Report from the court room
The second criminal bench of the federal high court has on Monday, June 12, 2007, passed a guilty verdict against most of the defendants in the Hailu Shawel case file. The timing of the ruling was a complete surprise to all of us.
Here is what happened on that fateful day in an impoverished corner of Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa.
As the judges came in to the court room with rather imperious expressions, the defendants rose to receive them as is the customary practice in any court room. Usually, the defendants sit after the judges, but to the mild surprise of every one, this mid morning Monday, they remained firmly in their standing position. This certainly caught the attention of the three judges. The senior judge, Adil Ahmed, skewed to his right to confer with Leuel Gebremariam, the judge that sits to his right. They whispered for a few seconds, while the third judge, Mohamed Abdulsani, stared straight ahead with one of his perfectly attuned blank stares.
Judge Adil chose not to ask why the defendants were not sitting as usual.
“Today’s court session is to deliberate on…” began Judge Adil, trying his best not to look in the direction of the defendants. But the defendants would have none of it, “We have an appeal to present to the court” said Berhanu Nega in an authoritative voice. Judge Adil veered angrily in the direction of Berhanu. He did not look amused at being interrupted: “You can not speak when you want to. The court is explaining today’s agenda. We shall first hear from the correctional facility. Has the court order been carried out?” said a flustered Adil in a frantic gesture to control the court room. Berhanu did not respond.
A representative of the prison at Kaliti immediately took center stage: “…The defendants had been given an opportunity to hold a half day conference as ordered by the court, but they refused citing the absence of Engineer Hailu Shawel (he was in a hospital at the time). They were given a second opportunity, and a half day conference was carried out as ordered by the court. They have also seen all the videos as prescribed by the court”
The reaction of the defendants against the statement by the prison representative was striking for its spontaneity. They protested in unison: “We have a petition to present to the court. We need to be heard…”
But Judge Adil would have none of it, and his refusal to listen exasperated the prisoners.
Dr Yakob Hailemariam was particularly vocal, repeatedly referring to the law in support of his appeal to be heard. “We won’t listen!.” (“Anadametem!” was what he said in Amharic)”
Sshot back Judge Adil: “The court had ordered that you should hold a half day conference. That the order had been carried out has been confirmed by the correctional facility…”
A second burst of spontaneous protest interrupted the judge: “We did not watch (the videos)…” cried out the prisoners.
Adil was on the verge of losing control of the court, a fact that was not lost to Judge Leuel, who interjected to warn the defendants in a severe tone of voice: “Let’s listen to each other. It has now become a standard practice to hold this court in contempt. We should not waste time by punishing you for contempt of court…”
Dr. Berhanu Nega responded to Leuel’s threat: “But you should listen to us. Listen to us (Admetun!)”…
Leuel did not let him finish: “Sit down. You have not been granted permission to speak…”
Berhanu stood his ground by remaining in his standing position. For a second, it looked as if though Berhanu would be held in contempt.
Judge Adil intervened: “Let him remain standing. Defendants are supposed to stand, not sit, during court proceedings. If you stand [speaking directly to Dr Berhanu Nega], it means you are respecting the law. Doctor, you can not speak when you want to. This is a court.”
Berhanu was not cowed: “Listen to us. We are the defendants. Let us speak.”
Dr Yacob Hailemariam, too, spoke out: “We have a right to be heard. Listen to us.”
Judge Adil responded angrily: “You yourselves are the ones who said that you will not engage in a defense.”
Judge Leuel continued: “You did not submit your evidences to the court.”
Berhanu did not disagree with him: “Listen to us. It is not about evidences…”
But it got him no where.
“Today’s agenda is to deliberate on how the defendant’s evidences will be presented to the court. After ruling on matters related to the evidences, we will address other issues. The court is adjourned for ten minutes,” said Judge Adil suddenly, and the three judges stood up and hastily walked out of the court.
The ten minutes turned out to be two hours, and when they returned they had a surprise for everyone.
Judge Adil immediately started reading a written statement: “We have a ruling concerning the defendants who have so far failed to submit to the court a listing of their evidences. The court has repeatedly ruled that the defendants should submit their evidences to the registrar’s office. However, the defendants have all along insisted that the court should not be presiding over their case. The law clearly stipulates that defendants should submit their evidences before the beginning of the trial. That they have not done so to date, signals that they do not have a defense to submit. As such, we find all but nine of the defendants guilty of the charges brought against them by the prosecutor [This is a very brief synopsis of the ruling].”
There was a stunned silence in the court after the ruling. It was totally unexpected. And so ended this Monday’s court session, abruptly and dramatically.
As we drove back to the center of Addis, we gazed out of our car’s window towards the residents of Addis, who went about their ways entirely oblivious to the historical significance of this Monday.