The Claims Commission held Ethiopia responsible for “looting and stripping” of Senafe and Tserona towns.
No civilian Eritrean was killed by Ethiopian soldiers, a sharp contrast to the murders the troops of Eritrean warlord Isaias Afwerki committed against civilian Ethiopians during the 1998-2000 War. The inhabitants of Irob wereda took the brunt of the murders, tortures, abductions and rape, although inhabitants of several Ethiopian towns had gone through the ordeal of bearing Eritrean atrocities.
To free itself from the crimes,
Eritrea had argued that the Claims Commission cannot pass decisions on inhabitants of the larger parts of Irob wereda because the Boundary Commission’s ruling had given the areas to Eritrea, and by implication, the inhabitants of the said Irob Wereda were Eritrean nationals. Therefore, Eritrea argued, the Commission cannot interfere in the internal affairs of Eritrea, and hold it responsible for whatever happened against Eritrean nationals.
The Commission, however, dismissed Eritrea’s rebuttal, saying the “Commission doesn’t agree that persons should be denied the protections of international humanitarian law because of disputes between the parties to an international conflict regarding the sovereignty over the territory concerned.”
Following are two excerpts from what the Claims Commission passed as “rewards” for each party of the dispute, and one can clearly observe the degree of atrocities the Eritrean regime committed against defenseless Ethiopians in several towns and villages of northern Ethiopia as compared to the absence of the death of an Eritrean civilian by the Ethiopian Defense Forces:
D. Findings of Liability for Violation of International Law
The Respondent is liable to the Claimant for the following violations of
international law committed by its military personnel or by other officials of the State of
Ethiopia:
1. For permitting the looting and stripping of buildings in Tserona Town
while it occupied the town from late May 2000 until late February 2001, it is liable for
75% (seventy-five percent) of the total damage caused by looting and stripping in the
town;
2. For permitting the looting and stripping of the adjacent Tserona Patriots
Cemetery, it is liable for 75% (seventy-five percent) of the total damage caused by looting
and stripping of the cemetery;
3. For the destruction of the Sub-Zoba Administrative Building, the Sub-
Zoba Health Center, and the Warsai Hotel in Tserona Town;
4. For inflicting damage on the infrastructure of the village of Serha during
its occupation of that village, it is liable for 70% (seventy percent) of the total damage
inflicted on Serha from May 1998 through February 2001;
5. For failure to take effective measures to prevent rape of women by its
soldiers during its occupation of Senafe Town;
6. For permitting looting and stripping in Senafe Town during its occupation,
it is liable for 75% (seventy-five percent) of the total damage from looting and stripping
suffered in the town between May 26, 2000 and June 2001;
7. For the unlawful destruction of or severe damage to the following thirteen
major structures in Senafe Town during the Ethiopian occupation of the town, and
8. For permitting, while occupying the area, deliberate damage by explosion
to the Stela of Matara, an ancient monument in the Senafe Sub-Zoba.
D. Findings of Liability for Violations of International Law (by the State of
Eritrea):
1. For permitting in Mereb Lekhe Wereda frequent physical abuse of
civilians by means of intentional killings, beatings and abductions, as well as widespread
looting and property destruction in the areas that were occupied by its armed forces from
May 1998 to May 2000;
2. For permitting in Ahferom Wereda frequent physical abuse of civilians by
means of intentional killings, beatings, abductions and wounds caused by small-arms fire,
as well as widespread looting and property destruction in the areas that were occupied by
its armed forces from May 1998 to May 2000;
3. For permitting in Gulomakheda Wereda frequent physical abuse of
civilians by means of intentional killings, beatings and abductions during the invasion in
June 1998 and less frequent, but recurring, physical abuse of civilians and frequent
looting and destruction of civilian property in the areas that were occupied by its armed
forces from June 1998 to June 2000;
4. For permitting the looting and stripping of Zalambessa Town;
5. For the deliberate, unlawful destruction of 75% (seventy-five percent) of
the structures in Zalambessa Town;
6. For permitting in Irob Wereda a recurring pattern of excessive violence by
Eritrean soldiers against civilians, including frequent beatings and intentional killings,
and frequent severe beating and other abuse of civilians taken into custody, as well as
widespread looting and property destruction in the areas that were occupied by its armed
forces from May 1998 to June 2000;
7. For failing to take effective measures to prevent rape of women by its
soldiers in Irob Wereda;
8. For failing to release civilians taken into custody in Irob Wereda and to
provide information regarding them; and
9. For failing to take all feasible precautions to prevent two of its military
aircraft from dropping cluster bombs in the vicinity of the Ayder School and its civilian
neighborhood in the town of Mekele on June 5, 1998, and for the resulting deaths,
wounds and suffering by civilians and the physical damage to civilian objects.
sovereignty over large portions of Irob Wereda was disputed. The final
award of the Boundary Commission placed in Eritrea substantial areas in northwest Irob
that were claimed and administered by Ethiopia when the war began. Many claims
alleged by Ethiopia arose in these areas. (Page 24)
[Eritrea]
contended that the alleged offenses involved interactions between Eritrean forces and
Eritrean nationals, and hence were outside the Commission’s jurisdiction. It was also
urged that, because the Boundary Commission determined the territory to be Eritrean, it
could not be subject to belligerent occupation by Eritrea’s own forces.
The Commission does not agree that
persons should be denied the protections of international humanitarian law because of
disputes between the Parties to an international conflict regarding sovereignty over the
territory concerned.
Eritrea maintained it had
“no claim to answer.”
80. The Commission agrees that the evidence supporting several of Ethiopia’s claims
is insufficient to establish liability. However, as to several important claims, the
Commission finds clear, compelling and unrebutted evidence showing patterns of serious
misconduct by Eritrean forces. This evidence includes multiple allegations implicating
named Eritrean officers.
81. Claims of Physical and Mental Abuse. The evidence shows frequent friction
between occupied and occupiers in the occupied areas of Irob Wereda, including frequent
insults and verbal abuse. There is no doubt that the situation was psychologically painful
and difficult for many. However, the evidence is not sufficient to permit the Commission
to make findings of liability for non-violent harassment and verbal abuse.
82. Of much greater concern are numerous accounts in Ethiopia’s evidence of acts of
violence by Eritrean forces against civilians. Many accounts, including eyewitness
accounts, described frequent beatings of civilians by soldiers, often resulting in
substantial injuries. More than a dozen accounts refer to intentional killings of civilians
by soldiers unrelated to combat. Most of these deaths involved intentional shootings;
others resulted from beatings. Many of these declarants claim to have been eyewitnesses.
Some accounts converge; two describe the killing of a named civilian in Ayega shot in
the back while carrying a beehive. The Commission believes that this unrebutted
evidence is sufficient to establish a recurring pattern of excessive violence by Eritrean
soldiers against civilians, including frequent beatings and deliberate killings.
The unrebutted evidence is sufficient to establish a pattern of serious misconduct
by Eritrean forces involving the detention and subsequent failure to release or provide
information regarding the whereabouts of numerous civilians.
There are numerous unrebutted accounts of widespread thefts by Eritrean soldiers
of livestock, the most common and important form of wealth in rural Irob. Numerous
declarations describe Eritrean forces seizing large numbers of animals. Eritrean soldiers
are described slaughtering and feasting on civilians’ sheep and goats; other accounts tell
of stolen livestock being collected and herded back to Eritrean rear areas.(Page 28)
The
Commission received no evidence indicating any changes in Eritrean training or doctrine
aimed at avoiding possible recurrence of what happened in the third and fourth sorties on
June 5, 1998. Eritrea did not make available to the Commission any evidence from the
pilots and refused to identify them (Page 32)
Commission finds that Eritrea is liable for the deaths,
wounds and physical damage to civilians and civilian objects caused in Mekele by the
third and fourth sorties on June 5, 1998.
In any event, the Commission finds no liability for this Aksum bombing, as an
airfield is a legitimate target, even when there are no military personnel there at the time.
The landing strip and other facilities could be used later for military purposes. (Page 32)
Ethiopia claims for several air strikes against targets in the town of Adigrat and
for periodic shelling of the town. It is contested whether one of the claimed air strikes
occurred, but the Commission need not decide that, as the claims fail for lack of proof.
Adigrat is on a main north-south road with many Ethiopian military installations
With respect to matters prior to Eritrea’s accession to the Geneva
Conventions of 1949, effective August 14, 2000, the international law applicable to this
claim is customary international law, including customary international humanitarian law
as exemplified by the relevant parts of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949.
