32 human rights treaties should include a “universal jurisdiction” clause requiring every State party either to try or to extradite perpetrators of violations. The necessary political will is still essential, of course, to enforce such clauses. For example, humanitarian provisions in the 1949 Geneva Conventions or the United Nations Convention against Torture have scarcely ever been applied. Restrictions justified by the desire to combat impunity may be applied to certain rules of law in order to support efforts to counter impunity. The aim is to prevent the rules concerned from being used to benefit impunity, thus obstructing the course of justice. The main restrictions are as follows. • • • • • • • • • No Prescription for offences; No Amnesty for offences; No Right to asylum for perpetrators; Extradition of all perpetrators; Trial in absentia; Due obedience is no defence; Legislation on repentance should not avoid either amnesty or prescription; Military courts should not be used; The principle of the irremovability of judges. The right to reparation entails both individual measures and general, collective measures. On an individual basis, victims - including relatives and dependants - must have an effective remedy. The procedures applicable must be publicized as widely as possible. The right to reparation should cover all injuries suffered by victims, and this right embraces three kinds of action: • Restitution (seeking to restore victims to their previous state); • Compensation (for physical or mental injury, including lost opportunities, physical damage, defamation and legal aid costs); • Rehabilitation (medical care, including psychological and psychiatric treatment). The right to non-recurrence is also crucial according to the Sub-Commission, and three measures need to be taken in order to avoid victims having to endure new violations affecting their dignity: • • Disbandment of parastatal armed groups; Repeal of all emergency laws, abolition of emergency courts and recognition of the inviolability and non-derogability of habeas corpus; • Removal from office of senior officials implicated in serious violations. Perhaps we have established the right to know during these petitions, but it is clear that the other rights are far from being accepted or implemented in Zimbabwe. The rights to justice and nonrecurrence are wholly vitiated by the Amnesty of October 2000 and the general climate of impunity within which the perpetrators have continued to operate. There is no evidence that groups implicated in gross human rights violations have been disbanded, rather that they have been increased under the National Youth Training Scheme. However, it can be claimed that these petitions, and the extremely brave testimony of the victims, have contested the general tendency in Zimbabwe to use impunity rather than the law to deal with gross human rights violations. We can only hope that this small step will be met in the future with a commitment to implement the kinds of principles developed by the United Nations. AMANI TRUST: Neither Free nor Fair: High Court decisions on the petitions on the June 2000 General Election.