Significance of the Case
This case places a positive obligation on member States to the Convention to take measures ensuring all residents have access to safe, clean drinking water and sanitation. However, this case does not set a clear standard for what that obligation looks like. While the Court determined that Slovenia’s measures to legalize settlements where the Roma lived, and in the meantime to provide water tanks and water distribution connections to settlements, were concrete measures that functionally ensured access, these measures leave much to be desired. The Commissioner of Human Rights of the Council of Europe in 2017 determined that people in the Škocjan settlement were ill and unable to maintain basic hygiene due to lack of water and that this affected their education and employment. The Commissioner recommended the Slovenian government more clearly indicate what success looks like and put more pressure on the municipalities to improve living conditions for the Roma settlements. The Court did not compel the government to take those measures, and so this leaves the Court’s determination unclear as to what may or may not constitute meeting the “positive obligation.” Additionally, the United Nations Special Rapporteur indicated in her 2010 report that the “illegality” of settlements was used as a justification for not connecting Roma communities to water and sanitation services, something that the Court did not seem concerned with. While setting out important standards, the Court’s decision is overly deferential to government in its analysis and represents a missed opportunity to enforce a just and transformative vision of human rights.
For their contributions, special thanks to ESCR-Net member: the Program on Human Rights and the Global Economy (PHRGE) at Northeastern University.
