Research and Discussion Paper on a TJ Framework for Zimbabwe attributed to the State and constitute gross violations of international human rights law or serious violations of international humanitarian law”.44 The ACHPR commission has defined reparation as an eminent factor of healing, including “restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction - including the right to the truth, and guarantees of non-repetition. The comment has defined reparation as an eminent factor of healing as follows: “The ... overarching goal of these forms of reparation is to provide healing for victims of torture and other ill-treatment. Healing entails making whole that which has been broken and wounded. It seeks to restore the dignity, humanity and trust violated by torture and other illtreatment. It recognises and facilitates the journey of coming to terms with the torture and other illtreatment and dealing with the consequences of trauma and other injuries. It has physical, psychological, social, cultural and spiritual dimensions and helps break the cycle of violence at individual, family, collective, institutional and societal levels.”45 In this guideline, it is also stated that also a person, a legal person, or another entity than the state if found liable for reparation to a victim, such party should provide reparation to the victim or compensate the State if the State has already provided reparation to the victim. This is a very interesting aspect also in the case of Zimbabwe: not only the state but identifiable individuals have illegally overtaken farms, occupied diamond and gold mines, whereby evicting people from their lands. Former land owners have not been compensated. Diamond revenues have just been pocketed, people evicted from the mine areas have not been compensated. All this was and is being done with the encouragement and the knowledge of the state. Apart from human suffering, state-run illegal mining activities and occupation of farms, the environment has suffered and communities were displaced. The UN guideline states in these cases that “[i]n cases of substantial harm to the environment, restitution, if ordered, should include, as far as possible, restoration of the environment, reconstruction of the infrastructure, replacement of community facilities and reimbursement of the expenses of relocation, whenever such harm results in the dislocation of a community”.46 The right to reparation for victims of gross and systematic human rights violations goes beyond the reparation demands and rights of a criminal victim. Whereas a criminal victim can demand some kind of reparation from the perpetrator according to the law, the victim/victims of state induced violations find it difficult, if not impossible, to demand reparation. The UN says: “Where public officials or other agents acting in an official or quasi-official capacity have violated national criminal laws, the victims should receive restitution from the State whose officials or agents were responsible for the harm inflicted. In cases where the Government under 44 Basic principles and guidelines on the right to a remedy and reparation for victims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law; adopted and proclaimed by general assembly resolution 60/147 of 16 December 2005 45 General comments No. 4, African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: The Right to Redress for Victims of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Punishment or Treatment (Article 5right to be free from torture and ill-treatment), adopted during the African Commission’s Extraordinary Session on 27 February 2017; http://www.achpr.org/instruments/general-comment-right-to-redress/ 46 Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power A/Res/40/34) 24 DRAFT