A/HRC/45/CRP.7 provided for under international humanitarian law. Humanitarian relief personnel must be respected and protected, and restrictions on freedom of movement are permitted on a temporary basis only when required for imperative military necessity.139 Violations of humanitarian relief norms may also constitute the use of starvation as a method of warfare.140 112. In May 2018, the Security Council in resolution 2417 unequivocally condemned “the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare in a number of conflict situations.”141 It further referred to the prohibition on depriving civilians of objects indispensable to their survival and the obligation to allow and facilitate humanitarian access.142 Adopted unanimously, this resolution is considered a landmark in acknowledging the link between conflict and food insecurity.143 113. In December 2019, the Assembly of State Parties to the Rome Statute voted to include a specific offence relating to the use of starvation as a method of warfare in non-international armed conflict in the Rome Statute of the ICC, largely mirroring the offence included in the Rome Statute for international armed conflicts.144 The offence is not yet in force. However, the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare has been recognised as a serious violation of international humanitarian law amounting to a war crime in NIACs under customary international law.145 114. Under international human rights law, everyone has the right to an adequate standard of living, including the right to adequate food.146 Adequate food means food being available, accessible, acceptable within a given culture and of sufficient quality to satisfy the dietary needs of individuals.147 Accessibility, in this context, encompasses both physical and economic accessibility (i.e., affordability).148 States are under an obligation to use the maximum available resources available to achieve progressively the right to adequate food. However, there are immediate obligations – e.g., not to directly or indirectly interfere with persons’ access to food, or discriminate in relation to access to food. Failure to provide for the “core content” of the right, including freedom from hunger, would also be regarded as a prima facie violation. Thus as the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has stated, article 11 would be violated “when a State fails to ensure the satisfaction of, at the very least, the minimum essential level required to be free from hunger”.149 115. Should a State claim that it is unable to fulfil this obligation for reasons beyond its control, it would have to be proven that this is the case, and also that “it has unsuccessfully sought to obtain international support to ensure the availability and accessibility of the necessary food”.150 For example, the prevention of access to humanitarian food aid in a NIAC can constitute a violation of the right to food. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has drawn attention to the obligation on other States to recognise the essential role of international cooperation and comply with their commitments to take joint and 139 ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law, rules 31, and 56. Violations of humanitarian relief norms are independent international humanitarian law violations. However, violations in this category may also represent violations of the use of starvation as a method of warfare. 141 S/RES/2417 (2018), para. 5. 142 S/RES/2417 (2018). 143 https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sc13354.doc.htm 144 The adopted offence largely mirrors the wording used in the Rome Statute in the context of IAC, omitting only the reference to the Geneva Conventions at the end of the offence. The offence is phrased in terms of “Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies”. 145 ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law, rule 156 commentary. 146 ICESCR, art. 11. 147 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 12 (1999) on the right to adequate food, para. 8. 148 Ibid., para.13. 149 Ibid., para.17 150 Ibid. 140 35