It’s
unconstitutional and a failed venture
by Justice
Rajindar Sachar (retd)
( October 29,
2012, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian) India is governed by a written
Constitution and any policy decision, programme by the Central or state
government must be within the constitutional parameter of the Constitution.
The water problem and its peculiarities in supply, distributions are all misdirected against the supply to the poor.
The State under
our Constitution is mandated to protect the human rights. Any government
policy, which seeks to shift this responsibility from the state to the private
sector, would be, without anything more, unconstitutional and hence
impermissible.
The United
Nations, since its inception, has accepted that water is a ‘human right’. In
2010, the General Assembly adopted a resolution declaring the Right to Water
and Sanitation a human right.
The Supreme
Court has held that Article 21 of the Constitution includes the right of a
citizen to water and sanitation. In that light per se any proposal to privatise
water would be unconstitutional. Is it not, therefore, a matter of concern that
the Indian state should be working towards privatising water supply, which
really amounts to abdicating its duty to enforce human rights? Ever since the
National Water Policy 2002 was formulated, there have been attempts in India to
privatise and commoditise water.
The water
problem and its peculiarities in supply, distributions are all misdirected
against the supply to the poor. I am, however, highlighting the position in
Delhi, which is enforcing privatisation of water supply policy meant to cater
to the affluent at the cost of the poor — 70% of the households in Delhi with a
monthly per capital of expenditure of less than Rs. 1,500, the poverty line
accepted by the Planning Commission.
The whole
exercise by the Delhi government is to give exploitive profits to the private
party. Thus, according to public information, it costs the Delhi Jal Board Rs.
15 per litre to obtain water – but it has agreed to supply water to the private
company at about Rs. 1.50 per litre. There is then further benefit to the
company by permitting an automatic annual increase of 10% in water billing by
the private company. In the new tariff apart from water charges a sewage charge
of 60% is also imposed, notwithstanding that the replacement, if any, of pipes
will be by the Delhi Jal Board. But most astounding is the introduction of
service charges apart from the billing for water consumption. This service
charge is a shame-faced attempt to give extra money because the consumer is
paying separately for consumption anyway. On a consumption charge of, say Rs.
170, per month there will be added a service charge of Rs. 320 per month There
is no explanation of what and how service charge can be imposed apart from
consumption charges.
Another
unabashed provision to favour the private company is to divide colonies into
District Metered Areas (DMAs) on the pretext that water would be provided to
the DMAs by private companies at all times/days (24x7). But there is an ill-conceived catch so as to
benefit private companies, as the performance of the water company will be
assessed not on the basis of whether water is received 24x7 water in every
house or not, but on the basis of whether the water company provided 24x7 water
at the input of each DMA or not. The water company can also divert water from
one area to another within the same DMA. This would neither affect the
performance of the company nor be treated as a violation of any of the licence
conditions. The water company will try to maximise revenues by diverting water
to big hotels, industries etc, which would purchase water in bulk at higher
revenues.
The Delhi Jal
Board should be looking into more worthwhile functions. It supplies 850 million
gallons of drinking water per day more than its installed capacity. Its
treatment facility provides for only 5.4 million gallons a day – the rest of
the untreated water is one of the major sources of pollution of the Yamuna.
The Delhi
government is inspired by the World Bank-supported 24x7 water supply pilot
projects as, for example, in Hubli- Dharwad. But the report of the Working
Group on Urban Water Supply and Sanitation for the 12th Plan has pointed out that the initial project
period was 2004-08 and was then extended to 2011. Reaching 10 per cent of the
twin cities’ existing connections took seven years.
Water
privatisation and other similar schemes to benefit big corporations are the
brainchild of the World Bank. Though initially the countries succumbed to this
pressure, the anger of the masses at the deprivation of life-giving water to
them and instead to benefit big corporation has unleashed a world movement of
“re-municipalisation” of water supply in several cities, most notably Paris
(which re-commenced with public water management in January 2010) due to
cost-saving potential. The “re-municipalisation” got off to a promising start –
water tariffs were reduced by 8 per cent in 2011. Two countries are making
water privatisation illegal: Uruguay, and the Netherlands. In both cases, the
new laws prohibit not only the sale of water systems but also the delegation of
the operation of water supply to private companies.
As recent as
October 2012 many civil society organisations have protested to the President
of the European Commission to stop imposing the policy of privatisation of
water.
The newly formed
municipal corporations in Delhi have also demanded that water supply be handed
over to them. It is for the Delhi Government to ignore the global trend towards
“re-municipalisation” and to invite
private companies to play a
larger role in so essential a public utility as the supply and distribution of
water. The so-called PPPs are a barely concealed cover for the public-private
sharing of risk and profit such that there would be predominantly public risk
and predominantly private profit.
A pervious
attempt to privatize water was made in 2005; At that time August 2005 when
World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz visited Delhi, he was confronted with
vociferous protests against ‘the Bank’s policies and condition alities of water
privatization through the back door’ – a clear message of ‘Hands Off Water.’
Why is it being revived now – is the forthcoming elections in Delhi and the urgent need for
getting big donations the real secret. Any continuance of water privatization
policy will remain suspect.
The writer is a
former Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi, Government of India.