Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards Foreword This report argues that an increase in integrity levels is instrumental to the progressive, full realisation of the human right to water. The relationship between the human right to water and integrity will be analysed by examining Community Water Boards (CWBs) in Central America. A CWB is a social, not-for-profit structure established under a framework which allows it to capture, treat and distribute water to the community. CWBs’ principles include environmental protection and conservation, social participation, solidarity, transparency, accountability, mutual trust and social commitment. Their core mission is to ensure that safe water reaches the places where it is needed most, and that the immediate surroundings are environmentally healthy and protected. CWBs’ legitimisation at local level is derived from high standards of integrity, transparency and accountability toward the community, and their role therefore goes beyond water supply and environmental conservation. Indeed, successful CWBs use a model that indirectly fosters social justice and economic development. In disadvantaged areas, CWBs are the primary agent implementing the human right to water. Given that CWBs exemplify the most recent, accepted developmental models promoting sustainability, inclusion, equity and human rights, one would expect them to be considered a key ally of the state and, as such, to be protected, recognised and supported. However, more often than not, CWBs’ role, function and mandate are weakened by poor recognition at national level, unclear regulation, insufficient training and support, and (again at national level) low levels of integrity. This report supports the claim that integrity at all levels and across sectors is both a tool and an objective of the full implementation of the human right to water, and that the approach and model adopted by CWBs should be carefully studied, protected and supported by national and international actors. 2 Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards ANNA MARIA BUZZONI 3 Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards Acknowledgements: The author would like to extend her sincere thanks to many people who have graciously accepted her request for interviews and who have shared their experience with courage and integrity – Xinia Briseño (President of CWB Milano, Costa Rica), María del Rosario Pérez (President of the CWB of Aldea San Juan, Guatemala), María de lós Ángeles Alfaro Bolaños (President of the CWB of Santa Gertrudis Sur de Grecia, Costa Rica), Carlos Alberto Beltrán (Administrator of the drinking water supply system of Cantón La Peña, El Salvador), Francisco Alberto Urizas Fernández (President of the CWB barrio Parrasquiñ Dos, area 4, Santa Cruz del Quiché, Guatemala). Thanks also to Rolando Marín, president of CLOCSAS, and to Aline Baillat of WaterLex, for their attentive review and expert advice. Thanks Rolando Castro and Soledad Castro of CEDARENA, Costa Rica, for their support, insight and assistance with the case study on Costa Rica and the photos, and for their encouragement. Thanks to the WIN team and especially to Binayak Das who supported this initiative since the very beginning until the very end. Author: Anna Maria Buzzoni Copy Editing: Stephanie Debere and Jane Garton Photo Credits: Centro de Derecho Ambiental y de los Recursos Naturales (CEDARENA), Costa Rica Layout and Design: Nirmal Singh ©2014 Water Integrity Network Citation: Buzzoni, A M (2014); Integrity and the Human Right to Water at Community Level in Central America; Water Integrity Network, Berlin, Germany Water Integrity Network Alt Moabit 91b, 10559, Berlin www.waterintegritynetwork.net email: info@win-s.org The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of WIN and responsibility for the final publication rests with the author only Contents Foreword 2 Acknowledgements 4 List of abbreviations 6 An introduction to integrity and the human right to water 7 Community Water Boards in Central America 10 CWBs: internal challenges and strengths 12 CWBs: external challenges and opportunities 14 Conclusion: from a demand-driven to a rights-based approach 16 Case study: the human right to water in Milano, Costa Rica 18 Interviews with CWB presidents 22 References 24 5 List of abbreviations AyA National Institute for Aqueducts and Sewers (Costa Rica) CESCR Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (United Nations) CLOCSAS Latin America Confederation of Community Water Boards CWB Community Water Boards FUNDAMUNI Foundation for the Support of Municipalities (El Salvador) ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights INFOM National Municipal Investment Fund (Guatemala) IRET Regional Institute for Studies of Toxic Substances (Costa Rica) MAG Ministry for Agriculture (Costa Rica) MINAET Ministry for Environment, Energy and Telecommunication (Costa Rica) MINSA Ministry of Health (Costa Rica) NGO Non-Governmental Organisation RedCAPS Network of Committees of Drinking Water and Sanitation (Nicaragua) TAP Transparenty Accountability Participation TI Transparency International UN United Nations UNAGUAS Union of Council Acqueducts of Grecia (Costa Rica) WIN Water Integrity Network 1 An introduction to integrity and the human right to water "(Corruption) allows the powerful to break the rules that preserve habitats and ecosystems, to plunder and pollute the water sources that entire world regions depend upon and to steal the money that is meant to get water to the poor." Hon. Prof. Wangari Maathai, 2004 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate: Water in the community: why integrity matters Foreword to Transparency International’s Global Corruption Report 2008 7 The right to water was first recognised in 2002 Another important aspect to consider is Article 2 with the adoption of General Comment No. 15 by of the ICESCR, applicable to the human right to the United Nations (UN) Committee on water, which rules that states must devote the Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. This maximum of their available resources to became an authoritative interpretation of the progressively achieve the full realisation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and right. Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and is now used to monitor states parties’ compliance. The right to As we will see, these provisions are closely water was reaffirmed by the UN General related to anti-corruption theory and practice.2 Assembly (A/RES/64/292) and the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/12/24) in 2010. Since then, All projects and initiatives aimed at improving sanitation has also been considered part of this access to water should be based on three key understanding.1 However, sanitation is not within principles: Transparency, Accountability and the scope of this paper and we therefore refer to Participation (TAP)3 – see definitions box on next the human right to (drinking) water. page. The UN’s human rights framework prescribes These principles are shared by anti-corruption several obligations, principles and criteria which framework analysis, which has adopted them in also relate to water. Signatory states to the its practice. As it is difficult – if not impossible – ICESCR have the following obligations: to measure corruption, the anti-corruption community has been focusing instead on OBLIGATION TO RESPECT measuring levels of integrity, with the aim of The state must not inhibit people from accessing reducing integrity risks, i.e. opportunities for water services or may not prevent people already corruption. enjoying the right from continuing to enjoy it. For example, it should not sell the land where a water Integrity and integrity risks are usually source is placed without first providing an equal or measured and monitored through these TAP better alternative to affected communities. principles, as well as through specific anti- OBLIGATION TO PROTECT corruption measures adopted by states The state must protect people from interference by (Transparency International 2008). third parties who impede access to safe water services. For example, it should protect people Corruption and integrity are especially relevant from (domestic or foreign) companies polluting a to the progressive realisation of the human right water source or from organised crime taking over to water (A/HRC/RES/21/L.13). As pointed out in resources. Transparency International’s Global Corruption Report 2008, the water crisis is a governance OBLIGATION TO FULFIL The state and its institutions with delegated authority must provide for an appropriate legal, 1 For a more comprehensive discussion on whether sanitation administrative and financial framework, i.e. it should be considered a distinct right (the human ‘rights’ versus the human ‘right’ to water and sanitation) please see must ensure that the conditions exist for Albuquerque and Roaf (2012), p.27 2 For a comprehensive overview of the relation between everyone to enjoy their rights – including through corruption and the human right to water and sanitation see education and information. Baillat 2013 3 CESCR, General Comment No. 15, paras. 48, 55 8  Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards crisis with corruption at its core (Transparency Definitions International 2008). The World Bank suggests that 20 to 40 per cent of water sector finances This paper uses the following definitions which are being lost to dishonest and corrupt practices derive from the human rights-based approach (SIWI 2006), while the Global Corruption Report and the anti-corruption framework. They are estimates that water sector corruption increases overlapping and mutually reinforcing. household connection costs by up to 30 per cent Integrity: practices which impede corruption and in developing countries, costing the industry promote respect for the rule of law. US$48 billion in annual losses. These figures are even more dramatic given that, of approximately Transparency: the existence of clear, accessible, 1.2 billion people who did not have access to safe complete and reliable written information drinking water in 2006, two-thirds lived on less regarding, inter alia, contracts, processes, than US$2 a day (UNDP 2006). decision-making, roles and responsibilities of actors. As corruption is draining the water sector, an Accountability: This requires clear identification increase in integrity levels is instrumental to the of roles and duty-bearers. It has two dimensions. progressive, full realisation of the human right The first refers to the means by which an to water. individual or group enforces their rights against the state or another private actor by demanding a Many forms of corruption breach one or more of remedy for past or ongoing violations. The second states’ obligations as prescribed by ICESCR. seeks to influence the state’s behaviour in the future, making it more responsive to the needs Such corruption includes embezzlement, and rights of its citizens, including through misappropriation, bribes, traffic of influence, effective and transparent monitoring clientelism, collusion, extortion, fraud, nepotism, mechanisms. and patronage.4 These all prevent the state from fulfilling its obligation to devote the maximum Participation: This is the right to participate and available resources to safe drinking water. influence decision-making processes. It must be active, free and meaningful and it must reach out to all sectors of society, especially to the most While the state must make appropriate vulnerable and marginalised people. interventions that regulate interactions among different actors to ensure that everyone is empowered to fulfil these responsibilities, it is not subcontracting of small or large infrastructures, the only responsible party. Plummer and Cross or when the state has lost part or all of its proposed an analysis of corruption in the water jurisdiction over certain territory and resources – sector based on interactions between public for example, due to organised crime. bodies, between private and public bodies, and between consumers and providers (Plummer and The relationship between the human right to Cross 2006). However, there is another important water and TAP principles can be clearly type of interaction: that between private bodies. understood by examining Community Water This is particularly relevant in relation to the Boards (CWBs)5 in Central America. 4 For definitions, see Transparency International (2009) 5 CWBs are also known as Organizaciones Comunitarias de Servicios de Agua y Saneamiento (OCSAS), or Community Organisations for Water and Sanitation Services 9 2 Community Water Boards in Central America According to the World Bank, Latin America has water supply system, through their own work roughly 80,000 CWBs, serving roughly 70 million and capital investment. A CWB is established people,6 with a capacity to serve 18 million more under a framework allowing it to capture, treat (Water and Sanitation Programme 2008). In and distribute water among partners. Revenue some areas of Central America, for example collection is also part of its remit. However, a Honduras, El Salvador, Costa Rica, the CWB will work pro-bono out of social percentage of the population served by CWBs is commitment. In other words, CWBs are non- 30-40 per cent (Ramírez 2010). The boards are profit, self-organised water monitors and therefore a crucial actor at national and sub- providers at the community level (Castro 2009). regional levels. Their relationship with the state varies greatly across countries. A CWB could be defined as a social structure, association, cooperative or committee at Some CWBs were established more than 40 community level. It is made up of partners who years ago, often by strong, charismatic have decided to contribute to the conservation of community leaders, to address a lack of access the water ecosystem and the construction of a to water in quantity or quality. Sometimes the problem in accessing water is not due to Community Water Boards at a glance scarcity, but to inadequate distribution or a lack of integrity.7 CWBs are commonly established in A Community Water Board (CWB) is a social rural areas, or where displacement or structure, association, cooperative or committee urbanisation have resulted in inadequate service at community level. It is established under a provision by the state or private services. They framework allowing it to capture, treat and distribute water among partners. Revenue are sometimes considered a beneficial outcome collection is also part of its remit. The boards of an otherwise negative event, in this case state work pro-bono. or private failure. These forms of self- organisation are demand-driven and work on the CWBs serve roughly 70 million people in Latin principle of participation (Albuquerque and Roaf America and the Caribbean. 2012). CWBs may serve any number of people, from a few dozen families to several thousand. Their principles include environmental protection and conservation, social participation, solidarity, While the supply of drinking water remains their transparency, accountability, mutual trust and primary concern, some more advanced CWBs social commitment. have extended their service to include areas such as sanitation and solid waste management. 6 Declaration: Agua y saneamiento para nuestras comunidades en Latino América y el Caribe, CLOCSAS/CODIA at Stockholm World Water Week 2013 7 See interviews with CWB presidents 10  Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards CWBs’ core mission is to ensure that safe water reaches the places where it is needed most with STRUCTURE OF A CWB no interruptions, and that the immediate surroundings are environmentally healthy and President protected. In disadvantaged areas, CWBs are the Elected every 2-5 years) primary agent implementing the human right to water. They do this through an integrated management focus which pays special attention Board Elected every 2-5 years. Usually made up to the environment and to the community served. of 3-16 members with clearly assigned responsibilities, such as president, In Central America, where TAP levels are treasurer, secretary, spokesperson, etc. generally low8 and water is unevenly distributed,9 CWBs’ role, potential and limitations are General Assembly especially relevant to the debate around TAP and The CWB's highest authority, composed of all users. It chooses the board's management, the human right to water and sanitation. and approves or rejects the board's actions. It can elect or remove board members. CWBs are formed in response to a need for water that is otherwise not met. Civil society engagement is a prerequisite of their formation. as a fee collector or a technician. The board is The most notable consequence of CWBs is that elected every two to five years by the general access to quality water is extended to a larger assembly of users, which has the ultimate section of the population. Successful decision-making power. Board members do experiences and models of citizen participation their work voluntarily, with great social and empowerment are well documented, mainly commitment, being the only employees of the through regional networks and NGOs which have organisation not paid for their services. been studying and supporting CWBs for the past 30 years.10 An important element, shared by Community leaders are the key drivers of these CWBs across the whole Latin America region, is initiatives. Users participate in the decision- active participation in environmental making process regarding water infrastructure conservation and protection.11 The boards’ and ecosystems, and have voting powers to steer structure is fairly similar throughout the Central it. This form of participation is generally rooted in American sub-region. They are usually the principles of transparency and accountability. established as a form of association, where A CWB may or may not be organised under more members are also users with voting rights. or less formal structures,12 but it remains “User” is generally defined as a house or family. essentially a community project based on mutual CWBs are run and administered by a board trust. There is ownership of the project, consisting of 3-16 members with clearly especially because state support is limited. In assigned responsibilities, and employees, such some cases, matching funds as well as technical 8 Based on past Corruption Perception Indexes published by Transparency International 9 While the Joint Monitoring Programme criteria seem to indicate significant progress towards improved water coverage, the quality and reliability of water and services can be very inconsistent (GWP 2011). 10 See, inter alia, FANCA, AVINA, GWP etc. 11 See interviews with CWB presidents and Rolando Castro (2009) 12 For example in Nicaragua, where Law 722 provides a legal framework to CWBs 11 Water Integrity Network, 2013 capacity building have been provided by foreign so it is hard to assess CWBs’ compliance with the NGOs or governments. principles of equality and non-discrimination. Data collection from the community on sensitive CWBs: internal challenges and strengths issues is perceived as offensive and intrusive, hence culture may obstruct transparency and One of the major challenges to meaningful negatively impact human rights. participation by CWBs is the lack of capacity and education at community level. In disadvantaged It is also important to remember that CWB users rural communities, which have often are not the same as their beneficiaries (with experienced both the national and local some differences in Panama), i.e. there may be consequences of conflicts, the lack of water and large networks of water beneficiaries who have safe shelter result in very limited access to no access to information and decision-making general education. This has several rights. This is particularly relevant to tariff repercussions such as the inability to regulation. Except in Costa Rica, tariffs tend to understand fully and draft clear information, be decided and agreed by the community of poor attendance at meetings and unwillingness users, and generally include several savings to take responsibility. As a result, some plans – maintenance, and environmental individuals are overloaded,13 or malfunctioning protection and conservation being the most boards14 are not removed. It is generally common. Tariffs need to be affordable for all if recognised that capacity building is a CWBs are to fulfil their role in human rights prerequisite of meaningful participation. protection. In Guatemala, for example, some CWBs fixed very high tariffs (40-50 per cent of Gender equity and equality in power relations are household income), draining much-needed widely documented as a major challenge. Despite resources from the most disadvantaged the internationally recognised role of women, families.15 It must be noted that if payment is while some women do have the position of CWB delayed or services suspended, families can president or vice-president, the majority of boards usually access a safe water point less than 100 report that women do not take part in making metres from their house. decisions. The user is generally represented by a man at the general assembly. The most common Despite these challenges, CWBs have several roles for female board members are those of intrinsic strengths which can be turned into treasurer or secretary. Where gender equality great opportunities for attracting funding and laws are present, as in Costa Rica, these are a recognition. Community participation, ownership positive step and give stronger legitimacy to and trust are key elements of a healthy CWB. women willing to engage, but the gender gap is still estimated as substantial. Transparency is a key strategic approach that should be adopted throughout the cycle of the Disaggregated data on languages, ethnicity and community project, from fundraising and other minority groups is not usually monitored, operations to financial planning and 13 As documented in interviews with CWB presidents in Milano and Santa Gertrudis Sur de Grecia (Costa Rica) 14 As documented in interviews with CWB presidents of Municipio de Baja Verapaz (Guatemala) and Milano (Costa Rica) 15 It is argued that such tariffs are calculated to offer a sustainable, high-quality service, which includes environmental conservation, reforestation and protection 12  Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards management. Together with accountability, it is processes that positively affect fulfilment of the pillar of CWBs’ legitimacy.16 their human rights. Transparency is both a tool and an objective. Participation, clear rules, access to information, Written material is publicly available on CWB good service, vision and leadership foster a premises and to association members. When climate of mutual trust and therefore data is sensitive (as in El Salvador, where the accountability. Nonetheless, the lack of engaged presence of organised crime necessitates people with the right capacities has had some secrecy,17 it can still be released in a safe way negative repercussions for CWBs’ accountability. (i.e. behind closed doors at the CWB president’s While the voting rights of a CWB’s general office). States have very varied legal systems, assembly have never been suspended, there which may provide full or partial frameworks for have been some cases of corruption or the legalisation and transparency of the mismanagement at community level, with direct association and its assets. These frameworks and dramatic consequences for people who lost may cover areas such as land registration and their access to water or suffered illnesses as a equipment ownership, or certification on water result of contamination.18 In such circumstances, quality and services. CWB presidents the situation has improved only with time and interviewed showed a strongly proactive because a new leader emerged, either because approach towards written regulation; for she or he had recently moved to the community example lobbying for laws and making or because a term of office had expired. immediate use of new regulation that enabled them to register their water points with To restore access to water services interrupted authorities. or affected by corrupt practices or mismanagement, new leaders have focused on Transparency – and therefore CWB’s recreating the relationship with the community operations and legitimacy – depends on access through increased accountability and inclusion, to information. More often than not, as demonstrated by CWB presidents María del transparency and access to information are Rosario Pérez, Xinia Briseño and María de los facilitated by active community participation in Angeles Alfaro Bolaños.19 For example, they fundraising and the construction of imposed a restructure of the billing system to infrastructure, as well as the restoration and make it clear and simple, travelled around the protection of the water ecosystem. In addition, community to see and assess people’s needs, tariffs should be clear and disaggregated, and and made sure that all equipment and assets paid through the banking system where came under the formal ownership of the available (rather than through the exchange of committee. Regardless of the regulatory cash between individuals), reducing scope for framework, they established clear rules, rights corruption. Therefore, transparency is and responsibilities for board members, users confirmed as one of the cornerstones of the and beneficiaries. External audits or social legitimacy of power and citizens’ ownership of audits are also common. 16 As documented in interviews with CWB presidents from El Salvador (Carlos Alberto Beltrán), Guatemala (María del Rosario Perez and Francisco Alberto Urizas Fernández) and Costa Rica (Xinia Briseño and María de los Angeles Bolaños) 17 See interviews with CWB presidents 18 See interviews with CWB presidents 19 Presidents of the CWB Milano and the CWB de Santa Gertrudis Sur de Grecia (Costa Rica), respectively 13 Water Integrity Network, 2013 “They hold the same post for years, not comes to technical capacity building and because they deserved it, but because no institutional development, which it is the state’s one else wanted to take the responsibility.” obligation to provide. Basic training is often — María del Rosario Pérez, President of the CWB given by foreign NGOs, with little or no and Deputy Mayor, Aldea San Juan, Municipio de involvement from the public sector and weak or Salamá, Departamento de Baja Verapaz, Guatemala inconsistent accountability on the part of international development agencies. Most importantly, accountability is widely reported as the first ingredient for successful CWBs which want to register formally with the fundraising within the community, and is often authorities are often confronted with expensive, the only way CWBs can start building trust – as unnecessarily complex and time-consuming well as water infrastructure. Accountability (both bureaucracy. A lack of effective decentralised to beneficiaries and to authorities, where structures is also a problem, as sometimes present) is both a driver and a strategic priority there is a great distance between communities for CWBs, because it enables them to function and the centre of power. This results in long and legitimises them. Where strong delays in the construction of water systems, accountability systems are in place, healthy inefficient maintenance and a decrease in water is more accessible, finances are in better community trust. It is estimated that nearly 40 shape and the water ecosystem is clean, per cent of people served by CWBs do not have maintained and protected. Risk reduction access to water in adequate quantity and quality mechanisms also need to be in place to make (Evans 1992), which in some cases may be a the system more resilient to shocks, such as result of the long delays and lack of support natural disasters or economic and social unrest. from institutions. In Guatemala, four years for In some cases, boards with strong accountability the registration of a CWB is considered fast in have been able to save considerable funds and comparison to some communities which started invest in development projects in the the process 15 years previously.21 community.20 Similarly, the lack of clear and accountable legal CWBs: external challenges and and regulatory frameworks (Guatemala), opportunities confusion over the legal identity of CWBs and their resources (Costa Rica), and general When reinvestment and diversification of confusion and conflicts around identity, rights investment is not possible, this may be the result and obligations of duty-bearers have been well of external factors such as contamination (for documented as high risks to integrity (Gentes example, due to the pineapple industry in Costa 2011; FANCA 2006; Castro 2009). Rica – a clear breach of the state’s obligation to respect and protect – see case study below). CWBs supply a vital service traditionally managed by the state, creating and running this Studies on CWBs confirm poor or no support service with their own money, time and from local and national government when it resources. Their existence arose from the state’s 20 For example, in Municipio de Baja Verapaz, Guatemala 21 Interview with Francisco Alberto Urizas Fernandez – President, Comité de Pozo Mecánico de Bombeo in Santa Cruz del Quiché (Guatemala) 14  Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards failure, or from excessively-priced and low- Verapaz). Evidence of carefully planned quality water supplies managed by private mitigation measures is also documented (for agents. However, the human right to water example, by Carlos Beltrán from Cantón La cannot solely be CWBs’ responsibility. It is Peña, and Usulután, El Salvador, who created important that the state’s responsibilities are not stock inventories, meaning costly trips to the lifted. The government of Nicaragua chose to capital to buy parts can be carefully planned and create a specific law for community rural water less frequently made). management (Law No. 722, Ley Especial de Comités de Agua Potable y Saneamiento), with The demand-driven approach tends to replicate CWBs able to make extensive proposals for legal itself within the community. As long as CWBs reform throughout the process. On the contrary, depend on the level of charisma present in their Guatemala has no law for the water sector and community at a given time – that is, the strength CWBs have no specific regulation or recognition. of respected community leaders who are able to organise local people to demand their rights – In some cases, CWBs are reticent towards they will never be able to fulfil their role of legalisation within the given system, as the realising the human right to water in a resilient regulatory institution formally becomes the way. If international development organisations owner of the community-paid (and built) assets and states want to achieve sustainable progress (Castro 2009). However, if they do not register in the full implementation of the human right to themselves they cannot access training and water and sanitation, they should address the support. This discrimination against capacity challenge with a novel approach. unregistered CWBs goes against states’ Capacity building should go beyond technical obligations and may be unconstitutional (ibid.). training and supervision, to include support to knowledge networks and areas of specialisation. To face these challenges, CWBs have started to Training itself must be specific and focused to organise networks mutually reinforcing TAP the country context, repeated and updated over mechanisms through capacity building in key time. It should be built on TAP criteria to foster areas. Unión de Acueductos Comunales de the human right to water and sanitation, a Grecia (UNAGUAS) in Costa Rica22 and RedCAPS healthy environment and institutional in Nicaragua are examples, but others exist. development. Effective capacity building comes These networks can offer several benefits, such when procedures are clear and understood, and as specialisation, economies of scale and nodes when more people can take part in the decision- of knowledge flows. Spontaneous forms of local making process in an informed way. Capacity networks exist in Guatemala (as documented by building is needed also at government level, and María del Rosario López from Municipio de Baja for private providers. 22 The CWB of Milano (Costa Rica) was one of several CWBs to receive capacity building support from UNAGUAS in Costa Rica 15 3 Conclusion: from a demand-driven to a right-based approach The state has a duty under the human rights communities, where no other solution is framework to enable an environment conducive available. They offer great potential, which must to these rights being fulfilled. Policies, regulation be recognised and developed. The challenges and monitoring must be made simple, consistent, they pose are smaller than the opportunities transparent and available. Accountability links at they offer. all levels need to be assessed through a holistic approach that embraces the whole functioning of CWB mechanisms can function well only when the state. This is especially relevant in the case of based on accountable relationships, which need ‘hard accountability mechanisms’ (punitive to be rethought if conflict is to be managed and measures taken by the state or provision for human rights respected. As one CWB member damage repair by the offending party) in cases put it at a regional conference of CWBs in where local water supply for domestic use is Nicaragua (Nuestra Agua 2013), “the state and threatened by third parties. It is important to the community are divorced”. Although this underline that the state’s obligation to protect divorce is not only the consequence of corrupt also includes an extraterritorial dimension. This practices, it is very often the result of poor TAP means that the state “should take steps to levels. It costs more money23 than previously prevent human rights contraventions abroad by thought, and, more importantly, prevents corporations which have their main seat under its otherwise participatory and accountable jurisdiction” (CESCR 2011). The judicial system organisations from implementing the human must be able to assign clear responsibilities and right to water where there is no alternative. remedies. Rulings must be enforced, and the human right to water protected before any other To be able to demand interest. This is not happening in most countries greater accountability, of the sub-region, including those which score recognition, support higher in human development and corruption and respect for their indexes, such as Costa Rica. Even there, the link role in the fulfilment of between the lack of integrity at government level the human rights to and the resulting breach of the state’s obligations water and sanitation, towards human rights is evident (see the case CWBs need to increase study below). their visibility as protagonists in CWBs base their legitimacy on TAP principles, as bridging the urban-rural gap. Latin-American well as on solidarity and mutual trust. They are and Caribbean CWBs have therefore created a the protectors of water and the implementers of confederation, Confederacion Latinoamericana the human right to water in the poorest de OCSAS, (CLOCSAS) after Confederacion 23 In developing countries, corruption raises the cost of connecting a rural household to a water network by as much as 30 per cent, inflating the cost of achieving the Millennium Development Goal on water and sanitation by more than US$48 billion or nearly half of annual global aid outlays (Transparency International 2008) 16  Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards Latinoamericana de OCSAS (CLOCSAS),24 which specific capacity building, support by advocates for the recognition of their role and institutions and networks, and sector needs at national and regional levels. restructuring with a focus on increasing levels of TAP in the relationships between national and CWBs are a crucial actor in the implementation local levels, the human right to water and of the human right to water and sanitation in sanitation is neither protected, respected nor Central America.25 Without adequate and fulfilled. 24 For more information on CLOCSAS see their webpage at: http://wash-rural.ning.com/profile/CLOCSAS 25 It is important to mention that CWBs have a crucial role in many other countries in Latin America 17 4 Case Study: the human right to water in Milano, Costa Rica The aqueduct in the rural community of Milano communities of Cairo, Luisiana and Milano. The is a water supply system in the province of fragility and vulnerability of water sources did Limón, near the Caribbean coast of Costa Rica.26 not allow for intensive farming. Despite this The community was established in 1982-3 by warning, the area has since become largely used around 30 families. At that time, everybody had for intensive pineapple cultivation and in late access to water through home-made wells. Ten 2012, around 60,000 hectares were dedicated to years later, the water became polluted by faecal this crop across the country (Tragua and GWP bacteria, and the community decided to build an 2012). It is unclear who is accountable for those aqueduct. Some community leaders started concessions. organising the fundraising through rodeos, fairs and raffles, and a publicity campaign. To build Toxic effects of pesticide trust in the community, they published the breakdown of funds raised at each event on the Bromacil: a pesticide moderately toxic in liquid door of the local shop, where everybody could form. It irritates the skin, eyes and respiratory tract. access it. Eventually, with their own money and Diuron: a pesticide which irritates the skin and labour, they were able to build the water system, throat. It has been linked to changes in the spleen a tank, office premises and a meeting room for and bone marrow. Chronic exposure in animals the whole community. Capacity was improved causes changes in blood chemistry, increased from 1.3 to 11 litres per second. mortality, growth retardation, abnormal blood pigment and anaemia. Transparency and accountability were the keys to restoring and guaranteeing safe drinking water Triadimefon: a moderately toxic fungicide which has been linked to birth defects, among other for all. Community leaders were able increasingly conditions. to engage with the community by making Source: http://extoxnet.orst.edu comprehensive information available in public spaces and accounting for every cent spent. The community felt ownership of the project and This change had a dramatic impact on the water freely took part in the whole project cycle. supply in nearby communities. Around 6,000 people were affected, including the population of In 1996, engineers and officials from the Milano. Between 2001 and 2004, the Regional National Institute for Aqueducts and Sewers in Institute for Studies of Toxic Substances (IRET) of Costa Rica27 (AyA) warned about the danger of the National University of Costa Rica found the changing land use in the aquifer recharge zone pesticide Bromacil in groundwater. IRET shared which supplied drinking water to the this analysis with AyA and with the communities 26 Unless otherwise stated, information comes from interviews between the author and Xinia Briseño, President of the CWB of Milano 27 AyA has the legitimacy to delegate local water management administration (for drinking and waste water), including to Community Water Boards, which, if registered with AyA, are called ASADA 18  Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards affected. They also sent a copy of the report to that these illnesses are or may be directly related the Ministry of Health (MINSA), the Ministry for to the chemicals found in water. Environment, Energy and Telecommunication (MINAET), the Ministry for Agriculture (MAG) and In mid-2007, affected communities presented a the pineapple corporations (Hacienda Ojo de complaint before the Sala Constitucional, the Agua, Babilonia and SA Frutex – now Corporation highest Court in Costa Rica. It pronounced its Del Monte). Yet AyA took no steps towards verdict in 2009, ordering institutions including supplying alternative sources of clean drinking AyA, MINSA and MINAET to restore immediately water, leaving the population of Milano with no the safe drinking water sources contaminated by choice but to consume contaminated water until pineapple cultivation.28 2007. That same year, the herbicides Diuron and Triadimefon were also found in drinking water. However, after more than four years, the process has not yet started and the situation remains Consequently, AyA started to drill for new virtually unchanged for the community of sources of water free from pesticide Milano. In addition, AyA informed the community contamination. However, wherever they tried to that it could resume drinking water from the access new sources of water, these were affected aqueduct because the contamination was over. by pesticide use and were of insufficient capacity. However, this analysis, at first claimed to have As a result, in August 2007, AyA started to supply been conducted by AyA, has been widely drinking water by truck. It promised this would questioned. Subsequent analysis confirmed that be a temporary measure and that it would build a the contamination still persists, and is so high new water pipeline by 2009. However, this that it even killed laboratory organisms during remained unfulfilled as of August 2013. tests (El País 2011). In addition, the water truck service is irregular As Xinia Briseño, and of inconsistent quality. It is not clear when and president of the how often trucks will arrive, and water often CWB, reports: “At needs to be boiled to ensure it is safe. Many weekends the stream families are still drinking contaminated water. running by our Illnesses such as rashes, gastric problems and community smells of kidney cancer are common, especially in pregnant chemicals and the women and children. Genetic modifications have water has a green- been observed, and animals are also affected. yellowish colour. But Despite this, the authorities have until now failed we cannot file a to investigate the relationship between complaint at the weekend, because offices are contaminated water and the illnesses found in closed. We think that the corporations dump Milano. The necessary investigations are very their untreated water tanks into the environment expensive, and apparently Costa Rica does not at the weekend because they know we are have a suitably equipped laboratory. The doctor is powerless.” only present in the community once a week. Hospital doctors have allegedly refused to record In July 2010, the community of Siquirres, 28 Resolution No. 2009-009040, 29 May 2009, “De forma inmediata se inicie el proceso de saneamiento y eliminación de residuos de plaguicidas de las fuentes de agua que abastecen a las comunidades amparadas” 19 Water Integrity Network, 2013 representing the public conference, despite being invited. more than 6,000 This case study offers valuable insight into the people directly potential of CWBs, with Milano’s board affected by successfully fulfilling the human right to water. pineapple farming, Sadly, it also shows the failure of the state of filed a criminal Costa Rica to protect, respect and fulfil this complaint against right, by allowing a foreign corporation to Del Monte contaminate water and soil consistently and Corporation for repeatedly. The state has prevented a community water already enjoying the right to water from contamination. This continuing to enjoy it, by changing soil use to is currently still intensive pineapple farming despite early being investigated by prosecutors. warnings, and by failing to comply with the judicial decision issued in 2009. It has lacked In May 2011, the newspaper El País was accountability and transparency in its laboratory informed that a representative from the AyA tests, the information given to the community, water laboratory stated in a public conference at and compliance with rules and regulations. This the University of Costa Rica that AyA intended to has resulted in the community drinking permit minor doses of Bromacil and other toxic contaminated water for years, causing substances in drinking water (ibid.). MINSA was widespread health problems and environmental widely criticised for not participating in this degradation. 20  Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards money. As corruption and the infringement of human rights affect poor and marginalised people more than anyone else, honest discussion is needed about what is not working or what is not accessible to all those who have yet to see their human right to water protected, respected and fulfilled. One of the next steps in the progressive implementation of the human right to water should be a leaner, simpler and more accessible way to hold ICESCR signatory states accountable. Integrity and TAP principles guaranteed safe drinking water for the community of Milano until this social, economic and legal pact was Another key issue to be considered – although breached by an unaccountable state and elusive beyond the scope of this report – is the third parties. Removing integrity from this accessibility of complaint mechanisms for poor system has resulted in incalculable rural communities. Many obstacles prevent them environmental damage, social conflict, illness from accessing formal complaint mechanisms and institutional delegitimisation, as well as a under the human rights framework. To file this waste of newly-built infrastructure. How much type of complaint requires time, expertise and do these pineapples really cost? 21 5 Interviews with CWB presidents MARÍA DEL ROSARIO PÉREZ have safe drinking water available 24/7. Every house President of the CWB of Aldea San Juan, has a hydrometer. There is perfect gender equity on Municipio de Salamá, Departamento de Baja the board (three women and three men). Verapaz, Guatemala We registered our water sources in 2006. Despite an order by the Supreme Court of Justice, someone Our duty is to protect the forest and groundwater built a motorbike racetrack and some private houses, levels. contaminating several water sources which had to be When I took office, I pointed out that the billing abandoned. I called the municipality to question why system was not transparent and presented serious they were granting those concessions, but they said risks of weakening trust in the CWB. No one in the the responsibility was with the Directorate of Water at community wanted to take responsibility for the CWB, the Environment Ministry. So we asked to see the and the previous board stayed in power not because documents at the directorate, because we suspected they were good, but because no one wanted to issues of low integrity. Yolanda Martinez from the replace them. We installed water meters to establish National Institute for Aqueducts and Sewers (AyA) equity and access. This was successful. We decided said that those water sources did not belong to us any all to pay the same amount of money. There is no more, despite the documents which prove that they distinction, as we are all poor. Part of the tariff is to have been registered as ours since 2006. pay for fire-fighting operations. The point here is not access to water (there are We publish a bi-monthly monitoring report on other sources that we can use), but our strenuous budget and operations, available at the office commitment to environmental conservation and premises. water protection. We are the protectors of water. The National Municipal Investment Fund In order to receive support from AyA, you need to (INFOM), the municipality and the community register all your assets with them, so they then successfully cooperated over the establishment of become the owners. Some community members did the CWB. not want to register, because they put time and There is a lot of resistance against the money into building the system and they didn’t want participation of women. to lose ownership. But without registration, we have There is no legal recognition of CWBs. We want to no rights [to receive training and other have a mechanism that recognises and protects the services/support foreseen for registered CWBs]. nature of the CWB (we provide water for essential What would AyA be without CWBs? Our visionary household consumption), so that other users leaders have fought for our rights with no support (businesses, which have a higher consumption) do from the state. not use our water. CARLOS ALBERTO BELTRÁN MARÍA DE LÓS ÁNGELES ALFARO Administrator of the drinking water supply BOLAÑOS system of Cantón La Peña, near Solután, El President of the CWB of Santa Gertrudis Sur de Salvador Grecia, Costa Rica Before the earthquake in 2001 there was no water I became the president in 2003, and I found no legal available in the community (water was two hours’ recognition of the water point and massive faecal walk away and very expensive), and people’s mistrust contamination. After eight months we managed to of authority was high due to alleged corruption. Then 22  Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards FUNDAMUNI [a not-for-profit organisation which without water (there was a service through private supports the development of municipalities in El vendors, but the water was not healthy). There was Salvador], CARE and the Chamber of Commerce of corruption in the administration of the water pump. New York channelled funds. Every community We started as a security committee (engaged in member worked for free for 55 days to build the surveillance and protection of the community) and aqueduct. developed into a water board, completely leaving The board is elected every two years. We have 16 aside the security component. We decided to engage members, half of them women. Five of them receive a directly and we built our own system with support salary, the others work pro-bono. Every six months we from an NGO, but none from the municipality. The publish a financial report, and the general assembly community raised US$75,000 for the initial approves the annual plan every December. Integrity is investment. Trust was built through transparency and the way to build trust and respect for institutions. accountability. During that period we met twice a In the assembly you cannot speak openly about week. Now we meet twice a year in the general financial details because it is dangerous. In Solután assembly. there are maras, street gangs. They take advantage of We waited four years for the registration of our the water supply system but they don’t pay for it. On CWB, but others have been waiting for more than 15 the other hand, they don’t apply their extortion racket years. Corruption is a challenge (bribes to speed up to the CWB. If someone wants to discuss financial processes), along with unclear and complex details, I invite them into my office where I am bureaucracy. completely transparent about every single detail. The Ministry of Health supports us with quality The only support we receive at the moment is a control every month or every second week. They give subsidy for electricity (which has increased in price me a copy of the report, which is publicly available. 75 per cent in three years). There is no technical The tariff for water connection is about 30-50 per support or any other form of support. However, CARE cent of people’s average income. I admit that it is and FUNDAMUNI helped us to decide the tariff. When more or less three per cent of my family income. we need capacity building, we hire a private sector There is no provision for poor families. We waste provider. water, we need more education and the tariff can help We have an inventory of parts which makes our us [to understand that water is a valuable resource, trips to the capital city (to purchase equipment for and that maintaining the system costs money]. The repairs and maintenance) more efficient and avoids NGO Wonderful People supported us in tariff design. stock shortages. Through a sustainable tariff, we proposed a saving The government is not interested in rural plan aimed at covering maintenance for the next eight communities. The Ministry of Health is not even years, as well as contributing to building of a carrying out quality monitoring as prescribed by our treatment plant. Constitution; we have to pay to have it done. There is a regulation for CWBs, but it is not comprehensive. The duty bearers ignore this regulation. FRANCISCO ALBERTO URIZAS FERNÁNDEZ We are alone in this fight for our rights and our President of the CWB barrio Parrasquiñ Dos, needs. There is no systematic support, no networks area 4, Santa Cruz del Quiché, Guatemala and no capacity building. Internal conflict has resulted in migration from rural to informal urban settlements. We spent six years 23 References Baillat, A. (2013) Corruption and the human right to water and sanitation: A human rights-based approach to tackling corruption in the water sector, Berlin: WaterLex and Water Integrity Network. Castro, R. (2009) in Ballestero, A. (2009) Aportes para la Discusión sobre Derecho Humano de Acceso al Agua en Costa Rica, San José: Andrea Ballestero Salaverry. de Albuquerque, C. and Roaf V. (2012) On the Right Track, Lisbon: UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights to Water and Sanitation. El País (2011) Detectan residuos de plaguicidas en agua en zona piñera de Limón, San José: El País, available at http://www.elpais.cr/frontend/noticia_detalle/1/47511 Evans, P. (1992) Paying the piper: An overview of community financing of water and sanitation, Delft: IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre. FANCA (2006) Las Juntas de Agua en Centroamérica, available at http://hidrico.sociedadhumana.com/media_files/download/LasJuntasdeAguaenCentroamerica.pdf [accessed 16.05.13]. Gentes, I. (2011) Informe Regional De Integridad Y Transparencia En El Sector De Agua Potable Y Saneamiento En Centroamérica, Berlin: WIN (unpublished). Global Water Partnership (2011) Situación de los recursos hídricos en Centro América, Tegucigalpa: Global Water Partnership. Plummer, J. and Cross, P. (2006) Tackling Corruption in the Water and Sanitation Sector in Africa, Starting the Dialogue, Water and Sanitation Program Working Paper. Ramírez, B. (2010) “Gestores comunitarios de desarrollo”, Aquavitae, December 2010: p.13. Sala Constitucional de Costa Rica, Resolution No. 2009-009040, 29 May 2009. Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) (2006) Corruption in the water sector, Stockholm: Swedish Water House and Water Integrity Network. Tragua and Global Water Partnership (2012) Memoria Foro Internacional Agua en Centroamérica, Managua: Tragua and Global Water Partnership, available at http://tragua.com/wp- content/uploads/2012/11/memoria-nicaragua.pdf Transparency International (2008) Global Corruption Report 2008, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Transparency International (2009) The Anti-Corruption Plain Language Guide, Berlin: Transparency International. 24  Integrity and the human right to water at community level in Central America The role of Community Water Boards United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2006) Human Development Report 2006, Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Water and Sanitation Programme (2008) Operadores locales de pequeña escala en América Latina: su participación en la prestación de los servicios de agua y saneamiento, available at http://www- wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2008/07/11/000020953_2008071109305 8/Rendered/PDF/444040WSP0LAC01res0locales01PUBLIC1.pdf [accessed 16.05.13]. Selection of UN Conventions International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) Selection of UN Resolutions CESCR, 2002. General Comment n.15. The Right to Water. Geneva; OHCHR. UN Human Rights Council, Panel discussion on the negative impact of corruption on the enjoyment of human rights, 24 September 2012, A/HRC/21/L.13, available at http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/21/L.13 [accessed 10 February 2014] UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Independent Expert on the Issue of Human Rights Obligations related to Access to Safe Drinking Water and Sanitation, Catarina de Albuquerque, 1 July 2009, A/HRC/12/24, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4a9d1beaa.html [accessed 10 February 2014] UNGA, 2010, RES/64/292, The Human Right to Water and Sanitation. New York; United Nations. 25 26  Water Integrity Network The Water Integrity Network (WIN) is an action- oriented coalition of organisations and individuals promoting water integrity to reduce and prevent corruption in the water sector. Its membership includes the public sector, the private sector and civil society, as well as leading knowledge-based organisations and networks in the water sector. WIN works through knowledge sharing, advocacy, capacity building and the development and promotion of tools to improve integrity in the water sector. As of 2013, WIN is funded by grants from the governments of Germany (BMZ), The Netherlands (DGIS), Sweden (Sida) and Switzerland (SDC). Water Integrity Network Alt Moabit 91b, 10559 Berlin, Germany www.waterintegritynetwork.net info@win-s.org 28