ZHRC’s jurisdiction in this matter is derived from Section 243 (1) (d) of a. the Constitution of Zimbabwe. Complainants are entitled to the right to an environment that is not harmful to their health or wellbeing as enshrined in Section 73 (1) (a) of the Constitution. 4. Methodology In carrying out the investigations, the ZHRC employed a number of methods which included desk research, individual interviews with complainants, Chief Mazvihwa, Ward councillor, EMA official and the District Environmental Health Officer. Correspondences and reports from the respondent, EMA and the Ministry of Health and Child Care (MoHCC) were also referred to in the investigation. 4.1. Desktop Research 4.1.1. The ZHRC conducted legal research into the legal framework governing human rights locally, regionally and internationally. This was done in order to identify and assess the human rights if any that were violated by the alleged conduct of the respondent Company. Use of relevant case law was also pertinent in the research. 4.2. Interviews 4.2.1. The ZHRC interviewed some of the complainants after it had respondents secured in order responses to make from a the balanced assessment of the situation. Reports of consultants who carried out an assessment of the levels of dust emissions and the impact of blasting in Mazvihwa community and those from EMA and the District Environmental Health Officer were also made reference to. 4.2.2. Interview guides were developed to facilitate interviews with Complainants and Respondent. Page 4 of 15