The sample reported more experiences of trauma than witnessing or hearing stories on the Harvard Trauma Scale. Only 7 (47%) persons of the clinically disordered group showed signs of PTSD, but this was a much higher percentage than other Zimbabwean studies, and undoubtedly reflects the acute nature of the psychological distress. PTSD would be more strongly expected as an immediate consequence of OVT than other forms of disorder. We have not reported details of the personal experience of any of these cases, since all these cases are sub judice, but the general data corroborates the reports from the Mabvuku interviews. The sample reports overwhelmingly experiences of gross human rights violations, and, distressingly, most have physical, psychological and social difficulties as a consequence of their experience. All these cases are currently awaiting the outcome of their civil suits, and the Civil Division of the Attorney-General’s Office has indicated that it will contest all the cases. Here we would comment this is unsatisfactory in the light of the UN Human Rights Committee’s recommendations that all cases of gross human rights violations should be paid compensation, and that it is legalistic of the Government to insist upon court proceedings before any award of compensation. We are certain that this was not the intention of the UN committee. Furthermore, we would point out that the cases reported upon here represent a small proportion of the persons who likely experienced gross human rights violations. If, as noted above, more than 70% of the persons seen in the Harare Magistrate’s Court were unconditionally discharged, and the evidence of the conditions in detention (see above in Section 5) was that gross human rights violations were perpetrated on a massive scale, then the numbers will be clearly much higher. Even more important, when the evidence suggests that gross human rights violations were perpetrated on a massive scale within the communities without arrests taking place, then the numbers affected will be in the region of many thousands. Of course this is assertion based upon extrapolation and no substitute for detailed analysis, but this is of course what the Human Rights NGO Forum has continually requested from the President and the Government: an independent commission of inquiry. Importantly, this has also been requested by the UN Human Rights Committee. As can be seen from this section, the human consequences of the Food Riots were not trivial and the suffering continues unaddressed for an unknown number of ordinary Zimbabwean citizens caught up in a terrible disturbance. They require a better response from the Government than either ignoring the problem or offering a mendacious report such as that offered by the Zimbabwe Republic Police. 7. Conclusions and Recommendations The conclusions and recommendations outlined in the report published on 10 March 1998 remain as relevant today as then, and the results of this more detailed report merely vindicate these earlier views. Firstly, as stated in the initial report, it remains evident that in Zimbabwe there is a highly volatile and unstable social environment. This stems from gross discontent with very harsh economic conditions and massive levels of unemployment. As we hope we have demonstrated, the disturbances were predictable and, indeed were predicted by many commentators. More recent analyses of the Zimbabwean situation make many of the same points as we have in our analysis of the background. Unless these problems are properly addressed, there is bound to be increasing levels of social instability. Secondly, in this sort of environment, ill-conceived measures by Government that worsen economic suffering will inevitably lead to some sort of backlash. As can be seen from the analysis of the economic and other factors preceding the Food Riots, these factors have strong implications for public order. It is noteworthy that there have been riots subsequent to the Food Riots, and that these riots were determined in the main by economic factors and the Government’s ill-conceived policy in dealing with the economic issues.