in
existing
wells.
Qassem
attempted
to
dig
a
well
higher
in
the
valley
than
Person
94’s
well.
Person
94
did
not
agree
with
this,
and
eventually
took
the
case
to
court
several
times.
Each
time
the
case
was
won
by
Person
94,
albeit
with
contradictory
statements
of
the
NWRA
in
Taizz
and
Sana’a.
Furthermore,
the
Qassems
still
pushed
their
objectives,
and
the
conflict
remains
unresolved.
Case
9
Ta’izz:
Quaradha
and
Al
Marzuaah
village
Parties
Qurada
village
versus
Marzooh
village
Conflict
The
conflict
concerns
the
share
of
water
produced
by
springs,
with
the
two
villages
located
on
each
side
of
the
wadi.
An
assigned
government
committee
ruled
on
the
division
of
the
water
that
was
saved
in
special
tanks,
but
Quradha
village
refused
to
acknowledge
this
ruling
on
several
occasions.
After
2011,
the
Quradha
villagers
decided
to
take
control
of
the
springs
and
divert
the
tankwater
to
their
side,
leaving
the
people
of
Marzooh
village
without
tankwater.
Third
party
interventions
If
conflicting
parties
are
unable
to
settle
the
conflict,
a
third
party
can
be
invited
to
settle
the
conflict.
Due
to
the
pluriformity
of
legal
institutions,
this
third
party
can
be
a
state
actor
(courts,
judges,
etc.),
tribal
and
customary
institutions
(sheikhs,
wise
elderly,
etc.),
or
religious
actors
(religious
leaders).
A
distinction
needs
to
be
drawn
between
non-‐violent
water
conflicts,
which
relate
to
the
access
and
use
of
water,
and
water
conflicts
that
became
violent
resulting
in
the
loss
of
life.
Non-‐violent
water
conflicts
are
approached
differently
under
traditional
and
formal
law
than
the
latter.
According
to
a
participant
of
the
consultation
workshop,
conflicts
over
water
alone
are
not
considered
to
be
important
enough
to
unite
a
tribe
and
organize
a
response
against
the
perpetrator.
It
only
becomes
an
issue
for
the
whole
tribe
if
people
are
killed
in
the
conflict.
Generally,
the
customary
and
traditional
rules
govern
the
resolution
of
water-‐related
conflicts.
Tribal
conflict
resolution
includes
mediation
and
arbitration
practices.
The
practices
are
bound
by
certain
protocols
with
different
levels
of
sophistication.
Sheiks
are
key
tribal
figures
that
should
have
the
knowledge
of
the
traditional
rights
and
skills
to
lead
such
processes.
However,
the
capability
of
the
local
traditional
leaders
to
deal
with
the
conflicts
is
deteriorating.
They
either
lack
knowledge,
or
their
involvement
in
patronage
systems
prevents
them
from
operating
in
the
service
of
their
community.
Almost
all
of
the
water-‐related
civil
court
cases
concern
illegal
drilling
cases
identified
by
the
branches
of
the
NWRA.
Actual
water
conflicts
are
seldom
brought
to
civil
court
for
a
number
of
reasons.
Firstly,
generally
speaking
faith
in
the
fairness
of
the
courts
is
limited,
due
to
corruption
and
the
politicisation
of
officials.
In
addition,
although
traditional
arbitration
is
also
costly
to
conflicting
parties,
the
cost
of
settling
a
conflict
in
through
judicial
means
is
in
many
cases
considered
to
be
too
high,
which
prevents
people
from
seeking
justice
through
the
legal
system.
Consequently,
most
of
the
cases
are
resolved
within
the
local
communities
according
to
local
traditions,
as
these
are
familiar
to
and
relatively
more
affordable
for
a
large
group
of
people.
Water-‐related
conflicts
involving
killings
and
are
brought
before
the
criminal
court,
provides
an
indication
for
the
occurrence
of
water
conflicts
in
Yemen.
According
to
an
unpublished
estimate,
based
on
the
criminal
court
cases,
each
year
2,500
people
die
as
a
result
of
a
water-‐related
conflict.
Approximately
one-‐third
of
the
cases
brought
before
the
criminal
court
(and
thus
involve
killings)
are
water-‐related
cases.
The Political Economy in Yemen of Water Management: Conflict Analysis and Recommendations
5
of
241