A/HRC/44/50/Add.2 monitoring the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association despite its limited resources. The Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission has been accredited A status by the Global Alliance of National Human rights Institutions. 25. The Constitution stipulates the framework of the independent commissions supporting democracy and governs the activities of the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission and the National Peace and Reconciliation Commission, among other independent institutions. III. The exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly A. Legal framework 26. The legal framework regulating the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly has been characterized as restrictive and its implementation inherited from colonial times. The Law and Order (Maintenance) Act of 1960 was used as an instrument of repression to supress civil unrest as the liberation struggle intensified, leaving limited space for the exercise of this freedom. Although the Act was repealed in 2002 and replaced by the Public Order and Security Act, its provisions replicated many of the limitations imposed by the Law and Order (Maintenance) Act and its application was, more often than not, selective, abusive and misinterpreted, aiming to silence dissenting voices and heavily restricting the exercise of fundamental freedoms. 27. The right to freedom of peaceful assembly is a constitutional right regulated by the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act, which came into force in November 2019. Before concluding his visit, the Special Rapporteur raised his concerns10 with different authorities regarding the restrictive provisions contained in the legislation and he regrets that it was adopted without taking due consideration of them. 28. Under the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act, peaceful assemblies are regulated by the following provisions, which the Special Rapporteur considers worrying as they do not align with international human rights standards: (a) Section 7 requires conveners of public gatherings to give the local regulating authority advance notice of their gatherings. Failure to give notice will be a criminal offence rendering the defaulting convener liable to imprisonment. The information to be provided is particularly bureaucratic as it includes the anticipated number of participants in the gathering, the exact and complete route (for demonstrations), the number and names of marshals, etc.; (b) Sections 5 to 8 require advance notice to be given of all gatherings, leaving no room for spontaneous assemblies regardless of the number of individuals exercising the right. If 2 or more persons demonstrate in a street or public space, or conduct a procession, or if more than 15 persons hold a meeting in a public space, they will need to notify the regulating authority. There are no exceptions to allow demonstrations to be held in immediate response to matters of public concern. Section 8 allows the regulating authority to impose conditions on the holding of the gathering and even to prohibit the gathering if its convener objects. Failure to comply with any conditions imposed by the regulating authority will render the convener liable to imprisonment or to a fine; (c) Section 10 bans public gatherings close to Parliament, courts and places protected under the Protected Places and Areas Act; (d) Section 12 states that, if conveners fail to give the regulating authority notice of their gatherings, or fail to comply with the directives, notices or orders given by a regulating authority, they will be civilly liable for any damage, injury or death “occasioned by any public disorder or breach of the peace caused by the gathering”; 10 See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=25041&LangID=E. 5