Organisations file lawsuit to annul Uruguay’s drinking water mega-project contract.
A group of environmental groups is seeking the annulment of the Neptuno project, which involves the construction of a water intake on the Río de la Plata and a drinking water treatment plant (see previous Blue News about the case here).
There is a consensus in the Uruguayan political system that a solution must be found to improve Montevideo’s drinking water supply. There is a nearby precedent to back up some of the warnings: in 2023, there were days when the water from the taps was salty. But there are differences in the way.
The government of Luis Lacalle Pou looked to the Neptune project as a solution. It is planned for Arazatí, in the department of San José, about 100 kilometres from Montevideo. The idea, presented by the Aguas de Montevideo consortium (made up of the companies Berkes, Saceem, Cimsa and Fast), proposes the construction of a water intake on the Río de la Plata, a water treatment plant, a pumping station and a pipeline.
One of the last decisions of the Lacalle Pou government was to sign this agreement.
In addition to the government’s objections, some civil society organisations also oppose the initiative. In this context, according to La Diaria, some groups have filed a lawsuit to have the signed contract declared null and void. This legal action is being promoted by the National Commission for the Defence of Water and Life, the Tucu-Tucu collective of San José and the Legal Clinic of the Law Faculty of the University of the Republic.
This is not the first demand that the organisations have made, but they define that the situation is different today.
“We are no longer discussing a draft treaty, but are challenging a treaty that was signed with total disregard for democratic debate, transparency and citizen participation. It is a contract that is null and void in itself, and we are promoting it because we are deeply convinced that no contract between the state and a consortium of companies has any validity.”
The document claims that the “democratic pact that consecrates water as a common good and its management as a non-delegable obligation of the State” is at risk.
The social organisations claim that the Neptuno project “is not a mere infrastructure project, which suffers from irregularities: it is a contract that is null and void from the outset, because it violates constitutional norms”. If the project goes ahead, the organisations warn that ‘essential functions of the drinking water service’ will be privatised.
“The delegation to a private consortium of the operation of the raw water intake, the reservoir and the maintenance of the entire system – a critical phase in the cycle – and the design of a financial scheme that transforms a public service into a source of guaranteed profitability for private capital, constitute a flagrant violation of the public constitutional order,” argue the proponents of the annulment action in the document.
In addition to the constitutional arguments, critics of the project claim that the contract is ‘in direct violation of the guidelines of environmental legislation’.
Yamandú Orsi‘s government is working to renegotiate the contract and has decided to put the mega-project on hold for 90 days.
The Orsi government recognises that work and measures are needed to guarantee the supply of drinking water to the population of the metropolitan area until 2035. However, the Frente Amplio’s programme states that priority is given to another project: the construction of a dam in Casupá, in the department of Florida, on a freshwater tributary. This project would provide ‘enough raw water’ for the inhabitants of the Uruguayan capital, according to the president’s secretary, Alejandro Sánchez.
The Minister for the Economy, Gabriel Oddone, admitted in an appearance before parliament that it was necessary to ‘reduce the risk of a shortage of drinking water in the metropolitan area’. “Everyone knows the agenda of projects that are on the table. This is a mandate of this government; it is impossible for it to let five years go by without having a solution to this problem, because it was already evident in the drought crisis we had,” Oddone said.
