Even though land grabbing entails positive outcomes in terms of investments in poor countries, concerns about detrimental effects have been voiced by the World Bank (2011) and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Olivier De Schutter. They express concerns about violation of human rights. A significant driver motivating land grab is the promotion of biofuels (Clancy, 2008). Even though biofuels are generally considered a sustainable solution, it is widely contested whether they escape potential negative effects (Thompson, 2008). In this paper I will discuss ethical arguments concerning land grab in regard to biofuels and human rights. The paper proceeds as follows: (1) A paradigmatic case of morally bad land grabbing driven by biofuels is defined. I call this the ‘Food vs. Fuel-Land-Grabbing’ (FFLG) case; (2) the categories of human rights relevant to land grabbing, based on De Schutter’s UN recommended list of rights, are discussed. The human rights approach is equivalent to the promotion of a global code of conduct on land grabbing; (3) the critical claim that human rights based responsible investment-approaches will only lead to more morally bad land grabbing is presented; and (4) this will provide the cue for arguing that a pluralist and institutionally sensitive sort of cosmopolitanism is needed in the moral argument against bad land grabbing driven by biofuels as exemplified in the FFLG case.