Image: Orhan Akbaba on Pexels

Anyone who tampers with or sabotages water infrastructure in South Africa must face the full might of the law and possibly be charged with terrorist activity, but this may not be the most effective legal process.

This is part of the SA Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) Policy Brief entitled, How to Address Systemic Sabotage of Essential Water Infrastructure. Dr Johandri Wright, a postdoctoral researcher at the Dullah Omar Institute in the SARChI Chair in Multilevel Government, Law and Development at the University of the Western Cape (UWC), helped develop this policy brief.

UWC’s Prof Lukas Muntingh, Dr Jean Redpath, and Peacemore Mhodi were also part of the team that contributed to the brief.

The systemic sabotage of water infrastructure in South Africa is often linked to organised crime networks known as "water mafias." These criminal acts threaten the constitutional right to water and undermine public service delivery. The brief outlines legal frameworks and policy recommendations to combat this growing crisis. Criminals are motivated to damage water infrastructure because there are lucrative contracts to be gained from repair work.

UWC Post-Doctoral Researcher Dr Johandri Wright. Image: Supplied

Dr Wright and Mhodi agreed: “This policy brief discusses the Protection of Constitutional Democracy Against Terrorist Activities Act 33 of 2004 and its applicability to the deliberate sabotage of water infrastructure. It highlights that although the deliberate sabotage of water infrastructure in South Africa may meet the definition of ‘terrorist activity’ under the Act, prosecuting such acts as terrorism is not straightforward and there may be more effective means to address the problem.”

Yet, even using the term terrorism in South Africa is not straightforward. South Africa’s history of misuse of terrorism legislation under apartheid, the broad and open-ended legal definition of terrorism, and the complex procedural requirements mean that a terrorism prosecution may be costly, contested, and ultimately ineffective. Although classifying these acts as terrorism could highlight the severe threat to essential services and public safety, the risks of acquittal and unintended diplomatic consequences can outweigh the benefits. Targeted criminal charges under existing law, with clear evidence and narrower elements, may therefore offer a more practical and effective response to organised sabotage of critical water services.

One of the recommendations is to classify sabotage of water infrastructure as a national priority crime, enabling the Hawks (Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation) to allocate resources and investigate effectively.

Wright said: “One key recommendation is that the Criminal Matters Amendment Act should be used as the preferred legal instrument to prosecute deliberate sabotage, as it provides clear definitions, strong penalties of up to 30 years’ imprisonment or heavy corporate fines, and avoids the procedural challenges of terrorism charges.”

Another recommendation is that the President proclaim and promulgate the remaining sections of the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act (CIPA) of 2019, and that all water services infrastructure be declared critical under CIPA once fully operational.

The SAHRC brief also states that suppliers involved in criminal activity targeting infrastructure be blacklisted and the recurring sabotage of water infrastructure be reported to the Hawks for investigation.

Read more on this policy brief HERE.