Most of the institutions are weak or are deliberately weakened and manipulated for political ends. Some of the institutions that were primarily set up to offer protection end up being the persecutors themselves. Police and security agents appear to be the main violators of the rights of human rights defenders, as they are responsible for their arrest, abduction, harassment, intimidation and even torture or murder. Despite their duty to carry out their tasks in an impartial and professional way, the evidence on the ground, however, suggests that a number of them have been politicised and play active political roles in stifling the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms of those perceived not to be “politically correct”, i.e. who express critical views, regardless of their political beliefs. The cases of Ms. Jestina Mukoko, Ms. Manjoro and Ms. Maguwu are an illustration of this lack of respect for basic standards by law enforcement officials (see below). have faced broad sets of charges in the framework of fabricated cases brought against them. The combination of the lawyers’ efforts and the rulings of the judiciary on pre-trial bail have made it possible to provide human rights defenders in Zimbabwe with some degree of legal protection of their rights. However, as a result of the intensification of political pressure, particularly since the 2008 elections, most judicial officers have become afraid of carrying out their duties in accordance with the principles of their profession, and with their oaths of office. This has generally resulted in great loss of confidence by the population in the courts as an independent and impartial institution ready to deliver justice. In some instances, the very orders, injunctions or decrees of the Courts, when issued, have not been adequately implemented for lack of any enforcement mechanism. The independence and impartiality of the prosecuting authorities is also questionable. In some instances, cases of selective prosecution were reported, while in others, the law was deliberately used to achieve political goals. Some politically motivated criminal cases are launched by the Prosecution in spite of any clear legal basis. The mission observed that Zimbabwe had a well-established legal system, supported by a judiciary system and a fairly independent legal profession. In theory, the legislative framework (Constitution and domestic laws) provides for an independent judiciary. Zimbabwe is also bound by a number of international human rights instruments that guarantee the right to an effective remedy before independent and impartial tribunals. However, in practice, the judiciary is not independent, due to, i.e.: – A faulty and opaque appointment process that has resulted in the key judicial positions being taken over by persons close to one political party and to the executive, – A funding model that makes it dependent on the executive and often results in inadequate funding of the judiciary, – The absence of a clearly understood and publicly enforced judicial code of conduct, in the framework of which any action against judicial officers would be made public, which would make the judiciary not only independent, but also accountable to the public, – Poor working conditions of the judiciary and supporting staff, which makes them potentially corruptible, – A general climate of intimidation and fear due to a national culture of violence, impunity and intolerance that makes judicial officers live with some degree of fear and apprehension, – A general collapse of the legal systems, including those that support an independent judiciary, due to the governance crisis that has gripped the country for over a decade, and – The politicisation of key organs of the judiciary (such as the Attorney General’s Office, the police, the security sector, the prisons), which has resulted in a selective application of the law. Despite those difficulties and in a context of adversity, a core group of judges, magistrates and prosecutors has continued to act with independence and impartiality. Some observers had hoped that this core group would lead and support judicial reforms during a genuine political transition. In particular, in the area of procedural justice, the judiciary, with the support of a group of human rights lawyers (mainly from Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights - ZLHR) who have been very active in dutifully and fearlessly taking many cases to courts for the sake of human rights, regardless of the outcome, have made it more difficult for the law to be used as an instrument of repression. Pre-trial detention has decreased and practically every detention is subject to judicial oversight. Human rights defenders are no longer detained for prolonged periods without some political cost for the authorities. Since 2003, when ZLHR, an NGO created in 1996 in Harare, established a human rights defenders legal emergency response project focusing on pre-trial justice, over 1,000 human rights defenders have benefited from legal representation and have generally been granted police or judicial bail. Thanks to this project, not a single human rights defender has been convicted since 2003, although many 14 The Observatory ZIMBABWE: Ongoing risks for human rights defenders in the context of political deadlock and pre-electoral period The Observatory ZIMBABWE: Ongoing risks for human rights defenders in the context of political deadlock and pre-electoral period 15