sawhoyamaxa community from the land resulting in their loss of access to basic essential services, like water, food, schooling and health services. this fell within the scope of the american convention on human rights; encroaching the right to life. water is included in this right, as part of access to land. the courts required the lands to be returned, compensation provided, and basic goods and services to be implemented, while the community was in the process of having their lands returned. international centre for settlement of investment disputes the following cases from the international centre for settlement of investment disputes (icsid) concern the contracts established between governments and corporations for the maintenance of waterways. although the cases regard questions of investment, commentators have noted that the indirect impact of the right to water upon the verdicts is significant. world bank data shows that water privatization spiked starting in the 1990s and significant growth in privatization continued into the 2000s. azurix corp v. argentina the first notable case regarding the right to water in the icsid is that of azurix corp v. argentina. the dispute was between the argentine republic and azurix corporation regarding discrepancies arising from a 30-year contract between the parties to operate the water supply of various provinces. a consideration in regard to the right to water is implicitly made during the arbitration for compensation, where it was held that azurix was entitled to a fair return on the market value of the investment. this was rather than the requested us$438.6 million, citing that a reasonable business person could not expect such a return, given the limits of water price increases and improvements that would be required to ensure a well-functioning, clean water system. biwater gauff ltd v. tanzania secondly, a similar case encountered by the icsid is that of biwater gauff ltd v. tanzania. this was again a case of a private water company in a contractual dispute with a government, this time the united republic of tanzania. this contract was for the operation and management of the dar es salaam water system. in may 2005, the tanzania government ended the contract with biwater gauff for its alleged failure to meet performance guarantees. in july 2008, the tribunal issued its decision on the case, declaring that the tanzania government had violated the agreement with biwater gauff. it did not however award monetary damages to biwater, acknowledging that public interest concerns were paramount in the dispute. right to water in domestic law without the existence of an international body that can enforce it, the human right to water relies upon the activity of national courts. the basis for this has been established through the constitutionalisation of economic, social and cultural rights (escr) through one of two means: as "directive principles" that are goals and are often non-justiciable; or as expressly protected and enforceable through the courts. south africa an image of a group of people gathering around a communal tap in johannesburg, south africa. in south africa, the right to water is enshrined in the constitution and implemented by ordinary statutes. this is evidence of a slight modification of the second technique of constitutionalisation referred to as the "subsidiary legislation model". this means that a large portion of the content and implementation of the right is done an ordinary domestic statute with some constitutional standing. residents of bon vista mansions v. southern metropolitan local council the first notable case in which the courts did so was the residents of bon vista mansions v. southern metropolitan local council. the case was brought by residents of a block of flats (bon vista mansions), following the disconnection of the water supply by the local council, resulting from the failure to pay water charges. the court held that in adherence to the south african constitution, that constitutionally all persons ought to have access to water as a right. further reasoning for the decision was based on general comment 12 on the right to food, made by the un committee on economic, social and cultural rights imposing upon parties to the agreement the obligation to observe and respect already existing access to adequate food by not implementing any encroaching measures. the court found that the discontinuation of the existing water source, which had not adhered to the "fair and reasonable" requirements of the south african water services act, was illegal. it is important to note that the decision pre-dates the adoption of the un general comment no. 15. mazibuko v. city of johannesburg the quantity of water to be provided was further discussed in mazibuko v. city of johannesburg. the case revolved around the distribution of water through pipes to phiri, one of the oldest areas of soweto. this case concerned two major issues: whether or not the city's policy regarding the supply of free basic water, 6 kilolitres per month to each account holder in the city was in conflict with section 27 of the south african constitution or section 11 of the water services act. the second issue being whether or not the installation of pre-paid water meters was lawful. it was held in the high court that the city's by-laws did not provide for the installation of meters and that their installation was unlawful. further, as the meters halted supply of water to residence once the free basic water supply had ended, this was deemed an unlawful discontinuation of the water supply. the court held the residents of phiri should be provided with a free basic water supply of 50 litres per person per day. the work of the centre for applied legal studies (cals) of the university of the witwatersrand in johannesburg, south africa and the pacific institute in oakland, california shared a 2008 business ethics network benny award for their work on this case. the pacific institute contributed legal testimony based on the work of dr. peter gleick defining a human right to water and quantifying basic human needs for water. the big respondents took the case to the supreme court of appeal (sca) which held that the city's water policy had been formulated based upon a material error of law in regards to the city's obligation to provide the minimum set in the south african national standard, therefore it was set aside. the court also held the quantity for dignified human existence in compliance with section 27 of the constitution was in fact 42 litres per person per day rather than 50 litres per person per day. the sca declared that the installation of water meters was illegal, but suspended the order for two years to give the city an opportunity to rectify the situation. the issues went further to the constitutional court, which held that the duty created by the constitution required that the state take reasonable legislative and other measures progressively to realise the achievement of the right to access of water, within its available resource. the constitutional court also held that it is a matter for the legislature and executive institution of government to act within the allowance of their budgets and that the scrutiny of their programs is a matter of democratic accountability. therefore, the minimum content set out by the regulation 3(b) is constitutional, rendering the bodies to deviate upwards and further it is inappropriate for a court to determine the achievement of any social and economic right the government has taken steps to implement. the courts had instead focused their inquiry on whether the steps taken by government are reasonable, and whether the government subjects its policies to regular review. the judgment has been criticized for deploying an "unnecessarily limiting concept of judicial deference". india the two most prominent cases in india regarding the right to water illustrate that although this is not explicitly protected in the constitution of india, it has been interpreted by the courts that the right to life includes the right to safe and sufficient water. an image of the jamuna river, the river that the state of haryana and the city of delhi were using. delhi water supply v. state of haryana here a water usage dispute arose due to the fact that the state of haryana was using the jamuna river for irrigation, while the residents of delhi needed it for the purpose of drinking. it was reasoned that domestic use overrode the commercial use of water and the court ruled that haryana must allow enough water to get to delhi for consumption and domestic use. subhash kumar v. state of bihar also notable is the case of subhash kumar v. state of bihar, where a discharge of sludge from the washeries into the bokaro river was petitioned against by way of public interest litigation. the courts found that the right to life, as protected by article 21 of the constitution of india, included the right to enjoy pollution-free water. the case failed upon the facts and it was held that the petition had been filed not in any public interest but for the petitioner's personal interest and therefore a continuation of litigation would amount to an abuse of process. world rights to water day water is essential for existence of living beings including humans. therefore, having access to pure and adequate quantity of water is an inalienable human right. hence, the eco needs foundation (enf) deems it necessary to recognise the right to water (with ensured per capita minimum quantity of water) through the appropriate expressed legal provision. the united nations with its several covenants has made it obligatory for all the nations to ensure equitable distribution of water amongst all the citizens. accordingly, the enf began to observe and promote the celebration of world rights to water day on 20 march, the date on which dr. babasaheb ambedkar ("the father of modern india") led the world's first satyagraha for water in 1927. the world right to water day calls for the adoption of special legislation establishing the universal right to water. under the guidance of founder dr priyanand agale, the enf arranges a variety of several programmes to ensure the right to water for indian citizens. new zealand escr are not explicitly protected in new zealand at the current time, either by the human rights or bill of rights acts, therefore the right to water is not defended by law there. the new zealand law society has recently indicated that this country would give further consideration to the legal status of economic, social and cultural rights. united states in pilchen v. city of auburn, new york, a single mother named diane pilchen was living as a rental tenant in a foreclosed house, in which the owner (landlord) of the house had failed to pay the water bill for some time. the city of auburn billed pilchen for the landlord's arrears, and repeatedly shut her water service off without notice when she could not pay these debts, making the house uninhabitable. the city condemned the home and forced pilchen and her child to move out. pilchen was represented by the public utility law project of new york (pulp) in the lawsuit. the city of auburn attempted unsuccessfully to argue that water is not a constitutional right because bottled water could be used instead, an argument that was contested by pulp as absurd. in 2010, pilchen won summary judgment in which it was determined that shutting off the water violated her constitutional rights, and that pilchen could not be billed and stopped from having water due to an unrelated party's delays in paying water bills. standing rock sioux tribe v. united states army corps of engineers people protesting against the building of the dakota access pipeline in 2016, there was a prominent case known as standing rock sioux tribe v. united states army corps of engineers, where the sioux tribe challenged the building of the dakota access pipeline (dapl). this crude oil pipeline spans over four states, which includes the beginning in north dakota, then passes through both south dakota and iowa, and ends in illinois. the standing rock reservation is located near the border of north and south dakota and the pipeline is built within a half a mile of it. since the pipeline was built near the reservation, the tribe feared that historical and cultural significance of lake oahe would be