HC verdict on safe water: What next?

The recent High Court verdict recognising access to safe drinking water free of cost as a fundamental right is a welcome and timely juridical intervention. By declaring that "access to safe drinking water free of charge is a fundamental right of every citizen as per Article 32 of the Constitution," the court has given due constitutional weight to an issue that goes far beyond mere survival. Access to safe drinking water is the foundation for building healthy, educated and economically strong communities.

The verdict comes at a time when drinkable water is becoming increasingly unaffordable, largely due to the authorities' failure to protect this vital resource from profit-driven exploitation. On the one hand, public reliance on bottled water is steadily rising because of limited access to safe, potable supplies and the questionable quality of water provided by WASA. On the other hand, there has been a mushrooming of commercial ventures offering "safe" drinking water at ever higher prices. As a result, ordinary citizens are left with little choice but to pay for what should be a basic necessity.

In many areas, even paying for water does not guarantee safety or reliability. Nowhere is this crisis more acute than in the south-western coastal regions, where saline intrusion has made drinkable water scarce for much of the year. Women in these areas walk miles to collect water. Similar hardship afflicts remote parts of the Chittagong Hill Tracts. Despite numerous projects undertaken at great cost, the reality on the ground has changed little, raising serious questions about policy effectiveness and governance.

The verdict says: "The state is obligated to provide free, potable and safe water to every citizen and must take consistent, continuous and progressive measures to meet such obligations."

Noting that it is not financially and institutionally possible for the state to provide safe drinking water to everyone at the initial stage, the court instructed the government to gradually provide access to safe drinking water in all major public places in Bangladesh within the next one year. 

These places include railway stations, bus terminals, train stations, launch terminals, airports, raw food markets, rural markets, shopping malls, government hospitals, all public educational institutions and places of religious worship.  In addition, the government has been asked to make arrangements for providing safe drinking water at designated venues in coastal salinity-hit areas where potable water is scarce, in water-critical areas declared under the Water Act, for citizens living in remote mountainous communities, and across all courts and bar associations of Bangladesh.

Of particular importance is the court's instruction to assess the risks and impacts of water privatisation, prevent further privatisation and, where possible, restore public ownership of water resources, infrastructure and management services. This directive highlights a policy debate regarding whether a life-sustaining resource can be left to the uncertainties of  market forces.

Earlier an investigation by the Bangladesh Competition Commission (BCC) exposed alarming practices by the country's leading bottled water companies, which led to an unjustifiable rise in prices. Between January and September 2023, the price of a half-litre bottle increased from Tk 15 to Tk 20. While the companies cited higher import costs, rising raw material prices and fluctuations in the dollar as justification, the BCC's findings told a very different story. The investigation found that the actual increase in production costs was minimal and insufficient to warrant such price hikes. It revealed that by collectively fixing unreasonably high prices - in violation of the Competition Act of 2012 - these companies inflated their profit margins by as much as 400 per cent during the period.

The extent of profiteering is further evident at the retail level, where companies reportedly offer commissions of Tk 5 to Tk 9 per half-litre bottle sold at Tk 20. Yet consumers are shown no such consideration, bearing the full burden of an essential commodity turned into a vehicle for excessive profit.

In urban areas, implementing the High Court verdict will require strengthening of the Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA). In most cities around the world, water supply is an integral part of municipal services, rather than being managed by a separate body. Despite this institutional arrangement, WASA appears to have focused more on raising water tariffs almost every year than on ensuring the quality of the water it supplies. Tests conducted by the Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution (BSTI) have found WASA water to contain bacteria and excessive dissolved solids, raising serious public health concerns.

WASA, however, is not solely to blame. About 15 per cent of its water is drawn from surface sources, mainly rivers, whose waters around Dhaka have been polluted to an almost irrecoverable level, rendering conventional purification methods ineffective. At the same time, the alarming depletion of groundwater makes it imperative for WASA to increase its reliance on surface water. It underscores the urgent need for a sustained drive to rid rivers of the massive volumes of pollutants being discharged into them. Alongside this, WASA also needs to replace its old and corroded pipelines which in many places are said to lie close to the sewerage pipes, and update its purifying technology.   

The court's directive to take all necessary measures to protect water reservoirs and safeguard surface and groundwater sources from pollution and destruction is equally important. The nationwide pollution, encroachment and degradation of water bodies - rivers, canals and wetlands - have long been a matter of serious concern. While the authorities frequently announce initiatives to protect rivers and other water sources, tangible improvements remain elusive. Against this backdrop, the High Court's intervention introduces a much-needed layer of legal scrutiny and accountability.

This verdict should serve as a wake-up call for policymakers and implementing agencies. Declaring a right is only the first step; realising it will require political will, institutional reform and long-term investment. If implemented in letter and spirit, the ruling has the potential to transform water management in Bangladesh on a principle that access to safe drinking water is not a commodity to be bought and sold, but a fundamental right that the state must protect and provide.

aktuhin.fexpress@gmail.com