Back to Index

Transitional justice: Options for Zimbabwe
US Embassy
October 28, 2011

On November 17, Mr. Effie Ncube, one of Zimbabwe's principal civil society leaders and director of the Matabeleland Constitutional Reform Agenda, made reference to a broad range of transitional justice models during a Food for Thought discussion organised by the American Corner at the Bulawayo Public Library.

"There is no doubt in my mind that given a history of tyranny ... Zimbabwe needs a credible national transitional justice mechanism. This is currently not being done by the Organ on National Healing." Ncube led the discussion with independent South African political analyst Leon Hartwell as part of the American Corner's weekly public discussion series. According to Hartwell, "Transitional justice debates generally take place in countries emerging from conflict situations. Victims rightfully demand some form of justice and accountability."

"Of all the mechanisms available, retributive justice is probably the most unlikely option at this point. The security sector will oppose it and it is incredibly expensive. For example, the cost of International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was roughly $1.3 billion between 1996 and 2009 while it detained a mere 74 individuals," Hartwell continued.

Both speakers hinted that uncertainty regarding what would happen to perpetrators contributes to the current political stalemate.

"Those in power are united by their fear of the crimes they committed against their own people. They obviously understand that justice is beckoning somewhere in the horizon but somehow hope to postpone the inevitable course of justice and accountability."

Hartwell argued that given the current balance of power, the MDC formations could consider the possibility of extending conditional amnesty to perpetrators of political violence. "Conditional amnesty should focus on issues that would move the transition forward. That means that political parties and the security sector should commit to the establishment of a liberal constitution, allow civil society to operate independently, support free media (especially broadcasting), commit to free and fair elections, support a future truth and reconciliation commission, and ratify international human rights treaties."

Ncube largely concurred that a truth commission is an attractive option for Zimbabwe, but he argued that, "it cannot take place in a constitutional and legal vacuum.... We need to dismantle the apparatus of dictatorship first before anything credible can take place." He also cautioned that impunity should be avoided at all costs as "it is the greatest threat to Zimbabwe."

Both speakers said that past discussions on transitional justice often brought attention to the willingness of victims to forgive their perpetrators and that it is important to take a victim-centred approach when considering the options for Zimbabwe.

"Every time I talk to victims of injustices committed since 1980, I see a willingness to forgive and engage.... For me these are the critical ingredients for any society that desires to move the transitional justice path. I just hope we don't see the recurrence of crimes against the people to the extent that they end up taking the vengeance path. It's a choice that those in power have to make now"

Hartwell concluded the discussion by arguing that, "in South Africa, it was largely conditional amnesty linked to the transition process that helped the country to move forward. That is how the most racist regime in the world came to an end. The security sector supported the democratisation process, free and fair elections, and, although the Truth and Reconciliation was opposed from many corners inside the country, there were almost 22,000 victims and perpetrators that broke the silence on what happened during the country's violent past."

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP