Every year dozens of settlements in Serbia have a huge problem with drinking water. Almost every day, on television and social networks, you can see videos of people going all over Serbia tropical heat they pour water from the tanker truck into various containers.
Would introducing the right to water into the Constitution finally force the authorities not to leave citizens without water?
The interlocutors of "Vremen" believe that Serbia, even without writing water into the Constitution, already has enough water resources and good laws, thanks to which no one in Serbia would have to be thirsty. But, they add that these resources are wasted, and the laws are ignored.
Worrying situation
Žaklina Živković from the "Right to Water" Initiative reminds that in 2010, the United Nations classified safe drinking water as a basic human right, and that the Constitution of Serbia was adopted in 2006, and therefore the right to water was not a standard when it was written. Constitution.
"Nevertheless, in the Constitution of Serbia there is a right to a healthy environment, and that right includes healthy and clean water. "The right to water means the right to clean drinking water on a non-profit basis, in the sense that water must not be a commodity and that the right to water must not depend on anyone's financial situation," says Živković.
He notes that in the current political conditions it would be very difficult to add the right to water to the Constitution.
"We do not shy away from such an initiative, but we believe that with the existing level of understanding of the institutions regarding this problem, we would not be able to implement that initiative." You can see for yourself how the Constitution is respected, we have articles of the Constitution that protect the environment, but even so, the state of the environment in Serbia is worrying," says Živković.
He adds that this is why systemic changes are required at different levels so that the right to clean drinking water is effectively guaranteed.
"This means that the institutions should first understand that we do not have enough water, and that we are in a very bad situation due to climate change and irrational consumption, pollution and privatization of water resources," says Živković.
Photo: Tanjug/Jovana KulaševićPhoto: Tanjug/Jovana Kulašević
Little depends on local governments
He notes that the "Right to Water" Initiative has been conducting research for three years, which shows that several dozen local governments in Serbia have problems with water every summer.
Živković points out that it may seem on paper that local governments are responsible for water supply, but he points out that this issue is also centralized, "like everything in Serbia".
She notes that local self-governments have very little of their own finances and that their budgets mostly depend on grants from the republic budget, so the amount of water available to them depends on the state authorities.
"The Law on Water implies integral water management, where at the national level we see how much water we have for different needs, and this is called the water balance, and then through a strategy and action plan, a plan is made to determine how much water is needed for human needs, how much is water needed to survive the living world, and what remains can be redistributed to the economy, energy, agriculture, mining and the like."
"Local self-governments can dispose of and receive funds for the restoration of water pipes, for investment in water factories and similar pressing problems," says Živković.
Photo: Pixabay/Alexas_FotosPhoto: Pixabay/Alexas_Fotos
Losses on all sides
She presents the frightening data that at the level of Serbia, the annual loss of clean drinking water amounts to 37 percent. And that's only because of bad water pipes and installations in water pipes.
This is the amount of water that can fit into the Zlatar Lake - about 165 million cubic meters of water.
Živković states that Zaječar has annual losses of 57 percent, and Leskovac slightly more than 50 percent, so the situation with clean drinking water is dramatic already due to the dilapidated water supply infrastructure. It is further aggravated by illegal connections and debts to water distributors.
"Therefore, it is unfair to accuse local governments of poor water supply." However, they have to fight for their budgets and their voice, but they don't do that, they fit into the state policy," Živković criticizes.
"There is no example of the local self-government stepping forward, saying that it has a problem and asking for help from the state, but simply the problems that arise when water restrictions appear, they blame the citizens, appeal to them to use water rationally and accuse them of filling the pools and they water the gardens, which probably happens somewhere, but first of all there must be a system and major systemic issues must be resolved in order to bring the problem down to the citizens as well."
"If we know the losses on water networks, then it is insulting to blame someone for filling the pool or watering the garden," says Živković.
Fulfilling the wishes of big capital
Živković points out that the highest institution at the national level is the Directorate for Water, which according to the systematization of work should have sixty employees, but it currently employs only thirty people.
In addition, he adds, the Water Conference was established ten years ago, an advisory body that would gather civil society organizations and discuss water-related problems, but that conference was only established and never met.
Finally, Živković emphasizes, the highest professional body that dealt with water in Serbia was the "Jaroslav Černi" Institute, but it was privatized a few years ago and was bought by the construction company Millennium Team.
"These examples show how weak the already weak institutions have been and we are getting to the point that, if we talk about water, we talk about fulfilling the wishes of big capital, in terms of mining and other industries, while drinking water and citizens are left to their own devices."
"We fear that the whole of Serbia will become a Zrenjanin who has not had drinking water for two decades, people there buy bottled water, and those who have no money drink polluted water." The goal is to make water a commodity and to make it normal to buy it in plastic bottles and balloons," says Živković.
Photo: FoNet/APPhoto: FoNet/AP
Long-term concession - de facto sale
On the other hand, she indicates that those who package water have good profits. Bottled water is one of Serbia's biggest export products, especially to China, but it is a rather unregulated area, because the law on bottled water has been waiting to be adopted for a long time.
"According to our law, springs in Serbia cannot be sold, but they are given in long-term concessions, for 40, 70 or 90 years, which means that they are practically sold. Considering that there are only eight water inspectors in Serbia, the question is how well the use of water is controlled at all," says Živković.
She warns that the bad attitude towards water can also be seen in the example of spa springs that often dry up, so two years ago in Vrnjačka banja, three out of seven sources of medicinal water dried up because the surrounding hotels used the springs irrationally.
As a bad example, he cites Zaječar, which has more than 30 public fountains with spring water, but in which the water has been declared technical, so the local population suspects that this is because the local private agricultural company could irrigate the crops and that the local brewery water could be used for beer production.
He also cites the example of Niš, where all the fountains with spring water are defective, because of the enormous pollution of the underground water by municipal waste water.
"In Serbia, only 16 percent of the population is covered by some kind of wastewater treatment, while the rest, 84 percent of municipal wastewater goes directly into rivers and underground water." "Doctors indicate that there is a huge increase in water-borne diseases, such as Escherichia coli, because people continue to drink water from those fountains or get their water from wells," says Živković.
The right to environmental protection
Answering the question whether the right to drinking water could be included in the Constitution of Serbia, the professor of constitutional law at the University of Belgrade, Tanasije Marinković, reminds that the European Court of Human Rights protects the right to a healthy environment.
"The court derived the right to a healthy environment from the right to life, and the right to private and family life, which are recognized by Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights."
As Marinković adds, the Court considers that a healthy environment is a prerequisite for everyone's undisturbed private and family life
individual.
"Thus, many issues of water, air and land protection entered the practice of the European Court of Human Rights." "The European Court of Human Rights also took into account that sometimes even the lives of individuals are threatened because there is no healthy living environment," says Marinković.
Photo: AP/Jenny KanePhoto: AP/Jenny Kane
We have a good normative framework, but...
He emphasizes that in Serbia there is an appropriate normative framework for environmental protection, which obliges us to treat water rationally, but that it is not respected, especially because there is no awareness among citizens and competent public services about the importance of water.
"For example, planning the construction of residential buildings on Makiš, which will threaten water sources, directly threatens the right to a healthy environment, including the right to life," says Marinković.
He points out that there is a need for greater engagement of citizens' associations and political parties that would deal with topics related to environmental protection.
"We see that environmental political engagement is alive and the government is reacting to it, but it is not articulated enough to lead to a more concrete goal." The government reacts to this through the media struggle, using the judicial apparatus and the police and taking repressive measures," says Marinković.
Maximum engagement of citizens is required
That is why, he emphasizes, citizens should be maximally involved in court proceedings when they believe that the environment is endangered, because they can have as an outcome the appearance of those proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights.
"It's a bit longer, because it is necessary to exhaust domestic legal remedies first, but in such cases there are no shortcuts." The topic of the fight for the environment showed that people in Serbia are reacting to it, because the number of people who went to protests across Serbia due to the announcement of the opening of a lithium mine, even in conditions of media darkness, says that it touches them," adds Marinković.
"We are aware that the judiciary is closed and that it is maximally controlled when it comes to politically sensitive issues, but the mass, spontaneity and emotionality of people when it comes to environmental protection may have some effect on the judiciary that we have not seen so far," concludes Marinković .
