A Comparative Study of the Right to Water for Prisoners and Detainees in Light of the Jurisprudence of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Master's student in International Law, Shiraz University, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Public and International Law, Shiraz University, Iran

10.22034/law.2025.67797.3498

Abstract

The right to water for detained individuals and prisoners, as persons under strict care and restrictions, is not only a fundamental need but also a human right that must be upheld to preserve human dignity and ensure their health, with violations thereof prevented. Recognizing the right to water as an independent right plays a pivotal role in adequately securing and guaranteeing this right. This article, based on a descriptive-analytical method, addresses the question of how the right to water for individuals deprived of liberty has been interpreted and guaranteed in the judgments of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights. The study concludes that, given the lack of explicit recognition of this right in the European and American Conventions on Human Rights, these courts have not treated the right to water as an independent right but rather as an element of human dignity. Through various cases, such as “Vitkovskiy v. Ukraine” in the European Court of Human Rights and “Bissoon et al v. Trinidad and Tobago” in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, violations of the water right have been recognized as violations of human dignity. To elaborate on access to safe and sufficient water, these courts have legally considered violations of this right as breaches of member states’ obligations to protect human dignity, as stipulated in Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 5(2) of the American Convention on Human Rights. However, in several instances, such as “Valašinasv. Lithuania” in the European Court of Human Rights, subsuming the right to water under other rights has resulted in the failure to establish a violation of Article 3 of the Convention, thereby undermining the effective guarantee of this right for prisoners.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. الف) منابع فارسی

    - کتاب‌ها

    1. آفنداک، خلیل و حسن‌دوست، المیرا (1392). راهنمای اصول اساسی جایگزین‌های حبس. تهران: روانشناسی و هنر.
    2. صفاری‌نیا، مهزاد (1394). حق بر آب آشامیدنی سالم در حقوق بین‌الملل بشر. تهران: مجد.

    - مقالات

    1. احمدی، سید محمدصادق و بدیسار، سید ناصرالدین (1395). حق بر آب در نظام بین‌المللی حقوق بشر. حقوق محیط زیست، 1(2)، 38-50.
    2. اسلام‌پناه، میثم؛ میرعباسی، سید باقر؛ و مرادی، مریم (1401). نگرشی بر نقش رویه‌های ویژۀ حقوق بشری در دسترسی به حق آب آشامیدنی سالم در کشورهای در حال توسعه. جامعه‌شناسی سیاسی ایران، 5(3)، 307-335.
    3. امیری، مجاهد؛ امیری، روح‌الامین؛ و راسخ، سید محمدمهدی (1401). حق بر آب در پرتو رویۀ قضایی دادگاه اروپایی حقوق بشر. مطالعات بین‌المللی، 19(3)، 209-226.

    Doi:10.22034/ISJ.2022.325239.1735

    1. ذاکریان امیری، مهدی؛ بلوری، پیمان؛ هرمیداس باوند، داود و باقری حامد، یوسف (1398). چالش‌های امنیت انسانی در پرتو حق بر سلامت و بهداشت عمومی. مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی معاصر، 10(18)، 51-73.  Doi:10.22034/law.2019.9668
    2. گراوند، فرشاد (1399). حق بر آب در پیکرۀ حقوق بین‌الملل و حمایت از آن در داوری سرمایه‌گذاری بین‌المللی. مطالعات حقوق عمومی، 50(4)، 1683- 1705.
    3. محمدی، عقیل و حاجی‌ملا، هیوا (1402). تعهد دولت‌ها به اجرای فراسرزمینی حق بشر بر دسترسی به آب سالم و بهداشتی. مطالعات حقوقی، 15(1)، 387-420.
    4. نصراللهی شهری، نیما و زمانی، سید قاسم (1399). بررسی حق بشری دسترسی به آب در پرتو رویۀ دیوان داوری ایکسید. مطالعات حقوق عمومی، 50(2)، 423-441.

    - مقالات همایش‌ها و کنفرانس‌ها

    1. نریمانی، مهدی؛ نصیری، ولی‌اله؛ مطلق‌العنان، علی‌اکبر؛ و نجد قهرمانی، سمیه (1396). بررسی حقوق زندانی در اسناد بین‌المللی حقوق بشر. اولین کنفرانس ملی حقوق و علوم سیاسی.

    - وب‌سایت‌های اینترنتی

    1. پژوهه، (31/02/1397). اعلامیۀ اصول اساسی رفتار با زندانیان، قابل دسترس در:

    <  https://shorturl.at/XeY5z>

    ب) منابع انگلیسی

    - Books

    1. Heller, L. (2022). The Human Rights to Water and Sanitation. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2022.
    2. Mowbray, A. (2012). Cases and Materials on the European Convention on Human Rights. New York: Oxford.
    3. Rodley, N. (2000). The Treatment of Prisoners Under International Law. New York: Oxford U.P.
    4. Winkler, I. (2012). The Human Right to Water Significance, Legal Status and Implication for Water Allocation. Hart Publishing, Oxford.

    - Articles

    1. Bertazzo, S. (2015). The Protection of Access to Drinking Water in International Law. Universidad Católica del Norte, 22(2), 55-92.
    2. Benöhr, I. (2023). The Right to Water and Sustainable Consumption in EU law. Journal of Consumer Policy, 46(1), 53-77.
    3. Cahill, A. (2011). The Human Right to Water- a Right of Unique Status: The legal Status and Normative Content of the Right to Water. International Journal of Human Rights, 9(3), 389-410.
    4. Crosson, J; Sylvester, R; & Worsham, K. (2024). Locked out of Water: a Reflection on WaSH Access in US Prisons. Journal of Water, Sanitation & Hygiene for Development, 14(11), 1146-1154.
    5. Fantini, E. (2019). An introduction to the Human Right to Water: Law, Politics, and Beyond. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Water, 7(2), 1-8.
    6. Franziska Braig, K. (2018). The European Court of Human Rights and the Right to Clean Water and Sanitation. Water Policy; Oxford, 20(2), 282-307.
    7. Grafton, RQ; Manero, A; Chu, L; & Wyewoll, P. (2023). The price and Value of Water: An Economic Review. Cambridge Prisms: Water, (1), 1-17. Doi:10.1017/wat.2023.2
    8. Herrfahrdt-Pähle, E; Houdert, A; Dombrowsky, I; Cullmann, J; Mukherji, A; Unver, O & Varady, R. (2025). Empowering Global Water Governance: Taking the 2023 UN Water Conference Outcomes Forward to Address the Current Water Crises. Water International, 50(1), 4-10.
    9. Jewkes, Y; Moran D & Turner, J. (2020). Just add Water: Prisons, Therapeutic Landscapes and Healthy Blue Space. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 20(4), 381-398.
    10. Kirschner, A. (2011). The Human Right to Water and Sanitation. Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, (15), 445-487.
    11. Lee, J & Best, M (2017). Attempting to Define the Human Right to Water with an Annotated Bibliography & Recommendations for Practitioners. The Georgetown Environmental Law Review, 30(1), 75-123.
    12. Lines, R. (2008). The Right to Health of Prisoners in International Human Rights Law. International Journal of Prisoner Health, 4(1), 3-53.
    13. Murillo Chavarro, J. (2014). The Right to Water in the Case-Law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. ACDI Anuario Colombiano de Derecho International, (7), 39-68.
    14. Roaf, V & Winkler, I. (2024). Challenging Exclusion: Bringing the Human Rights to Water and Sanitation to Europe. Journal of Water, Sanitation & Hygiene for Development, 14(10), 971-975.
    15. Soboka Bulto, T. (2011). The Emergence of the Human Right to Water in International Human Rights Law: Invention or Discovery? Melbourne Journal of International Law, 12(2), 1-25.
    16. Strakos, P. (2016). Water as a Human Right: Comparative Study of its Protection in the Inter American and European Jurisprudential Spheres. Revista da Faculdade de Direito, 61(3), 141-164.

    Doi:10.1080/02508060.2025.2452108

    1. Wallace, A. (2020). The European Court of Human Rights: a Tool for Improving Health. The Lancet Public Health, 5(2), 78-79.
    2. Williams, M. (2007). Privatization and the Human Right to Water: Challenges for the New Century. Michigan Journal of International Law, 28(2), 469-505.

    - Thesis

    1. Hansén, Nora (2018). The Human Right to Water and its Status in International Law. Master’s Thesis in Public International Law, Stockholm University.

    - Documents

    1. American Convention on Human Rights 1969.
    2. Inter American Court of Human Rights, “Differentiated Approaches with Respect to Certain Groups of Prisons Deprived of Liberty”, Advisory Opinion OC-29/22 of May 30, 2022.
    3. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom 1950.
    4. United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of prisoners (The Nelson Mandela Rules), 2015.

    - Reports

    1. International Committee of Red Cross, “Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Habitat in Prisons”, 2005.
    2. Penal Reform International, “Global Prison Trends”, 2022.
    3. South African Human Rights Commission, “The Right to Sufficient Water. 3rd Economic and Social Rights Report”, 2000.
    4. World Health Organization, “Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality: Fourth Edition Incorporating the First and Second Addenda”, 2022.

    - Jurisprudence

    1. C.H.R, Case of Abdilla v. Malta, (36199/15), Judgment of 17 July 2018.
    2. C.H.R, Case of İlerde and Others v. Türkiye, (35614/19), Judgment of 5 December 2023.
    3. C.H.R, Affaire Marian Stoicescu c. Roumanie, (12934/02), Arrêt du 16 Juillet 2009.
    4. C.H.R, Case of Mihai Laurenţiu Marin v. Romania, (79857/12), Judgment of 10 June 2014
    5. C.H.R, Case of Mikalauskas v. Malta, (4458/10), Judgment of 23 July 2013.
    6. C.H.R, Case of Peňaranda Soto v. Malta, (16680/14), Judgment of 19 December 2017.
    7. C.H.R, Case of Rezmiveș and Others v. Romania, (61467/12, 39516/13, 48231/13 and 68191/13), Judgment of 25 April 2017.
    8. C.H.R, Case of Story and Others v. Malta, (56854/13, 57005/13 and 57043/13), Judgment of 29 October 2015.
    9. C.H.R, Case of Shishkov v. Russia, (26746/05), Judgment of 20 February 2014.
    10. C.H.R, Case of Valašinas v. Lithuania, (44558/98), Judgment of 24 July 2001.
    11. C.H.R, Case of Vartic v. Romania, (12152/05), Judgment of 10 July 2012.
    12. C.H.R, Case of Vitkovskiy v. Ukraine, (24938/06), Judgment of 26 September 2013.
    13. C.H.R, Case of Volodia Avetisyan v. Armenia, (39087/15), Judgment of 3 May 2022.
    14. A.C.H.R., Case of Amrhein et al. v. Costa Rica. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of April 25, 2018. Series C No. 354.
    15. A.C.H.R., Case of Bissoon et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of November 14, 2022. Series C No. 472.
    16. A.C.H.R., Case of Dial et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of November 21, 2022. Series C No. 476.
    17. A.C.H.R., Case of González et al. v. Venezuela. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of September 20, 2021. Series C No. 436.
    18. A.C.H.R., Case of López Álvarez v. Honduras. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 1, 2006. Series C No. 141.
    19. A.C.H.R., Case of Lysias Fleury et al. v. Haiti. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of November 23, 2011. Series C No. 236.
    20. A.C.H.R., Case of Montero Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia) v. Venezuela. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 5, 2006. Series C No. 150.
    21. A.C.H.R., Case of Rodríguez Revolorio et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of October 14, 2019. Series C No. 387.
    22. A.C.H.R, Case of Vélez Loor v. Panama. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 23, 2010 Series C No. 218.
    23. A.C.H.R., Case of Yvon Neptune v. Haiti. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 6, 2008. French Version. Series C No. 180.

    - Provisional Measures

    1. A.C.H.R, Matter of Persons Deprived of Liberty in Evaristo de Moraes Penitentiary Regarding Brazil. Adoption of Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of March 21, 2023.

    - Websites

    1. Association for the Prevent of Torture )apt(, Food and Water, Available at: >https://www.apt.ch/knowledge-hub/dfd/food-and-water<.
Jurisprudence and Islamic Law
Volume 16, Issue 39
September 2025
Pages 29-59

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics