Skip to content

Ethiopia Freedom of Information

Ethiopia: Unfreedom of Information

Posted on , Updated on by Alemayehu G. Mariam

By Alemayehu G. Mariam

Life and Times of Democracy in Africa

The long march of democracy in West Africa seems to be well underway. In July 2009, I wrote a weekly commentary marveling about Ghana’s multiparty democracy. Wistfully, I asked the {www:rhetorical} question: “Why is democracy in motion in Ghana, and on life-support in Ethiopia?”

In May 2011, in another commentary I expressed my admiration for Cote d’Ivoire President Alassane Ouattara when he publicly asked the International Criminal Court (ICC) to conduct an investigation into gross human rights violations in his country, despite the high risk that he and his top leaders and supporters could potentially be implicated in such an investigation. I rhetorically asked: “Could the election of Alassane Ouattara signal the beginning of Africa’s second independence?  Is there hope for the end ofthugtatorship in Africa and the beginning of a new era of democratic {www:governance}, openness and political accountability?”

Hope springs {www:eternal} in Africa and light is now visible at the end of Africa’s thugtatorship tunnel. On May 31, 2011, Nigeria’s newly-elected president Goodluck Johnathan’s lifted the dark curtain of secrecy that had shrouded Nigerian politics for decades by signing a freedom of information act (FOIA). Nigerians now have the legal right to demand open government, political accountability and transparency.

Meanwhile, democracy in East Africa remains on life support. It suffered a massive stroke in Ethiopia in May 2010 when dictator Meles Zenawi declared election victory by 99.6 percent. Since 2005, Zenawi has put that country’s tiny private independent press on the ventilator and {www:tethered} the rule of law to the heart-lung machine. He put human rights in intensive care and has managed to anesthetize the population into silence. A couple of weeks ago, he secretly sought to negotiate a deal with the Governing Board of the Voice of America (VOA). If the VOA blacklists and blackballs his critics in the U.S. and banishes them from ever appearing on VOA broadcasts, the electronic jamming will be lifted. Last week, Zenawi’s henchmen appeared before the Human Rights Committee of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights to boldly claim that the independent press operates freely in the country, there is not a single instance of official torture and so on.

In Uganda, Yoweri Museveni, who seized power in 1986, became president-for-life in 2011. In Kenya, democracy survived by the skin of its teeth after 1,500 people were killed and 600,000 displaced in election-related violence in 2008. Somalia? What more can be said about Somalia?

Freedom of Information in Nigeria

Nigeria’s FOIA, like Ouattara’s request for an ICC investigation, is one of those {www:bellwether} events that could be used to determine whether Africa is poised for a second independence from thugtators in uniform or designer suits. The law has been in the planning and deliberation process for over a decade. It aims to deal with the core problems of governance in Nigeria – endemic corruption, lack of accountability and transparency and official secrecy.  Gbenga Adefaye, President of the Nigerian Guild of Editors, explained that the Act “has expanded the frontiers of press freedom for Africa’s most vibrant press.” He praised Johnathan for his “personal commitment to openness, transparency, accountability and good governance.”

The consensus among Nigeria’s opinion leaders is that the law will not only serve to improve governance but also empower citizens and enhance their ability to effectively participate in the democratic process. Armed with critical information on the functions and operations of government institutions and performance of political leaders, citizens could help keep government clean, expose and fight corruption and hold accountable those officials who rob the public treasury and abuse their powers.

The law establishes “the right of any person to access or request information” from “any public official, agency or institution.” One need not give a reason to request information. A public agency must provide the requested information within 30 days. If the information is not turned over, the person requesting can get a court order to compel disclosure. The law makes a narrow exceptionfor information that is likely to “ jeopardise national security, affect the conduct of international affairs or would amount to the release of trade secrets of the country.”

All “public institutions” are required to keep “records and information on all of their activities, operations and businesses”. The information to be kept include a wide variety of documents ranging from organizational manuals, official decisions, rules, regulations, planning documents, reports and studies to applications for any contracts, permits, grants, licenses or funds and even the names and  salaries of public employees. Such information must be “widely disseminated and made readily available in print, electronic and online sources, and at the offices of such public institutions.”

A public institution may deny a request but must “state reasons for the denial.” If a “wrongful denial of access is established, the defaulting officer or institution shall on conviction be liable to a fine of N500,000.00].” Any public employee who “willfully destroys any records kept in his/her custody or attempts to doctor or otherwise alter same before they are released” is subject to imprisonment for one year.

Unfreedom of Information in Ethiopia

In 1991, Zenawi as a victorious rebel leader declared, “Now is the beginning of a new chapter. It is an era of unfettered freedom.” Twenty years later today, we have an era of “unfettered” unfreedom of information. While Nigeria is opening its political process to the light of public scrutiny, Zenawi has blanketed the country with an electronic information blackout and kept busy drawing up blacklists of imaginary enemies he wants censored and gagged in the U.S. and elsewhere.

Since 2010, Zenawi has electronically jammed the broadcasts of the Voice of America, Deutsche Welle and the Ethiopian Satellite Television (ESAT). Following the 2005 elections, he managed to totally decimate the independent press by shuttering newspapers and jailing journalists. Last month he jailed two young journalists, Woubshet Taye, deputy editor of Awramba Times (a struggling weekly paper) and one of the few female journalists in the country, Reyot Alemu of Feteh (another struggling weekly paper) newspapers, on bogus charges that they were “organizing a terrorist network.” According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, “Alemu had recently criticized the ruling party’s public fundraising method for a major dam project on the Nile, and Taye has critically covered local politics as the deputy editor of his newspaper.”

Last week, Zenawi jailed Swedish photojournalist Johan Persson and reporter Martin Schibbye on charges that they crossed over the border from Somalia without accreditation. Press repression in Ethiopia is so massive and intense that Zenawi even censored World Press Freedom Day events this past May. Ethiopia has the second lowest Internet penetration rate (after Sierra Leone) in sub-Sahara Africa. Every Ethiopian pro-democracy website is blocked from access in Ethiopia.

President Ronald Reagan said, “Information is the oxygen of the modern age. It seeps through the walls topped by barbed wire, it wafts across the electrified borders.” If that is true, Ethiopians today must be suffering from an acute case of hypoxia and breathing through the heart-lung machine. Supposedly, Ethiopia has a freedom of information law (Proclamation No. 590/2008 – A Proclamation to Provide for Freedom of the Mass Media and Access to Information.) Anyone who has carefully studied this proclamation will be impressed by the lofty platitudes, truisms and boilerplate legal clichés and verbiage borrowed from the laws of other nations. But as a piece of legislation, it is hollow, vacuous and meaningless. In Article 4, it provides, “Freedom of the mass media is constitutionally guaranteed. Censorship in any form is prohibited.” Yet the proclamation bursts with heavy-handed censorship. Onerous burdens are placed on “editor-in-chiefs”, “media owners”, “publishers”, “importers”, “printers”, “distributors” and ordinary citizens who seek to gather or disseminate information through an elaborately camouflaged system of registration, certification and licensing requirements. It compels self-censorship through direct threats of serious criminal and civil prosecution for “offenses committed through the mass media” (Arts. 6-9; 41.)

Under the proclamation, citizens supposedly have a right of “access, [to] receive and import information held by public bodies, subject to justifiable limits based on overriding public and private interests.” But the “justifiable limits” include non-disclosure of any Cabinet documents or information (Art. 24), any information relating to the “financial welfare of the nation or the ability of the government to manage the economy of the country” (Art. 25), and any information on the “operation of public bodies [including] an opinion, advice, report or recommendation obtained or prepared or an account of a consultation, discussion or deliberation… minutes of a meetings…” (Art. 26). Simply stated, no information may be released on the activities of government ministers and officials, banks or any other official financial institutions and the internal {www:proceedings} or external reviews of public institutions. To top it all off, any public body may refuse a request for information if it determines for any reason the “harm to the protected interest which would be caused by disclosure outweighs the public interest in disclosure.” (Art. 28.) Such is freedom of information by smoke-and-mirrors.

Nigeria now has a reasonable chance of having openness and transparency in government with its FOIA. For decades, Nigeria’s government has suffered a reputation as one of the hopelessly corrupt in the world. Allegations of massive {www:graft}, fraud, abuse, waste and conflict of interest in government have persisted year after year. Despite anti-corruption laws and enforcement efforts, the problem of corruption in Nigeria has not diminished. The Nigerian judiciary and law enforcement agencies are criticized widely for lack of integrity and professionalism.

There are many who say implementation of the law will be nearly impossible because of the prevailing culture of corruption in Nigeria. No one believes the FOIA is a panacea to the problem of corruption or governance in Nigeria, but the availability of a legal tool that can be used aggressively by a determined few in the media could put a big chill on the criminal activities of the thugs and gangsters that have a chokehold on power. Minimally, Nigeria’s FOIA could be used to name, shame and prosecute some of the most corrupt officials and create broad public awareness for clean honest government.

It is said that “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Freedom of information is the principal tool by which the absolute powers of dictators can be curbed. African dictators, like hyenas on the African plains, like to operate in the dark invisible to the prying public eye. It is through freedom of information laws that these hyenas could be forced out of the dark and into the public square and be held accountable.

Hope springs eternal in Africa. The rising sun of democracy over North Africa is casting rays of hope on West Africa. The sun that rises for North and West Africa will also rise for East Africa. The African Lords of Darkness should not feel victorious because keeping a nation in the dark does not mean the people are blind, deaf and dumb. The light of freedom shines in the hearts and minds of the oppressed during the day and at night; and there is no power on earth that can put out that light. Those condemned to live in darkness should always remember that night always turns into light; the moon, the stars and the heavens shine brightly in the darkest of nights, and it is always darkest before the dawn. Until dawn breaks, let us reflect on the words of Shakespeare: “There is no darkness but ignorance…I say, this house is as dark as ignorance, though ignorance were as dark as hell; and I say, there was never man thus abus’d.” I say there was never nation thus abus’d.

Previous commentaries by the author are available at: www.huffingtonpost.com/alemayehu-g-mariam/ andhttp://open.salon.com/blog/almariam/

 

 

Ethiopia: Tear Down the Stonewall of Secrecy!

Posted on , Updated on by Alemayehu G. Mariam

By Alemayehu G. Mariam

It has been said that Africa’s natural resources — oil, diamonds, minerals — have often proven to be sources of woe, suffering and misery than wealth, prosperity and progress for the people of the continent. What should have been a blessing for Africa’s poor has become a curse of corruption, malfeasance and bad governance. Could Africa’s new found wealth in farmlands prove to be a curse once again? If so, how could it be averted?

Last week, Ghanaian Vice President John Mahama contended that transparency, public accountability and scrutiny are necessary to ensure the proper use of natural resources in Africa. Speaking to an international conference in Accra on the public’s right of access to official information, Mahama announced that  “information on all contracts on the oil find [in Ghana] would be made known to the citizenry for public scrutiny.” He explained that “Lack of access to information will create a gulf of confidence between government and the governed, breed mistrust, suspicion, corruption and lack of faith in the building blocks of democracy… It is against this background that the government of Ghana has started publishing all information on contracts on our oil find.” Mahama praised Ghana’s media for its dogged investigative role in promoting transparency and accountability in government contracting. He topped off his speech by declaring that “legitimate governments would not withhold information from the citizenry.” Ex-President Jimmy Carter praised Ghana’s effort at transparency, and reported that “President Mills also told [him] a third of the [oil] revenue will be put away for posterity, a third will be invested into education to benefit future leaders and a third will go directly into national treasury for current expenses.”

Recent oil and gas exploration deals in Ghana have been mired in serious allegations of corruption and criminality. In 2007, Ghana announced it had discovered offshore oil reserves with the potential to produce more than 2 billion barrels of oil by 2030. In 2004, the Ghanaian government signed an oil exploration agreement with various companies whose activities are now under official scrutiny. Last March, the newly-elected President John Evans Atta Mills pledged to make public all past and future gas and oil exploration agreements.

There are many disturbing questions surrounding the 2004 oil exploration agreements. The fact that the government concluded the complex agreements with the companies in weeks has raised questions about the thoroughness of the negotiating process. The agreements, concluded without parliamentary approval or formal cabinet-level review, have led to allegations of cover-ups. More red flags were raised when it came to public light that certain key players in the oil deals had close association with the former president John Kufuor, but little or not prior experience in the oil business. One of the co-owners of the company awarded an exploration contract was a physician in the U.S. who was later appointed ambassador in various European capitals by Kufuor. Little is known about the identities of the individuals or the financial backers of the companies who received the sole-source exploration contracts. Few details are available to the public on production and distribution rights, payments to the government and share transfer agreements between investors and the various companies involved. One of Ghana’s leading media outlets commented: “The sweetheart deals in the oil sector, which spotted powerful oil barons, whose footprints leads to the office of former President John Agyekum Kufuor, is about to turn sour… with the ‘Kufour boys’ about to face 25 criminal charges, [for actions] bordering on criminality [including] blatant falsification of public records in a mad rush to control Ghana’s black gold…”

Transparency and effective public access to information on official decisions and the decision-making processes used to reach them are cornerstones of  international law and the constitutions of most countries. Article 13 of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (2003) [ratified by Ethiopia on November 27, 2007] requires signatories to ensure “transparency and effective public access to information”. Article IV of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights Resolution on the Adoption of Principles on Freedom of Expression (2002), provides that “Public bodies hold information not for themselves but as custodians of the public good and everyone has a right to access this information, subject only to clearly defined rules established by law.” Article 29 (3) (b) of the “Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia” guarantees an all-inclusive duty of disclosure of official information that meets the test of “public interest”: “Freedom of the press shall specifically include the following… (b) access to information of public interest.” Article 29 is bolstered by Article 12 (“Functions and Accountability of Government”), which sweepingly mandates: “The activities of government shall be undertaken in a manner which is open and transparent to the public…”

For the past couple of years, there have been many questions raised concerning the Ethiopian dictatorship’s numerous foreign “investment” deals involving millions of hectares of farmland[1] and a border agreement with the Sudan[2]. Except for those who secretly concluded the so-called farmland “leases” or sales, or signed the border “demarcation” agreement with the Sudan, the negotiation processes and the complete text of the agreements remain shrouded in a veil of secrecy behind a dense fog of official cover-ups, hush-ups and whitewashes. None of the deals and agreements have been subject to public scrutiny. However, there is sufficient evidence gathered by independent sources which raises many disturbing questions about the negotiation process and the terms and conditions of the farmland and borderland deals.

According to a study by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), the official reports of the dictatorship with respect to the magnitude of the land deals lacks credibility[3]:

In Ethiopia, for example, enquiries at the state-level Oromia investment promotion agency found evidence of some 22 proposed or actual land deals, of which 9 were over 1,000 ha, in addition to the 148 recorded at the national investment promotion agency. It is possible to speculate that state-level agencies in other Ethiopian states may also have records of additional projects, and that some land acquisitions may not have been recorded at all…. For example, in Ethiopia information about the land size of many deals proposed or concluded in 2008 was missing….

There is further evidence to suggest official under-recording and misclassification to conceal the true nature and scope of the land “leases” or sales. The FAO/IFAD report states: “An investment by German company Flora EcoPower in Ethiopia was reported to involve 13,000 ha (hectare), while it is recorded at the Ethiopian investment promotion agency for 3,800 ha only.” Moreover, the dictatorship intentionally misclassifies the lands “leased” or sold to the foreign “investors” as vacant “wastelands” (that is unoccupied by anyone or just wilderness) in an effort to conceal the fact that inhabited lands are part of a grand land giveaway scheme to foreign “investors”. The FAO/IFAD report specifically points out:

In Ethiopia, for example, all land allocations recorded at the national investment promotion agency are classified as involving “wastelands” with no pre-existing users. But this formal classification is open to question, in a country with a population of about 75 million, the vast majority of whom live in rural areas. Evidence collected by in-country research suggests that at least some of the lands allocated to investors in the Benishangul Gumuz and Afar regions were previously being used for shifting cultivation and dry-season grazing, respectively.

On May 21, 2008, Meles Zenawi publicly described his agreement with Omar al-Bashir as follows:

We, Ethiopia and Sudan, have signed an agreement not to displace any single individual from both sides to whom the demarcation benefits…We have given back this land, which was occupied in 1996. This land before 1996 belonged to Sudanese farmers. There is no single individual displaced at the border as it is being reported by some media.

Zenawi insists on keeping the actual Agreement shrouded in absolute secrecy. There is no reason whatsoever why the border Agreement should not be made public in its entirety. If the Agreement is made public, it will either provide support to Zenawi’s claims or negate them, demonstrating that he is misrepresenting facts. The cloak of secrecy surrounding this Agreement raises many questions: Why isn’t the text of the formal Agreement between the two countries available for public scrutiny? What are the specific terms and conditions concerning the border demarcation lines and the rights of individuals living along the border made public since that would be the best evidence of the vicarious representation of them made by Zenawi? Why wasn’t the Agreement ratified by the “House of Peoples’ Representatives” as mandated by the Article 55, section 12 (“House of Peoples’ Representatives… shall ratify international agreements concluded by the executive.”) of the “Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia”? What conceivable “national security” exceptions apply to an Agreement which has been a subject of public commentary and explanation by the head of the dictatorship? What conceivable justification exists to keep secret an Agreement that merely marks the international borders of the two countries and protects the rights of the population in the border?

The simple point is that the runaway farmland and borderland giveaway deals need to be publicly scrutinized to ensure transparency (detect corruption and criminality) and to make certain that private interests (sweetheart deals) have not overtaken the public interest, or secret deals are not made to harm the Ethiopian national interest.

Mr. Zenawi: TEAR DOWN THE STONEWALL OF SECRECY AROUND YOUR FARMLAND AND BORDERLAND DEALS!” The Ethiopian people have a right to know, and you have a compulsory legal duty to ensure that they have “access to information of public interest.” (See, “Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia,” Article 29 (3) (b) and Article 12, section (1) (“government activities must be open and transparent to the public); Article 13 of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (2003) [ratified by Ethiopia on November 27, 2007].)

“Legitimate governments would not withhold information from their citizenry.” Ghanaian Vice President John Mahama

(Alemayehu G. Mariam, is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. He writes a regular blog on The Huffington Post, huffingtonpost.com/alemayehu-g-mariam/ and his commentaries appear regularly on pambazuka.org, allafrica.com, newamericamedia.org and other sites.)