servants. In 2001, no report was received from the Government, and so the Committee of Experts repeated its comments from the previous year as an observation. In 2002, the Conference Committee invited Zimbabwe to participate in its work in relation to its observance of Convention No. 98 and suggested that the Government should have recourse to an ILO mission. 6 12. Another Committee on Freedom of Association complaint brought by the ZCTU in 2000 concerned the appointment of an investigator to look into the union’s funds and property, which the Committee continued to follow up until 2004, when it regretted that the Government had not reformed the law. Two complaints were filed by the ICFTU in 2002, both of which were listed as serious and urgent cases by the Committee. One of those cases concerned alleged interference by the police in a ZCTU meeting and the threat of deregistration; the other related to allegations of arrest and detention of nine trade unionists in the context of a planned mass stay-away, assault by the police, and riot police having prevented a trade union meeting. 13. In 2002, in its observation on Convention No. 98 the Committee of Experts regretted that the Government had not accepted an ILO mission as suggested by the Conference Committee. In 2003, for the first time, Zimbabwe was mentioned in a special paragraph of the Conference Committee’s report as of special concern. The Government commented that its listing was unnecessary given the current labour law reform processes, and emphasized its cooperation with African political leaders to address the problems it faced. The Government stated that, although it was willing to accept technical assistance from the ILO, a direct contacts mission would be political in nature; the view was expressed that those who were trying to participate in the political process in the country were failing to respect the fact that African countries were capable of resolving their problems on their own. 7 14. A further complaint to the Committee on Freedom of Association was filed by the ICFTU in 2003 concerning allegations of the arrest of 165 trade union leaders during a nationwide protest, some of whom were seriously assaulted, and of 390 trade unionists at a nationwide protest one month later. The Government of Zimbabwe replied that many of the ZCTU’s actions were political, rather than of a true trade union nature. By 2006, the Government did not reply to further information provided by the complainants containing details of alleged violence, despite an urgent appeal to do so. On both occasions that it examined the case, the Committee on Freedom of Association brought it to the special attention of the Governing Body. 15. In November 2003, the Committee of Experts noted with satisfaction that the Government had introduced new legislation that partially resolved some of its concerns in relation to interference, compulsory arbitration and the application of the Labour Act to most public servants. However, it regretted that some problems remained in relation to collective bargaining and freedom of association rights of prison workers. These same issues were raised by the Committee of Experts the following year. The Conference Committee discussed the case of Zimbabwe again in 2004 and in 2005, when it noted positive legislative developments as well as problems in practice, and the Government’s continued refusal to accept a high-level direct contacts mission. In 2005, the Committee of Experts encouraged Zimbabwe to accept a direct contacts mission. 16. In 2004, a complaint was filed with the Committee on Freedom of Association by the Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU), the UNI Global Union and the ICFTU 12 6 90th Session, International Labour Conference, June 2002. 7 91st Session of the International Labour Conference, June 2003. Meetings-2009-Zimbabwe C of I-2009-12-0035-3-En.doc/v3