2. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY Zimbabwe, before and after independence in 1980, suffered a series of conflict episodes, but there has never been a viable process to facilitate national healing, reconciliation and integration. The government’s interests to address the past conflicts and mapping a new pathway for peace building was first observed when it established the Organ on National Healing, Reconciliation and Integration (ONHRI) (2008/9), the Joint Monitoring Committee (JOMIC) (2008/9) and the Constitutional Parliamentary Select Committee (COPAC) in 2009. Then the subsequently adopted Constitution in 2013 provided for the establishment of the National Peace and Reconciliation Commission (NPRC), an independent commission responsible for facilitating transitional justice. However, since 2013, the government is delaying full operationalization of the NPRC and addressing the causes and consequences of the past conflicts. In order to establish an effective Commission it is crucial to have a baseline understanding of what is needed for Zimbabwe to move beyond its tumultuous past, which is currently lacking. This justifies the need for a baseline study to guide the NPRC’s priorities and indicators for success within different communities and constituencies, a gap this report intends to fill. The conceptualisation of the NPRC in Zimbabwe brings up questions regarding the provision of an ideal reconciliation framework that promotes bottom-up transitional justice solutions. The national programming priorities on reconciliation and the basis upon which the NPRC and other ancillary reconciliation processes track their achievements are missing. The peoples’ perceptions of national healing and reconciliation remain underresearched within this field of inquiry. Therefore, primary key questions emerge, including: What are ordinary peoples’ perceptions about the reconciliation and national healing in Zimbabwe? What are 14 RECONCILIATION PROCESSES IN ZIMBABWE popular sentiments about the direction of national healing and reconciliation and the institutions that support the process in the country? What are the obstacles and opportunities for reconciliation? Above all, what can be done to address these concerns? This study aims to contribute to answering these questions, but at the same time it recognised that further investment in transitional justice research is crucial. A comprehensive documentation of the reconciliation issues in Zimbabwe can help decisions, whether by government, aid agencies or the business community to be made while factoring in a number of social and political realities that are critical to peace and reconciliation. More importantly, an annual Reconciliation Barometer independently commissioned by stakeholders such as Churches and Civic organisations in peace building and conflict transformation, together with the government may assist in facilitating a robust peace and reconciliation process in Zimbabwe.