ABSTRACT
This is a case study of the problematic relationship between the state as an institution that benefits from human rights abuse and the ICC as the Court of last resort. The ICC uses the law to solve political problems in the process of prioritising justice thereby giving primacy to punitive justice over peace. This is a demonstration of how states participate in oppressing their citizens instead of assisting them to get justice. The chapter demonstrates how efforts to bring atrocities committed in Zimbabwe before the Court were frustrated, not only by Zimbabwe but also by the United Nations Security Council whose members, for various reasons, are interested in what happens or does not happen in Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwe National Peace and Reconciliation Commission of Zimbabwe is presented as a façade meant to present a picture of a state willing to address human rights abuses. The effect of this Commission is interpreted as that of crowding-out other mechanisms given that the state cannot institute and run a Commission to investigate the atrocities which the state committed. By reporting to the state, which is the prime accused of human rights abuses, the Commission is open to abuse, politicisation, instrumentalisation and hiding and justifying atrocities.
