N AT I O N A L I N Q U I R Y R E P O R T ZIMBABWE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION For Human Dignity 2.2.1 Time Constraints The ZHRC could not cover all the hotspot areas due to time constraints. The time frame for conducting outreaches in all the provinces was five (5) days, which was inadequate especially for vast provinces such as Mashonaland West, Midlands, Mashonaland Central and Matabeleland North. Time constraints also affected the number of invited witnesses who could give evidence before the Commissioners in public hearings. Oral testimonies from witnesses were protracted due to the complexity of issues, which needed a lot more time for probing by Commissioners to get an in-depth understanding as well as to contextualize the issues. This made it impossible for all witnesses to submit oral evidence. However, this was mitigated by the fact that information could be extracted from written forms. 2.2.2 Resource Constraints Due to resource constraints, the ZHRC could only deploy three advance teams to conduct outreaches and receive submissions in preparation of public hearings. This meant that limited ground was covered as some districts needed more time to address complicated issues. 2.2.3 Participation of Marginalised Groups Low numbers of submissions were received from marginalised communities, with affected people shying away from directly engaging and participating in the National Inquiry process. They preferred that their representatives give evidence on their behalf. As already reported, in mitigation, specific outreaches were conducted after the public hearings to reach out to marginalised communities40. Gukurahundi-affected communities exhibited fear and reluctance to open up resulting in very few individual witness forms being received from them. To mitigate this drawback, the ZHRC ensured that during public hearings, representatives of Gukurahundi-affected communities such as traditional leaders and CSOs were invited to present oral evidence on behalf of individuals, and individual witnesses who came forward were given the option to give their evidence in camera. Very few PWDs attended the community outreaches organised in the provinces due to mobility challenges among other reasons. This resulted in low submissions by PWDs. The ZHRC mitigated this limitation by visiting institutions where PWDs are kept such as Margaret Hugo Copota School of the Blind and Henry Murray, among others. The Commission also engaged Organisations of Persons with Disabilities (OPWD) such as Federation of Organisations of Disabled Persons in Zimbabwe (FODPZ) and Jairos Jiri to make oral and written submissions. 2.2.4 Modes of Disseminating Information Modes of disseminating information to the general public were limited due to long power cuts and exorbitant fees for radio and television programmes. This limited the number of members of the public who could be reached with information and notices on the National Inquiry. The ZHRC had to, therefore, rely on secondary means of disseminating information such as traditional, community and local leaders and CSOs. In some cases, the information that reached citizens was not always accurate, for example, in almost all the outreaches, information that reached the communities was that ZHRC was issuing out national documents. 2.2.5 Co-operation by the Department of the Registrar General The Commission worked closely with the DRG which co-operated by setting up help desks and deployed Provincial Registrars to respond to issues which arose from the cases that were being presented. The Registrar General (RG) as the Head of Department responsible for policy and implementation of national documentation was formally invited to make a detailed written submission and present oral evidence before the Commission. He was requested to outline in detail, the national challenges, policies and operations on access to documentation. Whilst the RG appeared before the Commission41, he however declined to give oral evidence because he viewed the process as “flawed”. He later made a short-written submission which did not address or provide information requested from him by the Commissioners42. The National Inquiry therefore, failed to benefit from his input on the national challenges, operations, policies and new developments in the DRG on national documentation issues. This type of attitude from a public servant is unfortunate and highly regrettable. Refer to Section 2.1.5 of this Chapter. The Registrar General appeared before the Commission on 25 November 2019 in Harare. 42 See Annexure 8 for Registrar General’s submission to the National Inquiry. 40 41 14 14