The mirage of safe water

The right to safe drinking water has been recognised as a universal human right. The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) also endorse this right through political commitment at country level in a measurable manner.

The case of Pakistan in general and Punjab in particular is a precarious one where the nomenclature of multiple policy instruments alludes to a plethora of responsibilities and reporting instruments without making an express commitment to providing safe drinking water to the populace. The situation is further compounded by the inability of the legal apparatus to define meaningful pathways for exercising this right.

The National Drinking Water Policy 2009 recognised access to safe drinking water as a basic human right and deemed it the responsibility of the government to ensure its provision to all the citizens. The policy committed to providing access to safe and sustainable drinking water supply to the entire population of Pakistan by 2025. This commitment was an important benchmark in the history of water governance and back then 2025 seemed far away.

Ten years down the lane, we got the National Water Policy 2018 which in its 33 stated objectives used phrases like’ quality of fresh water resources’, ‘addressing drinking water demand’, and ‘setting national targets for drinking water’. However, the policymakers were wise enough to abstain from setting a deadline for provision of safe drinking water to the citizens. Though the planning principles of the policy also recognised access to affordable and safe drinking water as a fundamental human right of all citizens, it laid down for progressively providing access to clean and safe drinking water facilities while committing to its affordability and sustainability.

In this purview, the federal policy did establish the contours of the right to safe drinking water – though access was made subject to non-committal progressive provision. Subsequently, the federal policy commitments were reflected at the provincial level where two sets of legislations defined the parameters of access to safe drinking water – the Punjab Water Act 2019 and the Punjab Local Government Act 2022. The former holds the water undertaker – a company, a local government or a statutory authority so appointed – responsible for the supply of wholesome water whereas the latter attributes the supply of drinking water as the responsibility of local government.

Historically local governments have been responsible for water supply in the province but without any statutory provision for supply of safe drinking water. Legislations prior to the Local Government Act 2019 made no mention of drinking water and restrained to merely assigning the responsibility of water supply to different categories of consumers – household, commercial and industrial. Thus, the provincial governance framework acted blind to the citizens’ need for safe drinking water but it did actively correspond to the Clean Drinking Water for All project of the federal government in 2004.

With all its shortcomings of project design and coverage, limiting installation of one water purification plant per union council without ensuring maintenance, the initiative may be rated as the first serious attempt to address the right to safe drinking water. In contrast to this initiative, the entire portfolio of provincial and local water governance emphasises maintaining and increasing access to water supply without any consideration of safety for human consumption.

The Punjab Water Act 2019 does make supply of water unfit for human consumption an offence on the part of the water undertaker and creates personal liability for the one authorising the supply of unfit water. It further holds the water undertaker responsible for the supply of wholesome water through means other than pipes where supply of wholesome water is not possible at a reasonable cost. However, even such provision has been made subject to reasonable costs which in case of Punjab are going to be mammoth.

Basic human right to safe drinking water also resonates in SDG 6 of the UN SDGs that are centred on the principle of leaving no one behind. Pakistan as a signatory to the SDGs has committed to achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all by 2030. However, in its first Voluntary National Review (VNR) 2019, Pakistan reported on select six SDGs which did not include SDG 6. Later on, the VNR of 2022 did report on all 17 SDGs and the reported data of Punjab for target 6.1.1 of SDG 6 set 2014-15 as the baseline year for proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services with a baseline value of 98 per cent.

By 2019-20, the latest value for this target was reported at 99 per cent, thereby creating a sharp contrast between the proportion of population with access to safe drinking water and the proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services. It is evident that in the case of Punjab such service is highly unlikely to result in the provision of safe drinking water. The misleading nomenclature is of immense benefit to the prevalent mechanism of water governance and service delivery as it helps create a facade of service delivery improvement without tending to the rights of citizens.

In the above context, if a citizen residing in Punjab decides to exercise his/her right to safe drinking water, then recourse is available – albeit inconsequential administrative compliance. Recent laws on safe water or policies of the distant past fall short of altering the administrative practice of promoting unsustainable water management and continued supply of unsafe drinking water.

The 94 per cent proportion of the population using safely managed drinking water services do not comprise even half the percentage according to the limited national sample by the Pakistan Council of Research in Water Sources (PCRWR) – out of a sample of 435 drinking water sources from 29 cities only 39 per cent were found safe. However, experts estimate that a major contributor to contamination is the water supply system making safe drinking water accessibility fall to merely a single digit across the country. A court may decree in favour of citizens but enforcement of that decision is likely to meet the same fate as that of the right to free and compulsory education. Afterall, how many and how much fines can courts impose on water undertakers in the province?

An initiative to break the policy and administrative inertia is needed, one that rises above letters of policy and makes a real attempt at realising the right to safe drinking water.

The writer is a public policy analyst. He can be reached at: hamidmasud@gmail.com