I want to remind us what I’m after and what I’m up to in what I’m trying to share in these three short articles. I’ve never intended these short articles to solve any major problem or contribute anything significant to the multiple societal problems, our illnesses, as I’ve been referring to them. My intention has been modest, and hopefully realistic, as an attempt to understand the possible root causes for the problems we seem to have kept inheriting from generation to generation. Unless we pause to reflect, long and hard and deep, on the root causes for our ailments, I do not think we’d ever come up with a lasting solution or remedy for our illnesses.
Once again I want to underscore the approach I’m taking here at getting to the root causes for our societal ills, even individually and collectively. It’s diagnostic. It first aims at understanding before proposing a solution. It goes on proposing a solution based on the reality, the truth, about the root causes of the problems we all commonly share. We as a society have been around for quite some time, for far too long to fail to realize that our today’s problems have their roots in the past. Therefore, our past that has been giving birth to multiple problems that plague us today must be examined in order for us not to keep sinking into the abyss of hopelessness as we grope in darkness that never seems to be going away.
* * * * * *
Socrates, the philosopher, centuries ago, said “An unexamined life is not worth livingâ€Â. That motto seems equally true today, or even more so, for not all, or even the majority of us, would pause to examine our lives individually and collectively as a community and a society in search of lasting solutions for the problems that define us and which have also become our global identities. Who am I? Who are we, who are the Ethiopians? Why am I the way I am today? Why are we as a society the way we are today? We need to answer these ever timely questions turning to all the resources that we’ve at our disposal. We need to know the truth about us for truth to set us free, to free us from at least some of the most prominent yet multiple problems that plague us, gradually but permanently.
A point worth keeping in mind: these questions that I want us to wrestle with are not primarily questions of our political identity nor are they meant to receive solutions from political leaders even if we’ve the best political leaders in the history of the world. Political leaders can accomplish significant things only if there are values and principles that organize the society they lead and govern. If some of us still want to cling to the “hope†thinking and believing that political leaders have all the permanent solutions for our societal ills, the questions become: Is it reasonable for us to believe that it’s the job of political leaders to transform, for example, the moral lives and the moral characters of the people they are leaders of? Is it reasonable for us to expect from our political leaders to make us good, virtuous, truthful, honest, transparent people who are respectful to one another, hard working, loving, faithful, and on and on?
I hope that the answer to above rhetorical questions is clear. What kind of government in this world does possess all, or even most of, these virtues, intrinsically desirable values? The answer is, unsurprisingly, none. We also know why the answer is none: remember that political leaders are largely the products of the values of the larger society that they come from? Even if they can overcome all the ills they inherit from their larger society they cannot change the lives of the people they’re leaders of in any way that their political leadership allows them to do. One cannot make another human being a virtuous or a good person by force; that seems to be a contradiction in terms. Such changes of character begin, unsurprisingly, once again, with the life of an individual.
We, as a society, will not make much progress in any desirable direction if we fail to search for fundamental answers to the fundamental question, “Who am I?†first, before we search for answers to the question, “Who are we as a society?†for a society is a collection of individuals. The classic question which comes first, the chicken or the egg, applied to the questions we’re wrestling with becomes, which comes first, an individual or a society. I do not need to settle this question here since our question is not about the origin of human beings in the first place. Our purpose is rather to seek some answers to the question as to the logical starting point for desirable directions for societal change for there is no society without individuals that constitute it. Hence my focus on the importance of wrestling with fundamental questions about who we are as individuals first and as a society secondarily.
* * * * * *
Now my hope is that you, my readers, see where I’m heading to. If you recall from my previous articles I’ve made the point that all of us as human beings hold values, good or bad, and most of our decisions and actions in our individual and collective lives are reflections of those values.
Once we realize that the root causes for the larger societal illness could be traced back to that of an individual person’s life, and hence to one’s community that that individual belongs to and eventually to the larger society that community belongs to, a reasonable proposal for a solution for the larger societal ills seems to begin with a proposal to address the root causes for the life of an individual. The proposal that I suggest here for the life of an individual as well as that of a community and that of the society is spiritual and moral. I propose that the multiple problems that plague Ethiopia as a nation have their roots in the spiritual crises that the society has been undergoing for far, far too long.
Recall what I was hinting at in Part I in my article? I said there, “We [Ethiopians] claim to be a very religious society with profoundly religious and moral values that could have shaped Ethiopian history in a much desirable direction for centuries but then we’ve been what we claimed to be who we are largely in name, i.e., nominally. We, as a society, are paying a heavy price today because we’ve failed to live up to what we claim to be what defines us as a society and as a nation.†Now so, so many of us have believed and said out loud that Ethiopia is a Christian nation, one of the oldest Christian nations in the world, etc, etc. Still most of us preach this as a solid historical fact. No problem about that claim, my fellow Ethiopians. That is undisputable. But then do not forget that there is a huge difference between saying or claiming something and being what one says or claims to be. I can say or claim that I’m a Christian without even a vague idea of what it means to be a Christian. I do not want to name names for every single person who reads this piece, and who claims that that person is an Ethiopian and a Christian, hopefully, sees what I’m trying to communicate here.
Some in my audience will undoubtedly and perhaps reasonably protest saying that “you’re committing a fallacy of hasty generalization†by saying all Ethiopians have failed to live up to what they claim to be Christians! I’ve an answer to this reasonable charge and it’s this: if what I say does not reflect any degree of truth about you, my dear reader, then I’m not addressing you, but then upon careful self-examinations if you discover some ways of failing to live up to what the Christian faith requires you to live, then it’s a good thing to know the truth about yourself and do something about it for your neighbors, and above all your community needs some such exemplary Christians like you who live their lives consistently, as much as possible, as their ultimate identity as Christianity calls them to live out their lives on their own, individually, and in the midst of their community and the larger society. Those of us who’ve failed in any way to live up to the resources our Christian faith offers us need you. Live your life in such a way that others emulate your exemplary life. I’m not judging any person for that is not my job, nor is it my responsibility. Far from it. I’m only trying to draw out implications by way of diagnosis of our root causes for our society starting with the life of an individual. Who am I? Who are we? We need transforming answers to these fundamental questions.
* * * * * *
If what we claim to be who we are as individuals and as a community and a society is not largely in name, if we’re not largely nominally Christian as a society, I want any one in the audience to show me how some of the following Christian values bring about the kind of paralysis that we’ve witnessed far, far too long in Ethiopia as a nation. Let’s take some of the resources from what we claim we’ve as our birth right as one of the oldest Christian nations:
Christian faith teaches, among other so many things, some of these: love as the most fundamental virtue, one consequence of embodying this virtue is loving our neighbors as ourselves; our neighbors include even our enemies these days more than any other time! Jesus whom we claim to follow loved those who killed him even while they were in the process of killing him.
And truth and truthfulness is another inherently good thing. How consistently do we, those who claim to be Christians, tell truth and resist lying all the time?
What about humility? How many of us, those who claim to be Christians, are humble enough to admit our weaknesses and think that others are better than us? How often have we learned from our mistakes in such a way that learning from our mistakes has changed our lives for better? I’m asking fellow Ethiopians as an Ethiopian myself, mind you, I’m not a foreigner to the way our deep rooted habits manifest themselves; can we, many of us, it could be even most of us, say honestly, truthfully and humbly, that we’re a society where one can observe more often than not, our humility, considering others to be better than others, in light of what we claim ourselves to be, a Christian nation?
Peace and being peaceful with oneself and with others is another Christian virtue. I do not need to comment on this for it’s too obvious how much peace we’ve lacked in our nation’s long history.
Virtues such as goodness and kindness and self-control are Christian virtues and we can see how these virtues define us as a society too. I leave the answer to my readers.
* * * * * *
Now I do not want some among my readers to conclude from the above brief outline of Christian virtues that are meant to define Christian character in a way that those who claim that they are Christians that I’m under an illusion to believe or to suggest that everyone in Ethiopia is a Christian or wants to be a Christian or has anything to do with Christianity. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I’m only trying to show that if those who claim to be Christians in Ethiopia, in the past or at the present, live their lives, starting with an individual and as a community, the following vices that have been destroying the society would not be a result of the virtues outlined above.
Where, then, do the following vices come from such as hatred, discord, jealousy, selfish ambitions, envy, factions, etc, etc? Can we honestly and sincerely be oblivious to the fact that such vices, among so many others, define us as a people, as a community, or as a society? Can we honestly and truthfully say that such characters, such vices, are the exact outworking of our history as Christians then? To just cite from the Christian Scriptures, from the source book for our Christian faith, if need be, the following text seems to sum up what I want to communicate about us as a society and as individuals: “You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. 14 The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 15 If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each otherâ€Â. Galatians 5: 13-15. Have we not been fulfilling what the Apostle Paul has warned us against as we continued to bite and devour each other? Mind you, my dear readers, I’m only showing the implications of our persistent, endless claims about who we’re as a nation for a long time, a Christian nation, a Christian island, Ethiopia, as its history, or its story goes. I’m not making up anything. The logical outworking of such claims is clear for anyone who wants to pause to reflect on what it means to be a Christian as an individual and as a nation.
* * * * * *
Now multiple objections could be raised against such naïve sounding talk about a possible diagnosis of our multiple problems and how they could be taken as some pieces of evidence for our failure to live out what we claim to be our birth right, our Christian identity, which we claim to define us as a society. I’d only mention a few objections and show how to respond to them, just briefly.
Are you saying that everyone in Ethiopia should be a Christian in order to exercise some or all of the virtues you’ve listed above? Who can believe such a proposal in the first place whoever proposes that? I said these virtues are inherently desirable, good things in and of themselves. Even an atheist who believes that there is no God cannot deny, sincerely and consistently, that love is a virtue, love of truth and truthfulness are good things and so forth for other virtues. But Christians, as many call themselves to be so in Ethiopia, who claim that their Christian faith commits them to the pursuit of such virtues fail to live up to their Christian faith when they do not practice what they claim to believe if they care honestly and consistently about what they claim to be.
Almost half or more than half of the Ethiopian population consists of our Muslim brothers and sisters and why are you leaving them out? I leave the answer to our Muslim brothers and sisters if what their faith commits them to contradicts all or some of the virtues that we’ve observed above. Having said that, I suggest that even when an atheist would not, honestly and consistently, deny such virtues since they are intrinsically good and desirable, I cannot see how Islam would commit our Muslim brothers and sisters to a denial of such values an atheist would hold without believing in any supernatural being.
What about other Ethiopians who are neither Muslims nor Christians who believe in whatever or nothing; are you saying that they are inherently vicious people or cannot be virtuous people if they are not Christians? What I said does not automatically commit me to saying that because I’ve already argued that those Christian values described above and others like them are values that are inherently or intrinsically good and desirable and any person who embodies and lives them out reflects shared values that Christians are committed to living by, if they do live by them, as their Christian faith requires them to.
Now one more objection, among many others, could be: you kept saying that these Christian values are inherently or intrinsically good and desirable values but show us that they are what you portray them to be. My short answer to this challenge to anyone who is doubtful or skeptical of such values as love, truthfulness, honesty, humility, goodness, kindness, being peaceful, etc as being intrinsically good and desirable is for my objector to argue and show the rest of us that it’s possible to be loving, truthful, humble, kind, good, peaceful in any other way that does not require the resources of the Christian faith. Even if such a task is possible that does not make those values intrinsically bad or evil, it will only show that there are independent arguments to arrive at them without being committed to Christianity. But then, once again, that does not show that such values are not inherent to the Christian faith either.
* * * * * *
When I finished Part II of my article I said, “In Part III of this series I’ll address the people of Ethiopia, including myself, as to what we should do to bring about a desirable change for ourselves as a society. Political leaders can accomplish only so much. If the value of the society is conducive or fertile for the leadership of those in various leadership responsibilities, that way, we, all of us in leadership positions and otherwise, can usher in a better future for a future generation of Ethiopians. A forward looking generation now can give birth to a generation that will flourish in the good things, the good legacy that it receives from its previous generations, that is us. I do hope that we can become a forward looking generation while focusing on the present for without the present there will not be a future.†Who am I; who are we, once again? I do hope that knowing the truths about us will begin to set us free from all the vices that have become our defining identities, for some of us individually, and also collectively.
I do hope that the resources that we’ve at our disposal that we claim to be our birth rights, the religious and moral values, that I’ve attempted to briefly outline above, will go a long way in transforming us individually and collectively for a generation that cries out to see such a transformation in us. Am I being a utopian, proposing an impossible ideal for a society? Absolutely not! For those who entertain a nagging doubt about this whole idealistic, dogmatically religious sounding talk, I hope to address some of your important doubts in a future book project where I’ll undertake an in-depth examination of values and ideals that shape or influence our lives as individuals and also as a society. This is just a small beginning to trigger some probing questions as I hope we set out to discover fundamentally transforming answers to our fundamental questions, who I am and who we are as individuals and as a nation, as Ethiopians.
By Dr. Yacob Haile-Mariam
Kaliti Prison, Addis Ababa
Under the Case File “Engineer Hailu Shawel and Others,†we have been charged with serious and heinous crimes by the prosecutor of the Ethiopian government. We could have used our own legal expertise and experiences, or could have appointed the best lawyers available in the country. But we chose instead not to defend ourselves against the fabricated and baseless allegations. On the first day when the allegations were presented to the court, Professor Mesfin Wolde-Mariam, speaking on behalf of all the accused, had explained that the positions taken by the government and by the accused were political, and needed to be resolved through dialogue and mutual understanding, and not through court litigation. Similarly, national and international human rights advocates and many democratic governments had expressed the view that the case was a political matter, which should be resolved through negotiations. They had also appealed, and continue to appeal, for the unconditional release of the prisoners. Many prominent Ethiopians and civic organizations have also tried to convince the government to settle the matter amicably in the spirit of reconciliation. The response of the EPRDF government to all these appeals from Ethiopians and the international community has been a complete disregard.
Cognizant of the political nature of the situation and convinced about the absence of any legal basis for the allegations, we have decided not to defend ourselves in order to avoid any opening for our accusers to mislead the people of Ethiopia about the truth and our fundamental rights. I am writing this open letter, just a few weeks before the court is expected to give its verdict, not because I want to give credence to the so-called arguments presented by the government prosecutor. Nor is it to plead with the court or with anybody else. The court is fully aware that in any criminal case, the closing arguments of the accused are not limited to final legal statements, analyses of legal articles and materials presented by the prosecutor. They go far beyond, and can cover a much wider territory.
In our country, cases were established at different times against many patriots who wanted to change the prevailing system; and sad verdicts were given. The arbitrary accusations and judgments against Belay Zeleke, Mengistu Neway, Tadesse Biru and Alemu Kitessa can illustrate this point. The forthcoming verdict against us will be different and of a much bigger magnitude than all past political trials. It can have an unprecedented positive or negative impact on the judicial system, the economy, peace, development and democracy in the country. Hence, I have no doubt that the people of Ethiopia and the whole world will be watching attentively the verdict that will be given by the court in Ethiopia in a few weeks.
Dear fellow Ethiopians:
Who are the accused under the Case File “Engineer Hailu Shawel and Others?†Is it really a case against Engineer Hailu Shawel? Or the renowned human rights advocate Professor Mesfin Wolde Mariam? Or Dr. Berhanu Nega? Or Judge Birtukan Mideksa? Or the rest of us? No, it is justice itself which is on trial under this File. It is democracy itself which is on trial. If the court passes a guilty verdict on us, and we are sentenced to prison or sent to death row, then it will be the peace and the faith that the people of Ethiopia have in the justice system that will be the real casualties. The court is in a serious dilemma, as it is on trial itself. Through its verdict either justice will prevail or tyranny can continue unabated. Hate or love will reign. Reconciliation and peace will be established or endless conflicts will continue.
The people of Ethiopia know very well our vision and commitments. Our aspiration has been to do our share in helping bring a genuine democratic system, lasting peace, and freedom from crushing poverty and underdevelopment to the well-deserving but hitherto deprived people of Ethiopia. We have no other purpose. If standing for justice, peace and democracy is considered a crime, we are prepared to accept the court’s verdict whether it is imprisonment or death penalty. Our resolve to bring justice, peace, unity and democracy to our country will have no bounds. We will be guilty only when we betray our fellow citizens and give priority to our selfish interests against the interests of the country, or when we break our oath of commitment to the people of Ethiopia about justice, peace, democracy and development. We, the accused members of the Coalition for Unity and Democracy Party (CUDP), particularly those of us who are older, did not join the Party to seek power and to acquire personal wealth as it is the case in some places. Most of us are accomplished professionals and have sufficient income for our livelihood. The younger members of the Party including the civic leaders who are imprisoned with us are also fully committed individuals ready to sacrifice the privileges of youth and pay a heavy price for the wellbeing and development of their country. The young journalists also imprisoned with us are the real democracy heroes who have advanced the people’s fundamental rights to free speech.
Here it is worthwhile to recall a statement made by General Mengistu Neway, (who attempted to overthrow the Haile Selassie government) during his court trial 46 years ago. When the General was asked to explain the reasons for his attempted coup d’êtat he replied: “If I wanted, I could have changed cars on a daily basis. I could drink selected French Champagne everyday. When thousands of people would queue-up to enter the grounds of the Imperial Palace I had unfettered access to the Emperor. I chose to forfeit these privileges and opportunities and decided to free my people and country from darkness, poverty and underdevelopment. I had no other ambition.†Today we the imprisoned members of Kinijit (CUDP) are proud to echo the General’s words in the courtroom. However, there is a fundamental difference between the General and us. He wanted to change the government by force. We want to bring change legally through the ballot box, in a free, fair, transparent and peaceful democratic process. Those of us who are falsely accused of genocide and treason, envisioned to liberate our country from its grinding underdevelopment and pave the way for lasting peace, security, democracy and prosperity, by working hand-in-hand with the people of Ethiopia, including our jailers.
Life is always short, and is even shorter for those of us who are older. It is our burning desire to contribute to saving our peace-thirsty country from the man-made and natural disasters, and pave the way to peace, justice and democracy. We want to leave behind a peaceful, just, democratic and harmonious Ethiopia so that our children and the future generations can lead a better and more peaceful life. This is our commitment and only ambition.
Dear fellow Ethiopians and Honorable Judges:
We recall vividly the bloody political history of our country and the sacrifices paid by thousands of Ethiopians in the past. We know also that leaders like Emperor Yohannes, Emperor Tewodros, Lij Eyassu, Emperor Haile Selassie, Princess Zeweditu, Prime Minister Aklilu Habtewold, Prime Minister Endalkachew Mekonnen, Generals Aman Andom, and Teferi Benti, were not lucky enough to die a natural death. Their loved ones were denied the right to even grieve and honor them with proper burial. Emperor Menelik’s death still remains a mystery. Colonel Mengistu Haile Mariam’s fate is yet unknown. We are aware of the volatile and dangerous nature of Ethiopian politics. Nevertheless, we chose not to remain bystanders when the country was descending rapidly towards unprecedented and multifaceted dangers. Our objectives are straightforward and clear. They include the following:
• To reinforce the culture of respect for the authority of the people, and work towards national reconciliation and inclusiveness through popular participation.
• To break the vicious cycle of transfer of power through brute force, and to institute genuine culture of democracy and good governance.
• To change the ugly image of Ethiopia painted worldwide as a beggar nation; and to advance the country forward as a self-reliant and vibrant society by capitalizing on its rich potential.
• To create educational and employment opportunities for young Ethiopians so that they will not be victims of the prevailing sufferings and humiliations as migrant workers, in foreign countries, in intolerable conditions. In this regard, an African observer once wrote that Ethiopia has become Africa’s shame. We want to change this disgraceful situation, and make Ethiopia, once again, the pride of Africa and the world.
• To ensure that the atrocities committed in the past will never happen again in our country. We have seen too many state-sponsored crimes and arbitrary imprisonments and humiliations in the past. For example, during the “Red Terror†in the district of Cheha, Gurage Zone of Ethiopia, a desperate mother saw a crowd of helpless people stampeding on her son’s headless body under the watch of government militias. We owe it to all Ethiopian mothers that their sons and daughters will never again become victims of tyranny and state crimes.
• To build a strong and peaceful Ethiopia that is capable of defending its sovereignty, national interests and territorial integrity while at the same time contributing significantly to regional and world peace, security and development.
Dear fellow Ethiopians and Honorable Judges:
In Third World countries, particularly in Africa, it is common practice for ruling parties to accuse opposition party leaders of treason on fabricated charges just to stay in power without any regard to justice and human rights. The pitiful and trumped up charges against us are no exception. What shocks and saddens me most is the totally baseless genocide charge labeled against us. I have no word to describe my anger and sorrow about this cruel and shameful charge. In my professional life, especially as prosecutor at the United Nations International Tribunal in Rwanda, I have witnessed what genocide really signifies. My recollections from that trial are too gruesome to narrate. I will simply mention a few of the evidences to illustrate the gravity of the genocide charges against us by the government prosecutor:
• In a certain locality in Rwanda, Tutsi mothers were asked to bring their children to a public gathering and ordered to dig graves. Then they were forced to throw their children into the graves one by one and burry them alive. As the mothers were covering the live bodies, the children were screaming frantically and asking their mothers to rescue them. But the mothers continued to fill the graves with soil until there was dead silence. It was at this time that many of the mothers fainted. The poor mothers obeyed the orders of the criminals in the hope of saving the lives of their remaining children.
• Over twenty-five thousand Tutsis were told that they were Ethiopians and needed to go back to their country of origin. To start the “journey†they were thrown with their hands tied down into a river flowing northwards. Ironically, for some time the river was called Ethiopian Airlines. As a prosecutor, I had to present the video of the testimonies about this most horrible act to the Tribunal. In a locality called Murabi over three thousand Tutsi men, women and children were massacred with machetes. Their bodies were kept in a school as documentary evidence of history.
• In a matter of 90 days close to one million Tutsi elders and children were exterminated with machetes. A few lucky ones were able to pay the murderers to kill them with bullets, possibly with less pain.
• In Asia two million Cambodians were exterminated for their ethnic identity and political affiliation.
• Hitler exterminated six million Jews because of their ethnic identity and religious belief.
• Similarly the Turks are reported to have exterminated no less than one million Armenians.
The above are a few examples which illustrate the gravity of genocide charges. We, the accused in Ethiopia are charged of committing genocide as defined by the prosecutor of the Ethiopian government – a charge that has absolutely nothing to do with genocide. When Ethiopians demonstrated to demand respect for their democratic rights and against vote rigging, incidents may have occurred including the partial burning of a resident’s house. To my understanding this happened not because of the person’s ethnic identity. Throughout their long history, Ethiopians have lived harmoniously together without any regard to ethnic, racial and religious differences.
We, the accused decided not to defend ourselves at the court hearings because we knew that we did not commit the fabricated and baseless crimes labeled against us by the government. Yet, the prosecutor pressed with the charges of treason and genocide. When we requested to be released on bail, he warned us to know that committing treason was the highest crime – worse than genocide. For us the motive was clear.
Genocide is the worst crime that can be committed anywhere and anytime. When six million Jews were exterminated there was no vocabulary to describe Hitler’s crime. The then Prime Minster of England, Winston Churchill, called it the Nameless Crime. It was at this time that a researcher named Lumpkin, a Jew who emigrated from Austria to USA, coined the Greek term ‘Geno’ which means race/ethnicity, and the Latin term ‘Cide’ which means mass killing. By combining the two words he created the word “Genocide.†In Amharic (Ethiopian language), it means “Zer Matifat.â€Â
Since the meaning of genocide was not well understood at the time, even the Nazis were not accused of this crime. To date only three accusations of genocide have been established globally, two of which are in Ethiopia. The first one is on Mengistu Haile Mariam’s regime; the second is on us under the Case File “Hailu Shawel and Others.†The third is in Rwanda. Even Saddam Hussein who killed thousands of his citizens was not accused of genocide. A genocide crime is, by its very nature, a crime against humanity because when a group of people are exterminated on account of their ethnic identity or religious belief, their demise is a loss to humanity. As such, the criminals of such a heinous crime can be legally prosecuted in any country.
Dear fellow Ethiopians:
Yes, the democratic process we started with you has been obstructed and delayed. It is also true that the illegal imprisonment imposed on us troubles us immensely. What is most disturbing and painful, however, is the engraving of our names by the government in a genocide file. The government prosecutor has attempted to portray us as enemies of our beloved people who are from the northern part of Ethiopia. How can Ms Serkalem Fasil who was six months pregnant at the time of her arrest (and later delivered her baby while in prison), or the shy Ms Seble Tadesse, or Dawit Kebede (a Tigrian) would dare to exterminate his own Tigrian brothers and sisters? Did the prosecutor really see any merit in the case or was he ordered to file the charges? It is impossible to imagine the incalculable damage inflicted by the government prosecutor upon the
name and long history of Ethiopia.
Those of us who are in the legal profession have the ethical obligation to uphold justice and to stand for the fundamental rights of Ethiopians and humanity at large. We have a professional responsibility to stand for the rights of our people. Maintaining the highest ethical standards for the legal profession cannot and must not be compromised. Legal professionals who are ethical would never sell their conscience to the highest bidder for money or power. Trying to establish a genocide case against “Hailu Shawel and Others†is a mockery of the massacres of the millions of Jews, Tutsis, Cambodians, and Armenians.
Throughout the court proceedings, the prosecutor has not been able to present an iota of tangible evidence against us, the accused. Although we are innocent until proven guilty, from day one we were labeled criminals by our accusers not only in the court but also in the media. The prosecutor tried to use the same so-called material evidence presented against one defendant, and wanted it to apply equally to the rest of the accused. It seems that this strategy is based on the Nuremberg Charter which decreed that an accusation made against a Nazi Party member de facto made all party members criminals by association. During World War II the Nazi Party and other Nazi organizations were made illegal and criminal organizations. Members of these organizations were declared illegal just because of their membership. This nullifies the established legal doctrine which asserts that crime is individual and that no crime works retroactively. Precisely for these reasons the Nuremberg Charter has been totally rejected by international legal experts. Referring to our case, if Yacob Haile Mariam, a member of CUDP is criminal, then the evidence presented against him can be used to implicate other CUD members and supporters. As the majority of voting-age Ethiopians are members or supporters of CUD, the prosecutor may be accusing millions of Ethiopians of treason and genocide, by association. From the legal and common sense perspective this is totally incomprehensible.
The honorable judges are faced with an enormous responsibility. When a private army officer makes a mistake he is accountable to his commanding officer; and a civil servant is answerable to his supervisor. To whom is a judge accountable? First, he/she is accountable to his/her conscience and must accept full responsibility for the actions. Then, he or she is answerable to his/her own conscience, children, the people of Ethiopia, the civilized world, and to history.
With the on-going trial for treason and genocide the peace-loving and law-abiding people of Ethiopia are also being tried. Would they be expected to feel unaffected if there is a miscarriage of justice? With the verdict the people will prove whether today there is justice in the country that they can respect and abide by. Throughout their history Ethiopians have attached the highest respect for law and order. They also understand fully the consequences of any miscarriage of justice, and arbitrary verdicts on innocent citizens for crimes they did not commit. In commenting about the Nuremberg Trial, the famous prosecutor, Robert Jackson, was known to have said that the world yields no respect to courts that are merely organized to convict. This would also be the feeling of people in Ethiopia towards the legal system if courts are merely organized to convict.
Dear fellow Ethiopians and Honorable Judges:
As you very well know, our country is facing a myriad of unprecedented political, social and economic problems. The solution to these complex problems lies in our ability to negotiate and resolve our differences through dialogue and mutual understanding. There will be no winner when divisiveness prevails over unity and harmony. Without peaceful and amicable negotiations of existing major differences the biggest loser will be our Ethiopia. Therefore, it is of paramount importance that we all start afresh to work together as brothers and sisters under the protection of the law, and with justice for all. If the differences between us the prisoners and EPRDF are in the ways we stand for the wellbeing and interests of our country, then such differences can be resolved easily. Failing to address our differences wisely and urgently can only intensify and prolong our collective suffering. Make no mistake about it. We, the accused are not worried about the type of sentencing that we will be receiving in the coming weeks. Our deepest concern is about the possible irreparable harm that can be inflicted on the justice system of our country, and the consequences on peace, security, democracy and development in Ethiopia and beyond. We know very well that at least history will absolve us from the fabricated and baseless charges. When the future generations study this pending case against us they will either be proud or ashamed of it. The choice rests with the honorable judges.
As leaders of the Coalition for Unity and Democracy Party, and as responsible citizens, we have tried our best to reach a negotiated settlement with EPRDF in order to resolve the unprecedented political crisis facing our country. None of us has attempted to take the life of a single person leave alone exterminating an entire ethnic population in Ethiopia. The honorable judges, the prosecutor, EPRDF, the people of Ethiopia and the international community all know our innocence. If the government prosecutor still believes the contrary, then let him present his material evidence to an independent and impartial court of law. No one is above the law, neither the accused nor EPRDF.
Long live Ethiopia with flourishing justice, peace and democracy.
This is an unauthorized translation of the letter which was orginially written in Amharic.
Dr. Yacob Haile-Mariam
Kaliti Prison, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
January 2007
The panel discussion on human rights in Ethiopia co-sponsored by the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Amnesty International and Qaliti Qal Kidan (Qaliti Covenant) was warmly received by a capacity crowd in attendance. Josh Rubenstein, the Northeastern director of the Amnesty International USA, Northeast Region, was the moderator for the event dubbed: ” Ethiopia: Peaceful Resistance and Civil Disobedience as Dissent.”
Dr. Meqdes Mesfin, the first panel speaker, set the parameters of the discussions by discussing the major events that took place after the May 2005 elections. She described the changing patterns in the Ethiopians government’s explanation of what happened during the protest. She said that based on her research she found that the official Ethiopian government’s explanation for the violence kept shifting over time from “It is the opposition, who is responsible”, to “The government had to act swiftly and decisively to halt an armed insurgency”, to” Police panicked when met with such volume of protesters”.
She wrapped up by saying that the crisis in Ethiopia today is not one of political partisanship but a need for accountability for human rights violations. She closed by saying that only with the release and the involvement of the prisoners at Qaliti would a sustainable resolution be found that would be based on accountability for human rights violations to eliminate the possibility of vengeful retribution and ensure the institution of the rule of law.
Judge Frehiywot Samuel presented a discussion of the methodology used by the Inquiry commission in investigating the facts surrounding the violence and killings of protesters in June and November of 2005. Judge Frehiywot said the Commission undertook its investigation by carefully collecting data from health care facilities, police agencies and government officials. He said the Commission visited the various locations where the protests had taken place, as well as prisons and other sites.
As part of its investigation, the Commission also interviewd Prime Minster Meles Zenawi and top police and defense ministry officials. Judge Frehiywot stated that the Commission determined on an 8-2 vote that government security forces used excessive force to quell the protests, and unanimously found that the conduct of the security officers was in violation of the human rights of the protesters and the constitution of Ethiopia. The judge stated that the government had provided the Commission a list of names of 30,000 detainees in the post election period. The judge clarified that the while they have evidence of documented casualties during the protest, he was making no speculations as to how many others may have been killed or injured in incidents on dates other than the ones the commission was authorized to investigate.
Ato Mitiku Teshome described the findings of the Commission in greater detail. Ato Mitiku said he and other members of the Commission were under continuous surveillance by security officials following leaks that the Commission had reached findings unfavorable to the government. There was much pressure to get the commission to rewrite its findings consistent with a prior whitewash in the Anuak massacre matter. He and the others left the country once it became clear that their lives were in imminent danger.
A short but powerful segment of the Inquiry Commission’s deliberations was screened with English subtitles for the benefit of the non-Ethiopians in the audience.
Prof. Al Mariam, the last speaker on the panel stated he was there to speak about “Human rights and government wrongs in Ethiopia.” He itemized the list of human rights guaranteed to Ethiopian citizens under the Universal Declaration of Human rights and other international conventions. He also listed a catalogue of “government wrongs”. He said: “The problem with the so-called ‘crimes against the state’ is that they are absurd as they are untenable. Charging a 76 year old retired university professor, a former UN genocide prosecutor at the Rwanda tribunal and former UN Special Envoy in the Cameroon/Nigeria border dispute, one of the most distinguished women judges in Ethiopia and a whole bunch of academics and newspaper reporters and editors with genocide just does not make sense.” He made a plea to the international human rights community to join the Ethiopian human rights community in advancing freedom, democracy and human rights in Ethiopia by supporting H.R. 5680. A sustained and animated question and answer period followed the presentations.
On February 9, 2007, members of the Greater Boston Ethiopian Community hosted an event at the Williams Middle School complex in Chelsea, Massachusetts. Councilor Mike Mekonnen introduced his fellow City Councilors with whom he had drafted and signed a resolution calling upon the Congress of the United States of America to support the fight for human rights democratization and economic developing in Ethiopia by enacting HR 5680.
They also promised to facilitate communication with other municipalities to support the cause of the release of the prisoners of conscience and the aforementioned legislation. In addition, Councilor Leo Robinson shared with the audience, and presented to Dr. Meqdes Mesfin, a letter he had received from Congressman Mike Capuano, expressing his commitment to working with the City Council and with Amnesty International USA in calling for the immediate and unconditional release of Professor Mesfin Woldemariam and all other prisoners of conscience detained since 2005.
The audience expressed its sincere appreciation for the presence of these men of integrity and thanked them for their commitment and dedication to the truth and the human rights of their fellow citizens in spite of the adversities they knew they would face.
Qaliti Qalkidan is grateful for the support it has received from Enem LeHagere, Democracy for Ethiopia, and many members of the community for organizing both of these events and providing the material, logistical, technical and human resources that was required to make this event a success. Our thanks also goes to the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, Josh Rubenstein of Amnesty International, Northeast Region, Councilors Mike Mekonnen, Leo Robinson, and Calvin Brown of Chelsea as well as many others who have worked on promoting the cause of the release of the prisoners of conscience, and the exposure of human rights violations in Ethiopia with a view towards the establishment of the rule of law, and respect for human rights in Ethiopia.
Following the signature of an agreement with the Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has announced the opening of a new Sub-regional Office for Eastern Africa countries here in Addis Ababa… Read more [pdf]
The Ethiopian government conducted the historical May 2005 election in the intention of getting international legitimacy. Zenawi’s government didn’t anticipate that type of opposition victory and were not really prepared to share or transfer power to the winner. Soon after, the first election results of the capital, Addis Ababa has shown that the ruling party EPRDF lost all the seats of the city parliament, the ruling party began tampering with the ballots boxes and changing the number in its favour.
Riot police and security forces shot at least 200 people, including several women and children, in the capital Addis Ababa and other parts of the country during June, October and November 2005, demonstrations over disputed elections. Meles has blamed the opposition for inciting the violence and defended the actions of the security forces as necessary to preserve the peace. Until the May election, Meles was one of among some heads of state once heralded as the next generation of great leaders on the continent. The May election has showed to the world that the Meles regime is not ready to play by the rule of the game and bullets, not ballots, determined who rules the country.
The Meles government is deliberately doing many things as a strategy to divert international attention from its domestic problems and to regain the lost international confidence and support. Three weeks later after the US General John Abizaid’s handshake with the PM Meles, Ethiopian troops ( Ethiopian/American Invasion ) invaded Somalia.
The war has shown Ethiopians two things. First, Ethiopia for the first time in history invaded a neighbouring country. Second, the war on Somalia has made it clear that Ethiopia has already become an overseas province of a super power nation. And the PM of Ethiopia has assumed the role of regional policeman. I personally support our troops. Ethiopian troops fight and die for their nation while the PM and his diplomats wine and dine for their “countryâ€Â.
Former dictator Mengistu was sentenced to life imprisonment, in absentia, ending a twelve-year trial for genocide and other crimes. The jailed opposition leaders, elected parliamentarians, journalists and leaders of the civic societies are facing “treason†and “genocide†charges. It seems to me that the ruling EPRDF has its own definition to the word genocide. But, what is genocide? According to the UN definition genocide as: “The deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, ethnic, political or cultural group, in whole or in part.†By all definition, what has happened against the Anuaks in Gambella is genocide.
Meles faced a tough challenge to convince the outside world that the democratic credentials are intact, particularly after authorising a crack down soon after the election. From the then UN Secrteary General Kofi Annan to the US President George Bush to Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, to many members of Congress and the EU have all called for an aggressive, transparent investigation and to hold those individuals to account for all those killings. ON November5, 2005, after a lot of international pressure, Meles announced that an independent commission would investigate whether police used excessive force to quell protests.
Excessive Force
ON November 14, 2005, after hearing the report presented by Workneh Gebeyehu, the Federal Police Commissioner, the parliament decided to establish an independent inquiry commission that would investigate the force used by the security forces was excessive or not; whether the handling of human rights was conducted in accordance with the constitution and the rule of law or not, and the damaged caused to life and property as a result of the incident. On December 5, 2005, the parliament endorsed the 11-member the Commission.
During the investigation, the Federal Police was not co-operative in giving evidences to the commission. In addition to that, Dr. Mekonnen Dissasa, a member of the commission, was leaking the inquiry commission’s findings to the government officials, specially to the government representative and spokesperson in parliament, Ato shifera Jarso, and to the speaker of the House, Ato Theshome Toga, who is a member of the ruling EPRDF. A day before the inquiry commission was to announce its findings to parliament, the parliament was adjourned for recess. Due to that reason, the inquiry commission was deliberately deprived of its rights to present its findings to members of the parliament. On the same day, Meles told members of the commission to reverse their findings and warned them that caution must be taken to make sure that the final report of the commission would not tarnish the image of his government.
According to Judge Frehiyowt Samuel, Chairman of the Inquiry Commission, a decision was made on July 3, 2006. The Commission found (voting 8 to 2) that security forces had used excessive force in killing of 193 civilians and injuring of 763 others. It should be known that the Commission’s report doesn’t include the 65 inmates who were executed at Kaliti Prison on November 1, 2005. Only two members of the Commission, Dr. Mekonnen Dissassa and Sheikh Redman, said that the measure taken by the government is not excessive. But, all members of the Inquiry Commission agreed there was no property destroyed and human rights handling was unconstitutional.
“Proportional” Force?
On October 26, 2006, Dr. Mekonnen Dissasa submitted a revised version of the Commission’s report to the parliament. He told the parliament that 193 innocent civilians were killed and the police did not use excessive force. Only God knows how Dr. Mekonnen defines the word excessive force. Dr. Mekonnen was appointed by the government as Acting Chairman of the Inquiry Commission. One cannot ignore the following two facts:
First, the legality of the report is questionable as it was presented by Dr. Mekonnen, Acting Chairman of the Inquiry Commission who was not appointed by the parliament. The report realeased by Dr. Mekonnen didn’t represent the will of the majority of the Commission’s members.
Second, it is known that the original report of the Commission has been taken out of the country by the vice chairman of the Commission. Dr. Mekonnen’s report was referred to the House Standing Committee for Legal and Administration Affairs Sub-Committee, 11 out 13 members of the committee are from the ruling party EPRDF.
On November 15, 2006, the European Parliament on its resolution on Ethiopia called on the Ethiopian Government to publish unamended and in its entirety, and without any further delay, the final report of the Inquiry Commission.
The behaviour of Dr. Mekonnen Dissasa, the Acting Chairman of the Commission, and Dr. Gemechu Megersa, self appointed Spokesperson of the Inquiry Commision, reminded me a commentary that I read on NA Magazine eleven years ago. Prof. George B.N. Ayittey on his commentary (NA, Oct. 1996) entitled “No tears for Africa’s intellectuals,†said: “so many of Africa’s intellectuals-–some with Ph.Ds and who ought to have known better–have sold out their conscience, integrity and principles to serve the dictates of military despots with half their intelligence.†We all know that Dr. Mekonnen and Dr. Gemechu are no exceptions.
Conclusion
May be Nepal could be an example for Ethiopia. On April 2006, in Nepal, Inquiry Commission held King Gyanendra responsible for the deadly crackdown on anti-monarchy protests, for the shooting and killing of 22 pro-democracy protests. We didn’t need to have a kind of ten commandments for understanding the crime committed against 193 innocent civilians. We all know that the Meles regime has no regard for the law. But that doesn’t hinder us from addressing this case again and again until justice has been served.
Meles Zenawi’s government used excess force against civilians. Zenawi’s government must take responsibility for the conduct of its own security forces. It is public knowledge that after the May election and during the killings, Meles declared a state of emergency, banned political demonstrations and assumed direct control of the Federal Police, the security and the military forces. I personally have no doubt that tomorrow those government officials (Germans call such officials “Schreibtisch Täter”) will fall in the hands of a free and an independent court in Ethiopia like a rotten apple and face justice. And that time will come.
If some of us think that the dead are the only victims, then we are mistaken. When children loss their parents, and parents loss their children, the loss not only felt by the family and the community, but also by the generation to come. We can draw the lesson from the victims of the red terror. And, I know that we Ethiopian do not have short memories. Therefore, only justice can stop and heal such pains from passing through generations to generations.
So, what can we do for 193 massacred innocent civilians. We must set priorities. Our first priority must be justice for the massacred innocent civilians. Our second priority must be justice for massacred innocent civilians. Our third priority must be justice for massacred innocent civilians.
(Text of speech given at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University on February 8, 2007.)
Thank you very much. Good evening, and thank you all for coming to this event.
Before I make my presentation, I would first like to thank the sponsors of this event.
First, I would like to thank the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the Kennedy School of Government.
The Carr Center was established to provide a balanced and critical perspective on the policies and actions of national governments and others that affect the realization of human rights with the ultimate aim of improving human rights advocacy strategies, monitoring practices, and response mechanisms.
Thank you the Carr Center for co-sponsoring this event.
Amnesty International and Amnesty International USA are the premier human rights organization in the world. AI and AI USA have made enormous contributions in preventing and ending grave abuses of the rights to physical and mental integrity, freedom of conscience and expression, and freedom from discrimination in every part of the world.
I am especially grateful to Amnesty International USA for doggedly investigating and monitoring human rights abuses in Ethiopia over the past two decades, and for championing the cause of Prof. Mesfin Wolde Mariam, the 76 year-old prisoner of conscience and founder and president of the Ethiopian Human Rights Council, and many other victims of human rights abuses in Ethiopia.
Thank you AI and AI USA for co-sponsoring this event.
I am also thankful to Qaliti Qal Kidan for working collaboratively with the Carr Center and Amnesty International USA to make this event possible. The name Qaliti Qal Kidan itself signifies a solemn covenant and a commitment to foster the development of a free society based on the rule of law in Ethiopia. Qalitiy Qal Kidan, thank you for organizing this event.
Human Rights and Government Wrongs
Ladies and gentlemen, I will be talking this evening about human rights and government wrongs in Ethiopia. I shall speak of human rights because Ethiopians are protected by the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights covenants and conventions ratified by Ethiopia.†This guarantee is unequivocally affirmed in Article 13 of the Constitution of Ethiopia.
So, what exactly are these human rights?
Well, there are quite a few of them. A partial listing includes a bundle of basic liberties such as the rights to free expression, association, peaceable assembly, petition for redress of grievances, and freedom of the press. There are also privacy rights protecting Ethiopians from unreasonable government searches and seizures. There are due process guarantees to those accused of criminal violations, including the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty and proof beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal convictions, the right to be informed of criminal charges and the right against self incrimination, the right to prompt judicial review upon arrest and the right to habeas corpus proceedings to challenge unlawful detentions, the right to be released on bail and the right to a speedy trial once charged with a crime, the right to inspect any evidence brought against the accused and the right of confrontation of the accuser. This is just a partial list.
I shall also speak of government wrongs. And what are these wrongs?
Over the past decade and half, the regime of Meles Zenawi has engaged in serious human rights violations in Ethiopia. And the brutality and inhumanity of Zenawi’s regime was bared to the world in the aftermath of the May 2005 parliamentary elections.
There is little disagreement among fair-minded people about the outcome of that election. The coalition of opposition parties delivered a decisive defeat to Zenawi’s party. Kinijit, or the Coalition for Unity and Democracy as it is known in English, swept out Zenawi’s party from Addis Abeba’s mayor’s office and city council, and achieved similar decisive victories in nearly every part of the country. But before the votes were fully counted, Zenawi declared victory. Massive demonstrations in protest of the stolen elections followed in various parts of the country between June and November of 2005. Zenawi’s regime reacted violently against the protesters, and his security forces fired indiscriminately on unarmed protesters causing countless deaths and life-threatening injuries.
Under international pressure, Zenawi and his parliament established an Inquiry Commission to investigate the civil disturbances and the use of deadly force by the regime’s security forces. We have just heard from the Chairman of that Commission, Judge Frehiwot Samuel, and a member, Ato Mitiku Teshome. The Commission determined that government security forces used excessive force in causing the deaths of 193 persons, and wounding of 763 over a period of 14 days in June and November of 2005.
Now, no one should be misled into believing that only 193 persons were killed by government security forces after the elections. There is no doubt the actual figure is much higher, perhaps in the tens of thousands. But the Inquiry Commission did not have jurisdiction to investigate any other incidents.
In November, 2005, Zenawi imprisoned the opposition leaders who refused to join parliament in protest of the stolen elections, along with numerous journalists, human rights defenders and civic leaders. These prisoners are informally and collectively referred to as the Kality prisoners of conscience, named after the town where the decrepit prison facility is located.
In demanding the release of these political and civic leaders, Amnesty International USA in its February, 2006 report stated:
These people are prisoners of conscience, imprisoned solely on account of their non-violent opinions and activities….We demand their immediate and unconditional release and a halt to this attempt by the Ethiopian government to criminalize freedom of expression and prevent legitimate political and human rights activity.
So, my friends, this is the tip of the iceberg in the egregious government wrongs that have been, and continue to be committed in Ethiopia today.
And to borrow Jefferson’s words from the Declaration of Independence, the killing of innocent civilians and persecution of opposition and civic society leaders is part of “a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object of absolute despotism.â€Â
So this evening, I hope to demonstrate to you ONLY, ONLY the wrongs that have been committed against the Kality prisoners of conscience.
Who are the Kality Prisoners of Conscience?
Now, who are the Kality prisoners of conscience? Let me introduce some of the prominent members of this group to you.
We have highly respected and accomplished scholars and academics such as Professor Mesfin Woldemariam, who also served as President of the Ethiopian Human Rights Council (ERCHO), the premier independent human rights organization in Ethiopia.
We have Dr. Berhanu Negga, the outstanding mayor-elect of Addis Abeba and the author of the smashing 600-page Amharic bestseller, Dawn of Democracy in Ethiopia.
We have the indomitable Engineer Hailu Shawuel, the Chariman of Kinijit, or the Coalition for Unity and Democracy.
Then there is Dr. Yakob Haile Mariam, the respected former UN genocide prosecutor at the Rwanda tribunal and former UN Special Envoy in the Cameroon/Nigeria border dispute.
We also have one of the prominent women judges, Birtukan Midekssa, and Serkalem Fasil, a woman journalist, in detention.
Trumped-up Charges
In the narrow context of the prisoners of conscience, Zenawi’s regime committed its first wrong by filing trumped up charges against them.
It is interesting to note that long before these prisoners were charged with any crime, Zenawi was openly telegraphing his intentions.
On May 6, 2005, 9 days before the elections and seven months before the November demonstrations and the arrest of the prisoners of conscience, Reuters quoted Zenawi accusing opposition leaders of trying to cause a “Rwanda-type genocide†by spreading ethnic hatred and strife, organizing a violent uprising aimed at overthrowing the government, and treason.
These comments anticipated three of the seven “criminal†charges — high treason, armed uprising or civil war, and genocide — that were leveled against the prisoners of conscience in November, 2005.
It is clear Zenawi had laid his plans to use the legal process to incapacitate the opposition long before any of the alleged crimes had been committed.
The charges against the prisoners of conscience originate from a section of the Ethiopian Criminal Code designated “Crimes Against the Stateâ€Â.
These “crimes†are not crimes in the ordinary sense of the word. Rather, they prohibitions which aim to discourage dissent and stamp out opposition political activity, and criminalize the free exercise of human rights guaranteed under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other related conventions.
The most preposterous of these so-called “crimes against the state†charged against the prisoners is genocide, later amended to attempted genocide, under Article 269 of the Ethiopian Criminal Code. The prisoners are alleged to have attempted to kill or inflict serious bodily harm with the intent to destroy a nation, nationality, ethnic, racial, religious or political group.
They are also accused of committing such exotic crimes as “outrages against the Constitution, obstruction of the exercise of constitutional powers, armed rising or civil war, attack on the political or territorial integrity of the state and impairing the defensive power of the state.
The “Evidenceâ€Â
The chief prosecutor sought to prove attempted genocide with evidence of beatings causing bodily injury to individuals of a certain ethnic group, or causing fear to such persons.
At “trialâ€Â, the prosecutor piled on perjured testimony of victims of attempted genocide who claimed they were psychologically “traumatized†by ethnic insults and epithets, police officers who testified that they suffered mental anguish from seeing rioters flipping their middle fingers (the bird) at them, and suffering the outrage of being called God-awful names.
The Problem With “Crimes Against the Stateâ€Â
The problem with the so-called crimes against the state charges is that they are manifestly absurd and untenable. Charging a 76 year old retired university professor, a former UN genocide prosecutor at the Rwanda tribunal and former UN Special Envoy in the Cameroon/Nigeria border dispute, one of the most distinguished women judges in Ethiopia and a whole bunch of academics and newspaper reporters and editors with genocide just does not make sense.
At least not in a world governed by reason, due process and the supremacy of the rule of law.
Denial of Due Process
There in lies the second egregious government wrong. Let me say point blank that to any fair-minded person or court, the outcome in the case against the prisoners of conscience should be a “no brainerâ€Â. The prosecution’s case is based entirely on lies, deceit, falsehoods, distortions, fraud libel and slander.
In its December, 2006 International Mission of Judicial Observation report on Ethiopia, the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders concluded:
In view of its findings, the Observatory considers the charges to be arbitrary and disproportionate to the nature of the events that occurred in the aftermath of the 2005 elections. The Observatory expresses its deepest concern about the fairness of the trial, as it believes it to be a way to silence any political criticism of the current regime.
But due process violations can be demonstrated in each of the seven charges leveled against the prisoners of conscience.
Let’s just take one of those charges, the charge of “outrage against the constitution.†This offense involves the use of “violence, threats, conspiracy or other unlawful acts†with intent to “overthrow, modify or suspend the federal or state constitution.
The prosecution’s evidence against the Kality journalist-defendants for the commission of the crime of outrage against the constitution consists of published interviews with opposition leaders, and criticism of the government and the ruling party during the election process.
But the journalists are prosecuted for doing precisely what they are guaranteed under art. 29 (4) of the Constitution of Ethiopia, which states: “the press shall, as an institution, enjoy legal protection to ensure its operational independence and its capacity to entertain diverse opinions.â€Â
Due Process Violations Documented by Trial Observers
The whole range of due process violations in the so-called trial of the Kality prisoner’s of conscience have been documented by international observers who monitored the proceedings, including representatives of various non-governmental organizations, officials of foreign embassies; and the U.S. States Department and the European Commission who submitted confidential reports on the deficiencies trial to regime leader Zenawi.
The Observatory for Protection of Human Rights Defenders, among others, has summarized the observations of the trial observers. Among the major breaches of due process include arrests without a court warrant, use of repeated dilatory tactics which has resulted in delays in court proceedings and denial of speedy trial rights, excessive delays in court rulings on motions, introduction of new evidence not previously provided in discovery to the defense or outright refusal to provide discovery to the defense, introduction of extraneous and irrelevant evidence, distortion of evidence by the prosecution in “extremely prejudicial mannerâ€Â, prosecutorial tampering with the evidence, among others.
Zenawi’s Kangaroo Court
So we have a classic kangaroo court passing judgment over the Kality prisoner’s of conscience. Article 79 of the Constitution of Ethiopia talks about an independent judiciary composed of jurists unaffiliated with any political organizations or causes, and insulated from political pressure and external influences. But the reality is Ethiopian judges, particularly in high profile cases, are mere political puppets stage managed by the political authorities. The judges assigned to preside over the Kality matter were hand selected by the political authorities for their loyalty to the regime and its policies, and trustworthiness to deliver a guilty verdict. So, the outcome of the so-called trial is pre-determined, and the so-called judges — more accurately, political hacks in robes– will bend the rules to deliver the preferred verdict of the ruling regime: Guilty on All Counts.
Zenawi’s Problems on February 19
On February 19, 2007, in eleven days, the kangaroo court is expected to rule, pursuant to art. 141 of the Ethiopian Criminal Procedure, on the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence “which, if unrebutted would warrant conviction.†Simply stated, the three judges will rule to acquit the prisoners (dismiss charges) if they believed the prosecution has not met its burden of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Partial Acquittal
But could they acquit, even partially? I don’t think so, but would love to be proved wrong on this issue. An acquittal would mean the government did not have a case from the beginning, and that the whole thing was politically motivated. An acquittal would confirm the prisoners’ claim that the whole “trial†is merely one manifestation of the regime’s systematic program of persecution and suppression of regime opponents.
Also, I would argue that Zenawi has learned a hard lesson from his experiences with the Inquiry Commission. He will not allow another humiliating embarrassment to himself or his regime. But he could direct his judges to acquit the prisoners on some of the charges while sustaining the prosecution’s case on the other charges; and order the defense to present its case on the remaining counts. This would allow him to claim that he has a real court instead of a real kangaroo court.
Withdraw All charges
Art. 122 of the Ethiopian Criminal Procedure allows the prosecutor to withdraw charges before judgment at any stage of the proceeding with the permission of the court. This can be done on the prosecutor’s own motion or at the “instructions of the governmentâ€Â. Zenawi could direct Kamal to withdraw or suspend the charges during the pendency of the supposed negotiations between regime officials and the prisoners of conscience. But I doubt it.
Dismiss All Charges
Could all of the charges against the prisoner’s of conscience be dismissed? If the judges were to acquit on all charges, it would mean, first and foremost, a new day for Ethiopian justice. It would mean the birth of an independent judiciary against all odds. It would mean the end of political prosecutions in Ethiopia; and the end of perjury and suborners of perjury in the Ethiopian justice system. It would be a New Millennium for the Ethiopian judicial system. But, it is also very, very unlikely.
The $64K Question
The big question now is whether the prisoners of conscience should defend or in any way participate in the proceedings of the kangaroo court after February 19.
The fact of the matter is Zenawi and the world know that the Kality trial is a “tale full of sound and fury signifying nothing.â€Â
Zenawi is the object of condemnation and scorn by the whole world — Ethiopians in Ethiopia and the Diaspora, international donors and human rights organizations and groups, the European Union, the U.N., the U.S. Congress and others.
Major international organizations and governments have condemned or criticized the so-called trial of the prisoners of conscience, and demanded their release.
But, the prisoners of conscience have already won. They have won the hearts and minds of the vast majority of their countrymen and women. They have won their cause for human rights and democracy in the court of world opinion.
The European Parliament has passed two resolutions demanding the release of the political prisoners, as has the African Commission for Human and Peoples’ Rights. But they can’t win in Zenawi’s kangaroo court. And they don’t need to win in Zenawi’s kangaroo court.
Zenawi just needs to let them go! Zenawi, let my people go!!!
What Now?
Another incontrovertible fact is that Zenawi has thumbed his nose at the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and all of the other human rights covenants. He has shown his utter contempt for the rule of law and the mandates of his own constitution.
He has become an outlaw!
Indeed, he continues to brutally suppress opposition and dissent, and has assumed dictatorial powers.
We in the international human rights community must go beyond mere moral condemnation and demand compliance with international human rights law. We must not let Zenawi kill, torture and imprison his way out of democracy.
So, I ask you today, to support H.R. 5680, also known as the Ethiopia Freedom, Democracy and Human Rights Act. This bill, as its title suggests, aims to promote freedom, democracy and human rights by providing a system of incentives to Zenawi’s government. The bill demands first and foremost the release of the political prisoners. It also provides for a comprehensive scheme to advance democracy and human rights in Ethiopia. The bill provides $20 million to the Ethiopian regime to undertake institutional capacity building, including technical assistance to train election workers, technical support for regional legislative bodies, assistance to develop an independent judiciary and professionalize the prosecutorial agencies, facilitate the growth of independent private journalism and privatization of the electronic media so that the government will no longer have a monopoly on radio, television and the internet, and allow the free operation of human rights defenders and organizations, among other things.
This past October, the bill passed the 50-member House International Relations Committee with a unanimous vote, only to be sabotaged from getting to the floor by none other than Dennis Hastert, the former Speaker of the House.
I am confident that H.R. 5680 will be reintroduced under a different bill number in Congress in the current session. I should like to think we have a much better chance of getting it passed this time around.
So, finally there is something we can all do to bring accountability to all of those who flagrantly violate the human rights of their people and thumb their noses at international law.
I respectfully ask you and the international human rights community to join those of us in the Ethiopian human rights community in advancing freedom, democracy and human rights in Ethiopia.
