In 2002, the Government enacted the Public Order and Security Act (POSA)34. This Act has been interpreted by the police as giving them powers much wider than the already-draconian Act actually provides for. Claiming POSA as their authority, the police have prevented most opposition meetings and demonstrations from taking place, asserting that such meetings are a threat to public order. ZANU (PF) meetings have taken place without interruption, and without apparently meeting the formal requirements of POSA. Under the guise of this legislation, police have broken up opposition gatherings and meetings, prevented demonstrations and imprisoned participants. Contrary to the provisions of POSA, the police maintain that all meetings require their permission, and that anyone attending a meeting without their permission may be arrested. The majority of arrests ostensibly carried out under POSA have not in fact accorded with the legislation 35 . Up to September 2004, there had not been a single successful prosecution under POSA for arrests arising out of purported violations of the Act. A survey carried out by the Zimbabwe Solidarity Peace Trust showed that, from a given sample, 73% of cases remain unresolved. This means that the charges have not been pursued or that the accused have been repeatedly remanded without a trial date ever having been set. Of the remainder, 133 or 11% were released without charge, the courts acquitted 85 or 7%, and 50 had charges withdrawn. In 55 cases or 5%, those arrested paid admission-of-guilt fines. These fines are commonly paid by arrestees to avoid extended incarceration at the police station and should not be taken as a genuine admission of guilt. Research by Amani Trust indicated 1,213 documented reports of arrests, ostensibly in terms of POSA,36 from its enactment to August 2004. Of these arrests, 639 people were released without charge. Only 8 of the arrests were of members of ZANU (PF)37. Some 63 public gatherings were dispersed, all being those of the MDC or civic society. On the other hand, there are no reported instances of the police stopping meetings, rallies and demonstrations by supporters of the ruling party. These statistics not only show the extent of the oppression of freedom of assembly, but also reveal highly partisan policing. This type of policing continued until shortly before the election observers arrived in the country, one of the last examples being the dispersal by police of people gathered to hear an MDC legislator, Ian Makone, address a conference of MDC candidates38. MDC campaigners are at 34 Chapter 11:17 See generally in this regard D. Matyszak Democratic Space and State Security: Zimbabwe’s Public Order and Security Act Zimbabwe Human Rights Bulletin, February 2005. 36 This information was supplied by a researcher at Amani and gleaned from various Human Rights reports over the period, particularly those of the Human Rights NGO Forum. 37 The Commissioner of Police has cynically used the fact that arrests are predominantly of MDC members to suggest that it is evidence of the lawlessness of the MDC – see Justice In Zimbabwe at p 43 and Amnesty International 2002 Policing to Protect Human Rights. 38 http://www.legalbrief.co.za/publication/archives.php?mode=archive&publication=Legalbrief_Afri 35 14