Introduction A democratic state is one in which the government respects human rights, will freely allow democratic activity, and whose law enforcement agencies will try to protect all persons against violation of their rights, regardless of the political affiliation of the people involved. The role of the police in a democracy is summed up in Article 1 of the United Nations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials as follows: Law enforcement officials shall at all times fulfil the duty imposed upon them by law, by serving the community and by protecting all persons against illegal acts, consistent with the high degree of responsibility required by their profession. 1 In stark contrast, a repressive regime with no respect for human rights will disallow ordinary democratic activity, and will use the law enforcement agencies to stifle dissent and opposition. The law enforcement agencies will themselves become the main human rights violators and a source of fear for those being targeted. A state in which this situation prevails is described pejoratively as “a police state”. The last time the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum issued a specific report concerning the conduct of members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police [ZRP] was in 2003.2 In that report the Forum made serious allegations about the involvement of the ZRP in torture. The 2003 report was based on reports that the Forum and its member organisations had received in the period from January 2001 to August 2002. The primary focus of the present report is the behaviour by Zimbabwe Republic Police, although it also touches upon the conduct of other law enforcement agencies and the conduct on the part of army personnel when acting in concert with the police force. This report examines the political environment in which the law enforcement agencies have been operating in Zimbabwe since 2000. It explores the extent to which the law enforcement agencies have become instruments of state repression, and the extent to which the abuses by these agencies are officially condoned, sanctioned or encouraged by their commanders and by the political leaders under whose auspices these agencies operate. As the title of this report indicates, the main issue is: “who guards the guards?” Applied to the law enforcement agencies 1 2 This Code was adopted by General Assembly Resolution 34/169 of 17 December 1979 See Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum Torture by State Agents in Zimbabwe: January 2001 to August 2002 (2003 Harare,).