adminAbel Zhakata Senior Reporter
THE on-going water disconnection blitz by Mutare City Council on defaulting businesses that had been earmarked to recover millions of dollars has been dealt a heavy blow after an affected hotel in the Central Business District was granted a court order compelling the municipality to reconnect it.
The local authority turned its barrel on commercial entities following its parent ministry’s instruction not to disconnect households on the basis that the provision of clean safe water was a basic human right.
Last week, Mutare senior magistrate Mrs Sharon Chipanga ordered council to reconnect City Centre Hotel known as “Moto Moto” following its disconnection over unpaid water bills amounting to more than $20 000.
The case is likely to open a floodgate of urgent court applications by several businesses in the eastern border city that had water supplies cut to their premises, thereby thwarting the cash-strapped municipality’s efforts to collect what it is owed.
In its founding affidavit, the hotel, which was being represented by one of its directors, Mr Boniface Nyamanhindi, said the water disconnection was a crime against humanity.
Mr Chris Ndlovu of Gonese and Ndlovu Legal Practitioners represented City Centre Hotel. Town Clerk Mr Obert Muzawazi and the local authority were cited as first and second respondents respectively.
“We are approaching this honourable court on an extremely urgent basis because of the facts of this matter and also because of the relief we seek…the applicant used to operate a full-fledged hotel at Number 62 Herbert Chitepo Street in Mutare. Over the years we scaled down the hotel business and we are left with a few rooms which we let out or operate as a hotel. Part of the hotel building was converted into business offices and retail shops. We house a significant number of tenants who sell their goods and services…our place is so busy during the day and it’s commonly referred to as Moto Moto. Our tenants and their customers rely on us for basic amenities,” reads part of the affidavit.
The hotel stated that it was in water payment arrears because there was a billing misunderstanding with council.
“Over sometime now we ran into arrears with our water account held with second respondent. This was due to the hard economic environment engulfing our nation and also because council has not been giving us actual bills.
“They have been billing us on estimated water use and this has been a source of dispute between us. While we agree that we may owe them some money it is the exact amount that is in dispute. We have challenged council to reconcile our statement of account with actual verified metre readings, but they have failed to do so. The end result is that we have been paying what we also estimated to be reasonable water usage at the hotel.”
The hotel disputed the disconnection saying it was inhuman.
“They removed the water meter and took it away together with some pipes and accessories. As we prepare this affidavit the water was disconnected and we do not have access to the basic service. Council’s action came as a complete surprise to us and our tenants. No warning has been given to us and our tenants.
“Water is one of the basic needs of a human being. It is more needed where many people gather. Failure to provide water is by its nature a crime against humanity. Deliberately disconnecting water is heinous and unpardonable. Even our new Constitution recognises provision of clean and safe water as a basic human right. Council’s actions were inhuman and shameful. They know that we deserve water and that the hotel cannot operate without water.”
It further argued that the disconnection was likely to cause water-borne diseases.
“A human tragedy is likely to be triggered by the actions of the respondents. We do not buy their argument that the Urban Councils Act or its by-laws allow the actions of the respondents. Such an argument has been addressed by the superior courts and has been found to be against the spirit of the law,” read the affidavit.
The hotel said instead of disconnecting water, council should have sued it to recover its money.
“In fact, the respondents have a legal remedy against us. They should sue us instead of resorting to self help. In any event, we have a legitimate expectation that water will be provided to us. If we fail to pay, respondents can safely sue us at the civil courts. It is wrongful on their part to simply disconnect water. That is lawlessness.
“It has the profound and unimagined effect of creating a severe health hazard for the whole community. Water- borne diseases can quickly engulf the city and it is the general public who will suffer. Other than the health issue, there is also the fact that our business will be affected.
“The actions of the respondents are tantamount to forcing us to close down our businesses and those of our tenants. Such actions are evil and go against the Government policy and generally militate against good business ethics. Water is a basic human right. It cannot be denied without due process and as a human right it ought to be protected by all.”
Online Reporter