Lusaka, Wednesday, April 8, 2026 – A Zambia NGO WASH Forum analysis of the proposed Water Supply and Sanitation Bill against the human rights to water and sanitation has revealed critical gaps in affordability safeguards, accountability for third parties, and explicit legal remedies for affected communities.
The Forum, a consortium of 61 local and international civil society organisations, acknowledged that the Bill includes positive steps such as environmental sustainability provisions and consumer protection mechanisms.
However, when measured against core human rights standards that water must be available, accessible, acceptable, affordable, and of good quality the Bill requires significant strengthening.
The findings were presented during a Forum meeting in Lusaka convened to review the Bill ahead of its consideration by the relevant National Assembly committee.
In a presentation, Forum Legal Scholar Dr. O’Brien Kaaba proposed that the four key human rights criteria which include availability, quality, acceptability, and accessibility, be explicitly written into Clause 3 and Clause 22 of the Bill.
While the Bill includes some tariff mechanisms intended to protect low-income households, Dr. Kaaba argued that these are not explicitly framed within a human rights obligation.
“Under a human rights framework, water cannot be treated merely as a commercial product; tariff‑setting must ensure that the essential minimum water supply remains affordable for all,” he said.
He cautioned that cutting off supply for non‑payment without considering a person’s ability to pay and without minimum essential guarantees risks violating international human rights law.
Dr. Kaaba further noted that the Bill is not explicit on the duties of third parties such as mining or agricultural operations not to interfere with the right to water and sanitation.
He said this lack of explicit language creates uncertainty for communities seeking to hold polluters accountable.
Dr. Kaaba cited a case in which affected communities had to take a water pollution case to the United Kingdom because domestic remedies were ineffective, highlighting a broader gap across Zambia’s water governance framework.
He said while the Bill itself may not be the primary vehicle for environmental enforcement, which falls under the Water Resources Management Act and ZEMA regulations, the Forum emphasised that the absence of clear linkages between these laws leaves communities without a coherent remedy pathway.
“Without clear remedies for communities affected by pollution from farming, mining, or inadequate wastewater treatment, the Bill falls short of the state’s duty to protect the right to water,” Dr. Kaaba added.
Earlier, NGO WASH Forum Coordinator Bubala Muyovwe‑Mumba called on the National Assembly to strengthen the Bill so that it fully reflects Zambia’s human rights commitments.
She said this could be achieved by embedding affordability safeguards within a human rights framework, explicitly stating third‑party duties not to interfere with the right to water and sanitation, and ensuring clear legal pathways for affected communities across relevant legislation.
Ms. Mumba further paid tribute to the Water Voices United project, co‑funded by the European Union and Danish People’s Aid and implemented by SNV in partnership with the NGO WASH Forum, for building civil society capacity to engage constructively with lawmakers on these reforms.