JUSTICE IN ZIMBABWE 62 ____________________________________________________________________ appointed judges. Ebrahim JA, a member of the original Supreme Court Bench, vigorously dissented. The majority set aside the Court’s earlier judgment (i.e. the judgment in the interdict case) and endorsed the government’s land acquisition policy. The reasons given by the majority for this volte face are legally questionable. The majority judgment The majority of the court decided that the government had complied with the Supreme Court order to put in place a proper programme of land reform that was lawful. This programme conformed to s 16A of the Constitution and the programme was being carried out in accordance with the law. Government had established resettlement models to be followed, as well as institutional, monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, and a budget giving an estimation of cost and how money for resettlement was to be raised. The CFU contended that the plan was not being implemented, but the court refused to go into that question, holding that the plan’s implementation was not a justiciable matter. The actual manner in which the programme of land reform was being implemented was a policy matter outside the purview of the court. The Chief Justice reiterated his view that “land acquisition and redistribution is essentially a matter of social justice and not strictly speaking a legal issue. The only legal issue of substance is whether the acquisition is done within the procedures set out by the law.” The majority did, however, find that the government had taken sufficient steps to restore the rule of law on commercial farms. “Rule of law” simply meant that all rights and powers must derive from a duly enacted or established law. The rule of law did not require a totally crime-free environment. What it required was that the government take adequate measures to enforce law and order. The test for restoration of the rule of law was not the number and gravity of criminal acts committed but the rather all the measures, including policing and prosecution, adopted by the government in the land acquisition exercise. The majority was satisfied that the government had taken adequate measures to enforce law and order on the farms. The rule of law had been re-established in commercial farming areas; this was achieved by