What lessons about formally accounting for past systematic and widespread human rights abuses can Zimbabweans learn from other societies that have undergone political transition? If there is a sociological and political case for a deliberative national process of remembering, dwelling, telling, uncovering, admitting, accusing, apologising, what international legal considerations at­ tend these questions or affect the forms that such processes might conceivably take? In 2008, and expressly in an endeavour to avoid the internationalization of criminal justice issues in a future Zimbabwe, the main opposition party have said that their transitional justice policy, if in government, would meet ‘international standards’.1 As part of the September 2008 agreement intended to break the political deadlock that followed the March 2008 elections, the parties have agreed to ‘give consideration to the setting up of a mechanism to properly advise on what measures might be necessary and practicable to achieve national healing, cohesion and unity in respect of victims of pre-and

* Max du Plessis is a Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law at the University of KwaZuluNatal, Durban; Senior Research Associate, Institute for Security Studies, Pretoria; Advocate & Associate Member of the Durban Bar.