Key Findings While recent surveys on transitional justice have presented some very interesting findings, they admittedly do not show the complete picture of the discussion process in the country. This survey is an attempt to close this gap and capture the views of a larger section of Zimbabwean society. Some of the key findings contained in the report are as follows: 1. In terms of the administration of a transitional justice programme, a substantial number of respondents said that they trusted the churches to lead the process. The second most popular option was for government to lead the process, with the majority of respondents believing that whichever government was in power should be responsible for a reparations programme. 2. In terms of the period to be covered by a transitional justice process, 41 per cent of the respondents said it should cover the period from 2000, while only 3 per cent said the process should go back as far as before colonization. There were, however, stark differences among the ten provinces with respect to this question. These differences were especially notable between the Matabeleland and Mashonaland regions: respondents in the Matabeleland regions favoured looking back to the period just after independence, whereas those in the Mashonaland regions predominantly believed that the period of time from 2008 to the present should be covered. This can be attributed to differences in the levels and concentrations of violence in the different regions at different times, most notably during the Gukurahundi era in Matabeleland. 3. Eighty-three per cent of the victims believed that victims of political violence should be rehabilitated through counselling, reparations, the prosecution of perpetrators, truth recovery and apologies from the perpetrators. In all regions, reparations came out at the top of the list as the most preferred option for the rehabilitation of victims. It is clear from the findings of the survey that the levels, nature, distribution and periods of violence in the various provinces have a significant impact on the preferred options for transitional justice as well as on who should administer the programme. Transitional Justice Survey – A Report of the People’s Perceptions and Recommendations 7