parties and civil society groupings in Zimbabwe, though, in line with President Mugabe’s rhetoric, CMAG continued to express the view that land redistribution was a significant causative factor in the Zimbabwe crisis. CMAG also gave indications of possible actions that might be taken by the Commonwealth. At the 18th meeting of CMAG, the Committee noted that the situation in Zimbabwe demonstrated violations of the principles of the Harare Declaration, and indicated that the Millbrook Declaration provided a range of sanctions if the violations persisted, and free and fair elections were not held in Zimbabwe. After the signing of the Abuja Agreement, doubt was cast upon whether the Zimbabwe Government was sincere in its commitment to undertake various measures that would build confidence amongst all sectors of Zimbabwean society, as continued violations of the Harare Declaration occurred immediately thereafter. None of the matters referred to in the Abuja Agreement were credibly dealt with by the Zimbabwe Government. Over time, the Abuja initiative fell away, and was in effect superseded by the events around the Presidential Election in March 2002, which the Commonwealth Observer Group declared neither free nor fair. However, it is important to note the Abuja process for the CHOGM deliberations, for it demonstrates the bad faith of the Zimbabwe Government. Having given an explicit undertaking to implement a range of confidence - building measures, the Zimbabwe Government was unable to fulfill any of them: land invasions continued, human rights violations persisted, and there was no demonstrable commitment to freedom of expression as guaranteed by the Constitution of Zimbabwe. As each step detailed in paragraph 3 of the Commonwealth Action Programme thus failed to elicit the desired response from the Zimbabwean Government, the next step was duly implemented, leading to Zimbabwe’s suspension from the Commonwealth for a year after its failure to hold a legitimate presidential election. The inevitable next step was full suspension from the Commonwealth but President Mugabe anticipated this by unilaterally withdrawing Zimbabwe from the Association. 4. The Basis for Continued Engagement with Zimbabwe by the Commonwealth. The suspension from the Commonwealth’s Councils was linked with a requirement that the Zimbabwe Government undertake measures to restore confidence, and particularly, to implement the recommendations of the Commonwealth Observer Group. The Commonwealth Chairpersons also remarked that there was a need to encourage a climate of reconciliation between the main political parties in Zimbabwe which they considered essential to address the issues of food shortages, economic recovery, the restoration of political stability, the rule of law and the conduct of future elections. Thus there existed a framework within which the Zimbabwe Government was expected to operate in order to lift its suspension from the Association. This framework continues notwithstanding Zimbabwe’s unilateral withdrawal. 7