29 grievances” referred to by Raftopoulos are tied in to an equally long history of gross human rights violations, stretching all the way back to the early 1960s, and perhaps even further38. Certainly the contemporary history of Zimbabwe since the 1960s is writ large with organized violence and torture, and this knowledge forms a well-articulated component in the understanding of ordinary Zimbabweans. Political dispute is invariably accompanied by extreme violence, and the contemporary political crisis is no different, and, in this history, the frequent resort by ZanuPF to such means has also loomed large39. However, the perspective of the victims in all this history is only told indirectly, and particularly as concerns the violence and the human rights violations since 1980. All too frequently the views of victims are only seen in the pages of human rights reports, or in the pages of research reports40, either by academics or non-governmental organizations41. However, this is beginning to change, and a recent symposium on human rights violations in Zimbabwe made very strong statements about the need for any process of accountability to be “victim-driven”42. However, it is not only in the area of human rights violations and accountability that victims’ views need to be directly canvassed. Since the whole intention behind organized violence and torture is frequently the silencing of victims’ voices from the democratic discourse, it is also the case that victims may have a decided stake in any dialogue concerning political transition itself. Here, of course, the issues around impunity are central to any political transition where gross human rights violations have taken place43, but the views of victims should not be restricted only to issues of impunity, for it is well-known that the most frequent victims of gross human rights violations are those who actively struggle for democracy. It is thus important that those who have suffered personally in the struggle for democracy not be sidelined in discussions about the future of democracy, but be encouraged to take an active role in this process44. This perhaps is the first step towards healing and re-empowerment. Results The views from the workshop process are described under five headings shown as shown below. Consensus on and participation in popular self government The participants stated unambiguously that there is no consensus on and participation in popular self– government. As they pointed out, people do not respect each other’s political differences and as a result there is violence, particularly around elections. 38 Here see the Summary and Declaration of the Johannesburg Symposium, where representatives of Zimbabwe’s civil society indicated that a Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission would have to consider at least gross human rights violations as far back as 1965. However, this same group argued that a Truth Commission should also be set up to consider human rights violations since the colonial occupation of Zimbabwe. 39 Here see Reeler, A.P, Sticks and Stones; Skeletons and Ghosts, in D. Harold-Barry SJ (Ed), Zimbabwe: The Past is the Future. Rethinking Land, State and Nation in the Context of Crisis, HARARE: WEAVER PRESS. 40 See J. ALEXANDER, J. McGREGOR, & T. RANGER (2000), Violence and Memory: One Hundred Years in the ‘Dark Forests of Matabeleland’, HEINEMAN, JAMES CURREY, WEAVER, DAVID PHILIP; 41 See CCJP/LRF (1997), Breaking the Silence. Building True Peace: A Report on the Disturbances in Matabeleland and the Midlands, 1980 to 1988, HARARE: CATHOLIC COMMISSION FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE, & LEGAL RESOURCES FOUNDATION; see also Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum (2002), “Are They Accountable?: Examining alleged violators and their violations pre and post the Presidential Election March 2002”, HARARE: ZIMBABWE HUMAN RIGHTS NGO FORUM. 42 See here the Summary and Declaration of the Johannesburg Symposium, where it states clearly in the Preamble“…that strategies must be pursued that will cater for the needs of victims of violence and that the victims will be consulted about their needs and what the victims perceived as being the most appropriate mechanisms for satisfying their needs”. For the full report see Themba LeSizwe (2003), Civil Society and Justice in Zimbabwe, The Proceedings of a Symposium held in Johannesburg, 11-13 August 2003, PRETORIA: THEMBA LESIZWE. 43 See UN [1997], The Administration of Justice and the Human Rights of Detainees: Question of the impunity of perpetrators of human rights violations (civil and political), Revised final report prepared by Mr. Joinet pursuant to Sub-Commission decision 1996/119, United Nations. Economic and Social Council. Commission on Human Rights. Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/20/Rev.1. 44 See KORDON, D., EDELMAN, L., LAGOS, D., & KERSNER, D. (1998), Argentina: Psychosocial and clinical consequences of political repression and impunity, TORTURE, 8, 43-47; see also LAGOS, D. (1996), Argentina: Psychosocial and clinical consequences of political repression and impunity in the medium term, TORTURE, 6, 13-15. IDASA: Zimbabwe at the Cross-Roads: Views of Zimbabwean citizens on democracy and transitional justice.