ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia — Ethiopian government prosecutors yesterday asked for the death penalty for a former Norfolk State University professor and 37 other politicians and activists. They have been accused of inciting violence in an attempt to overthrow the government.
The court is expected to issue a sentence on July 16. The accused, who have chosen not to defend themselves, did not speak during yesterday’s session but will have a chance to do so during next week’s court session.
“They have not shown any sign of regret in the court, and they have not [accepted] the sovereignty of the court,” prosecutor Abraham Tetemke said during yesterday’s court session. “Therefore we request that they should be punished with capital punishment.”
Yacob Hailemariam, 63, began teaching at NSU about 20 years ago before taking early retirement to return to his native Ethiopia to run for parliament in its May 2005 election. The former business law professor was imprisoned in October 2005 after winning election to parliament as a pro-democracy opposition candidate.
Contacted by phone at her Virginia Beach home, Hailemariam’s daughter said yesterday she was shocked.
“It’s very upsetting,” said Seyenie Yacob, who had visited her father in an Ethiopian prison this year.
She said she had no means to contact her father yesterday. “We will have to wait until next Monday when the judges are going to say what they are going to do with the [sentencing] recommendation.
In a previous interview with The Times-Dispatch, Seyenie Yacob expressed confidence that other governments would persuade the Ethiopian government to drop its charges. That remains her hope.
“We’re hoping [the sentencing recommendation] will show to the international community how serious this is and maybe there’s something the international community can do, including the U.S. government.”
The prosecution said they felt the maximum penalty was appropriate for the leaders, who were part of a group of more than 100 people jailed for allegedly inciting violence after Ethiopia’s controversial May 2005 elections. Although there is a death row in Ethiopia, no one has been executed in at least eight years.
“They have attempted an outrage against the constitution and the constitutional order, and attempted to disintegrate the nation,” Tetemke said. “They have created violence and many people lost their lives. . . . This criminal act has caused a serious social crisis.”
After court adjourned, family members of the accused shuffled out silently, some wiping away tears.
Mulatu Teklu, 67, walked dazedly out of court after he learned that his youngest son, 32-year-old Yenene Mulatu, could die for his actions.
“I’m very sorry,” he said, shaking his head. “I’m very sorry.”
Others were more optimistic. Asrat Tassie, a former defendant and opposition politician who was among 25 defendants released from jail in April, said he was sure there would be a pardon.
In Washington, a State Department spokesman stopped short of criticizing yesterday’s recommendation.
“We call on the Ethiopian government and high court to take action in making a final sentencing determination, which is consistent with the greater objectives of bolstering the rule of law and promoting much-needed reconciliation,” said the spokesman, Sean McCormack.
Hailemariam is well-known in the international law community. He was lead prosecutor for the United Nations’ International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, which was created in 1995 to try those responsible for the killing of 800,000 people during ethnic massacres in 1994.
Norfolk State students have held rallies and created a Free Yacob Web site at www.freeyacob.com.
Times-Dispatch staff writer Lawrence Latané III contributed to this report.
An Ethiopian prosecutor’s seeking of the death penalty Monday for 38 opposition activists has drawn expressions of shock from Washington and outrage from human rights groups. The defendants have until Wednesday to present evidence to reduce their sentence. They have been jailed since November, 2005, refusing to defend themselves because they did not think they would get a fair trial. Author and human rights attorney Michael Clough calls those charges unwarranted. He says that Prime Minister Meles Zenawi cannot be seen allowing death sentences to be carried out in his country.
“It sounds to me like Meles has already laid out the terms. There will probably be some kind of sentence that would seem on the surface to be fairly harsh, but will then allow the government and Meles in particular to claim that he took a reasonable stand, and that he pardoned the leaders, despite their role in the violence,” he said.
The accused include a leading human rights defender, 76-year old Professor Mesfin Woldemariam, several journalists, two women, and leaders of the opposition Coalition for Unity and Democracy party (CUD). The defendants face charges of usurping the constitution, and a few are still confronted by the government with leading an armed rebellion against the state. Earlier treason and attempted genocide charges were dismissed as 28 other defendants were freed back in April because, observers say, the prosecution lacked a case. Clough says it’s highly unlikely that many defendants will agree to sign government-fashioned admission of guilt statements in exchange for being pardoned, as has been suggested in the weeks since the defendants’ June 11 conviction.
“It’s possible that there may be some way to work out some sort of a deal if they were to go through with a death sentence. In any of these cases, it would cause serious damage to their international standing, so I’m sure the government is looking for some sort of compromise. But given what’s happened so far, I’d be surprised if many of them (the defendants) were willing to agree to anything that amounted to an admission of responsibility for the violence, which was essentially perpetrated by the government,” Clough explained.
Prime Minister Meles Zenawi is on record as saying there will be no death sentences in these cases. But with prosecutors and perhaps a zealous judge determined to mete out penalties, Michael Clough says the Prime Minister needs to have a ready-made agenda to activate to keep outside opponents from discrediting him.
“I think Meles is one of the more astute political leaders in Africa, and it probably serves his interests to have the prosecutor calling for the death penalty, and then Meles trying to represent himself as a voice of reason. I think that the whole thing is a bit of a charade, because obviously, the only reason that these people are on trial in the first place, is because Meles Zenawi was embarrassed by what happened in the 2005 elections,” he said.
On Monday, US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack called on the Ethiopian government to make a final sentencing determination that helps bolster the rule of law and promotes reconciliation. Clough sees US policy goals in Ethiopia to be motivated by ends far beyond the State Department sentencing objectives put forth.
“The only reason the United States is not speaking out harshly against this is because of Ethiopia’s role as an ally of the United States in the war on terror and its involvement in Somalia. If this same thing happened in any country that the United States was not supporting, we would be denouncing it in the most extreme terms,” he said.
PRESS RELEASE
Ethiopian Women for Peace and Development
We members of the Ethiopian Women for Peace and Development are very much concerned about the fate of the opposition party leaders and members, civil rights activists and journalists who are in prison in Ethiopia. We appeal to all peace loving people in the international community to pay attention to the following recent developments in the country.
Few weeks ago, the high court convicted 43 leaders of an opposition party (Coalition for Unity and Democracy), human rights activists and journalists of committing outrage against the constitution order. Today, the prosecutor asked for the death penalty for these 43 prisoners. The political leaders, human rights activists and journalists were imprisoned since they protested against the government’s frauds in the 2005 elections. Amnesty International has acknowledged them as prisoners of conscious.
There were rumors, in the last few weeks, that the government might release the prisoners. We thought the release of the political prisoners will lead to a dialogue with the government and eventually for peaceful resolutions of the country’s political problems. However, our hopes were dashed when the Prime Minister refused to release them and decided that the court should handle their fate. It is widely known that the judiciary system in Ethiopia is not independent and the trial of these people has not been fair. Today, the prosecutor has asked for the death penalty and the court will decide on the 16th of July.
In consideration of the above current serious situation in the country, we appeal to the American public and the international community in general to urge the Ethiopian government to free the political prisoners without any preconditions. Unless the imprisoned political leaders and civil rights activists are freed, we believe that there will be great upheaval by the people that will create chaos and turmoil throughout the country and the region and the consequences will be costly.
The Ethiopian government has refused to reconcile with political opposition groups in the country despite the repetitive calls for peaceful dialogue by the oppositions groups. To bring peace and stability in Ethiopia, all political prisoners must be freed and negotiations with all oppositions groups that are based inside and outside of the country must start urgently. Peace can only come through dialogue and reconciliation. We appeal to all peace loving people in the world to support us in our effort to bring peace to Ethiopia.
EWPD is a non-partisan Ethiopian women’s peace organization created in 1991.
Ethiopian Women for Peace and Development (EWPD)
5505 Connecticut Avenue, #259
Washington, DC 20015
www.ewpd.info * [email protected]
A delegation from the Ethiopian Muslim Diaspora was recently in Ethiopia to meet face to face with the prime minister and other officials to address the plight of Ethiopian Muslims and hopefully find some solution. There is no doubt that the delegation was prompted with the best of intentions to take this journey sacrificing its time, energy and resources so that a means can be found for the Muslims to enjoy their freedom and equality side by side with rest of the Ethiopian population. But from what I have so far realized to be the crude reality of governance in Ethiopia, failure was written all over this mission because of the inability of the delegates to observe and properly analyze the politics of the governing body.
The mission of the delegation would have made sense if those who are wielding the political power in the land have respect for the rule of law, democracy and fairness. And no Ethiopian is ignorant of this reality since the Ethiopian media, in and out of the country, has exhaustively written on the nature of the ruling clique. The political reality of the land has been very vivid for sometime now unless one is cocooned in some remote island without any access to communication not to know what is going on. Is it rational to expect a fair and just resolution for the plight of Ethiopian Muslims from a government that has repeatedly shown its hatred and disdain for a segment that comprises as much as half the population? If it was a matter of ignorance on the part of the government with regard to the condition of the Muslims, one would extend the courtesy to educate and inform the rulers to make the right decisions so that the rights of the whole population is respected and protected under the law. But if we make the assumption that the government is ignorant of gross violation of rights faced by as much as half the population, did it earn its keep to govern or should we let it stay at its helm no matter what?
A case would have been made in defense of the rulers had it been a matter of carelessness or benign neglect concerning the protection of the rights of Muslims even though it is a stretch to imagine why a government should behave in such a manner. But the reality is hard to ignore and points directly to the governments as the main culprit in this whole political saga. All the blame rests squarely at the foot of the governing elite for the suffering the Muslims are undergoing in the country. But was this fact somehow lost on the delegation in its eagerness to find a solution when it presented its case to the rulers and appeal to their sense of “fairness” and “justice” that was not evident during its entire reign? If the delegation sincerely believes that the government is ignorant of the reality and would be willing to remedy the wrongs if it is presented with the facts, I will give them the benefit of the doubt and shall wait to see the outcome of this misguided adventure. But truth be told, I believe it is the delegation that is badly in need of knowledge on the basics of political consciousness to analyze the reality. I can see the ruling elites laughing at the members of the delegates as soon as they left their presence because of their political naiveté. Isn’t this whole episode akin to asking a criminal to be the judge of the very crimes he committed?
The age old system of divide-and-rule was the first commandment that was adopted by the TPLF as soon as it came to power. Since the TPLF was an ethnic organization totally composed of Tigreans, the leaders understood fairly early that they had to adopt the system of sawing discord among the different ethnic groups in order to rule the land since they represent a meager minority to have a full control. And that they did without fail. They adopted the system meticulously and created a social upheaval among and within the various ethic groups the negative effect of which is present to this day. In trying to project themselves as bearers of freedom and equality to the largely neglected and forgotten ethnic entities in the land, they implanted the seeds of hatred among the different groups and became spectators in the fights the ensued.
The TPLF extended that strategy of division within the Muslims by interfering in the internal affairs of the community and creating a body that is counter to the Muslims interest but diligently serving itself. And this is how the Ethiopian Muslim Supreme Council came into being; all along, it was a well though-out plan for the primary purpose of dividing the Muslims. Every Muslim in the land knows that the Council is a TPLF concoction that has become a main hindrance to the struggle of the community. And the delegation rightly understood how and for what purpose the Council was created and addressed the issue to the ruling clique to make some changes so as to make it more useful. But this is exactly where the twisted logic of the delegation stopped making any sense. Since it was the TPLF that created the Council in the first place to serve its purpose, like it did with many other ethnic groups, does it make any sense to ask the dictators to change it in order to serve the Muslims? Isn’t that counterintuitive? In the interviews that the leaders of the delegation gave following their trip, I have come to understand that during its meeting with Meles, somehow the delegation got the gut to ask Mr. Meles to make changes to the structure of the Council and he responded by saying it is the government’s policy not to interfere in the internal affair of the Muslim community. Although I do not believe it is a case of forgetfulness, it was an open secret that the Council was created by Mr. Meles and that the key figures are his henchmen who are obediently serving under his tutelage.
Although it is my sincere wish to see the demands the delegates presented to the authorities get their due respect and resolution to the benefit of the Muslims, I am not holding my breath to see anything of substance to come out of this misadventure. In the subsequent interview since their trip, some of the delegates were caught running their mouth on subjects that they have no knowledge or perhaps deliberately making-up false assumptions in an attempt to mislead the Muslims. In an interview that one of the delegates gave to the local media, he gave credit to the TPLF for all the “transformation” the country is undergoing and said it deserved to be in the seat of power because it fought for years while the rest of the Ethiopian population was sleeping. I am not quite sure on what basis they selected the members of the delegation, but this is a very bizarre point of view and I dare say this person has been in total hibernation for the last thirty years or lying to his very soul to entertain his new masters. This person does not have to go any further to debunk his careless statement than asking the majority of the Diaspora Ethiopians how they came into this land. The military junta killed, imprisoned and tortured untold number of Ethiopians and the lucky ones made it into every corner of the world. They were made to suffer for the very fact of challenging the rule of the junta as the Meles gang was doing the same thing against the military government in its effort to get the non-Tigreans out of Tgirai. Yes, it was an ugly fact of history that Meles and his gang were fighting to secede Tigrai from Ethiopia and they were not fighting to liberate the Ethiopian masses from the tyranny of the junta as the clueless delegate would have us believe. I can not imagine how anyone can be ignorant of this basic fact and be a part of a delegation to address the rights of those who are disenfranchised. If one is not familiar with one’s own history, he can play safe and keep his quiet, but to brazenly lie about a condition that is still vivid in the memory of millions of Ethiopians to appease a dictator in return for a wishful dream, that is a total sellout. And this very person is no better than Meles whom he is asking a favor from; in fact he is worse because he is speaking in the name of Diaspora Muslims and pretending to fight for a cause.
Of all groups of people who have been disorganized and lacking in political sophistication to play its role in the Ethiopian political landscape, the Muslims of Ethiopia seem to be at the forefront. The Tigrean gangs have formed a fake Muslim organization in the name of the Council and planted their lackeys to give orders and see it implemented in a flash. Loyal to their masters, the yes-men of the Council are the first in line in defense and support of Meles in all issues, big and small, contrary to the interests of the Muslims whom they were supposed to serve. Likewise, in a misguided attempt to influence the policy of the Meles gang, a delegation seemingly representing the Diaspora Muslims, met Meles and some of his gang, and came back to tell us that it was our mistake all along and not that of the regime for the predicament that we, Muslims, find ourselves in. All the struggle the Muslims have waged to gain their rightful place in the land was forgotten in a second when Meles spelled his cast on the group. Mr. Meles played a nice trick on the members of the delegation by lodging them in a nice hotel and letting them see the “wonderful” work he has been doing for Ethiopia, contrary to the “propaganda” they have been hearing while abroad. The delegation came back with the message of giving the Meles gang a chance and trying to portray it in a different light that the world has learned to see . Forgetting why they have embarked in this mission in the first place, some of the delegation members did not even realize that they have turned into the exact image of the Council they were opposing. This whole episode brings forth an important observation and we are obligated to ask; is this some kind of power struggle between the Council and the delegation to be in the favors of Meles? Are these two groups two sides of the same coin?
It is high time that Ethiopian Muslims should realize that we should not appease a dictator and seek favors from him to redress our rights, but we should organize and fight for everything that is rightfully ours. We should base all our moves on solid principles that does not infringe on the right of others. We should have the determination to oppose anything and everything that is counter to our rights and beliefs and stand to defend the truth no matter what. When the regime embarked on a misadventure of unjustly attacking our neighbors to avert the attention of the population from what is ailing the country, we should have shown our resolve and stood firm to say this is wrong. When the whole world is demanding the release of unjustly imprisoned opposition party members, we should have made our stand clear and made it known to the government. Whole groups of people have been killed, imprisoned, tortured, fled the country and we did not hear a word from the delegation or whom it is representing in defense of the defenseless. Upon their visit, some members of the delegation chose to see some selected projects of the regime to pass an overall judgment about the welfare of the country, but the truth of the matter is our country is it is next to last in all significant social and economic statistics of any world body worthy of its name. Disease, famine, poverty and all sorts of social ills have become a brand that we have been accustomed to be known. And when the Melees gang is confronted with these facts that anyone can see upon landing even in the capital city, a formulaic response of blaming the previous regimes might have currency for a couple of years, but it has been repeating it for the last sixteen years in case it might have acceptance over time. And the delegation did not bother to ask this pertinent question to the man who was responsible for what we are witnessing in our land.
If it is the belief of the delegation that the demands that it presented to the Meles gang can be achieved in the political climate that Meles is operating, time will tell, but history is not on our side. In order to achieve what is demanded by the delegates and much, much more, we need a free political atmosphere whereby all the demands of the population will be freely entertained and given its proper resolution. In due time, I am sure the members of the delegation will realize the proper form of struggle to realize their goals and prepare for that eventuality. In the meantime, I remind the delegation members not to hold their breath in anticipation of anything substantial to come out of their misguided adventure.
New York, July 9, 2007—A prominent broadcaster covering public reaction to a large-scale government security crackdown in the commercial district of the capital, Mogadishu, was raided four times over the weekend by Somali government troops, according to news reports and the National Union of Somali Journalists.
In four separate raids since Friday, troops searched the offices of Radio Shabelle, a leading independent station, according to the same sources. Troops searched for weapons, threatened staff at gunpoint, and disrupted live broadcasts, but the searches did not yield any weapons, journalists at the station told CPJ. Last month, authorities confiscated guns carried by the station’s security personnel after conducting a search, according to CPJ research.
The station had aired recent interviews in which merchants and local residents alleged abuses by joint Somali-Ethiopian military forces in and around Mogadishu’s main Bakara market, local journalists told CPJ. Authorities launched a massive security sweep of the market last week in response to a spate of deadly attacks in the area, according to news reports.
Thousands of people have been killed or wounded in grenade attacks and roadside blasts set off by armed groups, and in counter-attacks by security forces since Ethiopian-backed Somali forces ousted an Islamist group from control of Mogadishu late last year. Battles in Mogadishu between March 12 and April 26 alone killed at least 1,670 people, The Associated Press reported.
“The repeated raids on the premises of Radio Shabelle and the death threats against its staff are in direct response to its independent coverage of the volatile situation in Mogadishu,” said CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon. “The Somali transitional government must restrain its security forces and stop harassing the radio station immediately.”
The station was first raided on Friday afternoon when about eight soldiers entered the studios, interrupting a live broadcast from newscaster Abdinur Mohammed Kadie, according to sources at the station who asked not to be identified for fear of retribution. Soldiers searched the station room to room, threatening to kill staff, including sports producer Abdi Rashid Abdi Ahmad, if any weapons were found. They also detained a staff security guard for an hour.
Separate groups of soldiers respectively returned on Friday evening, Sunday morning, and Sunday afternoon, forcing staff out of the studios and conducting more searches, the sources said.
It was the fourth time this year Radio Shabelle had been harassed, according to CPJ research. Last month, the station’s coverage of another government security crackdown led authorities to shutter the station for four days on accusations of fomenting unrest.
Somalia has had no effective central government since the fall of dictator Siad Barre in 1991. Rival Somali factions are scheduled to participate in a key reconciliation conference next week, according to news reports.
CPJ is a New York–based, independent, nonprofit organization that works to safeguard press freedom worldwide. For more information, visit www.cpj.org.
330 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001 USA
Phone: (212) 4651004 Fax: (212) 4659568 Web: www.cpj.org
Reacting to today’s court proceedings in Ethiopia in which the prosecutor demanded death sentences for all 38 defendants in a 14-month-long political trial, Amnesty International expressed shock and called for the court to reject the prosecutor’s demand.
The court told the defendants to submit pleas of mitigation in the next three days. Sentences are expected to be passed on 16 July.
The group of 38 includes two women, journalists, a prominent human rights defender, and leaders of the opposition Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD) party. All have been in prison since November 2005. During the prosecution case they had refused to submit a defence on the grounds that they did not expect a fair trial. After the judges ruled that they had a case to answer, they considered submitting a defence. However, on 11 June the judges reportedly cut short their requests concerning preparing a defence, and convicted them as charged.
The 38 had been convicted of “outrages against the Constitution” and “impairing the defensive power of the state,” with five of them also convicted of “leading, preparing or inciting armed opposition.” They had earlier been acquitted of “treason” and “attempted genocide,” but the prosecutor has appealed against this earlier court decision.
Amnesty International said that it is shocking that the defendants are now facing the possibility of execution. On the basis of the information available to Amnesty International, most — if not all — are prisoners of conscience imprisoned on account of their non-violent opinions, who have not used or advocated violence. Amnesty International has been calling for their unconditional release.
There have been several unconfirmed reports that the Ethiopian government is considering releasing the 38 on certain conditions — as well as some other CUD members still on trial — in the coming days.
For several months during the trial, the imprisoned CUD leaders had been reported by various sources to have been engaged in private communications with government representatives through an Ethiopian mediator.
It has been unofficially reported that they may be granted a “pardon” and released in exchange for having signed a statement, along with other CUD members still on trial, that is said to be an admission of some responsibility for the violence that took place during demonstrations in June and November 2005 following disputed elections. During the protests, 193 demonstrators were shot dead by the security forces and six police officers killed by demonstrators.
A government official has said that any such pardon could only be granted through the presidential amnesty or pardon process after the end of the trial.
Ten other defendants in the same trial who are presenting a defence are due to appear in court on 12 July. They include civil society activists Daniel Bekele and Netsanet Demissie, who are prisoners of conscience.
Another separate trial of CUD members — including Kifle Tigeneh, an elected CUD Member of Parliament — has been adjourned to 29 October. The defendants in this trial also face possible death sentences.
Amnesty International has been monitoring the trial to assess whether it is consistent with recognized international standards of fair trial. The trial has also been observed by the European Union. Amnesty International plans to attend the sentencing hearing and defence case.
Background
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases and without exception believing it to be a violation of the right to life and the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. The death penalty legitimizes an irreversible act of violence by the state and will inevitably claim innocent victims. Amnesty International therefore demands unconditional and worldwide abolition of the death penalty.
Amnesty International
1 Easton Street
London WC1X ODW
