Water 2020, 12, 340 17 of 28 arbitration and is defined in general terms. The UN Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violation of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law (Basic Principles), adopted by the UNGA in 2005, require states to “mak[e] available adequate, effective, prompt and appropriate remedies, including reparation” for victims by “[e]nsuring that their domestic law provides at least the same level of protection for victims as that required by their international obligations” [81]. The Basic Principles were noteworthy for legally establishing (although in a non-binding document) states’ responsibilities to establish a framework and institutions to deliver restitution and compensation to victims. However, the Basic Principles, in their reliance on “the same level of protection . . . as international obligations”, were doomed to fail when it came to violations of the human right to water because of lack of international obligations on this fundamental right. The Basic Principles do define “restitution” and “compensation” that could apply to violations of the human right to water in Articles 19 and 20: 19. Restitution should, whenever possible, restore the victim to the original situation before the gross violations of international human rights law or serious violations of international humanitarian law occurred . . . 20. Compensation should be provided for any economically assessable damage, as appropriate and proportional to the gravity of the violation and the circumstances of each case, resulting from gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law . . . [81] The principle that restitution should “restore the victim to the original situation” is commendable but, in the case of the human right to water, often impossible. The contamination of groundwater and destruction of aquifers is often irreversible for at least the lifetime of people dependent on water sources, while contamination by severe toxics or nuclear waste is effectively permanent. Physical harm caused by destruction of water infrastructure or denial of water access should be covered under “Compensation”, though guidance on how to enforce states’ obligations to supply this compensation is not provided. One notable incident that highlights the importance of reparations for victims of violations of the human right to water is the closure of a dam in the Iraqi city Ramadi, the capital of Iraq’s largest province, in June 2015. The closure of the dam had a dual objective of (1) reducing the water level, “allow[ing] [IS] to infiltrate from Ramadi to Khalidiyah and then easily move to other areas” and (2) depriving civilians in order to weaken the population as IS took over the territory. The incident in Ramadi is just one devastating example out of numerous incidents involving “strategic weaponization” (“the use of water to virtually or actually control large or important land areas or facilities to fulfill the vision of sovereignty . . . ”) and “tactical weaponization” (“the use of water as a weapon on the battlefield”), as well as water deprivation for psychological terrorism or incentivisation [15]. Ultimately, in these incidents, the most likely means of redress for violations of the human right to water is via the ICC or an ad hoc tribunal, though at present these avenues for redress are by no means guaranteed. Thus, a key policy recommendation that can be extracted from this article’s analysis is that establishment of a sustainable funding mechanism for the ICC Trust Fund for Victims (or a fund for reparations for water weaponisation victims that is disconnected from the ICC) ought to be given serious consideration by the Court and by the UN—substantially more consideration than the virtual absence of attention currently being paid to this matter. In northern Sana’a (Yemeni capital), 1.5 million people were once serviced by a single wastewater treatment plant. Violence in the current conflict damaged the plant, leading to raw sewage “stream[ing] dangerously through the Bani-Al-Hareth district, exposing residents to harmful waste and a potential public health crisis” [82]. This incident led to health issues and long-term agricultural devastation to land affected by sewage exposure. At present, there is no process that requires state combatants in an