The Zimbabwean Constitutional Court as a key site of struggle for human rights protection: A critical assessment of its human rights jurisprudence during its first six years

Several African countries have recently adopted fairly democratic constitutions. An emerging trend in these constitutions is the establishment of constitutional courts or councils as key institutions for human rights protection. However, adoption sometimes not complemented by democratisation politics, autocratic governments remain place after a new constitution. When this happens, countries' become sites protection struggles, many turn to public interest litigation an effort protect rights. Using Constitutional Court Zimbabwe case study, article investigates behaviour and their reliability institutions, when they operate under political conditions. The makes use systemic level factors theory conceptual framework analysing jurisprudence Court. It identifies trends manner which has handled high-level profile cases that involve interests ruling party government. These are majority ignored Constitution delivered judgments meant government from certain risks. In few appeared be bold enough enforce Constitution, but closer analysis reveals decided because reconfigured strategy internal factional contestations required permitted make those decisions. concludes performance thus far paints gloomy picture its utility guardian current regime concerned.