<<previous  |  index  |  next>>

IV. Government’s Failure to Assist and Protect the Displaced

Denial of vital assistance to the internally displaced

The Zimbabwean government’s campaign of forced evictions and demolitions has led to massive internal displacement.²¹ It is difficult to ascertain the exact number of persons who were displaced by the evictions. In her July 2005 report on the scale and impact of Operation Murambatsvina, the United Nations Special Envoy concluded that an estimated 570,000 people were displaced by the operation. U.N. rough estimates further indicated that out of 700,000 people directly affected by Operation Murambatsvina, 20 percent (114,000) were living in the open with no shelter; 20 percent (114, 000) had gone or were forced to go to the rural areas; 30 percent (170,000) were absorbed by families, friends or the extended family; and another 30 percent (170,000) sought refuge in the community in churches and other temporary accommodation.²²

In September and October 2005, through site visits to numerous locations, Human Rights Watch found that thousands of people were displaced in Harare, Victoria Falls and Mutare. Reports by other organisations such as the Solidarity Peace Trust also indicated that tens of thousands of people were displaced in Bulawayo and in the rural areas of Matabeleland South and North.²³ Representatives of other local and international humanitarian organizations working with victims of the evictions suggested in interviews with Human Rights Watch that there were hundreds of thousands of displaced persons throughout the country.²⁴

Under international law, as reflected in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, the Zimbabwean government has the “primary duty and responsibility to provide protection and humanitarian assistance to internally displaced persons within their jurisdiction.”²⁵ This responsibility was reaffirmed by the U.N. Special Envoy’s report that called on the government to immediately “create conditions for sustainable relief” and to ensure the provision of humanitarian assistance to population affected by Operation Murambatsvina.²⁶

The government of Zimbabwe, however, has blatantly defied its international obligations and the recommendations of the United Nations Special Envoy.

The government has refused to acknowledge the enormous scale of humanitarian crisis precipitated by Operation Murambatsvina, and the very existence of hundreds of thousands of displaced men, women, and children in need of immediate assistance. As one U.N. official put it, “Technically, most of the internally displaced don’t exist as far as the government is concerned.”²⁷

The government has made no attempts to locate and register the internally displaced in order to assess their numbers and needs. As a representative of a local church, which was trying to assist some IDPs in the aftermath of the evictions, told Human Rights Watch:

I don’t think there is any will on the part of the government to help the people. The government doesn’t have the details of where the people went and how many and who was affected. The government didn’t take any information down.²⁸

The overwhelming majority of IDPs interviewed by Human Rights Watch were in desperate need of shelter, food, health services and other forms of assistance. All of them reported having received absolutely no such assistance from the government.

The government’s failure to provide any form of temporary shelter to the displaced families was particularly striking. Throughout Zimbabwe, for the last six months people have been living outside on the porches or without any shelter in the bush; in rudimentary makeshift hovels made of pieces of tin and wood they found in the debris of the destroyed houses, or in overcrowded quarters with up to four families sharing one room in a house.²⁹

For example, in one of the townships in Victoria Falls Human Rights Watch interviewed a family of four that has been living amidst their scanty belongings with no roof over their heads. Since their house was destroyed in end of May, the family has been staying in the open on the edge of the bush and dangerously exposed to wildlife.³⁰

In a high-density suburb of Harare, another family—“Mary O.”, her husband and eight children—have been living on the site of a destroyed market place in a hovel made of pieces of tin and cardboard which, according to Mary O., the family has collected from a nearby dumping site. The woman told Human Rights Watch that the family used to own a brick house which the authorities had forced them to destroy during Operation Murambatsvina on May 25, 2005.³¹

“Thandi U.”, whose house also was demolished in the end of May, told Human Rights Watch that she had to move in with her grandmother’s family and now twelve of them were “sleeping in one room, including four children.”³²

Dozens of other families shared similar stories with Human Rights Watch.

In June 2005, Zimbabwean authorities announced the launch of Operation Garikai—a reconstruction program ostensibly initiated to provide accommodation to those who lost shelter as a result of the evictions.³³ The government claimed it had set aside U.S. $ 300 million to build altogether 1.2 million houses, and promised to build 4,900 houses within a few months. In her July report,³⁴ the U.N. Special Envoy expressed doubts at the success of the program and noted that Operation Garikai seemed to have been hastily implemented and did not account for the immediate shelter needs of people who had been rendered homeless by the evictions.³⁵

Human Rights Watch’s findings confirmed the Special Envoy’s concerns. Human Rights Watch researchers saw a number of Operation Garikai construction sites in Harare, Victoria Falls and Mutare, and found that the number of houses being built was negligibly small compared to the hundreds of thousands of persons rendered homeless by the evictions and so far few houses had been completed. For example, only about 20 houses had been built at the only construction site in Victoria Falls where over 10,000 people were rendered homeless by Operation Murambatsvina.³⁶ A foreman on the site informed Human Rights Watch that people were unlikely to move into the houses before the end of the year.³⁷ On other sites, such as the one in Mbare, Human Rights Watch researchers found no signs of construction, although the site was being watched over by a building foreman. On some construction sites in Harare and Mutare, Human Rights Watch found the construction of houses and stands at various stages, but it was evident that operations were far from completion.

These observations were corroborated by the authorities’ statements. In September, Information Minister Chen Chimutengwende announced the extension of the deadline for completion of houses under Operation Garikai from August 31 to December, citing building delays caused by shortages of fuel and construction materials. ³⁸

Human Rights Watch research also indicates that Operation Garikai has little to do with humanitarian relief effort, as the vast majority of the internally displaced will not be among its beneficiaries, as they are unlikely to meet the criteria for ownership of the new houses.

Recent statements by government officials as well as testimony provided to Human Rights Watch by the internally displaced and local authorities indicate that in order to qualify for the housing, a family has to produce a proof of formal employment, earn a specified salary, be on municipal housing waiting list, and be able to afford the initial deposit and monthly installments.

A local council official in Victoria Falls told Human Rights Watch that the government required the council to produce a list of intended beneficiaries for housing, so that the government could “vet the names in terms of ability to pay.”³⁹ A local human rights activist in Hatcliffe pointed out:

The houses (under Operation Garikai) were meant for those who had their houses destroyed but now they are saying that you have to earn a government level income and then you qualify and get a stand. If you don’t qualify, even if your house was destroyed on the stand, you won’t get a house. Before getting into the house you have to pay a deposit.⁴⁰

These concerns were confirmed by the statement of Gwanda mayor, Thandeko Mkandla, who stated in mid-October 2005, that the reconstruction program was no longer specific to the poor and vulnerable, who make up the majority of the internally displaced. The mayor reiterated the above-mentioned criteria for allocation of housing, and concluded:

Many people who were affected are squatters who have never been employed--they cannot afford any of the requirements. The houses will only be available to the gainfully employed, and one has to be well paid to afford the installments.⁴¹.

Several interviewees also shared with Human Rights Watch their concern that the houses built under Operation Garikai are more likely to be allocated to civil servants, army and police and other government employees. While Human Rights Watch did not find sufficient evidence to prove this allegation, these concerns appear credible, given the specified qualifications required for allocation of housing, and the fact that currently the reconstruction program is being overseen by senior army officials, with local authorities having little control of the situation.⁴² 

The government also made no effort to provide the vast majority of the internally displaced with food, water, sanitation, and health services. The lack of adequate shelter, nutrition and sanitation made the internally displaced more susceptible to life-threatening diseases.

For example, in one of the areas in Harare visited by Human Rights Watch, over 250 IDPs were living in makeshift shacks that they had built from plastic sheeting, tin, pieces of wood and cardboard. The conditions at the site were squalid and overcrowded, and the area had no water, electricity or sanitation facilities. The residents, who had been living in such dire conditions for months, told Human Rights Watch that they had only received food aid from the Roman Catholic Church once, in July, and that the government has offered them no food or other assistance. One of the displaced told Human Rights Watch:

There are lots of people living with TB (tuberculosis) here. I am also sick. No one is receiving any medical assistance. When I was sick, the people here put together some money for my medicine.⁴³

A representative of an international humanitarian organisation working with the displaced informed Human Rights Watch that the organization had observed a “big increase in pneumonia, fevers, and scabies” among the displaced population, due to overcrowding, exposure to severe weather conditions and lack of sanitation. The representative also mentioned that the condition of people with chronic diseases, such as tuberculosis, worsened because they lost access to treatment they used to have before the displacement.⁴⁴

The UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement stipulate the responsibility of national authorities to provide the IDPs—regardless of whether they stay in organized settlements or not—with access to essential food and potable water, basic shelter and housing, appropriate clothing, and essential medical services and sanitation.⁴⁵ The Guiding Principles further emphasize that, at a minimum, all IDPs should have access to primary health services, and urge the authorities to pay special attention to the prevention of contagious and infectious diseases.⁴⁶

Government’s obstruction of international humanitarian assistance

Following the evictions campaign, U.N. agencies and international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in Zimbabwe, in consultation with donors, have directed their efforts towards meeting immediate needs for food, clean water, and shelter to those who lost their homes or livelihood as the result of Operation Murambatsvina. However, contrary to recommendations of the U.N. Special Envoy, who called on the government to provide full and unimpeded access to local and international humanitarian organizations,⁴⁷ over the last six months, the government has been deliberately obstructing the efforts of international agencies to assist the internally displaced.

The government refused to sign a draft emergency appeal proposed by the U.N., which would have helped those hardest hit by the evictions, and refused to sign an agreement with the U.N. to mobilize much needed relief and reconstruction aid.⁴⁸ It also refused to endorse the U.N. Common Response Plan for assisting victims of evictions.⁴⁹

In late August, the U.N. Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland complained that a lack of cooperation from the government was hampering efforts to assist victims of the evictions.⁵⁰ Two months later, the government’s continued obstruction of humanitarian assistance led to a heartfelt appeal by the U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who expressed “deep concern” about the humanitarian situation in Zimbabwe and urged the government to allow U.N. agencies and other humanitarian agencies access to the victims of Operation Murambatsvina.⁵¹

Despite the desperate situation of the IDPs made homeless by the evictions, the government did not allow international agencies to provide temporary shelter to the displaced, claiming that there was no “compelling need to provide temporary shelter as there is no humanitarian crisis.”⁵²

Zimbabwean government refused to allow international agencies to provide tents or similar forms of temporary shelter to the internally displaced, fearing, according to one international staffer, that the erection of tent camps would expose the scale of humanitarian crisis precipitated by the evictions.⁵³ In August, shortly after several international agencies erected over a hundred tents for the displaced in the area of Headlands, Zimbabwe police took the tents down and explicitly told the U.N. country team that there should be no “tents of plastic sheeting.”⁵⁴ 

In mid-November, the Zimbabwean government reportedly finally accepted the U.N. offer to build 2,500 “units” for people made homeless by the evictions campaign. From media reports it was unclear, however, what kind of shelter will be provided and who the beneficiaries will be.⁵⁵

The government also prevented international agencies from distributing food aid to people displaced as a result of the evictions. One U.N. official told Human Rights Watch:

They [the government] do not recognize that there is a population affected by Operation Murambatsvina that are in need of food assistance. They have a problem with us targeting people that were affected by the operation. They don’t want people receiving food assistance out in the open in the urban areas. We can’t assist all the people evicted – especially those out in the open – directly because the government doesn’t like it.⁵⁶

A report by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) also noted that assistance to the internally displaced presented “operational challenges because of the government directive of assisting only those within designated areas and with housing development approved by the city councils.”⁵⁷

Representatives of other international organizations and U.N. agencies also told Human Rights Watch that the government had explicitly told them not to provide food and other assistance to those staying in the open outside of the areas recognized by the government, namely, Hopely Farm and Hatcliffe.⁵⁸  While some humanitarian agencies were initially trying to continue the delivery of food assistance to the displaced, the government’s non-cooperation has effectively paralyzed their operations, and since September 2005 food aid has not been provided to the vast majority of the internally displaced.  

Zimbabwean authorities have made it clear to local and international humanitarian agencies that they will not allow them free access to the displaced or tolerate any attempts to do so. A representative of one international humanitarian organization described to Human Rights Watch his arrest in September, as he was trying to assess the needs of displaced people in Mutare:

I was arrested in Mutare last week by intelligence officers. I was there to assess the needs of some of the victims with my team. I was interrogated for four hours. I was told that I had to ask for permission to visit the displaced from the local authorities.⁵⁹

On a number of occasions, the government has targeted and further displaced those who received visits and assistance from local and international agencies. For example, IDP camps in Bulawayo and Harare were swiftly closed in the weeks after U.N. Special Envoy’s visit in June.⁶⁰ Another camp in Mutare was closed just before the U.N. Special Envoy visited the area. ”⁶¹

Local organizations and churches which the U.N. agencies have been using as implementing partners for distributing food assistance, also told Human Rights Watch that they were afraid to seek access to IDPs in the areas not recognized by the government. A representative of one local organization told Human Rights Watch, “We can’t be too pushy (for further access) through the international organizations because we are scared of the government’s reaction.”⁶² Another local organization pointed out, “Looking at the laws here, if you make too much noise, they (government) will make an excuse to shut you down.”⁶³  A church official in one of the towns said, “If the government hears that we are assisting people with food or shelter, it may think we are working against them.”⁶⁴

The government’s obstruction of international humanitarian assistance contravenes the U.N. Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, which specifically establish the right of “international humanitarian organizations and other appropriate actors…  to offer their services in support of the internally displaced” and call on the national authorities to consider such offer in good faith without refusing it arbitrarily, “particularly when authorities concerned are unable or unwilling to provide the required humanitarian assistance.”  The Principles further urge the authorities concerned to “grant and facilitate the free passage of humanitarian assistance and grant persons engaged in the provision of such assistance rapid and unimpeded access to the internally displaced.”⁶⁵

Protection and assistance to vulnerable groups ignored

Six months after the evictions, the government has made few attempts to provide, or facilitate the provision of priority humanitarian assistance to a significant proportion of displaced vulnerable groups including children, female-headed households, chronically ill and elderly persons. The majority of vulnerable individuals interviewed by Human Rights Watch said they had received little or no humanitarian assistance from the government.⁶⁶

Although international humanitarian organizations, such as IFRC and community-based NGOs have tried to provide humanitarian assistance to displaced vulnerable groups, the government’s refusal to allow access to those living in the open significantly hindered their operations and limited the level of assistance.

The U.N. Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement put special emphasis on the government’s responsibility to ensure that assistance is available to vulnerable groups such as widows, children and chronically ill persons who may have difficulty obtaining food, shelter and other items.⁶⁷ The government’s failure to assist vulnerable individuals, including women and children, also violates its obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights which calls on states to ensure “the protection of the rights of women and the child as stipulated in international declarations and conventions,”⁶⁸ and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child.⁶⁹ 

Persons living with HIV/AIDS

In June 2005, Human Rights Watch documented how Operation Murambatsvina disrupted access to medical treatment for a significant proportion of persons living with HIV/AIDS. As of October, many displaced persons living with HIV/AIDS were still unable to access anti-retroviral, tuberculosis or opportunistic infection treatment. Local NGOs working with those living with HIV/AIDS have been unable to trace or reach many of their clients and informed Human Rights Watch that the government had made no attempts to locate their displaced clients and facilitate access to treatment, food and shelter for those living with HIV/AIDS.⁷⁰

According to an independent countrywide survey of the impact of Operation Murambatsvina carried out by ActionAid International Southern Africa Partnership Program (SAPP-Zimbabwe) in six urban areas of Zimbabwe in August 2005, less than 5 percent of households with people living with HIV/AIDS, who were homeless or lost their livelihoods due to Operation Murambatsvina, were receiving support.⁷¹ This support was mainly from community based organizations such as churches. According to ActionAid, support from the government of Zimbabwe was almost non-existent.

A local NGO working with orphans and those living with HIV/AIDS in Victoria Falls told Human Rights Watch that 371 out of their 700 chronically ill clients had lost their shelter as a result of the evictions and had no place to stay. According to the NGO, their clients have not been receiving food for two months, and the government has done nothing to assist them.”⁷² The director of an NGO working with people living with HIV/AIDS in Greater Harare also told Human Rights Watch that the government has done nothing to assist their clients displaced by the evictions.”⁷³ 

The IFRC reported that a large number of National Red Cross Home-Based Care clients, including orphans and HIV/AIDS patients in Matabeleland and Mashonaland provinces, were displaced from their contactable residential addresses. According to the IFRC, a significant proportion of those who went to the rural areas were unable to benefit from Home Based Care services and were in desperate need of food, medication and other basic amenities.⁷⁴

A representative of a Harare-based, international humanitarian NGO informed Human Rights Watch that they were particularly concerned about the impact of the lack of shelter on the condition of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis patients living in cold dusty conditions, as well as about the dispersal of patients who had been receiving anti-retroviral, tuberculosis or opportunistic infection treatment.⁷⁵

A number of people living with HIV/AIDS also told Human Rights Watch that due to the loss of livelihood they were no longer able to pay for their treatment. For example, “Priscilla Q.”, a widow, informed Human Rights Watch that she could no longer afford treatment for infections stemming from her HIV positive status:

As you can see, I am not well. I am HIV positive and now I have oral thrush. I went to the doctor and was given a prescription for the thrush but I can’t afford the medicine. At least when I was renting out the cottages I could afford the medicine but now I can’t. Most of my money now goes towards school fees for my children and not medicine for myself. I have no hope now. I think I am going to die soon. I am very sick so I can’t go to any rural area. I am too sick to travel that far.⁷⁶

Female-headed households and mothers of children with disabilities

The terrible plight of widowed women and mothers of children with disabilities displaced by the evictions has not improved since Human Rights Watch’s previous report on their situation in the aftermath of Operation Murambatsvina.⁷⁷

The director of a local organization working with widows and orphans told Human Rights Watch that, based on the organization’s analysis there are many widows who lost their homes or livelihood as a result of the evictions.⁷⁸ The director said that the widows have received no assistance from the government, and her efforts to draw the government’s attention to their problems proved futile.⁷⁹ Five members of the organization, all of them HIV-positive widows with children, confirmed to Human Rights Watch that their families have not been in any way assisted by the government after they lost their shelter and means of survival as a result of Operation Murambatsvina.⁸⁰

Mothers of children with disabilities residing in the urban areas of Harare have also been heavily affected by Operation Murambatsvina. Before the operation, many of these families were able to access physiotherapy and other forms of treatment for their children, as the women were renting out cottages and selling vegetables to earn their living.

As a result of Operation Murambatsvina, some of these families lost their livelihood and could no longer afford to pay for medical assistance for their children or even for transport to take their children for treatment. Many of the women and their children have been displaced and for months have been staying outside, in inadequate shelter, or in overcrowded conditions with minimal assistance, which had a detrimental impact on their children’s health. The families have received no assistance from the government. “Pamela Q.” who brought her son, suffering from cerebral palsy, to Harare City Hospital, told Human Rights Watch:

My son is suffering from diarrhoea and pneumonia… We were evicted from Mufakose four months ago. We now sleep at my uncle’s house with my son, on the floor in the corridor. It’s quite cold there and maybe that is why he is suffering from pneumonia. I have no money because I can’t sell vegetables anymore. I have received no help from anyone.⁸¹

The situation of women and children living in the government-recognized settlement, Hopley Farm, has been no less precarious, as they have been deprived of any means of survival and the assistance provided was extremely limited.  “Sandra T.” told Human Rights Watch that at Hopley Farm she and her nine-year-old son who has cerebral palsy have been staying in the open, with no shelter. Human Rights Watch interviewed her at Harare City Hospital where she brought her son suffering from diarrhea. She said:

[At Hopley Farm], we are sleeping out in the open. There is not enough water or proper sanitation there. There are no medical facilities and when someone gets sick we have to come all the way here. I think my son got sick because we have been drinking water from the Mukuvisi River.⁸²

Local women’s rights organizations also shared with Human Rights Watch their concern that displaced women and girls were also vulnerable to various forms of abuse and harassment including sexual abuse and domestic violence. As a representative of one of the women’s organisation told Human Rights Watch:

I am disturbed by the current status of women which has worsened [after the evictions]. If a family doesn’t have enough resources, violence will be there and more often it is the woman who suffers. My fear is that the younger girls may go into prostitution to earn a living.⁸³

“Mary M.,” a widow from Mutare, and her four children have no roof over their heads.
Just days before Human Rights Watch’s visit local police came and burnt the plastic sheeting,
which they used to cover their beds and belongings.  © 2005 Human Rights Watch

Children

The report of the U.N Special Envoy on the impact of the evictions estimated that up to 223,000 children were directly affected by Operation Murambatsvina.⁸⁴  In the aftermath of the operation, the government has provided little to no assistance to displaced children living with their parents or guardians, children separated from their families, or child-headed households.

In some cases, the lack of assistance could have caused particularly grave consequences. Thus, one international humanitarian NGO reported that it had documented seven cases of severe malnutrition in under-five year olds displaced by the evictions, and three of the children died after referral.⁸⁵

Many of the displaced children face significant hurdles in continuing their education. A survey on the effects of Operation Murambatsvina by ActionAid found that overall, 22 percent of children who had been attending school before Operation Murambatsvina, dropped out because of the evictions.⁸⁶ The displacement has also further hindered parents’ ability to pay for schooling, causing more children to drop out of school. In addition, children have moved further away from their schools and many parents told Human Rights Watch that they could no longer afford to pay the transport costs for their children to go school.

Many witnesses interviewed by Human Rights Watch confirmed that the families had to discontinue their children’s education due to their displacement and inability to pay the fees. For example, “Mary O.”, a mother of eight, said that she and her husband could no longer afford to send their children to school as the family had been displaced, and both parents lost their jobs.”⁸⁷ Another witness, “Tafadzwa U.”, also told Human Rights Watch that his seventeen-year-old brother stopped going to school after the house where the four orphaned siblings used to live had been destroyed during Operation Murambatsvina and they could no longer afford to pay the school fees.”⁸⁸

Restrictions on economic activities

The ability to generate income is particularly important for IDPs who will otherwise be dependent on humanitarian assistance.⁸⁹

With unemployment in Zimbabwe at 80 percent,⁹⁰ most of those displaced by Operation Murambatsvina worked in the informal sector. Many lost their livelihoods when the government destroyed market stalls and other informal sector businesses as well as their homes.⁹¹ Yet, not only has the government of Zimbabwe made few attempts to mitigate the effects of the loss of livelihood to those displaced by the evictions, it has worsened their plight by preventing them from engaging in informal business activities.

Informal traders displaced by the evictions in different areas of Zimbabwe told Human Rights Watch that police routinely harassed and arrested them, and took away their wares if they were caught selling items at the informal markets or by the side of the road.

For example, “Chipo D.”, from one of the townships in Harare told Human Rights Watch, “I used to sell vegetables as a market vendor but my stall was destroyed. I still try to sell the vegetables but the police arrest me and make me pay a fine.”⁹² Another witness said:

People whose market stalls were demolished have come back and are selling their vegetables in the open. Police come about five times a day to harass the vendors, and take their goods for free. One woman got tired of police harassment and threw stones at the policemen three weeks ago. She was arrested by the police, and I don’t know what happened to her.⁹³

Other witnesses told Human Rights Watch that having lost their trade as a result of Operation Murambatsvina, they do not dare to start selling goods again, fearing government retribution, and can hardly make ends meet. “Theresa U.”, a single mother of four from Mutare, who lost both shelter and livelihood as a result of Operation Murambatsvina, told Human Rights Watch, “We were vegetables sellers, sellers of small wares and these have now stopped. We are banned from vegetable selling. We are now relying on relatives and friends who come by and give us something.”⁹⁴

Involuntary relocation to rural areas

The testimony of many interviewees leaves no doubt that the government is making a concerted effort to coerce the displaced staying in the cities and towns across Zimbabwe to move to the rural areas.⁹⁵ The methods used to compel the displaced to move range from overt police harassment and forcible relocation to denial and manipulation of humanitarian assistance.

On a number of occasions in recent months, Zimbabwe police harassed the IDPs staying in the urban areas, pressuring them to move to the rural areas.

 In one case, after trying to coerce the displaced into moving to rural areas, the police forcibly relocated several hundred IDPs from Mbare, Harare to a holding camp at Hopley Farm. On October 2, policemen with dogs came to an informal IDP settlement in Mbare and threatened more than 250 men, women and children with physical violence and destruction of their property if they would not leave the area by October 5. Lawyers from the organization Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) managed to file an urgent application with the High Court preventing their further displacement.⁹⁶

However, several weeks later, a representative of ZLHR informed Human Rights Watch that on November 14 at 2.00 a.m., Harare City Municipal Workers, accompanied by the police, forced the families onto trucks and took them to Hopley Farm in contempt of the High Court order.⁹⁷

Several displaced families staying in the open in makeshift shelters in Mutare also told Human Rights Watch that on September 26, 2005, police visited them and told them to leave the area. “Theresa U.,” recounted the experience:

Because of the oncoming rains, we put plastic covers [over our belongings], but last Monday [September 26] the local authorities sent the police to take our covers and burnt them. They also burnt our beds and wardrobes. They said, ’We don’t want you squatting here.’ They told us to go back to the rural areas.⁹⁸

The police also threatened the owner of the land on which the families were staying, with eviction if he did not force the families to leave.⁹⁹

Over a hundred IDPs staying in the rubble of a destroyed market place in a high-density suburb of Harare, also told Human Rights Watch about the brutal methods police used trying to force them to leave for the rural areas. The witnesses said:

We are constantly harassed by the police – sometimes they beat people up; the last time they came three weeks ago. They said, ‘you must go to your remote rural areas.’ We say, ‘We can’t go, there is no land,’ besides many of us do not have a rural home to go, our parents were from other countries – Malawi, Zambia, Mozambique.¹⁰⁰

Many IDPs told Human Rights Watch that fearing police harassment and further displacement they have resorted to hiding during the day and only returning to places where they found temporary shelter at night.  

The government’s denial of shelter, food and other basic assistance to the internally displaced as well as restriction of their economic activities which has essentially left the IDPs with no means of support, have also forced some of the displaced families to move to the rural areas.

Moreover, representatives of a U.N. agency providing food assistance and church officials involved in food distributions indicated to Human Rights Watch that the government has been using food aid to compel the relocation to rural areas. Thus, a representative of a local church in one of Harare’s provinces told Human Rights Watch that the government only allowed the church to provide food packages to families who have agreed to move to the rural areas, while at the same time prohibiting food distributions to other IDPs. The representative was convinced that this tactics has been deliberately used by the government to force the displaced to leave the urban areas.¹⁰¹ 

While compelling the relocation to rural areas, the government made no effort to ensure that basic assistance would be available to the displaced after the relocation, or even to track down those who chose to move. Church officials who were assisting the displaced with relocation told Human Rights Watch that many of the displaced were unaware of poor conditions in the rural areas, and some have come back to the cities after seeing “that the situation in the rural areas was very bad.”¹⁰²

In its September report on the impact of the evictions, Human Rights Watch highlighted the problems victims of the evictions face in the rural areas, including lack of access to proper medical facilities, lack of land to cultivate and live on, and severe food shortages.¹⁰³

These concerns were confirmed during a Human Rights Watch visit to a rural area in Matabeleland South. The villagers complained about difficult conditions in the area. One of them said, “The hospital is far away and people have to travel to Victoria Falls to get medical help. Food is scarce and there are no international organizations which come here to provide food aid or other assistance.”¹⁰⁴ The village headman also said that the village had no means to assist the people relocating from the towns, and there was no land available for them to cultivate.”¹⁰⁵

“Ellen F.”, a mother of two who was evicted from Victoria Falls and later moved to the village, told Human Rights Watch that her family had to stay in a local pastor’s house, as there was no land in the village where they could have built their own house. “Ellen F.” said that while she used to make her living by selling vegetables in the city, there was no work for her in the village. She also found it very difficult to get medical assistance for her two children, both of whom suffer from asthma, as there were no medical facilities in the area.¹⁰⁶

By coercing people to relocate to the rural areas, the government of Zimbabwe has also ignored the fact that many of the displaced do not have rural homes to return to, as some were born and brought up in the urban areas and have no relatives in the rural areas, and others are of foreign origin.

Involuntary relocation constitutes a serious violation of the rights of IDPs. The U.N. Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement reaffirm the rights of IDPs to liberty of movement and freedom to choose their place of residence.¹⁰⁷ The government cannot force or compel the relocation of the internally displaced against their will, and has the duty to establish conditions, as well as provide the means, which allow internally displaced persons to return voluntarily, in safety and with dignity, to their homes or places of habitual residence, or to resettle voluntarily in another part of the country.¹⁰⁸

Forcible displacement also infringes on the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose one’s residence as guaranteed in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.¹⁰⁹ Forcible displacement also violates the right to protection from interference with one’s home, and may violate the right to an adequate standard of living (including adequate housing), set forth in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).¹¹⁰

Denial of access to legal remedies

The U.N. Special Envoy report concluded that during the evictions campaign the government of Zimbabwe has “breached both national and international law,” and that it should compensate the victims for illegally destroyed property as well as redress the suffering caused by the evictions and their aftermath. The report further called on the government to identify and prosecute “all those who orchestrated this catastrophe.”¹¹¹

Despite these clear recommendations, and its international obligations to provide effective remedies to victims of human rights violations under the ICCPR and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, the Zimbabwean government has not carried out any inquiries into the manner in which the evictions were carried out or investigated reports of use of excessive force by the police during and after the evictions. ¹¹²  In addition, no steps seem to have been taken to change the legislation to provide for improved housing rights and security of tenure for those in danger of eviction and displacement.

The government also failed to provide access to effective legal remedies to the victims of Operation Murambatsvina. According to lawyers from the organization Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR), the courts, run by politically compliant judges, have been extensively using delaying tactics in processing cases related to Operation Murambatsvina. In addition, few people were inclined to demand compensation as they did not believe that they would receive justice or effective remedy. ZLHR staff believed that the vast majority of the victims are unlikely to receive any compensation or other forms of reparations from the government.¹¹³