Haifa District Court Instructs Water Company to Temporarily Reconnect Water Supply to Arab Families in the Naqab

On 10 June 2003, the Haifa District Court, sitting as a special water tribunal, instructed Mekorot, the Israeli National Water Company, to renew the water supply for two weeks to the Abu Krenat family living in the Naqab (Negev). This interim ruling came in response to a motion for injunction and lawsuit filed by Adalah on 9 June 2003 on behalf of an Arab citizen of Israel against Mekorot, the Israel Lands Administration, and the Water Commissioner. With these filings, Adalah demanded that the water be reconnected immediately. These submissions followed Mekorot's arbitrary and abrupt disconnection of water to a sole water point from which the Abu Krenat family and others obtain their water. The Court also ordered the respondents to respond to the lawsuit within two weeks. Adalah Attorney Marwan Dalal filed the submissions and represented the Abu Krenat family before the Court.

The Abu Krenat family home is located in an area in the Naqab that does not fall within the jurisdiction of any municipality. There is no running water supplied directly to their home. Like many other Palestinian Bedouin citizens of Israel living in the Naqab, the family is forced to improvise by bringing water from a water point on the Water Company's main water pipeline, via rubber hose hook-ups and/or unhygienic metal containers. The water supplied via the water point is of poor standard: The water quality is sub-standard; the water pressure is very low; water is available only at limited times and in limited quantity; the water is very hot; and it is costly.

On 11 May 2003, the Water Company abruptly cut the water supply to the water point from which the Abu Krenat family obtains their water. No prior notice warning of the water cut was given to the family who have collected water from this water point and paid their water bills in a timely fashion for the last sixteen years. Following protests from the family, the Water Company renewed the water supply that same day. However, also on that day, the Abu Krenat family received a letter from the Water Company informing them that as of 25 May 2003, water would no longer be supplied to the water point and that they must begin using another one. The alternative water point is located very far from the Abu Krenat home and the homes of other users, and as such, will cause financial as well as other practical hardships. The letter provided no explanation for the water supply cut.

In the motion for injunction and the lawsuit, Adalah argued that the respondents' action violated the petitioners' right to water, under both Israeli and international human rights law. Adalah further argued that the respondents' must supply water to all citizens; they are forbidden from discriminating between different sectors of the population in fulfilling their legal obligations. By cutting the water supply, the respondents' violate the right to equality, as the petitioners' right to water should be equal to any other citizens' right to water. Adalah also argued that the disconnection of the water supply has far-reaching implications on the petitioners' right to health. The lack of clean and accessible water poses imminent health risks including dehydration and other diseases. Moreover, Adalah contended that the petitioners' right to due process was violated, as they were not contacted prior to water supply cut or given the opportunity to be heard, despite the direct and specific injury caused to them by this arbitrary decision.