displacements, and death threats,44 which all indicate that the violence reported in 2008 was significantly worse than in 2002. As mentioned above, many violations took place, in both periods, at bases, or at public meetings or at “pungwes”. In 2002, 11% of the cases mentioned that the violation had occurred at a base, whilst, in 2008, only 9% mentioned this.45 As can be seen from Table 5, the associations with the bases was, in both periods, more commonly with non-state agents such as ZANU PF supporters or ZANU PF Youth, but a fair percentage also mentioned the presence of state agents at the bases, although this is interestingly constant over the two periods whilst the frequency of non-state agents increased in 2008. Table 5 Presence of state and non-state agents at bases, 2002 versus 2008 State agents 19 [26%] 15 [26%] 2002 2008 Non-state agents 51 [70%] 45 [79%] Furthermore, in both periods the reports of bases come from all over the country; i.e., they are widespread. As can be seen from Table 6, there are changes over the two periods, but the reports of bases are more frequent in the three Mashonaland Provinces in both periods, with the additional change of a large increase in Harare, an urban setting. Table 6 Comparison of presence of bases in the Provinces, 2002 versus 2008 Byo Har Mash Cent Mash East Mash West Man Masv Mat North Mat South Mid 2008 1 19 13 8 12 3 0 0 0 0 2002 3 8 17 20 8 11 2 1 0 3 As was noted in previous reports,46 many of these bases were positioned at public or official places. In 2008, 21% were reported as being at schools, 23% at public buildings (such as business centres or ZANU PF offices), 7% at official buildings (such as clinics or training centres), and 5% at farms. This raises many questions about the attitudes of the authorities to the use of official places for it should be impossible for such abuses to take place without the knowledge of the authorities, and there is little evidence to show that the authorities attempted to prevent either the use of such premises or the abuses themselves. 44 45 46 2008 versus 2002: Abductions [p=0.001]; Intimidation [p=0.0001]; Displacements [p=0.001]; and Death threats [p=0.001]. This difference may also be explained by the observation that there seemed to be far less of an attempt by the perpetrators in 2008 to cover up their tracks, and perhaps even a strategy to be more public in the violence in order to achieve much greater fear and intimidation. See Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum (2001), Who was responsible? A consolidated analysis of pre-election violence in Zimbabwe, HARARE: ZIMBABWE HUMAN RIGHTS NGO FORUM; Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum (2002), “Are They Accountable?: Examining alleged violators and their violations pre and post the Presidential Election March 2002”, HARARE: ZIMBABWE HUMAN RIGHTS NGO FORUM.