Amnesty International
Five African migrants shot dead crossing Egypt-Israel border
Amnesty International supporters are sending appeals to the Egyptian authorities expressing concern that three men and two women have been shot dead by Egyptian security forces since the beginning of 2008, as they attempted to cross the border into Israel.
On 19 February Egyptian security forces shot dead a Sudanese man trying to cross into Israel bringing the total to five. Security officials said 50-year-old Ermeniry Khasheef was shot in the back after he ignored orders to stop as he attempted to cross barbed wire near the border town of Rafah, in the north of the Sinai Peninsula.
Three days earlier, an Eritrean woman, Mervat Mer Hatover was shot dead after she ignored orders to stop as she was attempting to jump over the barbed wire in the El Kuntilla border region, in south-eastern Sinai Peninsula.
According to security officials, Mervat Mer Hatover and her two daughters – aged eight and 10 – had been among a group of Africans who paid smugglers to help them cross into Israel. All were arrested. The military prosecutor has reportedly ordered an autopsy on Mervat Mer Hatover but no proper investigation is known to have taken place.
An Amnesty International spokesperson said:
‘We’re concerned that the Egyptian border police are disregarding their duty in opening fire on people who may have in no way presented an immediate threat to life.
‘The international standards are clear: if lives are in immediate danger, then lethal force is permissible. If not, it is not.
‘Desperate migrants should not be at the mercy of border guards who disregard basic international standards over using their weapons.’
On 30 January two migrants from Ivory Cost were shot and killed trying to cross the border south of Rafah. According to the Egyptian security forces, a 22-year-old man and an 18-year-old woman bled to death before an ambulance could reach them. Six Eritreans and two Ethiopians were also arrested. On 19 January, another man from Ivory Cost bled to death after he was shot in the thigh at the border with Israel. A Sudanese and a Guinean were arrested.
Thousands of migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers, mostly from Sudan and Eritrea or other parts of sub-Saharan Africa, try to cross from Egypt to Israel each year. Their numbers have been increasing since 2007. In July 2007 alone, over 230 mostly Sudanese migrants were arrested trying to cross into Israel without official permission. According to the UNHCR some two to three million Sudanese nationals live in Egypt; most of them are migrants but they also include thousands of refugees who have fled persecution in Sudan. Israel has put pressure on Egypt to reduce the flow of people crossing the border into its territory without authorisation.
Amnesty supporters will be calling on the authorities to order a thorough and impartial investigation into the killings in line with UN principles.
By Agere Mekuria
Unlike most of the US presidential elections in recent past, this one is characterized by many firsts (first woman, first black, etc…) and, at least on the democratic side, the presidential race has managed to stir up fervor and enthusiasm for the election process as well as the candidates themselves. Adding to the litany of firsts, for the first time, many in the Ethiopian-American community, having experienced the disappointment and witnessing the inefficacy of the fractured political system of their country of origin and frustrated by the outcome of the sham elections in 2005 and the disheartening developments since then, appear to have caught this bug of enthusiasm in spite of and/or as a result of this frustration. They are starting, in greater numbers, to be actively engaged in their adopted country’s political process. Adding to this enthusiasm is the increasingly successful campaign and candidacy of Senator Barack Obama, a fellow hyphenated American of African Heritage. Owing to a large extent to the Obama candidacy, Ethiopian-Americans are discussing these elections in coffee shops, restaurants, living rooms, kitchens and on websites that previously only discussed matters directly pertaining to Ethiopia.
As a community, the Ethiopian-American community is a relatively young one. When compared to other hyphenated American communities (with the understanding that most, if not all, American communities are hyphenated) its demographic presence is small and its roots in the American experience are not as deep. As such, its enthusiasm, loyalties, and ardor are reserved for the identity that precedes the hyphen (Ethiopian) and not for the one that follows it (American). For many in the community, these identities remain at odds with each other and the reconciliation of these identities did not appear to be eminent.
However, the optimism and hope filled message of the Obama campaign coupled with witnessing first hand and with seasoned eyes the machinations of a relatively functional democratic system seem to have done the trick in finally getting Ethiopian-Americans in larger numbers from the role of mere spectators and prognosticators to active participants in this sacred process. Having said that, there are those in this community that still profess and act as if their US citizenship is a citizenship of convenience, devoid of the due loyalty and adherence to country and constitution sworn to under oath. The only evidence and act of their citizenship is limited to their obtaining their American passport, offering it protection in the recesses of a locked drawer and annually flashing it with pride at an Ethiopian customs clerk and offering it with supplication to an American one upon re-entry. These same members of the Ethiopian-American community mistakenly believe that truly donning the cloak of their American citizenship would imply disloyalty and abandonment of their ancestry, heritage, and homeland. On the contrary, an Ethiopian-American community that fully embraces its citizenship and civic responsibility can work for issues that are important to the Ethiopian-American community at large and Ethiopia and Ethiopians as well. As seen recently, an organized Ethiopian-American community lobbying on behalf of HR 2003 (the Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act of 2007) was able to lend much needed support for the passage of this bill in Congress.
Given the fact that many Ethiopian-Americans will undoubtedly spend a majority of their lives in their adopted homeland, bear and raise their children, pay taxes, and otherwise invest in their futures here in the US, it is imperative that they reconcile the dichotomy that exists between their Ethiopian and American identities. With the realization that their dual identity is a source of strength and a force for change, Ethiopian-Americans, like many other hyphenated Americans, can mobilize and unite to further the causes that are near and dear to them. Moreover, this voluntary disenfranchisement and apathy, on the part of many in the community, will have adverse repercussions for the large number of second generation of Ethiopian-Americans being born and raised here who will be forced to draw from a vacuum to find examples of responsible citizenship, civic duty, and social altruism.
With this in mind, it is incumbent on all members of the Ethiopian-American community that they exercise their right to vote, engage actively as conscientious citizens in the American political process and lend their unique voice for the betterment of the society in which they live and for the world at large. Having this opportunity to enjoy the inalienable rights afforded by the constitution and bill of rights and the sacrifices of many in securing these rights, it would be a sad dereliction of duty to the community and to those all over the world that these rights have eluded for centuries, to apathetically avoid direct engagement in the political process and have a say in the future direction of this country and the world. As the renowned anthropologist, Margaret Mead noted, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has”. By choosing to be engaged, involved, and energized, the Ethiopian-American community can be a partaker in the American dream and share in shaping the mosaic that is the American experience.
____________________
Agere Mekuria can be reached at [email protected]
By Melaku Tegegne
Freedom of Speech is probably the phrase with the longest tradition. Freedom of speech addresses the ability of individuals to communicate ideas and information without interference with the state. When we talk about interference by the state as a legal notion, we are referring to the imposition of prior restraint.
Freedom of speech has typically meant the freedom to publish – publish being used here in its widest possible meaning, as writing, speaking, printing, or broadcasting ideas and information – without prior restraint imposed by the state.
In 1832, McKenzie King, a former Primer Minister of Canada, wrote: “Remember that wherever the press is not free, the people are poor, abject, degraded, slaves, that the press is the life, the safeguard, the very heart’s blood of a free country.”
Article 29 of the Ethiopian Constitution provides:
1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without any interference.
2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression without interference. This right shall include freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing, or in print, in the form of art, or through other media of his choice.”
Unfortunately, this well-intentioned constitutional right has been muzzled and effectively gagged since the National Election for Parliament in 2005 and the turbulent period that followed as a result of the popular demonstration of the people of Addis Ababa against the regime. The muzzling of the Ethiopian press by the Meles regime has been well illustrated by the symbolic handcuffed presentation made by Kifle Mulat, my former colleague and president of the Ethiopian Free Press Journalists Association. About Kifle Mulat’s has played a prominent role in the struggle for the restoration of press freedom in Ethiopia.
Twists and Turns in the Press Freedom
When I was a high school student in Addis Ababa, during the last years of Emperor Haile Selassie, there was a relative period of freedom of the press. Although there was a strict censorship by the government officials on the press, and sometimes rebuke and suspension of some vocal journalists against the government, there was not a single journalist who was imprisoned or killed as is a common phenomenon now. The late veteran journalist author, Berhanu Zerihun, the other veteran editor in chief and playwright Negash Gebre Mariam and the other prolific writer and head of the Press Department, Mulugeta Lule, had told the people of Ethiopia on several occasions that there was no severe repression by the government of the Emperor.
Also in that relative period of press freedom, many books, dime novels, some magazines, and private newspapers were published. The majority of the authors of these works were the journalists themselves. Berhanu Zerihun was one of them. The other rising star was journalist author Bealu Girma, who was later murdered by the security agents of dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam, because of his critical writing against both the officials of the regime and the totalitarian system prevalent in the country then. Bealu, in his last book “Oromai”, predicted the separation of Eritrea. This angered the dictator Mengistu and his spin doctors and led them to a paranoid decision to execute the beloved author.
In short, the period of Emperor Haile Selassie, the last emperor of Ethiopia, can be characterized as a period of relative freedom of the press and people were much happier than now.
The Derg Era
I can write many pages, if readers don’t get bored, about the press freedom during the Derg (the military government) of 1974-1991. I worked in two departments, the Ethiopian Television and the Ethiopian Press, as an assistant cameraman and a journalist for 12 years. It is quite a long time. The veteran journalist, prolific writer, and Head of the Ethiopian Press Department, Mulugeta Lule; my roommate, the vibrant sports writer and editor, Abraha Belai, now the Ethiomedia webmaster, were among the journalists with whom I worked.
Coming to the main point, press freedom during the Derg military regime was not only highly controlled but was also framed along socialist ideology and politics. There was not an iota of freedom of conscience for the journalists. We had no right to freely express our opinion, sentiments, or ideas. When I used to write feature articles, most often I was told by the editor in chief or by one of the senior editors to include certain points in the article that would reflect the ideology and policy of the government. Hence, the press was guided and controlled so much so as not to open any conduit for contrary ideas.
On the other hand, the period of the military government was characterized as a favourable period for translation works and some original works. Many young translators and writers had cropped up in that period. In this regard, the censorship was loose. Even many works of Sydney Sheldon, a well known author for romantic books, were let loose and sold in tens of thousands in the capital city and in some major urban areas of the country.
Contrary to this happy development, however, all the rank and file journalists were not allowed to read international magazines and newspapers such as Time, Newsweek, International Herald Tribune, the Washington Post, and the New York Times. All these magazines were always meant for the “eyes” of the high officials of the regime and department heads at the Ministry of Information. It seems that they had a fear that bad news would leak out to the public if the magazines or newspapers were allowed to be read by ordinary journalists.
To sum up, the period during the military regime was not good for press freedom or the media (there were no private newspapers, radio, or TV stations) but was good for fictional and non-fictional works, mainly imported books. As it was also a war period, we journalists had a strong fear for our lives and for our daily livelihoods. I, for one, spent 12 years of my young adulthood as a journalist in that particular period. However, when I look back on that period, sometimes I tend to think that the job I had done was not only dangerous but thankless as well. There was no freedom of expression and the whole exercise was a futile one for it has not satisfied the interests of anybody and the writer himself.
The Last Seventeen Years
In the last 17 years (1991-2008), I was away from journalism. I joined the Foreign Ministry in May 1991, twenty days ahead of the overthrow of the military regime by the rebel forces. I wanted to join the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which was considered to be a place of rare opportunity in a poor country like ours, mainly because I was a graduate of political science and international relations. Coupled with my journalistic training and work for a considerable number of years, my candidacy for a job at the Foreign Ministry received a quick response.
Hence, my first hand experience in journalism had shifted to foreign policy and diplomacy. I often focused on foreign policy matters, mainly the policy on neighbouring countries. The first years of the transition period were highly taxing. Everything had to start from scratch.
Coming back to the press issue, at the beginning of the transition period, the first years after 1991, the propaganda made by the journalists of the new regime was heavily laden with strong hatred against officials of the fallen regime and their cadres. This was not surprising. The surprising thing, however, was that the government controlled-press, radio, and TV stations often broadcast a hammered and systematized propaganda, tinged with race, against the Amharas. It was a subtle move by the leaders of the new regime, mainly crafted by the then President, now the Prime Minister. The catchwords were nefetegna, timkihitegna, that is to say “oppressors and chauvinists” – aimed at the Amharas, whose ancestors ruled the country for the previous 100 years.
The ideologists of this poisonous propaganda do not want to or cannot remember the 1000 year span of rule by the Sabeans and the Axumites, the ancestors of the PM and his ethnic group. Be that as it may, among some of the encouraging achievements made by the current regime before 2005, a heyday of the press freedom, was the annulment or the cancellation of censorship and permit for the establishment of private newspapers and magazines. After the transition period, newspapers and magazines mushroomed in the capital city due to the loose control by the government. However, practical problems cropped up regarding the functioning of the Ethiopian press. When many of the private newspapers and magazines became highly critical of the current regime and its political system, which is revolutionary democracy in name and tribal politics in action, the officials, including the Prime Minister, effectively began to deny information to the private press. This was unconstitutional. However, they ignored the articles in the Constitution and continued to practice restraint in a subtle way. In effect, it was back to square one, like the period in the military regime. Like dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam, the new dictator, Meles Zenawi, began giving press interviews to very few selected journalists to avoid controversial or tough questions. This is a common practice today.
In addition, the regime turned more focus on the government and the few party-controlled newspapers and their radio station, Radio Fana. The government had also established a parallel news agency of its own, namely Walta Information Centre, to compete with the Ethiopian news agency, the oldest agency which had a strong public trust.
Frustrated by such systematic blockade of information by the government officials of the regime, the private press journalists shifted their attention to focussing on stories based on hearsay, secondary sources of information, and the foreign media. They became more critical and the government came to loggerheads with the private press, and finally resorted to military solutions giving it a cover as legal measures. As is to be recalled, in the wake of the 2005 National Election and the public demonstration that followed, more than a dozen journalists were incarcerated along with the leaders of the main opposition party. Not only this, but also their computers, cameras and other equipment were illegally confiscated after their offices were broken into and ransacked.
Between 2005-2007, for nearly two years, no less than 20 journalists were incarcerated, many fled the country and still more lost their jobs thereby leading a hard life in the country. Kifle Mulat, my former colleague and President of the Ethiopian private press, is still outside the country leaving behind his family in Addis Ababa. This is a dark period for the press freedom in Ethiopia. As long as the current anti-press freedom, anti-democracy, racist regime stays in power with its outdated socialist political system, press freedom in Ethiopia won’t become a reality. Hence, the people of Ethiopia inside and outside the country should continue their peaceful struggle for the prevalence of press freedom which was nipped in the bud by Meles Zenawi and his “revolutionary democrats”, anti-press freedom thugs.
___________________
About the Author: Melaku Tegegne is a former Ethiopian journalist and diplomat, now a peace and democracy activist and can be reached at [email protected]. Please visit his blog, Issues in Focus, at http://issues-in-focus.blogspot.com/
