By Ghost Writer
Burundi has over the years suffered from the triple crisis of electricity, fuel and water. So much so that lives of the common people have become unbearable, even as the country’s crucial cogs of commerce have ground to a near-halt because of operational difficulties. As a result, it has become difficult for Burundians to access safe drinking water, predictably-run businesses that require power, and get quality healthcare services.
A landlocked country in East Africa, Burundi faces significant challenges in energy generation. Most of its electricity sources rely on hydroelectric plants whose output reaches only 10 per cent of the entire population, mostly in urban areas. Indeed, the country’s energy sector banks on dilapidated colonial infrastructure, while ongoing civil unrest threatens the development of more hydroelectric dams. In 2023, according to World Factbook, Burundi had an electrical generating capacity of about 131,000 kilowatts. It has petroleum deposits in Lake Tanganyika and the plains of Rusizi, but these have not been developed. The country produces no petroleum or natural gas, while consuming more than 6,000 barrels of petroleum per day.
Burundi’s acute energy crisis negatively impacts pumping, distribution and treatment of clean drinking water, leaving a huge size of its population exposed to recurrent water-borne diseases.
On 9 September 2026, Breaking Burundi published a story focusing on how various parts of the country were battling acute water shortages and repeated power glitches. Titled, ‘No Water, No Power: Burundi Cities Struggle With Basic Services’, the report spoke of how frequent electricity outages and limited access to drinking water were disrupting livelihoods across several Burundian cities. As a result, residents were forced to pay more for water, while their businesses were not operating normally.
In the economic capital, Bujumbura, businesses and workers whose activities depend on electricity and water, both supplied by the state-owned public utility company, Regideso, reported making huge losses as a result of the frequent interruptions.
Breaking Burundi said the sorry state of affairs was also reported in other urban centres, including the political capital, Gitega, as well as the towns of Ngozi, Kirundo and Bubanza. To show the gravity of the matter, Breaking Burundi quoted an earlier post on X by a civil society organization, PARCEM, warning that the electricity and water crises interrupted income-generating activities, deteriorated hygiene conditions, and paralysed businesses.
Helpfully, the publication noted that enterprises that could rely on power generators found the option untenable, “because Burundi has been experiencing a prolonged shortage of petroleum products.” It also carried a brief interview with the Regideso director general, Jean Albert Manigomba, who explained the prolonged drought had drastically reduced the water levels on which the country’s hydropower plants relied to generate electricity.
However, the story lacked interviews from those directly affected by the power and water crises so as to lend the required human face. Voices from the ‘victims’ of the scarcity would appropriately demonstrate the gravity of the matter and show the public feelings on whatever the government was doing to ameliorate the situation.
The Breaking Burundi reporter should have provided adequate information on a number of aspects to the crisis.
For instance, given that Regideso is a public utility, what budgetary allocation had it received in the current (2026/27) financial year to improve energy and water supply in the cities and the country at large? If so, how had the funds been used, and on what projects? What are the completion stages of running and new power and water projects, and how many people are targeted? What plans does Regideso have for overhauling the wretched power and water infrastructure, and exploring other affordable energy sources such as solar?
For its story, Breaking Burundi only interviewed one Bujumbura resident whose name was not given. Granted, media and public freedoms in Burundi are highly restricted, and the interviewee could have sought anonymity. However, that was no excuse for failing to interview residents – even if they were to use pseudo names – in the towns of Gitega, Ngozi, Kirundo, and Bubanza. Their voices were necessary in estimating business losses to electricity outages and lives affected by water-borne diseases.
Lesson learnt? By lacking voices of those affected by the power and water crises in the cities, Breaking Burundi failed to project the full picture of the residents’ health and commercial vulnerabilities.
