Human rights law clearly assigns the duty to ensure water and sanitation services for everyone to the state. Also, everyone is entitled, regardless of where one lives or what their status is. In practice, the situation is much different.
The human rights to water and sanitation are part of the human right to an adequate standard of living. This is guaranteed in Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) which also includes adequate food, clothing and housing, and the continuous improvement of living conditions. Other human rights treaties are relevant too. Read more
hereWe asked Benazir and Jacqueline to explain what they have witnessed in their work. Specifically, we asked: to what extent is their government aware of its duties (and acts upon them)?
Situation in Kenya
Most of the services in informal settlements are organised by communities, private parties and organisations, such as Umande Trust. Benazir explained: “When we started working in informal settlements, these places were completely neglected by the government and open defecation was rampant.”
Other challenges include that budgetary decisions are often made in favour of roads and lights, with a general lack of prioritisation for water, sanitation and hygiene services. Forced evictions and poor planning lead to communities being cut off from services altogether. Existing initiatives for upgrading informal settlements are problematic, as people are relocated with the aim of moving back once the upgrade has taken place. As is common, people are reluctant to move far away and often eligibility for moving back is unclear, which causes human rights concerns.
The Government particularly neglects areas that are not government-owned, or that are not assigned as land for occupation. Here, cartels – illegal competitors controlling the services and prices and investors – take over and dictate service provision on their own terms. This means that residents are at the mercy of cartels regarding the type of services, their availability and their affordability. For example, water points are only open at specific times, and residents need to pay much higher prices for their water and sanitation than people with formal service provision.
Ending on a positive note, according to Benazir the government has adopted a pro-poor policy within its Water Policy – and although much more needs to be done, the Government seems to take increasing responsibility for improving services in informal settlements. Improvements are needed in terms of regulation (availability, pricing, quality) of WASH services provided, and a redress mechanism to address governance issues around WASH needs to be established to reduce exploitation of residents. Education around WASH needs to be done to enable both citizens and duty-bearers to understand the pivotal role it plays in their lives.
Situation in South Africa
South Africa has a strong legal basis for the human rights to water and sanitation as it provides for these rights in its constitution. Also, the Upgrading of Informal Settlements Programme (UISP) was developed with three policy objectives: ‘tenure security (recognising and formalising the tenure rights of informal settlement residents); basic services provision, and participative processes to address broader social needs’ (V. Roaf et.al). The policy was meant to deal with the processes and procedures for the in situ upgrading of informal settlements. In situ upgrading is based on the notion that states should uphold the right to remain in situ whenever possible and desired by residents. According to Jacqueline, the UISP policy hasn’t been implemented fully in practice yet.
Generally, the Government of South Africa is relatively well aware of its responsibilities. Because the responsibility is so clearly assigned to the State, it is in fact prohibited for anybody else to provide services once it has formally recognised the settlement – creating problems when the Government is inactive. All too often there is no Government service provision and organisations like 1to1 Agency of Engagement have their hands tied.
Jacqueline told us about an even bigger issue: the many places where people live on privately owned land. The government does not feel any obligation to provide people with services who are residing on privately owned land. And residents are not able to force the owners of the land to provide access to services.