REDRESS/AMANI who were serving prison sentences for crimes committed during the civil war were released.92 (iii) 1 9 8 8 -1 9 9 8 Two general Parliamentary elections took place during this period, in 1990 and in 1995. Both were marred by political violence perpetrated against opposition supporters and candidates. The Zanu-PF Government organised its supporters and members to carry out physical attacks (especially through the party’s youth and women’s organisations), but state agencies were also directly involved, especially the CIO, which played a significant role in orchestrating the violence. Torture per se was not a distinct feature of these elections, and the violence was more in the form of politically motivated intimidation, assaults and destruction of property. After each election amnesties were proclaimed. 93 (iv) 1 9 9 8 -2 0 0 5 After losing the February 2000 Constitutional Referendum, the Government unleashed its all-out offensive (including the more systematic use of torture) the following month, which has continued unabated for five years. In October 2000, having only just obtained a majority in the June general Parliamentary elections, and in the face of the thirty-seven MDC election petitions, the Government declared a general amnesty for politically-motivated crimes committed during the period 1 January to 30 July 2000,94 which amnesty was also intended to influence the outcome of the MDC election petitions. 95 91 How many persons had been tried and imprisoned is not known, but in the light of the 1982 Indemnity Regulations it is unlikely to have been very many. The Government said at the time that it was releasing 75 members of the security forces or Zanu-PF already sentenced or awaiting trial for human rights abuses in terms of a special category under the amnesty. This included four Five Brigade soldiers sentenced to death for murder: see Can you have a reparations policy without justice? A.P. Reeler, Legal Forum, (Harare), Vol.12, No.4, (Dec 2000), at p.204. 92 Mugabe’s power to grant pardons or to declare amnesties derives from Section 31I of the Constitution (entitled ‘ Prerogative of mercy’): “ (1) The President may, subject to such lawful conditions as he may think fit to impose – (a) grant a pardon to any person concerned in or convicted of a criminal offence against any law;” . This power was found in the 1953 Constitution to the extent that the governor and later the head of state could grant a pardon to a person convicted of a crime; this was widened in the 1969 Constitution to allow the head of state to grant clemency to those involved in criminal activities, that is, whether they had been convicted or before any conviction. In the Lancaster House Constitution there are no criteria limiting this power or providing for any sort of further review by any other body, or by Zimbabwean society: see Zimbabwe, The toll of impunity, Amnesty International, June 2002 (AI Index: AFR 46/034/2002), at pp. 7-10. It has been suggested that in exercising his powers under Section 31I(1) the President is governed by Section 31H(5) of the Constitution and has to act on the advice of the Cabinet. It seems that this is not, however, the practice: see The Constitutional Reform Process and the Constitutional Commission’s Draft Constitution for Zimbabwe (Part I), G. Feltoe, C. Goredema & G. Linington, Legal Forum, (Harare), Vol 12, No 1, (March 2000), p. 38, footnote 61. Furthermore, in terms of Section 31K9(2) of the Constitution no court is permitted to inquire into the nature of any advice tendered to the President, or the manner in which he has exercised his discretion. The attitude of the Government was clearly illustrated by the well-known case of a CIO officer, Robert Masikini, who shot dead in cold blood and in front of witnesses a PF-Zapu detainee (who he had tortured) just prior to the 1985 elections. Masikini was tried in the High Court for murder, convicted, and sentenced to death, but was then pardoned by Mugabe and released. 93 General Notice 424A of 1990; Clemency Order No. 1 of 1995 94 Clemency Order No. 1 of 2000, published as General Notice 457A of 2000 in the Government Gazette Extraordinary on 6 October 2000. ‘Politically-motivated crime’ was defined as ‘any offence motivated by the object of supporting or opposing any political purpose and committed in connection with the Constitutional Referendum … or the general Parliamentary elections… whether committed before, during or after the said referendum or elections.’ A free pardon was granted to every person liable to prosecution for any politically-motivated crime excluding murder, robbery, rape, indecent assault, theft, possession of arms and any offence involving fraud or dishonesty. 95 The Government realised that the election petitions would result in detailed evidence being lead in court of the many criminal acts committed by its supporters and agents, including the widespread use of torture, and that this would lead to calls for them to be prosecuted. By giving them amnesty this destroyed any prospect of prosecution, but more importantly, it was also intended to de-motivate MDC witnesses who now had to risk their lives giving 17