As a domain expert in international human rights and environmental policy, I have spent considerable time examining the complex issue of water access and its implications for global society. The question of whether water is a privilege or a right is one that has been debated at various levels of society, from the grassroots to the highest echelons of international governance.

Water as a Basic Human Right
The fundamental principle that underpins much of the discourse on water as a human right is the belief that access to clean and safe drinking water is essential for life. The United Nations General Assembly has recognized the human right to water and sanitation through its resolution 64/292, which was adopted in 2010. This resolution asserts that clean drinking water and sanitation are essential to the full enjoyment of life and all human rights. It emphasizes that water should be accessible to everyone without discrimination.

Contradictions and Challenges
However, the reality on the ground is often at odds with this ideal. Despite the UN's declaration, there are regions where access to water is severely limited, and it is treated more as a commodity than a right. In some cases, access to water is controlled by corporations or governments, and it can be a source of conflict, as seen in instances of water privatization and the resulting social and economic disparities.

The Legal Perspective
From a legal standpoint, the judge's perspective mentioned in the provided content, which regards access to drinking water as a privilege rather than a right, reflects a stance that is not aligned with the principles of international human rights law. The assertion that water is a privilege implies that it is something that is granted or revoked based on certain conditions, rather than being inherently available to all individuals by virtue of their humanity.

The U.S. Stance in 2007
The reference to the U.S. response to the UN declaration in 2007 is significant. It highlights the geopolitical and ideological differences that can influence how a country approaches the issue of water as a right. The U.S.'s negative response could be attributed to various factors, including economic interests, political ideologies, or a differing interpretation of what constitutes a fundamental human right.

**The Role of NGOs and International Organizations**
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and international bodies play a crucial role in advocating for water as a human right. They work to raise awareness, provide resources, and pressure governments to uphold the human right to water. Their efforts are vital in ensuring that the most vulnerable populations have access to this basic necessity.

The Path Forward
Moving forward, it is essential to continue advocating for the recognition of water as a human right. This involves not only legal and policy changes but also cultural shifts in how society views water. Education and awareness campaigns can help to change perceptions and promote the idea that water is not a privilege that can be selectively granted, but a right that must be universally respected and protected.

Conclusion
In conclusion, while the debate over whether water is a privilege or a right is complex and multifaceted, from a human rights perspective, it is clear that access to water is a fundamental necessity for life and should be treated as such. The journey towards universal recognition of this right is ongoing, and it requires the collective efforts of individuals, communities, governments, and international organizations.

read more >>

The judge clearly regarded access to drinking water as a privilege, not a right. ... In 2007, the United States responded negatively to the United Nations declaration that access to safe drinking water be considered a fundamental human right.Jan 14, 2015read more >>