ZIMBABWE: FROM IMPUNITY TO ACCOUNTABILITY House in 1979 a ‘deal’ to ‘forgive and forget’ was brokered and an agreement on a blanket all-round amnesty for all those involved in the struggle for and against majority rule. British Governor Soames then legalized the arrangement through two Orders-inCouncil in December 1979 and March 1980 before Independence, leaving newly-elected Prime Minister Mugabe with little option but to proclaim the policy of ‘reconciliation.’ It is necessary for civil society to take a position on Mugabe’s reconciliation policy, and to analyse carefully both the positive and negative aspects of it. There was obviously a minimum of reconciliation between the two liberation movements at the time, which lead rapidly and directly to 17 the Gukurahundi of 1982-1987 and the widespread, systematic and organized violations in the southern and western regions of Zimbabwe during Government military operations. These too 18 were followed by impunity for perpetrators. This is again what 19 has been happening since 2000. Thus the history of Zimbabwe shows clearly that blanket amnesties, although they may appear to work politically in the short term, don’t in fact do so. The symposium recognized this in unambiguous terms: “The delegates noted that during the pre- and postindependence periods there have been successive amnesties and Presidential pardons for many of the persons who committed gross human rights violations. The failure to punish these violators, and to hold them accountable, created a culture of impunity and the potential for the re-emergence of violence and the abuse of human rights. The culture of impunity can only be ended if perpetrators of human rights abuses are held 20 accountable for their abuses.” 17 This is the name given to the post-Independence civil war. It means “the rain that washes away the chaff from the last harvest, before the spring rains.” 18 See REDRESS Zimbabwe Country Study, supra. 19 Ibid. 20 Summary (Appendix II) p. ix. 8