Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Transitional justice in Zimbabwe: A pilot survey of the views of activists and victims
Research and Advocacy Unit, Idasa
January 01, 2009

Download this document
- Rich Text Format version (309KB)
- Adobe PDF version (174KB)
If you do not have the free Acrobat reader on your computer, download it from the Adobe website by clicking here.

Executive summary

Transitional justice has become an increasing concern for Zimbabweans over the past three decades, and even more so in the past nine years. There have been small attempts to discuss this issue in the past, beginning with the publication of the CCJP/LRF report on the gross human rights violations of the 1980s.

A more substantive consideration of the transitional justice options took place in Johannesburg in 2003, which recommended the setting up of a Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission to cover the violations from 1960 to 2003. One of the recommendations of the 2003 Symposium was for wide consultation with the victims, but mostly this did not take place, with some very minor exceptions.

The present study was a small pilot study of the views of ordinary Zimbabweans, who were selected for the likelihood that they had been victims of the political violence and gross human rights violations since 2000.

A simple questionnaire was designed that would cover the major areas involved in any transitional justice process in a future Zimbabwe. The questionnaire was translated into Shona and Ndebele, and the interviewers were given a one-day training workshop on the issues behind the design and manner of administrating the questionnaire. 25 interviewers were then sent out into the community with the task of interviewing as many activists each as they could.

The final sample was composed of 514 persons, of whom 57% were male and 43% were female. The average age of the sample was 36 years [sdev. 12.9 years], which is very similar to that reported in other human rights reports in Zimbabwe. The sample was rural in the majority: 72% came from the rural areas and 28% from an urban setting. The sample was generally well-educated, with over 70% having secondary school education or more.

Although this small study cannot claim to represent a national profile, it does provide an interesting perspective on the views of activists, many of whom [47%] were victims themselves. The findings do suggest that there is a need for a much wider consultation about transitional justice in Zimbabwe. There were a number of interesting findings from this survey nonetheless.

Firstly, a substantial percentage of the sample felt that amnesty should be given, with a higher percentage feeling that this should be given if it was necessary to produce a political settlement, but much of this effect was produced by those that only had Primary school education. However, these might well be views that change after a political settlement is reached and time has passed, as was the case for the victims of the Gukurahundi.

Secondly, and contradicting this first point, only small numbers felt that that serious crimes should be excused, and again this was an effect where those with Primary school education were significantly more in favour of amnesty.

Thirdly, although most were not in favour of a TRC as an alternative to prosecutions, most were in favour of a TRC if prosecutions were not possible, and most were not in favour of exemptions for truthful testimony, with an apparent trend towards punishing command responsibility.

Fourthly, very few felt that there was need to investigate violations prior to 1980, and this was a general trend. The Ndebele and the Shona samples had strongly different preferences for the period that they saw as important, and this was probably not surprising.

Fifthly, it was apparent that there many differences within the sample in terms of ethnicity - Shona versus Ndebele - and level of education. Whilst the ethnicity factor is important, it does not appear to indicate a potential for ethnic conflict; rather the differences are due to the effects of the violations experienced by the two groups. The Ndebele are rightly concerned about the 1980s where very little has been done to redress the wrongs committed during that period, whilst the Shona are clearly very preoccupied - as are a substantial number of the Ndebele - with the current violations. These differences are unlikely to lead to ethnic conflict so long as the two time periods are given equal attention in any transitional justice process in the future.

Download full document

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