The impact of legal mobilisation on the Anti-Privatisation Forum (APF)

A study by the Centre for Applied Legal Studies (CALS), University of the Witwatersrand in partnership with ISS and HIVOS

Tags: Africa, South Africa, Civil Society Building
Additional tags: Civil society building access public services legal civic action

Under the South African Constitution, reinforced by a national Free Basic Water policy, all South African citizens have a right to water. In practice however, local governments continue to trade water as a commercial service, with perverse effects for the poorest. A case in point is Phiri, a poor suburb in Soweto. In 2004, Against the will of the residents, Johannesburg Water installed a prepaid water system. The system delivered a generally insufficient quota of water free of charge. If households would run out of (expensive) credit, their water service would immediately be blocked, leading to many households being without water for 10-15 days a month. In response, the citizens of Phiri did not take to the streets. They took the legal route and route successfully took their local government to court, resulting in an extension of the water supply and the abolishment of the discriminatory prepaid system

The study, conducted by the Centre for Applied Legal Studies (CALS) at the University of Witwatersrand, builds on previous research on access to water in Phiri and focusses on the impact of legal mobilisation around the Mazibuko water rights case. The delivery of basic services (including access to water) has become a key focus for direct protest over the past five years, with very little evidence of any improvement resulting from such civic action. For this reason it will be valuable to investigate whether legal mobilisation proves more effective in securing advantageous outcomes than traditional forms of protest have secured.

This study has two main links to the knowledge programme in Southern Africa. First, the study aims to contribute to the theorisation of legal mobilisation and civil society participation in South Africa, and perhaps more broadly. This is important not only in terms of advancing an understanding of the kinds of activities taken up by disempowered groups but also in terms of assessing the impact that engagement in particular forms of action – and in this case, specifically, legal mobilisation – has on advancing accountability and delivery. These points influence civil society tactics and strategies and can be used to inform resource allocation and funding priorities. The overall aim is to demand greater accountability and better service delivery from the government. Second, it will be useful to understand whether the uptake of rights-based litigation has a broader impact on social movements and activists and whether such impact contributes to the strengthening of civil society in terms of its engagement with government.