Thank you - I've seen the same document (or a translation thereof) previously. That is the reason I was initially so sure of it being forbidden. The wording is strong and sweeping, but it seems to me that the intent is banning arms exports - not to stop people from going hunting.
"To prevent internal repression within Zimbabwe, the decision and regulation prohibit:
- the sale, supply, transfer or export of arms and related materiel of all types for use in Zimbabwe, including
- weapons and ammunition
- military vehicles and equipment
- paramilitary equipment and spare parts"
One could argue that traveling with a hunting rifle IS indeed export (or possibly 'transfer' - not 100% sure how that word is to be understood), but that implies that you are planning on leaving the rifle in Zimbabwe, or letting somebody else use it to 'internally repress' the locals while you're there.
Reading the embargo text while wearing my common logic glasses, it is clear that it does not really apply to the visiting hunter, unless s/he is planning to;
- sell the rifle (sale),
- lend it to someone (supply),
- give it to someone (transfer?) or
- export it (which, I guess, is either of the first three, but involves a border-crossing).
An ordinary hunting rifle is usually a poor tool for police/military use, and more so the larger the calibre. A pump-action shotgun may be more 'dual use', and maybe that is why the text does not make distinctions between firearms for hunting and policing. There are grey areas, simply.
Perhaps the officials here are also wearing common logic glasses, and see things for what they are, but maybe they (and I) are wrong, and it IS really the intent of the embargo to stop all movement of firearms across the Zimbabwean border, regardless of the intended use.
Unfortunately I do not know if this has ever been tried in the courts here, which would of course set a precedent of how things are to be interpreted.