A major new plan to privatise the water supply in the capital has been announced by the government, sparking a fierce and immediate public debate. The initiative, which will see private companies take over Harare’s entire water value chain, was confirmed by Local Government and Public Works Minister Daniel Garwe. This move has prompted a flood of reactions from citizens, lawyers, and public figures, with many raising serious legal and ethical concerns about the future of a vital public resource.
According to the Herald Zimbabwe, President Emmerson Mnangagwa is scheduled to launch the privatisation project next month. The announcement was made by Minister Garwe at a workshop on 2 October 2025, where he described the public-private partnership as a “crucial step towards restoring order and efficiency in urban service delivery.”
Public Outcry And Legal Challenges
The government’s announcement was met with swift and strong criticism on X. Prominent lawyer and opposition politician Fadzayi Mahere directly challenged the legality of the move in a post dated 3 October 2025.
She asked:
“Is this privatisation legally competent in light of the clear provisions of the Water Act and the Urban Councils Act? Does it make sense to privatise and commercialise what’s meant to be a public good? Who are these private players? How were they selected? What safeguards are in place to avoid corruption and abuse which have become rampant whenever such models are adopted?”
This sentiment was echoed by other legal minds. A user named @obeyshava1 argued that the move is unconstitutional, stating:
“It is impossible, within the Zim context, to privatize water without the state violating its binding national, regional & international legal obligations on the provision of safe, clean and portable water. This move is retrogressive & contrary to S.77 of the Constitution.”
Another user, Tatenda Kutsirayi, was even more blunt, posting:
“You cannot privatize a human right. This nonsense must never see the light of day.”
A Defence Of The Plan And Calls For Pragmatism
Amid the criticism, some defended the government’s logic or urged pragmatism. On 3 October 2025, user Captain (@croc_mar) wrote:
“It is misleading to argue that private sector involvement in water delivery automatically violates constitutional or international obligations. Section 77 of Zimbabwe’s Constitution guarantees the right to safe, clean, and potable water but it does not prescribe that only the state may provide it. In fact, what matters is whether the government ensures access, not whether it is the direct service provider. What is retrogressive is leaving citizens trapped in a failing state monopoly that cannot deliver reliable water.”
Other voices stressed the urgency of solutions. User @simbarahse criticised opponents of the plan:
“You are talking at a privileged zone because vamwe (others) you have boreholes kumba (at your home). Do you think a person from Mabvuku is concerned by who brings water or as long tawana (we get) clean reliable water. Sometimes we must not oppose just for the sake.”
Another user, @Chii57733777145, expressed fatigue with the water crisis:
“Musangoshora zvese (Don’t just criticise everything), some of us are buying [water] which we don’t even know where it’s coming from because of the water woes. If there is a plan let’s explore it.”
Wider Public Suspicions And Comparisons
Many reactions reflected distrust of government motives and fears of corruption. User @Tsungyaxe dismissed the move by writing:
“Zimbabwe Pvt Ltd.”
Another, @trublu_chelsea, accused officials of deliberately manufacturing crises to profit from solutions, dubbing it a “Madhuku strategy.”
User @GrainfulTrust took to hyperbole:
“Whats left is to privatize the sun and even tax the air we breathe. I still don’t know how we survived this far without being taxed for using solar in Zim.”
User @MikeWayne80 drew a stark comparison:
“We are becoming an oligarch country. They are taking lessons from Russia. After the fall of the Soviet Union the thieves privatised everything amongst themselves.”
Concerns also emerged about the economic consequences. Analyst Curtley Matavire, in a detailed thread on 3 October 2025, warned:
“And the private is no better — lower costs (layoffs and slave wages) and high prices (may compromise quality of service). So a hybrid solution of private public partnership is a better solution (not best but better) but as you keep reminding us we live in a kleptocracy. Stuck.”
With the official launch expected next month, the debate over the privatisation of Harare’s water supply is certain to intensify.
Follow Us on Google News for Immediate Updates
The post Zimbabweans React Strongly To Government’s Plan To Privatise Water Sourced From Public Dams appeared first on iHarare News.
