The acceptance and codification of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) contribute immensely to the remarkable achievements of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea as a packaged deal, and permeates many facets of the successful implementation of law of the sea today. The EEZ concept emerged predominantly to serve economic purposes in balance with preservation of traditional freedoms of the sea. On the doctrine of attribution of rights and freedoms, any matter reasonably connected with economic benefits will ground a derogation pro tanto from the traditional high seas freedoms, whereas the essential navigational and communications freedoms continue to operate to the extent that they are not incompatible with the EEZ. The compromised balance in the EEZ is re-ensured by the doctrine that guides the exercise of the rights and freedoms whereby States need to have due regard to one another. These two legal doctrines further guide the principles to resolve conflicts arising from the attribution of residual rights and the settlement of disputes among State parties. The application of these two legal doctrines has sufficient flexibility for States to maintain a dynamic balance on an ad hoc basis to accommodate the growing and changing needs of States.

Anyone who has been observing the activities of the ruling class – both in government and in business – can see that it is disorganised, and, when viewed in isolation, tactically incapable and unwilling to address even short-term crises, let alone a significant existential dilemma such as the climate crisis. A revitalised social movement could promote swift and equitable climate action: what it needs to do is to mobilise 3.5 per cent of the population – although, of course, whether this number is enough to address any particular world crisis is unknown.

When governments restricted travel and closed borders in efforts to control the COVID-19 pandemic, we had a preview of how the world will most likely respond to intense global heating. Nations in the Minority World will probably erect visible and invisible walls to stop refugees and migrants from the Majority World, who will have been forced to flee their homes because of climate impacts, from entering.

Zimbabwe’s longest election season span from the February 2000 referendum to the 2002 presidential election. In 2002, voters became wary and weary of violent elections. Politically motivated violence continued as Mugabe and Tsvangirai had their moment of reckoning as to who should be president of Zimbabwe. Over time, Mugabe become ever more dependent on violence and dictatorial methods, and less and less interested in the welfare of his people, treating Zimbabwe’s wealth and resources as rewards for loyal Zanu PF supporters, boasting that there was no vacancy at State House. A closer study of the incidence of election violence shows voter resilience amidst cyclical bouts of state-sponsored udlakela. Voter resilience in the ruling party and opposition showed the potential and capability of the electorate to recover from crises and shocks. Zimbabwe voter resilience revealed that no matter the number of violent disturbances Zimbabweans absorbed over time, they remained within a relatively similar political state domain without imploding. Voters in Zimbabwe were remarkably resilient, displaying abilities of self-organization under extreme periodic election stresses. They built capacity and adaptation in the face of election adversities without resorting to civil war.

From 2000 to 2008, election overload fatigued voters when the Zimbabwe government balloted citizens in six elections – an average of one election every fourteen months. The July 2013 election was also harmonised, ending the shaky MDC–Zanu PF coalition government. The election was preceded by a generally peaceful adoption of a new constitution on 16 March 2013. The constitution was a milestone achievement but a dead letter, stipulating that all security forces and government institutions, including the state media, must be impartial and that reforms on all freedoms must be implemented. However, as in the past, Zanu PF dragged its feet on the full implementation of critical reforms needed to improve the human rights environment and create conditions for democratic elections. Such pipe dream reforms included: police training; renouncing the use of violence; ensuring that the government fully and impartially enforced domestic laws in bringing all perpetrators of politically motivated violence to justice; freedom from harassment and intimidation; the respect for the rule of law; and full realisation of the rights to freedom of association and assembly, and the promotion of freedom of expression and communication.