Text of Presentation by Judge Wolde-Michael Meshesha, Vice-Chairman of the Inquiry Commission on Post-Electoral Violence

Mr. Chairman, I would have liked to come and make my presentation in person. I regret that I could not have made it.

Mr. Chairman, thank you for giving me the opportunity to share with you the work of the Inquiry Commission, which was set up to investigate the 2005 post-electoral violence in Ethiopia. I am particularly grateful for Congressman Donald Payne who initiated this briefing which I believe would help Members of Congress and friends of Ethiopian to understand the process which the Inquiry Commission followed to reach to its conclusions. It is also important what happened once the Commission completed its work. The Government of Ethiopia first attempted to suppress and then to revise the conclusions of the Commission.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, I want to tell you about my background so that you understand that members of the Commission came from different profession. I am a judge and Vice President of the Federal First Instant Court. The political crisis, which Ethiopia faced after the May 2005 parliamentary and regional elections, was marred by violence. There were protests, which resulted in violence in Addis Ababa and other parts of the country in June and November 2005.

As a result of the post-electoral crisis, many lives were lost, property was damaged and thousands of people were rounded up and detained in several remote places (military camps) without proper legal procedures. The manner in which the government handled the post election crisis was criticized. There was indeed intense international pressure on the government to set up an independent inquiry commission to look into the reaction of the security forces and the police. In response to internal and external pressures, the government enacted a law (Proclamation 478/2005), which established an independent inquiry commission. According to the proclamation, the Inquiry Commission was mandated to identify:

Whether the force used by the security forces was excessive or not;

Whether human rights in matters related to the problem was conducted in accordance with the constitution and the rule of law; and

Damage caused to life and property.

Moreover, in accordance with the proclamation, eleven members, including the Chairman and the Deputy Chairman, were appointed by Parliament as members of the commission. I joined initially the Commission as an ordinary member but after the resignation of the Deputy Chairman, I was appointed as Deputy Chairman of the Commission.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, The Commission, which was given this important task, faced serious problems before it even started its functions. Four out of the eleven members of the Commission tendered their resignation on the ground of health problems. This indeed shows the tense condition in which the Commission started its function. The remaining seven members of the Commission began their investigation at the end of January 2006. As the Commission found it difficult to pursue its task, it requested parliament to appoint new individuals in order to replace those who resigned. The newly appointed five members joined the Commission in March 2006.

The Commission, which earnestly began its activities after overcoming these hurdles, adopted code of conduct for members of the commission; voting procedure and a work plan. These were meant to help the Commission execute its tasks in an effective, transparent, and an impartial manner. The Commission also hired its own six investigators and twenty support staff, despite the suggestion of the Speaker of the House to use investigators who will be assigned to the Commission by the executive.

At the start of its work, the Commission gave a press conference and called upon the members of the general public, civil society institutions, the press and other institutions to provide any information relating to the violence. More importantly, the Commission called upon victims and families who lost their loved ones to come forward and give their testimonies. The Commission also approached different local communal institutions, which organize funeral services for urban dwellers to testify what they know about the post election violence. Moreover, the Commission interviewed those government officials who had direct and indirect connection with the incidents. Moreover, Commission members visited different prisons/military camps, which were used as detention centers during the crisis, and government hospitals. After a laborious effort, the Commission successfully concluded its investigation in June 2006.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, The next important task of the Commission was compiling and categorizing the data, which it collected as provided in the proclamation. At this stage of the work of the Commission there were some signs of uneasiness of some government officials. There was pressure on members of the Commission who were government employees. In order to minimize government intervention and pressure, the Commission decided to hold its final deliberations and decisions out of Addis Ababa. The Commission was thus moved to Awassa, which is the capital of the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples Region (SNNPR). In Awassa, the Commission used the office premises of the Supreme Court of the SNNRP. This was facilitated through the Chairman of the Commission, Frehiwot Samuel, who was also then the President of the SNNPR Supreme Court. In Awassa the Commission prepared the list of people who lost their lives (196) and those who were injured (763). It also confirmed from the data gathered the violation of the human rights of thousands of people who were rounded up from different regions.

After establishing the facts, i.e. death and injuries; and damages to property, the next task of the Commission was to decide on the crucial question of whether the government used excessive force. On the basis of the procedure of voting which we adopted initially when the commission started functioning, abstention was precluded. Before voting on the issue of excessive force every member of the Commission was required to comment on the findings of the Commission. Finally a vote was taken on the question of excessive force. The members of the Commission decide d eight to two (8-2) that the government used excessive force to control the protests. Because of the national and international significance of the investigation and also the demonstrated uneasiness of government officials about the findings of the Commission, members of the Commission agreed to document their findings on video and audio. Retrospectively speaking, putting on record the deliberations of the Commission and the voting was one of the wise decisions of the Commission. The video record clearly shows the decision of each member on the question of excessive force. In my humble opinion, this is a clear testimony of every thing that went wrong with the promises of rule of law; independence of the judiciary, and democracy in

Ethiopia. One can imagine the pressure in which members of the Commission were subjected to so that they would suppress the true findings of the Commission and present an illegal report to the Ethiopian people at the end of October 2006.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,

After the Commission gave its final verdict on the question of excessive force on Monday July 3, 2006, the Commission proceeded to transcribe its deliberation on paper and write its final report. The Commission had in fact decided to present its findings to the last session of parliament on July 7, 2006 before the beginning of summer recess. This was communicated to the Speaker of the House and the presentation of the findings of the Commission was tabled as an agenda item for the last session of the Parliament.

The next day, July 4, 2006 , members of the Commission began to write the final report on a computer on the premises of the SNNPR Supreme Court. The writing of the report, however, only proceeded till midday. After a lunch break the same day, electricity was shut off in the entire town of Awassa so that we would not continue to process the report on a computer and the compound of the SNNPR Supreme Court was swarmed by plain clothed security personnel. The effort of the Chairman of the Commission to use the standby generator in the compound of the court was not successful obviously because of the intervention of the security personnel. While we were stranded on the premises of the court, the Chairman of the Commission, Ato Frehiwot Samuel was summoned to the office of the President of the Southern Region to meet some ministers who were sent from the office of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi. The rest of us had to go to our hotel. Upon our return to the hotel in which we stayed for few days we learnt that it was also swarmed by plain clothed security personnel like the premises of the Supreme Court of the Southern Region.

The next day members of the Commission were told by the Chairman of the Commission that he was told by the representatives of the Prime Minister that we should not publish the report and if we proceed to publicize our findings we would face serious consequences. He also informed us that we were told to see Prime Minister Meles Zenawi at his office in Addis Ababa on July 06, 2006. Members of the Commission aware of the danger they were in, returned to Addis Ababa on July 05, 2006. On July 6, 2006 members of the Commission met the Prime Minister in his office. Mr. Zenawi who was obviously enraged by the conclusion of the Commission report sternly instructed members of the Commission to reverse their decision. He lectured us about our failure to consider the context in which force was used and ˜advised us to use the report of the Gambella Inquiry Commission as a template.

The Prime Minister also told us that if the Commission publishes its findings without revision, it would have serious implications for the country. As we were going to the meeting with the Prime Minister, we learned that the Speaker of the House, Mr. Teshome Toga had adjourned Parliament before the official date for the beginning of parliamentary recess, i.e. July 7, 2006 though the agenda for the presentation of the findings of the commission had already been published. The closing of the Parliament without receiving any report from the Commission was a deliberate contravention of the law as all the deadlines, which were given to the Commission by the Parliament, would have expired after July 2006. The action of the Prime Minister who ordered the members of the Commission to revise their report and the Speaker of the Parliament who prevented the submission of the report to Parliament not only violated the sanctity and legality of the Commission but also show the mismatch between the practices and the promises of Mr. Zenawi’s government about rule of law, transparency, and accountability.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,

The mandate of the Commission, which ended at the beginning of July 2006, could only be renewed by another parliamentary decision. The members of the Commission who were faced with these great difficulties contacted the Speaker of Parliament about their mandate. The Speaker told us to continue our work, revise the original decision on the basis of the instruction of the Prime Minister.

The members of the Commission who initially believed that the government was committed to the investigation process were left with two difficult choices, i.e. to revise the findings of the commission or flee the country and bring the genuine findings of the Commission, which the government was seeking to suppress to the world. Moreover, any activity of the Commission after July 7, 2006 was illegal as the Commission’s mandate has expired.

At this stage, I had known that I had to make a difficult choice. At the personal level the choice was between betraying my own conscience and fleeing out of the country with the genuine report by endangering my family and myself. After several nights of soul searching, I decided not to betray my own conscience and also the trust of several hundreds of people (victims and families of victims) who despite intense scepticism in the general public about the independence of the Commission gave their testimonies and shared their agonies sometimes by endangering themselves. That is why, despite all the risks it involved, I decided to flee, leaving my family behind in order to bring the findings of the Commission to the Ethiopian people and the international community.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Commission has overwhelmingly decided in its July 3, 2006 meeting that the security forces of the government used excessive force. The so-called report, which was released at the end of October, 2006 accused the victims for their own suffering is not only illegal but also shows the true nature of the regime in Addis Ababa. I am a judge by profession. There is one good legal principle which applies to the report which was officially released in Addis Ababa any evidence which solicited by force is inadmissible as evidence in a court of law and as such the report produced in Addis Ababa cannot be taken seriously, as the members of the Commission even those who voted on the July 3, 2006 deliberations were forced to sign on the report and appear before Parliament. The official report is indeed a clear testimony about the problem of rule of law and independence of the judiciary in my country.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Before the formation of the Commission, I was working as Vice-President of the Federal First Instant Court in Addis Ababa. I worked as a judge for 14 years believing that things would improve and the supremacy of the rule of law would gradually take root in my country whose people have suffered for many decades from lack of rule of law and state violence. But my experience as a member of the Commission starkly showed me not only the brutality in which the security forces of the government deal with any opposition but also utter lack of respect to the rule of law by officials of the government beginning from the very apex of the system.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,

For Ethiopia to move forward from the present standoff and to pave the way for rule of law and respect for human rights, those who were responsible for the unnecessary death of more than 196 people and the wounding of 763 people, should be held accountable. The members of the Commission, despite all the difficulties and believing that the work of the commission make important contribution to national reconciliation among the many political actors in Ethiopia. I also hope that the commission’s findings could lead to a serious reconsideration by the government about its methods of dealing with protestors and its political opponents. I still do hope that friends of Ethiopia who would like to see stability, peace, and reconciliation, and democratization would put the necessary pressure on the government in Addis Ababa for the official publication of the suppressed report and also seek ways in which those who were responsible for the death, injury and detention of innocent civilians would be held responsible.

I thank you for your attention.

Wolde-Michael Meshesha