JUSTICE IN ZIMBABWE 58 ____________________________________________________________________ and the allocation of plots,” the court said, “the exercise degenerates from being an historical righting of wrongs into pure discrimination.”114 The displacement of farm workers of foreign origin who were lawful permanent residents also amounted to unfair discrimination. The court declared that forcing farmers and farm workers to attend political rallies had violated their right to freedom of association and assembly. The Supreme Court pointed out that it was the duty of the courts to insist on compliance with the laws and that there be a return to lawfulness. It ordered the respondents, namely the Minister involved in the resettlement programme, the Minister of Home Affairs, the Commissioner of Police and the President, to comply with previous High Court and Supreme Court orders that had been made with the consent of the parties. It also interdicted the Minister concerned from taking further steps to acquire land, but suspended the interdict until 1 July 2001. This meant that until then the government could continue with its (illegal) exercise of land acquisition. The court said it had suspended the order to enable the Ministers to produce a workable programme of land reform, and to enable the Minister of Home Affairs and the Commissioner of Police to satisfy the court that “the rule of law has been restored in the commercial farming areas”. The effect of this was that after the date the interdict became operative, the government (if it was concerned with the law) would have had two options: either it could have stopped acquiring any further farmland or it could have put a proper programme in place and restored the rule of law and then acquired further land in accordance with the programme. The CFU would have been entitled to return to court only if acquisitions were effected after that date in defiance of the interdict. In that event the CFU would have had to ask the court to rule that the government and the police were in contempt and to ask it to impose penalties for the contempt. The class action case Regarding the land cases there is a peripheral matter worth commenting upon, and that is an altercation in 2000 between the Supreme Court and Mr Justice Chidyausiku, who at that time was Judge President of the High Court. The Supreme Court, with the consent of the government officials involved in the case, had ordered the eviction of