GIHRBA 2015

FOR STAKEHOLDERS IN HARARE

WORKSHOP
26 May 2015
Harare, Zimbabwe
WORKSHOP REPORT

Hosted by Community Water Alliance

FOREWORD TO THE WORKSHOP

M.S H. RWAMBIWA
I welcome you all, residents' associations and
youth organizations, to the Gender Inclusive
Human Rights Based Approach training workshop
hosted by Community Water Alliance. Community
Water Alliance is a membership driven civic
organization with a National Water Council
structure of which I chair, Northern and Southern
regional structures, catchment structures,
constituency structures and ward structures.
This workshop is a platform for residents
associations and youths to learn, share
experiences and reect on your work
interventions. It introduces essential elements of
gender and rights based approaches to water
service delivery. It explores the rationale for
embarking on a journey that calibrate a needs
based approach and aim to recognize rights
holders as agents of change in situations of water,
sanitation and hygiene (WASH) deprivations and
violations.
We are all aware of the challenge of water
shortage in Harare. In some cases it is water
disconnections, in others water cuts, whilst other
areas like Southerly Park have no municipal water.
I believe residents associations will not forget the
2008/2009 cholera outbreak in Harare and even

diarrhea cases reported in suburbs of Mabvuku,

Tafara and Dzivarasekwa. All this indicates that
there is a strong need to address root causes of
poor water service delivery.
I therefore urge you to utilize this platform offered
by this workshop to reect on what we are doing as
civil society organizations, and then try to reason
on the effectiveness of our interventions to solve
the problem.

Ms Hildaberta Rwambiwa
Chairperson National Water Council
Community Water Alliance

INTRODUCTION
The Gender Inclusive Human Rights Based
Approach (GIHRBA) training workshop, held in
Harare on 26 May 2015, is a fullment of the
commitment made by Hardlife Mudzingwa
(CWA Programmes Manager) at the GIHRBA
training of trainers workshop organized by
HEKS/EPER during seven days in March 2015 in
Bulawayo. The GIHRBA training workshop in
Harare was supported by HEKS/EPER.
The Harare training workshop was attended by 20
participants represented by 10 organizations. The
organizations included Chitungwiza Residents
Trust (CHITREST), Chitungwiza Residents and
Rate-payers Association (CHIRRA), Community
Water Alliance (CWA), Simukai Residents
Residents Trust, Combined Harare Residents
Association (CHRA), National Association of Youth
Organizations (NAYO), Harare Residents Alliance
(HARA), Chitungwiza Progressive Residents
Association (CHIPRA), Norton Residents Alliance
as well as a representative of Harare Metropolitan
Residents Forum. There was one facilitator who is
a product of the HEKS/EPER GIHRBA training of
trainers 1, several participatory group
presentations, three brain-storming sessions and
one representative from HEKS/EPER for quality
control.
During the workshop participants contributed to the
analysis of the water sector using Human Rights
Based Approach tools as well as utilizing HRBA in
programming. The tools used included problem
tree analysis, framework analysis, rights-actor
table, pattern analysis, force eld analysis, and
SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities &
threats). The WASH sector challenges require
addressing root causes of the problem and
embracing interventions that ensures sustainability
of water service delivery. The workshop facilitated
building residents associations' appreciation of
GIHRBA by introducing essential elements of
gender and rights-based approaches to the water
sector. It explored how gender perspective can be
ignored and emphasized the essentiality of gender
in WASH provision. The workshop explored the
rationale for embarking on a journey that moves
beyond needs assessments and embrace rights
based approaches. The rights based approach call
for rights holders as agents of change in situations
of WASH deprivations and violations. It empowers
rights holders to claim their rights and develop the
capacity of duty bearers to meet their WASH
obligations and to be held to account for their
performance in this regard. The training calls for
adopting rights based approaches with
consideration and attention to different identities,
particularly gender, in the WASH sector. It requires
stakeholders to examine their understanding of
traditions and culture.

The workshop focused on four sub-themes which

include human rights to WASH knowledge;
Introducing Human Rights Based Approaches;
Gender and Water; Utilizing Human Rights Based
Approach Analysis.
Human Rights to WASH (Water, Sanitation &
Hygiene) Knowledge
In this session brainstorming exercise showed level
of understanding where participants were required
to contribute in what are human rights to WASH
(water, sanitation & hygiene), what special
attributes of rights are and give relevant
international instruments relating to rights to WASH.
Participants were encouraged to contextualize their
understanding to Harare in particular and
Zimbabwe in general.
The human right to water entitles everyone to
sufcient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible
and affordable water for personal and domestic use
(Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights, General Comment 15). Contributions made
by representatives of residents associations and
youth organizations demonstrated that their rational
and empirical understanding of the human rights to
WASH is limited. To integrate the sufciency
component the World Health Organization (WHO)
standard of between 50 100 litres of water per
person per day was used. These litres were viewed
as requirements to meet most basic needs and few
health concerns. Almost all participants concurred
that Harare City Council is failing to provide this
amount of water to citizens on a daily basis. Cases
of suburbs that have not received water for years
were referenced. The debate cascaded to whether
water disconnections violate the sufciency
c o m p o n e n t. P u b l i c a ti o n s b y C a ta r i n a D e
Albuquerque (UN Special Rapporteur on the
Human Rights to Water and Sanitation) show that
procedural safeguards before, during and after
disconnections should be put in place, including
provision of alternatives for those who cannot
afford. The High Court ruling of Mushoriwa vs City of
Harare established that any disconnections should
be accompanied by a court order. The safety of
Harare water which relates to freeness from microorganisms, chemical substances and radiological
hazards that constitute threats to human health,
was highly questioned. Reference to the 24 May
2015 Sunday Mail headline, Harare City Water
Pollution Shocker was a point of reference for
discussions on safety. Participants noted that there
is need to ensure that Local Authorities localize
standards in line with the World Health Organization
(WHO) Guidelines for drinking-water quality.
Although the acceptability component encompass
the colour, odour and taste of water as well as the
cultural appropriateness dimension, the workshop
concentrated on gender sensitivity, life-cycle and
privacy requirements. Participants noted that

although general gender policies and the National

Water Policy has rhetoric on gender sensitivity, the
situation on the ground at Local Authority level
shows insensitivity. The WHO standard of having a
water source within 1000 metres of the home and
the collection time of less than 30 minutes, was used
as the basis to discuss the physical accessibility
component of rights to WASH in Harare. The
affordability component raised interest amongst
participants since residents within communities had
been disconnected from water using the 1913 Water
Regulations by-law in Harare. Participants
reiterated that they have not promoted nonpayment for water services and that residents are
not major debtors as the Harare City Council would
want to portray. The affordability component in line
with the United Nations Development Programme
suggestion that water costs should not exceed three
percent of household income, was viewed as a
major area of engagement with the Harare City
Council.
International instruments giving legal foundations to
the human rights to WASH were noted as the 28 July
2010 UN General Assembly, through Resolution
64/292; Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination against Women and Children;
Convention on the Rights of a Child (Article 14(2))
and the November 2002 International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
General Comment No. 15 Article 1.1.
To illustrate special attributes of rights two individual
exercises were done. The rst one involved a
picture depicting a man giving a present to a woman
on one hand and a male worker receiving a salary
from a female manager on the other hand. The
exercise was to evoke perceptions of participants
on the relationship between giver and receiver as
well as between a rights-holder and duty-bearer.
Participants were tasked to list what they think those
at the receiving end felt about the present and the
salary awarded. The exercise culminated into selfintrospection on what residents associations and
youth organizations think their interventions and
programs elicit among people of their concern, i.e
whether they had a beneciary/receiver tag or a
rights holder tag. The second exercise involved a
picture depicting a lonely man on an Island on one
hand and two men on an Island with the other
drinking water on the other hand. Individual
participants were asked to state under which of the
two scenarios would a person say I need water or
I have a right to water and why?. Both of the
individual exercises showed that most interventions
in the WASH sector by CSOs is mainly conned to
needs based approaches rather than rights based
approaches. However two contrasting positions
came out from the exercise; one saying whether
there is a lonely man or not the statement should
always be I have a right to water; the other position
was that a lonely man should say I need water
whilst the other man accompanied by another

person drinking water should say I have a right to

water.
The session ended on questions whether CSOs
were rights-holders or duty bearers and whether
CSOs should disclose their budgets and if so to
what extent. Though CSOs facilitated citizens'
empowerment to demand services and also
capacitating Local Authorities to deliver, the
workshop noted that CSOs are also duty bearers in
some respect especially in the context of them
accounting to people of their concer

Introducing Human Rights Based Approach

To ignite graduation from a needs based approach
amongst participants and facilitate mindset shift
towards Human Rights Based Approaches,
participants were given a simple common sh story.
The sh story that if you give a person a sh, he or
she will eat for one day but if you teach the person
how to sh, he or she will eat forever was tabled for
individual assessment to determine the truth of it
and state reasons for either supporting it or not
supporting it. Two positions came out; one
supporting the statement and the other taking a
situational approach (it depends with the situation).
The sh story presented a call to nd new ways of
thinking and a paradigm shift from responding to
needs and embrace a rights based approach. The
sh story brings to the fore the need to embrace
important considerations like access to the river,
possession of shing tools, whether the river is
clean or polluted thereby exposing people to health
concerns, access to the market and several other
barriers to development.
An individual exercise with questions was given to
participants to establish key elements of the rights
based approach. The exercise brought to the fore
that in rights based approaches marginalized
people must have access to their rights and CSOs
should show solidarity to people of our concern as
they hold duty bearers to account. People of CSOs'
concern should take control of their lives, fulll their
roles, responsibilities and aspirations. HRBA
asserts the responsibility that duty bearers are

accountable to rights holders and develops the

capacity of duty bearers to meet their human rights
obligations. It works on non-discriminatory basis,
ensures people are the compass, address root
causes of the problem, promote non-violent conict
resolution and promote working with others.
The role of CSOs change from being an
implementer to a facilitator. The session ended on
group exercises on the differences between needs
based and rights based approaches.

Utilizing Human Rights Based Approach

Analysis

Gender and Water

Participants were tasked to brainstorm on what
gender is. The exercise showed that there is
confusion on the difference between gender and
sex. Majority of participants also dened gender
quite closely to gender roles. Information on gender
responsiveness and gender analysis is lacking
amongst some residents associations and youth
organizations.
The next task that aimed to relate gender to the
water sector was group work on analyzing a picture
of a man giving the instruction that for a fair selection
everybody had to take the same exam and ordered
animals present to climb a nearby tree. The animals
given the instruction were an elephant, a bird, a dog,
a sh, a penguin, and a monkey. This exercise
demonstrated that what seems fair has to be
unpacked at the level of vulnerability. It
demonstrated that people setting parameters can
be blind to circumstances and fail to take into
consideration diversity. General statements can be
gender blind because people have different
vulnerabilities. This exercise was followed by a
handout exercise to establish the value of gender
mainstreaming in human rights based approach.
The handout showing how women are differently
affected in water provision framework drew the
conclusion on why even at international level after
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, there
was need to also come up with the Convention on
the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women so
as to unpack situations as they come and recognize
different stakeholders in the water sector.
Gender analysis is therefore important so that
CSOs work is responsive and sensitive to gender.

Facilitator explained the use of the problem tree

analysis tool. Participants were divided into three
groups. After agreeing that the main problem was
water shortage, groups were tasked to establish
causes and effects using the problem tree analysis
tool. The groups identied the following root causes
to water shortage; obsolete water infrastructure;
failure to maintain and upgrade infrastructure; poor
planning and management; low revenue collection;
lack of condence with Local Authorities; awed
billing system; corruption; lack of good effective
accountability systems; poor citizen engagement;
uncoordinated local authority institutional
framework; centralization and interference by the
executive arms of government; brain drain; greedy;
poor ineffective water governance frameworks;
irrelevant policies and laws; inconsistency of
policies, laws and regulations; conict of interest;
poor prioritization of issues; destruction of water
sources e.g wetlands; lack of political will and poor
budget allocations.
The effects of the problem were identied as:
disease outbreaks e.g dysentery, typhoid and
cholera; abuse of women and children at boreholes;
loss of productive time queuing for water; water
disconnections at residents households; poor
sanitation; proliferation of unprotected water
sources; de-industrialization; privatization of water;
family disintegration; conicts at water sources;
instability and lack of social cohesion; degrading
human dignity; violations of human rights to water
and sanitation.
The causal analysis indicated that ineffective and
poor water governance frameworks were the
central problem in the water sector. Facilitator
explained the use of framework analysis tool and
groups were tasked to utilize the tool in water sector
diagnosis. On the legal framework the following
laws were listed: Constitution of Zimbabwe
Amendment No. 20, ZINWA Act, Water Act, Rural
District Councils Act, Urban Councils Act, Regional
Town Planning Act, Public Health Act, Environment
Management Act, Debt Assumption Act, Public
Private Partnership Bill, and 1913 Water

Regulations By-law. Policy frameworks identied

include the National Water Policy, the Zimbabwe
Agenda for Sustainable Socio-Economic
Transformation (ZIMASSET), the forthcoming
Sanitation and Hygiene policy, the National Health
Strategy and the National Climate Change Strategy
Paper. It was noted that there is a lot of
inconsistency in the legal, policy and regulations
framework and hence there is no guarantee for the
respect, protection and fullment of rights to WASH
in accordance with international standards and
principles. On the institutional framework the
National Action Committee on Water which
embraced the concept of integrated water resource
management and the National Coordination Unit
were listed as coordination mechanisms at national
level. Below them are Provincial Water and
Sanitation Committees followed by District Water
and Sanitation Committees. In rural areas they
cascade down to village development committees
whilst in urban areas they cascade to ward
development committees. The other sort of parallel
institutional framework noted was the one falling
under ZINWA which has Catchment Councils and
sub-catchment councils. The National Water Policy
through its National Water Supply Services Utility
(NWSSU Section 1.3.3) was viewed as an avenue
for another institutional framework that will have
water utility boards at municipality level e.g the
Harare Water Utility Board. Participants noted that
there are many, unnecessary and uncoordinated
institutional frameworks in the water sector. The
informal value framework included churches,
Community Water Alliance, Combined Harare
Residents Association, Harare Residents Trust,
Harare Residents Alliance, Epworth Residents
Development Association, Norton Residents
Alliance, Chitungwiza Residents Trust, Chitungwiza
Residents and Rate-payers Association,
Chitungwiza Progressive Residents Association,
Simukai Rural Residents Trust, Bulawayo
Progressive Residents Association, Bulawayo
United Residents Association, Gweru Residents
Association, Masvingo United Residents and
Ratepayers Association, Mutare Residents
Association, National Association of Youths
Organizations, the Institute of Water, Sanitation
Development, UNICEF, World Vision, Practical
Action, Leonard Cheshire, Mvuramanzi Trust,
WHH, Commonwealth Local Government Forum,
Zimrights, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights,
World Bank, Swissaid, USAID, AUSAID (DFAT),
EU, DFID, SIDA, CIDA, Hivos and several other
CSOs as well as community based organizations.
Participants agreed that priorities from the
challenges identied include synchronizing of water
laws, policy and regulations with the national
constitution; citizen engagement as well as policy
and institutional reform.

The Rights-Actors table was explained but using the

tool had challenges as majority of the participants
were not privy to sections of laws, policies and
regulations that had a bearing on WASH.
Community Water Alliance was therefore tasked to
compile relevant sections so that CSOs can make
effective use of the Rights- Actors table as a tool.
Time constrains did not allow group exercises on the
force eld analysis and SWOT analysis.
Discussions held however showed that CSOs used
SWOT as a tool to analyze their organizations rather
than to assess communities where there are people
of their concern.
The group feedbacks and discussions showed that
there is greater need for civic education, monitoring
a n d o b s e r v a t i o n o f WA S H , i n f o r m a t i o n
dissemination, advocacy and lobby, as well as
networking and capacity building. 'page 7

Workshop Report
Author: Hardlife Mudzingwa- CWA Programmes
Manager
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank many people who made the
workshop a success. We would particularly like to
thank the National Water Council Chairperson Ms
Hildaberta Rwambiwa
CWA Board Secretary Ms Aretha Mare,
CWA National Coordinator Mr Timothy Chitambure,
Mr Ruben Akili and Ms Farai Jangara both from the
Combined Harare Residents Association.
We acknowledge the free venue offered by CHRA
and the commitment made by CSOs in sending their
representatives to the workshop
HEKS/EPER is acknowledged for funding support
and contributions to the workshop.

ANNEXURE 1 WORKSHOP PROGRAM

D9 b 5 9 w Lb / [ { L 9 I a ! b wLDI { . ! { 9 5 ! t t wh ! / I w! Lb Lb D 26 MAY 2015

NO 12, OXFORD ROAD, NEWLANDS, HARAE Facilitator: Hardlife Mudzingwa

830hrs-0930hrs

Activity
Opening remarks and introductions, expectations and fears
Objectives of the workshop

930hrs-1000hrs

Human Rights Knowledge

Basics to the right to water
Legal foundations of the right to water and relevant instruments.
State obligations for the promotion of the right to water.
Break
Introduction to HRBA
What are HRBA?
Why HRBA?
Key elements of HRBA?
Why departure from NBA?
Difference between NBA & HRBA.
(Group Assignments on Difference Between NBA & HRBA)
Gender & Water
Introduction to gender concepts.
The intrinsic linkage between gender and human rights in relation to water.

00-1015hrs
015hrs- 1115hrs

115hrs- 1215hrs

215 1235hrs

235-1300hrs

00hrs- 1400 hrs

400hrs-1500hrs

500hrs-1535hrs

535hrs- 1620hrs
620hrs-1630hrs

Utilizing HRBA in Programming in the programme cycle

Groups Assigment
Utilizing HRBA Analysis
1. Framework Analysis
2. Rights-Actors Table
(Group Assignments on Analysis Tools)
LUNCH
Utilizing HRBA Analysis
1. Force Field Analysis
2. SWOT
(Group Assignments on Analysis Tools)
Utilizing HRBA Analysis
1. Solution Finding
(Group Assignments on Analysis Tools)
Group feedback and discussion on analysis tools
HEKS THEMATIC AREAS

Lead Person (s)

Hilda RwambiwaCWA National Water
Council Chairperson.
CWA
Participants
Facilitator

All
Facilitator
Participants

Facilitator

Facilitator
Participants
Facilitator
Participants

ALL
Facilitator
Participants
Facilitator
Participants
Participants
Belinda NcubeHEKS Rep