These organisations have a sound track record in terms of working in the human rights and democracy sector in Zimbabwe and have individually and collectively contributed to exposing human rights abuses as well as providing support to communities in distress caused by the political conditions in the country. As the political environment has become more and more hostile and repressive, CIVNET and its partner organisations have had to devise ingenious methods to hold their training workshops. Not only has the physical convening of workshops become threatening to the ruling party but the use of terminology associated with democracy and governance is perceived to be synonomous with resistance and a growing opposition movement and the ruling party has put in place various intimidatory mechanisms to monitor and in some instances prevent workshops from taking place. The risk of conducting workshops have also to a greater or lesser extent had an impact on the ability of individual trainers and course participants to effectively participate in the trainings. There have been individual threats by the authorities and party members in some of the communities, indicating the overall threat that programmes such as CIVNET pose to the ruling party and the fragile state of oppositional politics in Zimbabwe. 2. Overview of Review Period During the period under review (2001–2007) CIVNET has strategically manoeuvred its way through the fragmentation of civil society, the continuous intimidation and humiliation of ordinary Zimbabweans in both the urban and rural areas and increased political repression through the introduction of legislation such as Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA), the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) and the Public Voluntary Organisation Act (PVO). The country saw its fundamental democratic freedoms such as freedom of association, expression, movement and assembly being incrementally eroded and undermined. At times CIVNET and its partner organisations had to hold off conducting workshops as facilitators and trainers as well as workshop participants were at risk. This was especially prevalent during the pre referendum period as well as parliamentary elections of 2000 and the presidential elections of 2002 where there was intensified social mobilisation and citizens’ participation from all political perspectives and persuasions. The period between 2001 and 2002 has been conceptualised by Swedish Sida (for funding purposes) as Phase One of its five year Democracy Development Programme through Civic Education. “The overall object of the CIVNET Project is to promote democracy by enhancing people’s participation in the decisions affecting the development of their country and of their communities.” CIVNET set out to achieve its objectives by providing civic education programmes to predominantly the rural constituency to empower them with critical information to empower themselves to effectively interface and engage with central and local government structures about key issues affecting their communities. This was borne out of the premise that national politics has always been the central focus of the citizenry. Other than participating in the electoral process to ensure that the voice of the ordinary person is heard, there is not much else, within the legal framework, that an individual citizen or a community can do to hold their elected representatives accountable and responsible to the people and the undertakings they made during the pre election period. The ultimate sanction by any citizen is not voting the public representative back into a public position or recalling the representative because of poor performance. In most countries the provincial level of government is generally administrative and a conduit for transferring authority and funds from central to municipal level. Municipal government focuses on those issues that impact directly on the citizens and are of immediate concern to the ordinary people. It is therefore highly commendable and admirable that CIVNET has chosen the most complicated and difficult tier of government to work at. To deal directly with communities and their numerous challenges, especially in a society that is frag6 THE CIVIC EDUCATION NETWORK TRUST (CIVNET)) IN ZIMBABWE – Sida EVALUATION 2008:51