Channeling Water Conflicts through the Legislative Branch in Colombia

Abstract

This paper answers the question: has the Colombian Congress been effective at addressing relevant water conflicts and making them visible? While courts and social movements have been key for the advancement of social rights in Latin America, the role of legislators remains unclear. We conduct content analysis of all water-related bills, proposed bills, and constitutional amendments filed in Colombia from 1991 to 2020; we also analyzed Congress hearings of political control related to water; and the statutes of political parties who hold majority of seats in Congress. We also and conducted interviews with key actors on water governance in Colombia. We find that only three bills have passed in the 30-year time frame and that relevant water conflicts have not been addressed by Colombian legislators. We find that water conflicts are not reaching the political agenda of Congress, yet through political control hearings, it has given some late visibility to critical territorial conflicts in which water is a key element. We analyze our data in light of literature on legislative politics and legal mobilization in Latin America. This study adds to global research on the role of legislators in advancing the human right to water, particularly in Latin America.

Who Are You and What’s Your Issue? Winning in Collective Litigation in Colombia

“…(Interview 10, May 29, 2018) It is relevant to mention that the role of Veedurías Ciudadanas described by this interviewee focused on an urban setting. Citizen involvement in rural areas runs into challenges related to fewer resources available, making it less likely for individuals to file AP (Páez and Vallejo Piedrahita 2021).…”

Comparing Experiences of Constitutional Reforms to Enshrine the Right to Water in Brazil, Colombia, and Peru: Opportunities and Limitations

“…Meanwhile, Colombia has seen five attempts to reform the Constitution in this direction since 2010 [51], one proposal reached the final voting round in the Senate in 2017 but was defeated (Docket No. 22 March 2017, Senado: 14/2017 Cámara: 282/17).…”

“…The government of Colombia has weighed in on these debates, arguing that there would be serious difficulties in the implementation of a right to water, especially in rural areas. The Ministry of Environment has further argued that the government cannot legally commit to developing the necessary infrastructure to bring access to water to rural populations because it would be too costly [51].…”

“…In contrast, the 2017 reform attempt in Colombia seemed too costly for congress members to approve because the constitutionalization of access to pipeline water would affect powerful stakeholders such as the government mining companies. The Colombian government has openly stated its skepticism towards possible constitutional reform to enshrine the right to water due to its financial implications [51]. Particularly, the concerns point to litigation at the Constitutional Court level that is likely to support citizens' lawsuits, especially from rural and peripheral urban areas, with immense costs for the government.…”

“…In the case of indigenous and rural communities, the traditional model of water provision in the country has not been effective. In some cases, rural communities have developed their own community-based aqueducts that follow their own models of management and operate based on the infrastructure that these communities have developed [51]. In the case of indigenous communities, access to water is an ongoing issue that the government has failed to address.…”