25 • • • • Statements made by high-ranking members of the ruling party encourage the law enforcement agencies to perpetrate these abuses and it can be argued that the widespread abuses are state sponsored or at least condoned; The protection of the law has in many cases been denied to those considered hostile to ZANU (PF); For these persons, the law enforcement agencies have become an instrument of violence against them rather than an institution that offers them protection. They live in fear of the very agencies that are supposed to protect them; On the other hand, the perpetrators of abuses against these persons have often been immune from legal responsibility for their actions, and this impunity encourages them to continue to commit abuses. Neither this particular report – “Who Guards the Guards?” - nor any of the previous recent reports have received any response from the ZRP. In fact, the ZRP, through the office of the Commissioner of Police, indicated to the Forum last year that the force did not wish to receive reports from the Forum in the future. The rationale offered for refusing reports was that the ZRP were not offered a right to respond to the reports of the Forum before they were published. The fact that the ZRP has ignored this and other reports of violence by ZANU PF and ZANU PF militia, but has chosen to issue two reports responding to allegations of violence by MDC members and civic organisations, is in itself a clear indication of the politicisation and partisanship of the ZRP. CONCLUSIONS As is so frequently the case in Zimbabwe, government denials of gross human rights violations ring hollow against the facts. This time, however, the denial put forward by the ZRP in many respects confirms the facts previously alleged. The ZRP report, “ Opposition Politics in Zimbabwe: A Trail of Violence”, provides further evidence that the government and the ZRP act in concert to suppress dissent and the opposition in Zimbabwe. As our analysis of the ZRP reports shows, virtually all of the “subversive” activities alleged by ZRP would be treated as normal democratic activities in most countries of the world, and as a sign of a healthy and functioning democracy. In unashamedly treating political meetings, rallies and demonstrations as part of “a trail of violence”, the ZRP reports are evidence, from the horse’s mouth as it were, of the ZRP’s politicisation, intolerance of democratic opposition and violent suppression of opposition parties and leaders who try to exercise their civil rights and occupy such limited democratic space as remains available.