OPPOSITIONS DURING EPRDF ETHIOPIA

By Mathza, ( March 25, 2004)

I. POLITICS AND DEMOCRACY

A: Ethnic-based Federalism

B: State Land Ownership

C: Human Rights

D: Democracy

E: Governance

F: Support of the People

G: Attacks on the Leadership

H: Other Criticisms

I: The Private Press

J: Conclusions

II. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

A: Education

B: Health

C: Agriculture

D: Mining

E: Transport and telecommunications

F: Water and Energy

G: Industry

H: Observations

I: Conclusions

The introductory section and section A of Part I was posted in June. Here are sections B-D:

PART I: POLITICS AND DEMOCRACY

B: State Land Ownership

The oppositions incessantly condemn and harp on the policy of state ownership of land. They allege that state ownership of land constrains agricultural development and productivity as it discourages farmers from investing on the land they use. Some of them even say the land policy is the cause of the cyclical drought. In a recent interview by Africa Today, the Prime Minister asserted “peasants who have that land have the right to use it in perpetuity ... are able to pass it by way of inheritance to their children.” In other words, the land in the possession of the farmer is as good as ownership with security of tenure. There is therefore nothing to deter the farmer from undertaking improvements on his farm. All the farmer needs is a clear understanding and assurance of this right which has been confirmed by the new land certification scheme plus an adequate support and encouragement to make the optimum use of his holding.

Parts of the Oromia and the Amhara States are in the process of training trainers who will be responsible for issuance of land ownership certificates to the farmers. In fact, the Amhara State has already started issuing certificates. Mr. Martti Ahtisaari, the United Nation’s Special Envoy for the Humanitarian Crisis in the Horn of Africa, supported the government land policy for the same reason given by the government, selling land when in dire need followed by rural-to-urban exodus of farmers in droves. He made it clear that land “privatization is not an option in Ethiopia.” Dr. Diouf, FAO Director-General, corroborated this by saying “the proposals some parties have been forwarding calling for privatization of land ownership as the only means for agricultural development in Ethiopia is a misconception.” He cited China and Vietnam which did not privatize agricultural lands but were agriculturally successful. One does not have to be a rocket scientist to appreciate that the land policy has averted the influx of millions of peasants and their families to towns and cities during the consecutive droughts in Ethiopia in the past 30 years. The policy may be revised to allow sale of land now in the holding of the farmer, if necessary, once the danger of drought is reduced to a manageable level.

State ownership of land was inscribed in the constitution (Article 40) to reflect the wish of the majority which was arrived at through extensive consultations. A study carried out by the Addis Ababa University confirmed this. It is apparent that those who expressed opposition and reservations are the disgruntled elements who lost their landlordship of the most fertile agricultural lands, part of which were acquired by dispossessing of the poor peasants from their lands.

Land tenure is an issue which concerns 85% of the population. It should not be changed because a negligible vociferous elements in the oppositions cried loud. These do not represent the farmers. If there is going to be a change in the present land ownership the decision should be left to the farming population, as it should be under a democratic system. As suggested above for ethnic federalism, this could be done with virtually minimum cost by conducting a referendum on it during the 2004 election. It could be an alternative approach or a follow-up to the nationwide debate on land reform proposed by the Oxfam director Barbara Stocking.

One of the accusations that some of them have been hurling at the Prime Minister is that he has double standard in regard to land tenure. They say that he returned rural and urban lands to the previous owners in Tigray but failed to do so in the rest of the country. They, of course, did not tell us that the former was done during the Derg period when the TPLF was administering Tigray after the pull out of the Derg from Tigray. The TPLF was the sole decision maker then. In the current administration, whether the oppositions admit it or not, the TPLF is one of the EPRDF and affiliates who make policies and decisions. It is quite likely that an attempt could have been made by some to denationalize land but failed because the majority, particularly the southern states, would not allow it. Because of the differing land holding systems in northern and southern Ethiopia, reverting land to the former owners has more negative impact on the Southern States. In Tigray where, with some exceptions, land was practically owned by the farming population it does not make much difference whether former owners continue to use the land or the land is redistributed.

C: Human Rights

With respect to oppositions’ complaints regarding human and democratic rights violations, yes there have been shortcomings, violations and abuses. This is likely to continue for some time to come. Zealous civil servants, mainly at qebele level (intentionally or otherwise), policemen, militia, cadres and saboteurs as well as lack or inadequacy of institutions are among those to blame. Some times law enforcement forces react with excessive force when provoked and harmed or their colleagues or officials get killed. Absence of good governance at the state level in Gambella was found to be the major cause for the recent violence started by some Anuaks. According to government findings “Ethiopian highlander hooligans and youth as well as some members of the administration and state police committed the atrocity.” Most of the culprits were apprehended and were awaiting to be brought to federal courts. In the mean time the federal government apologized for its failure to take measures in advance. The area continues to be overwhelmed by on-going disputes and rivalries among the Anuak, Nuer and other ethnic groups, including ‘highlanders.’ It is complicated by the presence in the State of thousands of Nuer refugees from the Sudan.

Oppositions and separatists are probably the major culprits for inter-ethnic clashes. They instigate and fuel incidents and cry foul and human rights violations as a consequence of the incidents. It should be clear that the government has the responsibility to protect the public from harm and suffering brought about by irresponsible oppositions and others. Any harm that may come to the perpetrator(s) cannot be considered human rights violation. On the contrary, it is the perpetrator(s) who should be held accountable for ensuing disturbances, loss of lives and other human rights abuses.

The judicial institutions which are plagued by sever shortage of trained manpower and financial constraints, shortcomings, inefficiency and corruption are among government institutions contributing to human rights violations. The increasing number of college and university graduates, including those from the Ethiopian Civil Service College, are progressively reducing the backlog of court cases and rendering better services. This is a big relief to those whose cases have been collecting dust for lack of adequate qualified and genuine judges. This, the on-going training for judges and prosecutors on human rights issues, the judicial personnel training center that is going to be established and the pending establishment of a national coordinating forum for the justice system organs auger well for the reform of the judiciary, a critical priority area. The young and educated judges, will, hopefully, progressively reduce procrastination and corruption in the judiciary system. The success in increasing the annual court cases dealt with from 26% four years earlier to 95% in 1995 (EC) in Tigray State is an indication of what is already happening elsewhere in this vital government service.

Human rights violations will improve with time. The reasons for this optimism are: the pending establishment of the Human Rights Commission, the execution of the planned training of the police force, the putting into practice of the recent proclamation amending the Federal Police Commission creating “transparent working relations between the federal and state police commissions,” the launching of the Human Rights Center and the National Justice Information Center in the future and the better understanding of the working of democracy by all concerned. There are indications that the government does take actions against human rights violators. According to US Department of State’s human rights report on Ethiopia for year 2003 “Some of the alleged human rights violation by the Ethiopian military, police force and security forces is increasingly being subjected to internal investigation.” Let us not forget that democratic governance, which is a basic requirement for respecting human rights in Ethiopia, is at the experimental stage -- developing and improving.

D: Democracy

During the German Chancellor Gerhard Schroder visit to four African countries (Ethiopia included), German diplomats disclosed that the countries to be visited were chosen for their "anchors of stability" and “peaceful democratic transition.” This is an example of development partners’ endorsement of and support for the practice of democracy and governance in Ethiopia. And yet, the oppositions deny that there is such a thing as democracy in the country and that the leadership does not represent the people. They enumerate the attributes that characterize democracy as in the West. True, for understandable reasons, there is no democracy by American standard which nevertheless, as we all know, itself fails in a number of cases (racial disparity in health care, police racial profiling and brutality, meting out sentences not commensurate with the offenses or crimes, provision of inadequate legal support, torture in Guantánamo Bay, corporate executive scandals, tax shelter abuses, etc.) However, a beginning has been made. In his “The Supermarket and the Starving,” David Plotz asserts the Ethiopian government is “fairly democratic.” In a society of a developing country, particularly Ethiopia where, unlike in other African countries, the modern system of government had been evolving from a feudal system, the democratization process is arduous and time consuming. Oppositions would have us believe it can be a quick-fix and a smooth riding. No, there is no such thing as copy-cat democracy. There is no such thing as instant democratization. There is no such thing as painless transition to democracy in a country like Ethiopia. Introducing democracy in a developing country involves modifying Western democracy to take account of stark realities: socio-political as well as economic conditions, traditions, cultures, etc., which in the case of Ethiopia are as varied as the 87 or so ethnic groups in the country. In Ethiopia, democratization is a process in transition and at a fledgling stage and needs to be nurtured. We should all be mindful of the caveat that there is no such thing as perfect democracy in operation any where in the world leave alone in an emerging democracy which is the case in Ethiopia.

Introducing democracy in Ethiopia means change. Change is frightening for many people, not knowing how it will affect them personally. To expect change to a democratic system to have a smooth ride is naive. It is not surprising that disturbances can occur here and there, engineered by people and organizations who consider democracy is against their interests. For democracy to function at a substantially higher level than now, the concept of democracy will have to crystallize in the minds of the people. The requisite capabilities and capacities need to be developed. The attitude of people and civil servants typified by master-servant kind of people-government relationship has to change. In other words, practicing democratic governance in Ethiopia has begun and is going through a metamorphosis with improving administrative, security and judicial systems characterized by inadequate capacity. In the words of Aurelia Brazeal, the US ambassador to Ethiopia, “ it is clear we see a process here that is still evolving and is incomplete in terms of full democratic development.” This, in a nut shell, is the simple answer to most of the criticisms by the oppositions dealt with in this writing.

In the process of democratization in a society with limited familiarity with democratic concepts, mistakes and wrongs have been and will continue to be made, many of them attributable to civil servants’ lack of the requisite skills, lack of commitment, corruption, and even sabotage. It is an open secret that the bureaucracy is inundated with persons with nostalgia for the previous systems of government. It is not unlikely that many of these persons are ‘killing two birds with one stone,’ i.e., combining sabotage and corruption. Civil servants are not alone in this. Some elements of the public who unlawfully gain benefits and those who still continue to practice the kind of tradition of giving money, gifts, and other favors in order to receive governmental services for which they are entitled render the road to democracy more difficult to negotiate. Time is of the essence. With the finalization of nominations of officials, the Office of Ombudsman is expected to be operational in the near future. Through the performance of its functions the people will get exposure to the workings of democracy; realize that the civil servants are there to serve them; and the people will assert their rights more and more and thereby contribute to better governance and weakening of corruption. The anti-corruption and ethics education program that is being conducted by the Federal Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission will contribute to this. Educating the public in democratic rights and duties and in exercising them should be supplemented by genuine civic socities. The indigenous NGO, the African Initiative for Democratic World Order (AIDWO), is a good example of a civic organization that just does this. The fact that people can and do speak their minds and exercise freedom of speech are indications of some awareness of their democratic rights and duties and that democracy is taking root.

Public support and participation is critical in the fight against corruption. It seems that the public is responding to the government call for support. Public tip-offs during the last six months doubled to 949 compared to the same period last year. This augurs well to achieving substantial reduction in corruption within a short time and thereby enhancing progress in democratization.

Democracy and the culture of exchanging opposing views and political tolerance are being enhanced on many fronts. One of them, in addition to the one above, is through interactions between the government and parties and civic organizations. Meetings between the Prime Minister and other officials with opposition parties, staffs of higher institutions and members of the private press are examples of such interactions. The latest, the first meeting of the UEDF officials with the Prime Minister, seems to be a good start in civilized interactions between the incumbent government and the opposition parties.

As for the oppositions’ claim of lack of legitimacy of the government, the government was voted to power by two consecutive elections. The international and local observers (EHRCO, local UN staff, diplomatic missions, political parties, and domestic NGOs) that monitored the elections testified that the 2000 national elections “generally were free and fair in most areas; however, serious election irregularities occurred in the Southern Region, particularly in Hadiya zone.” This was confirmed by the 2003 United States Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Ethiopia. The irregularities were corrected by holding re-elections. The Norwegian Institute of Human Rights (NIHR) was very critical on the shortcomings of the elections in the South which it attributed to the thesis that “violations are conducted by local people at the lower level of the party.” It said it “had observed several signs of improvement from 1992 and especially in 2000.” Election irregularities do occur even in traditionally democratic countries, as happened in the United States not so long ago. If the Bush administration does represent the American people, why not the Meles administration which won elections with a much higher margin? It should be noted here that the factors that constrain proper management of government administration referred to elsewhere in this article apply to elections as well.

Whether opponents, hatemongers, jealous individuals and groups like it or not, the ruling party (the four-party EPRDF coalition), which directly and through its affiliates represents the whole cross section of the Ethiopian people, is there to stay. There appears to be no viable and sustainable alternative to it. Other alternatives are very likely to result in chaos and the dismantling of Ethiopia. The Ethiopian people who benefited and will increasingly benefit from the process of democratization will not let this happen. It is unlikely that they will go against their interest. Instead they will volunteer to defend their interest as they did to keep Ethiopia’s territorial integrity during the Eritrean aggression.

(To be continued)

A: Ethnic-based Federalism

B-D: State Land Ownership, Human Rights, Democracy
E-F: Governance, Support of the People