clean-up operation, including destruction of legal businesses and homes paying taxes to local authorities. Under both relevant international law and national legislation forced evictions can be justified under certain circumstances, viz: criminality; public health; public morality; and the rights of others. The Government of Zimbabwe appears to be relying on some of the above to justify its actions under international law. However, there is no indication that any of the procedural requirements were complied with: consultations were not undertaken; notices were not given in time if at all; information was not given on the proposed evictions; government officials or their representatives were not present during the demolitions conducted brutally as a national police and military exercise; the evictions took place during harsh weather; legal remedies were not available; and evictions resulted in thousands of people being rendered homeless without being provided viable alternatives. There is general concern over the failure of the High Court to safeguard the right of the victims of the Operation and that there has been a regrettable failure by members of the Bench to remain independent from the national and local politics of the day. With an estimated 700,000 people directly affected through loss of shelter and livelihoods, it has been established that while willing, the ability of the government’s response to the crisis is limited, and the international community has a responsibility to protect those affected. The impact will not be easy to redress and requires immediate large-scale and unconditional humanitarian assistance to protect those in need. Several submissions received during the mission contend that the actions of the Government, in forcibly uprooting hundreds of thousands of its citizens from their homes, meets the criteria of a “crime against humanity”, as defined by Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. A preliminary legal opinion suggests that with available evidence it would be difficult to sustain that crimes against humanity were committed. In light of this the Special Envoy believes an international debate on whether the statute of Rome could be successfully invoked is bound to be acrimonious and protracted. It would serve only to distract the attention of the international community from focusing on the humanitarian crisis facing the displaced who need immediate assistance. Nevertheless, it remains the strong recommendation of the Envoy that the culprits who have caused this man-made disaster be brought to book under Zimbabwean national laws. The international community would then continue to be engaged with the dismal human rights record in Zimbabwe in consensus building political forums such as the UN High Commission for Human Rights, or its successor, the African Union Peer Review Mechanism, and the SADC. Other specific recommendations would include: t. The Government should make efforts to pay compensation to those whose properties and homes were illegally destroyed, seized and auctioned off; u. Deployment of monitors to observe compliance with human rights standards, and help reassure communities or groups at risk of their safety and rights; and v. The international community should engage with the Government to observe the rule of law in all its future undertakings; and to reform its laws in order to ensure that the minimum standards guaranteed in international conventions are conformed with, and to eliminate the unrealistic high standards for housing development. 67