Hunger in Schools: The School Feeding Case

The Government of Uganda bears a constitutional mandate to promote social justice and ensure access to education, food, and nutrition security for all children. This obligation is enshrined in Articles 8A, 20, 22, 24, 30, 32, 34, and 45 of the Constitution. To advance this mandate, the government introduced Universal Primary Education (UPE) and Universal Secondary Education (USE), aiming to guarantee basic education for all children.

However, the Ministry of Education and Sports adopted a parent-led school feeding policy under the UPPET guidelines, placing the responsibility of feeding schoolchildren solely on parents. The policy further requires parents who can afford it to contribute toward feeding teachers and vulnerable children who cannot pay. Non-compliance is criminalized, exposing struggling families to penalties.

Available statistics reveal that 17% of school-going children are orphans, many from child-headed households, while 24% lack access to a nutritious diet at home. Additionally, 66% of Uganda’s population faces moderate to severe food insecurity. These figures demonstrate that most families struggle to afford meals at home, making it impractical—and harmful—for the government to withdraw support. The current policy condemns children to hunger, discrimination, and increased dropout rates, while also discouraging impoverished parents from sending their children to school for fear of penalties.

Challenging this unjust framework, CEFROHT filed Constitution Petition No. 81 of 2023, advocating for a shared responsibility between parents and the government, with the state bearing the primary duty for orphaned and vulnerable children. To bolster the case, CEFROHT conducted a field study in an orphan school receiving minimal government support. The findings exposed severe food insecurity, with children often surviving on hot water when food stocks depleted. Many resorted to child labor to escape hunger, a reality documented and submitted as evidence in court.

The litigation prompted the government to retract its initial position, announcing a new school feeding policy where the state would resume providing meals in schools. CEFROHT received an invitation to participate in a five-day retreat to draft the revised policy. However, discussions revealed that much of the proposed policy lacked evidence-based approaches and ignored on-ground realities, raising concerns about its feasibility.

While this marks progress, CEFROHT continues leveraging the case as an advocacy tool to push for a comprehensive, inclusive, and sustainable school feeding policy. The fight against hunger in schools remains critical to securing every child’s right to education and dignity.

Key Figures:

• Figure 1: Children in orphan schools often subsist on boiled beans and maize, leading to health complications like stomach ulcers.
• Figure 2: Newspaper coverage confirms the government’s policy reversal following litigation.
• Figure 3: CEFROHT’s invitation to collaborate on drafting the new policy underscores the impact of strategic advocacy.

The case underscores the power of public interest litigation in driving systemic change and holding the government accountable to its constitutional obligations.