Potential for Mukuyu-1's Results to be Above Market Expectations, page-181

Petere,
I think you have nailed it there.
Everybody (IVZ included) is keeping a low profile until after the election. It is caretaker lock-down mode on steroids.

I always get cancelled when I point out the risks of the true situation in Zimbabwe, but anyway here are some sobering words from Thandekile Moyo of Daily Maverick;

Zimbabwe’s ruling party subjugates the country’s people so as to rule illegitimately and loot resources with impunity. This looting by individuals in Zanu-PF results in ‘unequal power and unequal life chances’ between the beneficiaries and the victims of corruption.
This is structural violence. It may not always be seen, but it is ever present.The three major types of violence, according to Johan Galtung, the founder of the discipline of peace and conflict studies and of the Peace Research Institute Oslo, are direct/personal, indirect/structural and cultural. They are usually interconnected and often manifest as the cause and effect of each other.
Zanu-PF has become an exponent of all of them.Direct violence is also known as physical and/or psychological violence. It is visible and intended. Examples include murder, torture and domestic violence. The perpetrators and victims are identifiable.Zanu-PF, the party that has ruled Zimbabwe since independence in 1980, has been notorious for personal violence since its creation in 1963. During the war of liberation, several incidents were recorded of the Zanu military wing (Zanla) massacring Zipra soldiers (Zapu). Zipra forces were also accused of violently recruiting people into the guerrilla movement.
After independence, Zanu perpetrated the worst crime known to man, genocide, against the people of Matabeleland. The opposition party, Zapu, had won all but one seat in Southern Zimbabwe and this threatened Zanu’s one-party state ideology. As punishment for voting for Zapu, Zanu unleashed mass personal/physical violence on civilians in Matabeleland and parts of the Midlands. This we call Gukurahundi. To end the genocide, Zapu capitulated and agreed to merge with Zanu to form a one-party state.
Since then Zanu has continued to use physical violence and threats of physical violence to subdue the population. Victims of the Gukurahundi genocide, and of other atrocities committed by the government of Zimbabwe against dissenters and opposition, have been incapacitated as they live with the threat of the return of physical violence.
This means that, while the genocide and other cycles of violence ended, the insecurity continues. The violence continues in a different form - structural violenceIs there anything more violent than waking up to the news that billions of US dollars have disappeared from circulation, only for citizens to be told their hard-earned money, in the banks and in various investments, has been replaced with worthless bond notes? This erosion of savings, investments and insurance has happened to Zimbabweans over and over again, caused by corruption and mass looting of resources. Zimbabwe’s ruling party subjugates the people of Zimbabwe so as to rule illegitimately and loot resources with impunity. This looting by individuals in Zanu results in “unequal power and unequal life chances” between beneficiaries of corruption and victims of corruption.
This inequality and social injustice is called structural violence. It is the type of violence that cannot be seen and its perpetrators and victims cannot be easily identified. It is embedded in the country’s institutions and structures. Because resources and power are unevenly distributed, basic necessities are available for some but not for others. The disparities in resource allocation and subsequently in income manifest as unequal access to healthcare, education and even power.
Those with access to resources can “buy themselves into power”, as seen in Zimbabwe’s elections where vote-buying is rampant.A child born to a Zanu-PF politician has access to the best healthcare, education, land and other resources, whereas a child born to a regular Zimbabwean has limited access to the most basic things. From birth, children from these two classes have “unequal life chances”. . . . .