2. Civil Suits The purpose of this report is to look at all the cases that the Human Rights Forum, through its Public Interest Unit (PIU), has brought before the courts on behalf of the victims of organized violence and torture against the Zimbabwe government through the police, the army and other individuals. The government’s legal department, the Civil Division, represented the defendants in these cases. These victims sought compensation for the pain and suffering they endured as a result of ill-treatment and torture by the police and the army. The government has asserted that human rights organizations were fabricating stories about the human rights situation in the country. The Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs announced, in March 2006, that there will be a Constitutional Amendment to create a Human Rights Commission to counter the reports being churned out by non-governmental organizations.21 This report refutes the government’s assertions, as there are human rights abuse cases that have gone through Zimbabwean courts and have received judgments stating that human rights abuses do exist and have to be addressed. This report aims to highlight the fact that violence and torture are routinely used in Zimbabwe by State agents as a way of quelling dissent, as well as of extracting information from the public, be it for political or criminal reasons. There appears to be little difference between the treatment of political and criminal prisoners while in police custody. One of the aims of the report is also to support the pressure on the Zimbabwe government to ratify the UN Convention Against Torture, as requested by Parliament, and the Rome Statute on the International Criminal Court. Zimbabwe has signed both these instruments, but has yet to ratify them, let alone ensure their application in domestic law. There have been 291 cases taken to court between 1998 to date, with the suits being filed under common law, using the Police Act (Chapter 11 : 10), the Defence Act (Chapter 11 : 02) and the State Liabilities Act (Chapter 8 : 14). It is important to note that the information in this report is not exhaustive as it reflects only the cases referred to the Human Rights Forum; there are undoubtedly more that may not have been reported. The information compiled for this report includes: • • • • • • • • the date when the suit was initially filed; the status of the cases (i.e. whether at the trial stage or it was closed); the names of the victims bringing the claim; the defendants; where identified, the perpetrators; the offence committed; the reason behind the offence; the amount of damages claimed, awarded and paid, both in Zimbabwe dollars and US dollars; and • whether there was physical or psychological injury. 21 In the Herald, 1 April 2006, Minister Chinamasa, in conversation with Ceasar Zvayi, said: ‘There has been a lot of falsification, exaggeration, orchestration and stage managing of human rights violations by detractors since we embarked on our land reform programme. In order to counter these, we feel that we should set up this Commission so that any complaints which are raised can be investigated immediately and we can establish the facts and, where violations have occurred, redress can be made.’ Human rights complaints will be expected to be filed first with this Commission and human rights NGOs will have to be accredited to the Commission. The lack of independence, transparency and accountability in existing commissions does not raise high expectations for the impartiality of this Commission, and it is seen by the human rights community as a blunt way of curtailing their activities. 8