Human Rights and Water Reuse: The Non-Enforceable Nature of the Right to Water

While the right to water has been recognized as a human right by international bodies like the United Nations, it is not necessarily an enforceable right under all legal systems. This distinction has significant implications for legal professionals advising on water reuse projects, particularly in jurisdictions where the right to water is acknowledged but lacks binding legal mechanisms.

What Does It Mean When a Right is Not Enforceable?

The right to water, declared by the UN General Assembly in 2010, asserts that everyone is entitled to safe, sufficient, and accessible water for personal and domestic use. However, many such human rights are considered aspirational—goals that states commit to pursue, but are not directly enforceable in court unless integrated into national legal systems. Unlike civil or political rights, which are often protected by judicial processes, socio-economic rights, such as the right to water, are often non-enforceable unless states take proactive steps to incorporate them into domestic law.

In legal practice, this means that while the right to water can serve as a guiding principle for policy-making, advocacy, and corporate responsibility, its enforceability depends on whether it is recognized and codified within the specific legal framework of a country or region. Lawyers advising on water projects, therefore, must carefully navigate whether their jurisdiction grants legal standing to claims related to water access.

State Obligations: Respect, Protect, and Fulfill

Even when the right to water is not directly enforceable, states still have obligations to fulfill under international law, particularly through the tripartite obligation framework:

1. Respect: States must not interfere with individuals' existing access to water. Any actions—such as privatizing water resources or reallocating water supplies to corporate projects—that reduce access to safe water could lead to violations, though these may not be legally enforceable unless national laws explicitly allow it.
2. Protect: States are required to prevent third parties, such as corporations, from infringing on individuals' access to water. This means that governments should regulate and oversee corporate activities to ensure water is not diverted from communities or contaminated by industrial activities. If not, affected individuals could pursue claims against both the state and the corporations involved, though the success of such claims depends on the country’s legal system.
3. Fulfill: States have a proactive duty to take measures—such as investing in infrastructure and creating policies—that progressively realize the right to water. While the enforceability of this obligation varies, lawyers advising governments or companies involved in large-scale water reuse projects must consider these obligations in project planning and public consultations.

Non-Enforceability and Its Implications for Corporations

For corporations involved in water reuse, the fact that the right to water is not necessarily enforceable can lead to ambiguity in legal risks. While companies may not be held directly accountable under international law for failing to provide access to water, they are increasingly being scrutinized under corporate social responsibility (CSR) frameworks and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria. Public perception, investor pressure, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) often push corporations to act in accordance with the right to water, even when it is not a binding legal obligation.

For legal professionals, this means advising clients not just on strict compliance with existing laws, but also on broader reputational risks and the potential for soft law frameworks—such as the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights—to influence future regulation and litigation.

Conclusion

While the right to water is an established human right, its lack of enforceability in many jurisdictions creates a complex landscape for legal professionals. Lawyers must advise clients on their responsibilities under international frameworks, even when these rights are non-binding, and focus on compliance with domestic laws that may indirectly support these rights. Furthermore, corporations and governments should be proactive in addressing public concerns about water access, recognizing that public perception and international norms may drive future legal challenges, even if current laws do not provide for direct enforcement.

For legal practitioners, staying ahead of emerging trends in human rights law, particularly as they relate to environmental justice and water management, is essential to ensuring that both states and corporations meet their obligations, mitigate risks, and contribute to sustainable water governance.