Zimbabwe has the legal, political and social structures that would allow such work without endangering victims (individuals or communities) or researchers. There is good understanding of the health consequences of organized violence in Zimbabwe. The morbidity due to the Liberation War has been best documented to date, and the most reliable study indicated a likely prevalence of trauma sufferers of approximately 1 adult in 10 over the age of 30 years in 1997. The Government has not provided any national programme of specialized medical or psychological assistance for these victims, although war veterans have been beneficiaries on a number of occasions of financial compensation. Morbidity due to the Gukurahundi has also received some attention, although remarkably little given the genocidal nature of the events associated with Gukurahundi. This lack of attention has itself resulted in a widespread belief in south western Zimbabwe (among both populations and professionals) of systematic denial. One small study, in Gwanda district, indicated that 5 adults in 10 over the age of 18 years were suffering from significant psychological disorders, with over 90% of the sample reporting an experience with organized violence and torturexiii. The majority of these experiences dated from the 1980s rather that the Liberation War. In general, the events of Gukurahundi and their social and psychological sequelae are a very clear example of social denial and the silencing of suffering despite at least one group‘s remarkable and innovative attempts at community level healing.xiv There is no good estimate of the morbidity due the violence occasioned by the Food Riots in 1998. At the time the Zimbabwe Republic Police estimated that over 3,000 persons had been arrested, and the Human Rights Forum was able to obtain data on 1,431 cases of persons that had been arrested. Only 44 persons eventually elected to report to the Human Rights Forum, but 36% were diagnosed as having clinically significant psychological disorders. It is clearly inappropriate to extrapolate from such a small sample, but it is probable that the numbers affected were significant xv. The very low number of victims who chose to report to the Humans Rights Forum speaks directly to widespread public suspicion of the impartiality of the police and other legal bodies. Finally, there has been a virtual epidemic of organized violence and torture since February 2000, as seen in Table 1 above, and this is attested to by the vast outpouring of reports since that time. Very few studies have been done on the effects on victims, and certainly no reliable epidemiological studies. There are two indicative studies, however. The first, examining internally-displaced workers from the commercial farms demonstrated that 85% of the sample was suffering clinically significant psychological disordersxvi, whilst the second, a ―snap survey‖ of Zimbabwean refugees in Johannesburg, Gauteng, indicated a point prevalence rate of 14% in the sample xvii. These latter two studies are important for the purposes of understanding the effects of O peration Murambatsvina since they examine populations of displaced persons. Estimates of psychological disorders due to trauma are much higher amongst refugees or internally displaced persons than they are in the general population, as they are in specific populations such as those living in complex emergencies such as civil wars, or low intensity conflicts. In 2005, in the aftermath of Operation Murambatsvina, ActionAid International conducted a community survey, xviii and this indicated the following: The major finding was an extremely high rate of clinically significant psychological disorder in the sample. 69% of the sample had scores in the clinically significant range, which indicates a probable population needing psychological assistance of about 820,000 persons. The prevalence was higher in the HIV/AIDS group [75%]. It was also evident in the ActionAid study that women were considerably more vulnerable than men, with older women-headed households and single women-headed households the most vulnerable. Clearly, unaccompanied children and child-headed households are likely to be the most vulnerable. Additionally, there is considerable evidence that children are very common witnesses to the OVT that has taken place since 2000, and the many reports of violence within rural communities indicate this.