South Africans Win Landmark Victory for the Human Right to Water

I was up until midnight last night reading a landmark decision from the High Court of South Africa. The case, which our partner the Coalition Against Water Privatisation (CAWP) helped local residents bring to court, affirms water as a fundamental human rights that the South African government must respect, protect, and fulfill. I found the decision inspiring and hopeful at a time when human rights around the world are under threat.

In his decision, Judge Tsoka declared South Africa's prepaid-water-meter system to be unconstitutional because it denies residents access to water by physically shutting off supplies each month when a household’s free basic allotment runs out. He required Johannesburg Water, the municipal water utility, to increase the amount of free basic water per month to 50 liters per person per day, the amount set by the World Health Organization to be the minimum to live a life of dignity.

What I found amazing was that the judge took a further step than most other progressive South African judgments by saying that the human right to water does, indeed, include a “minimum core” responsibility to be met by the state. This idea of a “minimum core,” established in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, has been debated in South African courts. Previous opinions showed discomfort at setting a minimum standard that the state must meet because of a potential-lack-of-resources argument. But Judge Tsoka took a brave step forward by declaring that 25 liters per person per day was a national minimum, but 50 liters per person per day was required for a dignified life, another right in the South African constitution.

Law, and especially international human rights law, is built like a house. Each case is a brick that supports the overall structure and defines the various aspects of the legal framework. The South Africa water case will be a cornerstone in the development of the human right to water. It affirms that international human rights law can, indeed, have teeth. So far, as demonstrated in the South African High Court, it seems that human rights law is most effective when its principles are enshrined in national constitutions.

UUSC has partnered with CAWP for two years. We will continue to support their struggle to advance the rights of all South Africans to safe, sufficient, affordable, and accessible water. We are hopeful that this will be one of many more important victories won by our partners to promote and defend the human right to water.

To watch a UUSC video about the case, click here.

One Community Gets Its Water Back

After six years without water, the people of Kwamasiza Hostel, a huge low-income housing block in the Vaal region of South Africa, finally got their water back. The news came from our partner the Coalition Against Water Privatisation (CAWP), after their year-long campaign for water rights finally led the municipality to take action.

CAWP had written a letter in January 2008 to the municipality's water provider, Metsi a Lekoa, concerning water and sanitation problems at Kwamasiza Hostel. Instead of sending a customary written response, as so often happens, the municipality actually went ahead and reopened the local water valve, which was closed in September 2001 during an attempted forced eviction of local residents.

Patricia Jones and I traveled to South Africa in November 2007 to visit the community. There, a community organizer, Elliott Nsundu, told us about the day that police, military, and private security were called in and used tear gas and rubber bullets against local residents to clear them out. Refusing to leave, community members fought back. They had no where else to go.

Eventually, the police and military attack was repelled, and the community stayed in Kwamasiza. But as the police left, they cut off all basic services to the community, including water, sanitation, and electricity. Thousands of people living in the 10-story building block were forced to use the surrounding fields for their sanitation needs and buy water from a water-supply truck that came through once a week.

In this case, it's important to remember that restricted access to water and housing evictions have a different tone in South Africa, with its recent history of apartheid and the new national constitution that protects the right to water and the right to housing. This progressive legal framework has enabled South African citizens not only to fight for what is morally right, but to fight for what is legally entitled to them.

In Phiri (pronounced "piree), Soweto, the community is waging a battle against prepaid water meters in the High Court of South Africa.

Now, with their water services reinstated, the Kwamasiza community can begin to live their lives again with the dignity, health, and safety all people deserve.

A Victory for the Human Right to Water in Tanzania

The Guardian reported last week that Tanzania, one of the poorest countries in the world, won a case against Biwater, a multinational water supplier, in a London tribunal. In 2003, under pressure from the World Bank, Tanzania privatized the water system in Dar Es Salaam, the capital city, in exchange for much needed debt relief. The contract was awarded to a U.K. water company named Biwater.

Within two years, the World Bank’s own findings showed that under City Water Services, the Biwater subsidiary, the city’s water and sewage services had worsened greatly. In 2005, Tanzania took back control of water services in the city. Biwater then sued for breach of contract under the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) within the World Bank and within the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).

Forced or coerced privatizations by the World Bank have had negative impacts on public utilities across Africa. UUSC partner the Tanzania Gender Networking Programme (TGNP), which works on water and gender issues in Tanzania, has relayed to us their frustration and disappointment in the continuing trend of foreign aid and loans having strings attached, primarily in the form of privatizing public services.

In 2006, TGNP launched a water campaign with the goal of “returning resources to the people.” TGNP’s research exposed that lack of safe, sufficient, and affordable water had created gender-based violence around water accessibility and increased the rate of girls dropping out of school. This was because women and girls are largely deemed responsible for the provision of water in the home.

Seeing that water was such an integral issue in the lives of women in Tanzania, TGNP became involved in analyzing the national budget and funds for the water sector. They successfully campaigned to have a woman appointed as assistant water minister and an increase in the overall allocation for the water sector. Although access to water for all remains a pressing issue in Tanzania, the women of TGNP are satisfied that the power to decide how much water is provided no longer rests with the World Bank or private corporations.

Last week, a London tribunal threw out a case brought by Biwater against Tanzania under the rules of UNCITRAL and awarded Tanzania $7 million in damages and costs. This was a huge victory for Tanzania. It was an initial acknowledgment that water is an essential human need.

When a contract impedes a government in meeting their human-rights requirements to their people, it is essential that international bodies such as the United Nations and other intergovernmental bodies support human rights over corporate profit.

Tanzania still awaits the decision of ICSID, a World Bank body, which is expected in the next few months. Our partners at TGNP, skeptical about the impartiality and fairness of this embedded judicial body, have called for the courtrooms to be “open to the watchful eyes and cameras of the world so that the mayhem of plunder by profit hungry companies of the ‘global village’ can partly be revealed for all.”