As is well known by the regular readers of Ethiomedia.com, in the last few years Professor Alemayehu Gebre Mariam has been a constant and consistent voice of conscience for democracy and the rule of law in Ethiopia. Through his well-thought-out arguments, he has helped to keep alive the hope of the Ethiopian people, keeping fresh the memory of the jailed Birtukan Mideksa.
My commentary pertains to two recent articles of Prof. Alemayehu, the first penned in the first week of June 2010 under the title of “Ethiopia: Speaking Truth to the Powerless”, and the latest on a similar theme titled “Why Can’t we Just Get Along?”, dated August 30, 2010.
Perhaps quoting a representative paragraph from each essay might illustrate his points more clearly:
After reading his June article, I thought there was something fundamental missing from it, namely that the article by treating everyone the same and putting all opposition in the same dock, the lessons to be learned and the mistakes to be rectified were lost in generic talk. To that effect, I sent him a personal note registering my concern. To his credit, Professor Alemayehu was not one who considers himself “untouchable”, and he promptly replied by saying that “I offer opinions with the hope that they will generate informed and critical debate, discussion and analyses.” He then suggested that he would appreciate it I could post my comments on his blog site at Huffingtonpost.com which I did, but to my dismay, I did not see any other comments that might help develop this issue and shepherd it in the right direction.
For ease of analysis, simply focusing on the Ethiopian opposition inside the country and its situation since the 2005 election might probably make my point clearer. Over the last 5 years, the three main opposition parties inside the country have been MEDREK, AEUP and EDP. We all know the last two signed the so-called code of conduct with Meles’s EPRDF, while MEDREK called for a more comprehensive talk with the regime which Meles rejected and pushed MEDREK into a corner and eventually into the election. While MEDREK was an 8-party coalition, the last 2 were not members of any coalition, nor moved into any alliance. As a result, Ethiopians were forced to watch the spectacle of opposition running against opposition on top of the regime’s audacious malfeasance whose results we all know very well. Further, in these last 5 years, we sadly witnessed the internal problems of UDJ, one of the parties in MEDREK. Many citizens implored those expelled from the party to find solutions within and around the party, and not to take their grievances outside lest they adversely affect the morale of the people, and lest the regime take advantage of the situation. This was not to be. Government camera crew followed the dissenters and fanned the contradiction, coming to a confrontation and violence which finally and shamefully ended up in a kangaroo court as Professor Alemayehu rightly rages against.
I believe one of our treasured legacies as Ethiopians and blended from the different nationalities and ethnic groups of justice is a keen sense of fairness in our traditional legal systems inspired by religion, and culture. From making peace between husband and wife to finding solutions to communal problems, or working out proportional inheritance in the absence of a will, etc., our traditional system has developed a mechanism/s to deal with conflicts. It does not mean that this has been always perfect throughout our history. Some shimglina systems have been notoriously anti-women. In Tagel Seifu’s poem, “Yeamsa Aleka Gebru,” we see how Yamsa aleka Gebru is abusive of his wife, and thinks nothing is wrong, and traditionally many shimaglles have focused more on saving the marriage than addressing the injustice perpetrated against the wife. Some systems have acquiesced to those with guns even as the elders say out loud that “the guilty party is the soldiers; however, our decision is for the peasants to compensate the soldiers”. Still, the search and proclivity towards justice is a pervading aspect of Ethiopian culture, and those who have studied the matter more systematically may attest to that.
Professor Alemayehu in another essay has correctly pointed out the need for Ethiopian professionals to form professional societies to advocate for the oppressed Ethiopian. Nothing is more urgently needed now than the institution of shimaglles. Had we such an institution both inside Ethiopia and in the Diaspora, the UDJ tragedy may not have ended in a kangaroo court. But for such an institution to be effective, it cannot engage in generic talk, and “antem tew; anchim tey” pronouncements that do not address the root problems. It has to pass a studied and considered judgment on who the guilty party is and utilize the power of public shaming (since it has no instruments to enforce its rulings) to force solutions. Such institutions have been tried to mediate political disputes in the Diaspora. The first one was probably the one set up to mediate between Col. Goshu’s Medhin and COEDF, and which had shimaglles like the venerable Col. Asnake Engida (now frail and nearing 100 years old after continually fighting three regimes for Ethiopian democracy and prosperity and the author of numerous books). UEDF, when it was formed in 2003, had the institution of shimaglles to mediate disputes.
Although those associated with political parties could be members of such an institution in the future, in the initial phases, it is probably better to constitute the office with non-politically affiliated citizens, but with outstanding sense of justice, fairness and calmness. They should be upright citizens who value the institution more than themselves, especially at a time when Ethiopians cannot expect any justice from TPLF’s courts, and when we have multiple conflicts to manage and adjudicate. This is the first institution that has to be set up towards the road to healing our wounds. The shimaglles should know their roles well; they cannot keep quiet when justice calls for the freedom of jailed political leaders like Birtukan and thousands of others. They cannot be manipulated by the regime (as the recent shimaglle team that mediated the release of the CUD leaders) or by any of the opposition. Above all, they must not be afraid to call out guilty parties although the mechanism of that could be in private or in public as the moment demands. The institution would earn the trust of the opposition parties and the people at large through its democratic deliberative process and the fair outcomes. For starters, such people as Professor Alemayehu could initiate the formation of such an institution and recruit upright citizens taking into account the candidates’ gender, ethnic diversity and experience. Here is finally an institution to which we voluntarily proffer our support and commitment transcending our ethnic dividing markers and political shades. Here is also al last the start for democratic Ethiopians to concretely deal with their grievances against a dictatorial regime by forming our own independent and democratic institutions.
This is one way to channel protest literature into self-empowerment and show that we can carve out our political community independent of the regime.
