on the protection of human rights that are typically affected by the practice of forced evictions, such as the right to freedom of movement and residence, the right to personal security and the rights to education and to enjoy the best attainable state of physical and mental health. Decisions by the African Commission have articulated the obligations of state parties in protecting these rights. As the testimonies in this report show, the way in which the evictions were conducted in Zimbabwe had a devastating impact on the most vulnerable sections of the population. Many sick individuals were denied their right to basic medical attention. Children in the areas affected by evictions and relocated though displacement, were unable to receive the education they are entitled to. Zimbabwe is also a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR regulates among others, the right to freedom of movement and to choose residence, and the right to an effective remedy to prevent or seek redress in the event of human rights violations. There may be highly exceptional circumstances where it is justifiable for the state to conduct forced evictions.149 In terms of Article 4 of the ICESCR, evictions can be done when they are in accordance with national law which is compatible with international instruments, and the purpose of the evictions is to promote the general welfare in a democratic society. In such cases, important procedural guarantees in the conduct of evictions must be followed. The Zimbabwe government failed to follow any of the required procedures. Prior to the evictions, the authorities did not consult with those to be evicted. The evictions were carried out with little or no notice, without due process and frequently by force, using harassment and intimidation. Finally, they rendered most of the people affected homeless and vulnerable. Zimbabwe’s national laws such as the Regional, Town and Country Planning Act and the Housing Standards Act refer to certain procedures for carrying out evictions which the government failed to follow.150 These include the provision of adequate notice and court orders by local council authorities. However, Zimbabwe’s national laws on the right to adequate housing are only partly in line with international standards. No law exists in Zimbabwe that prohibits arbitrary evictions and grants a measure of protection of tenure to the persons who could be affected. 149 The CESCR, in its General Comment 4 on the right to adequate housing, paragraph 18, states that “[t]he Committee considers that instances of forced eviction are prima facie incompatible with the requirements of the Covenant and can only be justified in the most exceptional circumstances, and in accordance with the relevant principles of international law.” In its General Comment 7, the Committee makes it clear that forced eviction and house demolition as a punitive measure are also inconsistent with the norms of the ICESCR. 150 Refer to section 32 of the Regional Town and Country Planning Act and sections 16-22 of the Housing Standards Act. 37