1. Peru: “Protecting the right to water in Peru The case of the Ombudsman Office (2003-2005) ” Carlos Alza Barco Professor in the Catholic University of Perú Former Deputy Ombudsman for Public Utilities and Environment of Peru Istanbul, 2009

2.  The National Ombudsman Office, autonomous public body, implemented a mechanism to receive complaints from citizens against utility firms and regulators.  Information from citizens allowed to identify the key issues at the public policy and regulation levels.  The Ombudsman made recommendations to the public authorities where regulation needs improving in order to realize the right to water. 2

3. (1996) The Ombudsman Office opened its doors. Complaints from citizens against public utility firms and regulator were received. (2005) The Ombudsman published the Report No. 94 so called “Citizens without water: analysis on a violated right”. It analysed policy and regulation producing recommendations to the public authority. Applied the human right based approach in public utilities regulation. (2003 to 2005) Strong advocacy, communication and promotion of recommendations among citizens, civil society and public bodies. (2007) Published the Report No. 124 on the situation of water for human consumption in rural areas. 3

4.  Water was not a priority in the governmental agenda.  Management model in utilities had political interference from local governments.  Management problems in utility firms (tariffs under real costs, limited infrastructure investment, water not counted and bills unpaid)  Privatization in the agenda of the government vs. Population and civil society did not want privatization.  An electoral process coming in 2005...  Ombudsman with a strong credibility and legitimacy. 4

5. Source: National Plan for Water and Sanitation 2006-2010 Ministerio de Vivienda, Construcción y Saneamiento. 5

6. Source: Management indicators of the regulatory body 2004, SUNASS. Elaboration: The Ombudsman Office 6

7. Decentralized system of citizens´ complaints and systematization to do an analysis and regulation Impact and follow up system for investigative report´s recommendation:  Engaging decision-makers and increasing their awareness  Training modules for capacity-building for citizens and civil society  Interactive spaces for dialogue between authorities and citizens  Internal capacity building in the Ombudsman Office Creating a wide-country Monitory System for Water Access and Quality Develop an argumentation with a right- based approach to promote a change 7

8.  Influencing decision-making through Media Communication:  Executive summaries for directors  Identification of key/leading actors  Press releases  Participation of Public events 8

9. 9

10. Tariff increase not well seen by the population and civil society Information very technical and non understandable for the public Ideologies and dogmas about water, role of the state and property rights in conflict Lack of technical capacities Participation is (still) seen as an “instrument” to legitimize decisions. 10

11.  Consumers have a role to play in accepting and defining tariffs structures.  12 utility firms with new tariffs structures and progressive increase according the accomplishment of goals  Participation requires confidence in the body in charge of complaints. “Voice will be heard”.  More than 2,000 complaints countrywide (535 petitions and 2311 orientations)  Improved efficiency of utilities can be the result of having a voice oriented and accountable institution  19 firms with an Optimized Master Plan  Policy and regulation can be shaped by citizen voice and monitored through an Ombudsman. From case to policy- oriented strategy.  National Plan for Water and Sewerage  “Water for all” Plan (social programme for rural areas)  New rules and regulation 11

12. Carlos Alza Barco carlos.alza@pucp.edu.pe