Abstract
In the March 2005 issue of this journal, Stephen Tully set out to critique General Comment No. 15 on the Right to Water, issued in 2002 by the Committee overseeing the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Tully argues that the right to water cannot be implied from the Covenant, that its practical value is limited and, quite paradoxically, that the Committee was not bold enough in imposing direct obligations on multinational water corporations. This article contends that the general comment was neither radical nor conservative but a reasonable interpretation of the Covenant that was grounded in international law and practice. Further, the general comment has demonstrated a practical utility and this article provides examples of where the recognition of the human right to water has had an impact and also offers some thoughts on how the influence of general comments should be evaluated. Tully's proposals for reform of the Committee's approach to ‘General Comment-making’ are then considered in the context of international law and the historical practice of the Committee.