural land among landless peasants to eradicate bondage and food insecurity from Pakistan. They identified big landholdings by feudal and landlessness a major cause of poverty and food insecurity in the country.
They were speaking at the first day of the two-day Consultation on ‘Linkages between Land Rights, Food Security and Bondage’ organized by the Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research (PILER) at the PILER Centre, Karachi. Chairman Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum (PFF) Mohammad Ali Shah, Senior Economist Dr Shahida Wizarat, labour rights leader Mannu Bheel, Pakistan Food Security Coalition Representative Jabbar Bhatti, Executive Director PILER Karamat Ali, Joint Director of PILER Zulfiqar Shah, Dr. Ghulam Haider Malookani of Green Rural Development Organization, Ramazan Memon of Bhandar Hari Sangant and others spoke at the day-long session.
Speaking on the occasion, PILER Executive Director Karamat Ali said people of this country are suffering at the hands of poverty and food insecurity due to lack of a public distribution system. He recalled that ration system was effectively providing essential food items to all the citizens at affordable prices, but the government abolished this system. “This system is still being effectively practiced in India,” he said adding that instead Pakistan government has introduced a faulty system of providing essential items through Utility Stores, which has failed to benefit a major section of the population.
Mr. Ali said that though the colonial system has been condemned, there were many good features of the governance that the colonial rulers introduced, which were abolished after the independence. “During the British rule, whoever was cultivating the agricultural land was the owner of the land. Zamindars or feudal were only collecting a portion on behalf of the government. However, following independence, successive governments in Pakistan did not provide land to the poor people. Feudal became stronger, expanding their control over a majority of agricultural land.”
Chairman Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum (PFF) Mohammad Ali Shah said that without political struggle we cannot achieve food security. “Uneven and unjustified distribution of resources are creating food insecurity.” He said that it is the duty of the state to facilitate the provision of food to its citizens. “We have to move from food security to food sovereignty,” he added.
He observed that feudalism continues to act as an obstacle to development of the country. “Without the abolition of this system, we cannot achieve food security.” Shah emphasized that land reforms are the key to poverty eradication. “If land reforms are implemented in a systematic and judicious manner, every citizen will have enough land to overcome poverty.” Shah also stressed that a formal movement along the lines of a political movement, to pursue land reforms is critical to achieving the objective of a just and even distribution of land.
Senior Economist Dr. Shahida Wizarat presented a study in progress on food security in Pakistan. She observed that rising inflation that is eroding real wages, water shortage, weak planning and institutional set up linked to the production and marketing of agricultural products, and pressure from international financial institutions for unconstructive intervention in agricultural sector has resulted in serious challenges in food security and access to food for the poor. She said that the government is planning to provide uncultivable land to big corporations, which would further deprive the poor peasants from their landholdings.
The other participants of the consultation meeting, who are mainly working for bonded labour pointed out that most of the rights-based organizations are focusing on the release of bonded peasants. However, little efforts is being made for their rehabilitation or welfare.
The two day long consultation on ‘Linkages between Land Rights, Food Security and Bondage’ shall continue till April 10, 2010.
Praja Abilasha, which is also focussing the land issue in different angle need to focus our attention to the land tenure issues seriously as the share holder farmers[Anda Govi] are facing serious evictions due to introduced new laws on land tenure.
I am uploading the message I got from SAAPE list serve as it shows how our Pakistani friends engage in Land Issue as a collective manner.
Herman Kumara,
10.04.10
PRESS RELEASE
Land Reforms and Distribution of Agricultural Land Among Landless Peasants Demanded
KARACHI, Apr 09, 2010: Activists of trade unions, labour organizations and non-governmental organizations on Friday demanded to introduce land reforms and distribution of agricultural land among landless peasants to eradicate bondage and food insecurity from Pakistan. They identified big landholdings by feudal and landlessness a major cause of poverty and food insecurity in the country.
They were speaking at the first day of the two-day Consultation on ‘Linkages between Land Rights, Food Security and Bondage’ organized by the Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research (PILER) at the PILER Centre, Karachi. Chairman Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum (PFF) Mohammad Ali Shah, Senior Economist Dr Shahida Wizarat, labour rights leader Mannu Bheel, Pakistan Food Security Coalition Representative Jabbar Bhatti, Executive Director PILER Karamat Ali, Joint Director of PILER Zulfiqar Shah, Dr. Ghulam Haider Malookani of Green Rural Development Organization, Ramazan Memon of Bhandar Hari Sangant and others spoke at the day-long session.
Speaking on the occasion, PILER Executive Director Karamat Ali said people of this country are suffering at the hands of poverty and food insecurity due to lack of a public distribution system. He recalled that ration system was effectively providing essential food items to all the citizens at affordable prices, but the government abolished this system. “This system is still being effectively practiced in India,” he said adding that instead Pakistan government has introduced a faulty system of providing essential items through Utility Stores, which has failed to benefit a major section of the population.
Mr. Ali said that though the colonial system has been condemned, there were many good features of the governance that the colonial rulers introduced, which were abolished after the independence. “During the British rule, whoever was cultivating the agricultural land was the owner of the land. Zamindars or feudal were only collecting a portion on behalf of the government. However, following independence, successive governments in Pakistan did not provide land to the poor people. Feudal became stronger, expanding their control over a majority of agricultural land.”
Chairman Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum (PFF) Mohammad Ali Shah said that without political struggle we cannot achieve food security. “Uneven and unjustified distribution of resources are creating food insecurity.” He said that it is the duty of the state to facilitate the provision of food to its citizens. “We have to move from food security to food sovereignty,” he added.
He observed that feudalism continues to act as an obstacle to development of the country. “Without the abolition of this system, we cannot achieve food security.” Shah emphasized that land reforms are the key to poverty eradication. “If land reforms are implemented in a systematic and judicious manner, every citizen will have enough land to overcome poverty.” Shah also stressed that a formal movement along the lines of a political movement, to pursue land reforms is critical to achieving the objective of a just and even distribution of land.
Senior Economist Dr. Shahida Wizarat presented a study in progress on food security in Pakistan. She observed that rising inflation that is eroding real wages, water shortage, weak planning and institutional set up linked to the production and marketing of agricultural products, and pressure from international financial institutions for unconstructive intervention in agricultural sector has resulted in serious challenges in food security and access to food for the poor. She said that the government is planning to provide uncultivable land to big corporations, which would further deprive the poor peasants from their landholdings.
The other participants of the consultation meeting, who are mainly working for bonded labour pointed out that most of the rights-based organizations are focusing on the release of bonded peasants. However, little efforts is being made for their rehabilitation or welfare.
The two day long consultation on ‘Linkages between Land Rights, Food Security and Bondage’ shall continue till April 10, 2010.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
