REDRESS/AMANI Some damages claims have been brought against the State for human rights abuses committed after the end of the Gukurahundi, including during the recent period of gross violations which commenced in 1998. No official statistics are available of the number of awards which have been made, or the amounts which the State has been ordered to pay. Human rights organisations have taken on a considerable number of claims on behalf of victims, and some of these cases have been settled out of court and others are still pending. Sometimes when an award has been ordered, the State has taken months, even years184 to actually pay and this is highly prejudicial in the light of the fact that there is still three-digit inflation. 185 With the collapse of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary, it has become increasingly difficult to obtain effective relief through the civil courts. There have been numerous national and international reports documenting the collapse of the rule of law in Zimbabwe. 186 The latest and one of the most comprehensive is that published in December 2004 by five Common Law Bars to the International Council of Advocates and Barristers, which summarised its investigations saying “ we have concluded that the Zimbabwean justice system has ceased to possess those features which enable a justice system to be characterised as independent and impartial. The legal culture has been subverted for political 187 ends.” In Zimbabwe’s ongoing economic crisis lawyers, who at the best of times are beyond the reach of the majority, are now an undreamed of luxury for many who are struggling to find enough money to even buy food. In the circumstances, the NGOs are the only entities through which hope of reparations can sometimes be sought, although it is beyond the capacity of NGOs to deal with the sheer volume of cases. Additionally, NGOs and individuals that try to deal with such cases are under direct threat from the State. In December 2004 legislation was passed which was specifically aimed at forcing the closure or at least obstructing the operations of non-governmental organisations engaged in human rights activities by denying them access to foreign funding. The main target of this legislation is organisations that have been critical of the Government’s record on human rights and democratic to the intelligence service. He was arrested and assaulted, and sued for damages for unlawful arrest. The State sought to justify its actions under the state of emergency and the indemnity regulations. The Supreme Court held that the indemnity contravened the rights set out in Section 13 (5) of the Constitution for a person unlawfully arrested and detained to claim compensation – the provisions of Constitution allowing measures to be taken during an emergency did not entitle the executive to grant that form of indemnity. Mr Granger was never actually paid his compensation, and eventually set-off his claim against taxes that were due by him. This was not challenged by the State, in contrast to the decision in Commissioner of Taxes v First Merchant Bank Ltd 1997 (1) ZLR 350 (SC); 1998 (1) SA 27 (ZS). 183 The reason for this has already been given above, namely fear of retribution. See fn 180. 184 See the case of Chavunduka and Choto at page 24 above; tortured in 1999, the authorities apparently paid compensation six years later. 185 The official inflation rate peaked at over 600% per annum in 2003; since then it has declined to an official rate of around 140%. However, some reports put the actual rate far higher. 186 The destruction of the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law is comprehensively analysed in Justice in Zimbabwe, Legal Resources Foundation, Harare, 2002. See also the earlier report of the Research Unit of the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum, Enforcing The Rule of Law in Zimbabwe, Special Reports 3, (Harare), September 2001. For an international perspective see Report of the Zimbabwe Mission 2001, International Bar Association, London, April 2001. 187 The State of Justice in Zimbabwe, The Bar Council, London, December 2004, www.barcouncil.org.uk 37