A/HRC/42/47 would disadvantage women or cause them to have rights outcomes that are inferior to those of men. 58. Without access to adequate water and sanitation facilities in public areas, those who require use of them must seek alternatives, which might include open defecation or washing in, or drinking from, public fountains. However, those who undertake such practices can find, and often have found, themselves criminalized as a result. 54 Accordingly, in the absence of appropriate water, sanitation and hygiene facilities, homeless people and people who utilize and work in public spaces are left with little choice but to break legal prohibitions in that regard (A/HRC/21/42, paras. 41–42). Numerous instances of laws that subject people to criminal sanctions for fulfilling their water and sanitation needs, even in the absence of alternative options, are evident around the world 55 and the effects of these laws are evident.56 A survey conducted in San Francisco, United States, in 2016 found that the police had contacted 74 per cent of homeless respondents in the previous year for a socalled quality of life offence, which includes public urination and bathing. 57 59. There is a recognition that such laws breach the human rights of those people who are forced into breaking them because of the lack of proper water and sanitation facilities. In the case of Pottinger v. City of Miami, it was held in relation to the arrest of homeless people engaging in “life-sustaining activities”, such as public urination and bathing, in the absence of public facilities, that “the City’s practice of arresting homeless individuals for the involuntary, harmless acts they are forced to perform in public is unconstitutional because such arrests are cruel and unusual in violation of the eighth Amendment [and] reach innocent and inoffensive conduct, in violation of the due process clause of the fourteenth Amendment”.58 60. The effects caused by a lack of adequately available water and sanitation facilities in public spaces may also have a corollary effect on the enjoyment of many participatory rights, such as freedom of assembly, freedom of movement, the right to take part in cultural life and the right to manifest one’s religion, which are often exercised in public spaces through gatherings, protests and processions. People have a right to utilize public spaces for these purposes; however, ensuring their ability to do so requires that they be able to have their rights to water and sanitation fulfilled during the course of their activities. VI. Conclusions and recommendations 61. Access to water and sanitation in many spheres of life beyond the household is an essential element of the enjoyment of the human rights to water and sanitation. However, there is often an evident neglect of the provision and promotion of these vital services in such places. Domestic legislation and policy regarding water and sanitation are, more often than not, focused only on improving access at the household level, while spheres beyond the household are rarely on the radar of national or local governments, service providers or the regulators whose role is to ensure that the provision of those basic services complies with human rights standards. 62. As a result of that neglect, potential violations of international human rights occur all too frequently and disproportionately impact members of vulnerable and marginalized groups, such as homeless people, informal workers in public spaces and 54 55 56 57 58 16 Robert Hartmann McNamara, Charles Crawford and Ronald Burns, “Policing the homeless: policy, practice, and perceptions”, Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, vol. 36, No. 2 (2013). See, for example, https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=23375. See P. Scott, M. Sohail and S. Cavill, “Urination needs and practices away from home: where do women go?”, 40th Water Engineering and Development Centre international conference, Loughborough, United Kingdom (2017). Coalition on Homelessness, San Francisco, “Punishing the poorest. How the criminalization of homelessness perpetuates poverty in San Francisco” (2015). See https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/810/1551/1500109/.