the law fairly, and to desist from hate speech. Whilst laudable and undoubtedly designed to create the climate for negotiations, the sentiments in the MoU were ahistorical and did not deal with a serious issue of accountability. The ahistorical perspective of the MoU was largely continued in the GPA. However, just as apartheid was deemed to be a crime against humanity, and had to be confronted head-on during the CODESA processes, so must the widespread and systematic attacks on the ordinary citizens of Zimbabwe and the members of the MDC. To remove this understanding from the negotiating table is to seriously undermine the credibility of the negotiations in the eyes of the Zimbabwean citizenry, who, after all, will have to give their assent to the outcomes, and a flawed outcome will go no way to solving the political crisis in Zimbabwe, especially where very serious crimes have been committed. As was pointed out in the previous Human Rights Forum report, crimes against humanity are alleged when any of the following occur in peace time: • • • • • • • • • • • Murder; Extermination; Enslavement; Deportation or forcible transfer of population; Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rule of international law; Torture; Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law; Enforced disappearance of persons; The crime of apartheid; Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health. The Human Rights Forum alleged in its previous report that crimes against humanity had occurred in the period since the March 2008 elections. The Human Rights Forum alleged that, on the basis of the evidence derived from the reports made to the Forum and its partners, a prima facie case exists for considering that the Zimbabwe government was responsible for both widespread and systematic violations.16 16 The term ‘widespread’ requires that there is “massive, frequent, large scale action carried out collectively with considerable seriousness and directed against a multiplicity of victims.” [ICTR, Prosecutor v. Akayesu, ICTR-96-4-T, Trial Judgment and Sentence, 2 September 1998, para. 580; ICTY, Prosecutor v. Blaškic, IT-95-14, Trial Judgment, 3 March 2000, para. 206.] The term ‘systematic’ refers to the “organized nature of the acts of violence and the improbability of their random occurrence.” [ICTY, Prosecutor v. Kunarac, IT-96-23-T, Trial Judgment, 22 February 2001, para. 429.]