All the more so because of the post election developments which resulted in a tragic loss of lives and the destruction of property. It is also important that the Government’s position is understood fairly because of the general assumption that incumbent’s in the developing world are by definition less committed to a process of democratization than the opposition. It is useful, Hon. Chairperson, to allow for the possibility that this assumption, which might be true often, is not always true.

It is important to listen to the Government’s views on the May 15 elections in Ethiopia for yet another reason. Hon. Chairperson, it is sad to say that there is a tendency to overlook the context within which democratization is taking place in countries such as Ethiopia. This is a context which, on the top of the known challenges related to economic difficulties, is further complicated by the lack of the tradition of loyal opposition and the absence of a culture of give and take and compromise at the level of what, for lack of appropriate term, may be called the political class.
I am therefore very grateful, Hon. Chairperson, for this opportunity. I intend to present my Government’s views on the May 15 elections and related issues in three parts but in a very brief manner: The pre-election phase, the election period, and the post-election developments.

1. The Pre-Election Phase

Right from the outset, Hon. Chairperson, it was the conviction of the ruling party that the May 15 election should be as free, fair and as clean as possible. There were two reasons for this. The first, and which happens to be the major one, has to do with the Government’s conviction that the future, and the security of the country, were inextricable bound up with the democratization of the country. Ethiopia’s future does not lie in autocracy. A non-democratic form of governance for Ethiopia is a recipe for disaster, and is suicidal. Not simply because of preference for democratic values, but also because of pragmatic reason, the Government was convinced that it was in the vital interest of the country that the May 15 elections were as free, fair and as clean as possible.
Secondly, the Government was aware that some within the opposition were preparing to discredit the election and, in fact, to use the electoral process for mobilizing people to remove the constitutional order. It was crucial therefore for the Government to ensure that no pretext was available for those who were out to discredit the election and to use that pretext for creating political and social commotion in the country. We admit, we did not succeed fully in this, even though the extremists within the opposition, who were the one’s who have been setting the tone for the opposition in general, did not achieve their major objectives.

Honorable Chairperson,

Honorable Members of Parliament,

The pre-election campaigning for the May 15 election in Ethiopia was, without any doubt, as democratic and as equitable as practically possible. Unfettered debates were conducted for almost nine months on national TV and Radio live between the representatives of the opposition and the ruling party. No member of the opposition, if he or she were honest, would deny the fact that far from being undemocratic, the formats of the debates were in fact loose, to the point of being almost anarchic.

There were also consultations with the members of the opposition on the points they were raising with the view to conducting the elections on a level playing field. This related to issues such as access to the media and to issues with respect to the composition of the National Electoral Board. It was only on the question of the Board that agreement could not be reached. The Government found the request by the opposition that the representatives of opposition parties be members of the Board, unhelpful and, therefore, unacceptable.

The position of the Government was based on one simple logic — that given the reality in Ethiopia, an electoral Board made up of opposition parties would simply morph into a forum for political bickering among parties. The Government had no doubt that the existing Board would be a neutral body with the capacity to discharge its constitutional responsibilities.

This is the only major issue on which the ruling party did not concede to the opposition. Otherwise, there was absolutely no major issue of principle which stood between the ruling party and the opposition as Ethiopia moved closer to the May 15 elections. Rather, the Electoral Board has created an enabling environment by establishing the Joint Forum of political parties to discuss issues and concerns emanating from the electoral process.
The debates on national TV and Radio between representatives of the opposition and the ruling party for months was so free to the point of being un ethical that many an Ethiopian had wondered whether it would not have been proper to have had a code of conduct for the debates. There were none. In a country where the political culture demanded respect for authority, unethical and insulting remarks thrown at people with little inhibition must have created the climate for defying government authority in some areas. There were also instances whereby this type of reaction was encouraged by some members of the opposition.

In general, however, the pre-election period was an exciting period for Ethiopians, and unprecedented in their history. Many thought that Ethiopia was approaching a turning point in the process of its democratization. Whatever concern there might have been about the swiftness of the democratic opening in Ethiopia, was dispelled when during the last weekend before the election close to two million and half Ethiopians, supporters of both the opposition and the ruling party took turns on Saturday and Sunday to stage unprecedented rallies in the city with absolutely no incident to speak of. It was a hopeful curtain raiser for the election a week later. Ethiopians and friends of Ethiopia were hopeful that the elections will be conducted peacefully.

2. The May 15 Elections

I don’t think I need to say much about how the May 15 elections were conducted in Ethiopia. At least, there is full unanimity on one thing. That the elections were conducted peacefully and that the Ethiopian electorate behaved in a dignified manner, all those who witnessed the elections would testify to. It was an event, which made Ethiopians proud. It is also possible to make substantive generalizations based on the behavior of the 26 million registered Ethiopian electorate, 90% of who cast their ballots. Whatever one might say about the Ethiopian political class, the Ethiopian people have demonstrated that the democratization process in Ethiopia is irreversible and that autocracy and dictatorship would have no political basis in Ethiopia.

Honorable Chairperson,

Nor were the results of the elections devoid of surprises. In Addis Ababa, it became clear early the next morning that one of the opposition, the Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD), had swept all constituencies in the capital, winning all 23 seats with nothing to show for the ruling party.

It was immediately clear that the political landscape in Ethiopia was changing and that the opposition was becoming an integral part of the newly emerging political landscape in the country. But the gains made by the opposition were not limited to Addis Ababa. It became obvious very soon that the opposition had also made some inroads in other urban areas as well as a few rural section of the country. When all the results were calculated it became obvious that it was possible that the opposition would have close to 200 seats in the new parliament in comparison to the 12 seats in the outgoing parliament, while the ruling party would have more than 300 seats. This in itself would have represented a seismic change in the political situation in Ethiopia due to the enabling environment created by the government in order to deepen the democratic culture of the country.

Honorable Chairperson,

Honorable Members of Parliament,

While the new hopeful developments that I have recounted in the foregoing were underway, one could also witness right on the morrow of the election dangerous signs emerging which reflected the thinking that had existed within the opposition in the pre-election period. I am referring here to the statement made to the press by the head of the CUD while the ballots were still being counted in Addis Ababa. The BBC carried the statement the next day after the election. In a very categorical manner the head of the CUD was quoted by the BBC as having said that his party would not accept the result of the election in Addis Ababa because they know that the election has been rigged and manipulated. Within hours it became clear that far from the election having been manipulated by the ruling party, in fact the reality was that the opposition, namely the CUD, had won a landslide.

For the Government, however, the signs were ominous. It was very clear that the opposition was set to act in conformity with the script of their strategy prepared long before the election to discredit the electoral process and create a climate of instability in the country by delegitimizing the whole election process.

In this regard, the opposition, particularly the CUD was always bent on discrediting the whole electoral process in Ethiopia and then use the electoral mobilization to stage what has been called the “Rose Revolution” based on the experiences of the former Soviet Republic of Georgia and Serbia.

3 The Post-Election Period.

Regarding the post-polling process, the Electoral Proclamation has clearly specified comprehensive mechanisms and procedures for lodging, investigating and deciding on any complaint and dispute both at different levels of the NEBE and the Federal courts in which case every aggrieved stakeholder is strictly required to follow only and only these legally established mechanisms and procedures. Therefore, there is no practical and legal reason that any complaint or dispute arising from the electoral process could or should be a cause for the recent tragic events that claimed the lives of compatriots in Ethiopia.

However, following the announcement of the preliminary results, the leadership of Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD), while nominally agreed to the legal investigation procedures, have refused to accept the result by attempting various means to smear and engaging themselves in fomenting riots and violence. Accordingly, in its press statement of May 31, 2005, the CUD called upon the Ethiopian people to be mentally prepared for struggle measures ranging from stopping school, transport, and production activities to staging a nation-wide general strike to take place. The CUD didn’t stop there. It had started to implement its plans by encouraging various activities not conducive for peace.

These acts and moves of the CUD finally culminated in violence and riots in the capital Addis Ababa, which involved attempted looting, bank robbery, raiding police stations and disarm the police in breach of the one-month ban imposed on holding demonstrations and outdoors meetings until the announcement of the final results of the election. However, it is to be clear that the ban doesn’t in any way prohibit an indoor assembly of people, and that it was cautiously imposed after the polling day not to influence the pre-election process but only to ensure the security of the people and their property, against the danger that was cropping up due to the manifested move of some opposition parties under various pretexts.

Thus, the root cause of the problem has nothing to do with disputes arising from the electoral process. The root cause is rather the pre-designed strategy crafted by the leadership of the Coalition for Unity and Democracy to change the constitution unconstitutionally and grab power by force whatever it takes if it would enable them to oust the EPRDF Government.

In the aftermath of the May 15 election, Ethiopians had two options — to celebrate the newly emerging political situation in the country and vow to protect and nurture the new gains, or create artificial reasons for political confrontation so that, true to form, Ethiopia would once again descend into political turmoil. The latter path might be perhaps a path which grows out of our political culture which gravitates more toward a zero-sum calculation than toward adherence to principles of give and take and therefore to a win-win arrangement.

No sooner had the opposition heard about the enormous gains it has made in the election than it embarked on a major offensive to characterize as fraudulent all election results wherever the ruling party had won. It began issuing press releases almost every day calling on people to prepare for a struggle which they said, tongue in cheek, will be peaceful, to prevent the election from being stolen by the ruling party.

The opposition made it known to every one, including to the EU representatives, that it had no confidence and trust in the National Electoral Board.
In general, a climate was being created by the opposition, which, more or less, reflected the script prepared long before the election for conditions to be created in Ethiopia during the election to repeat the Georgian and the Serbian scenario.

On the other hand, it was clear to all objective observers that the allegation that there was systematic rigging and manipulation of the election in the rural areas was just not plausible.

It was not, Honorable Chairperson, only in Addis Ababa and the urban areas that the ruling party lost seats in a big way. Five or six major political figures of the ruling party lost seats in their respective rural constituency. If there was indeed wholesale manipulation of the election by the ruling party, obviously, that manipulation would have begun, first of all, by making sure that the seats of the EPRDF big shots were secure. Having engaged in systematic rigging, it would simply be incredulous for the EPRDF to fail to secure seats for its high level officials.

Whatever pretext may be claimed by the opposition and whatever motive behind their activities, what we can say at this point is that it is this approach by the opposition, which logically led to the tragic events of June 8 and the loss of lives of so many.
What makes the whole episode all the more sad is that the bloodshed could have been avoided. But it could also have been worse. It could have been avoided because already the official announcement of the results of the election have been postponed for anther one month and there was already understanding that all complaints would be investigated.

But the problem, Honorable Chairperson, was that the opposition was not prepared to accept Ethiopian laws and to act in conformity with the Constitution of the land. In short, the opposition was not ready to act like a loyal opposition. Regrettably, it was only after the bloodshed of June 8 that the opposition demonstrated readiness to accept the authority of the National Electoral Board. This is clearly embodied in the Joint Declaration signed between the ruling party on one hand and the opposition, namely, the CUD and the UEDF. There is now agreement among the parties to refrain from violence and from inciting people to violence. We are hopeful that these commitments will be observed.

Hon. Chairperson
Hon. Members of Parliament
Ladies and Gentlemen

I would like to assure you the firm commitment of my Government to the legal, peaceful and transparent completion of the electoral process and democratic transition. Most of the students who were arrested due to the violence in some Universities have been released while few of them will be charged in accordance with due process of law. The cases of those who have been involved in malicious violent acts are under investigation as expeditiously as possible. The government has kept on releasing those who have nothing to do with violent activities while those proved through police investigation to have been involved in criminal activities will be charged in accordance with due process of law. In the mean time, the police already allowed the international and national Red Crosse as well as family members to visit the detainees. Regarding whether excessive force was used in curbing the violent acts during the recent riot, the Government is ready to conduct an independent investigation.

Conclusion

Honorable Chairperson,
Honorable Member of Parliament,

That Ethiopia at present is at crossroads is obvious. We have not yet removed all the pitfalls. All members of the opposition may not yet have decided that mixing the parliamentary way together with the non-parliamentary and illegal way is a dangerous tactic. That is what led to the chain of events, starting with disturbances at universities and schools, which eventually led to the June 8 tragedy. It is not that there might not be within the opposition people who appreciate the dangers of extra-legal activities when broad democratic vistas are opening up for the country. But one cannot be sure about who might be calling the shots within the opposition.

That is why the following days and weeks are so critical not only for the democratization of our country but also for its peace and stability, to which, I can assure you, my Government is fully committed.

It is my Government’s hope that the Development Committee of the European Parliament will continue to stand behind the people of Ethiopia as we try to consolidate and nurture the huge gains that we have made on 15 May 2005 and avoid tragic events of the type that took place on June 8. All democratic countries are based on the rule of law and their democratic competitions are conducted on the basis of the rules of the game that are agreed to in advance.

This is what we have to learn in Ethiopia. My Government does not claim monopoly over the truth and over what is good for Ethiopia. In this spirit, it is prepared to co-operate fully with all those who have been given responsibility in line with the sovereign will of the Ethiopian people. The challenges faced by our country are so complex that even with all the co-operation among Ethiopians, these challenges would still be daunting. This is the spirit with which our Government intends to handle the issue between us and the opposition in the coming days and weeks and then beyond the announcement of the final results of the election on July 8, 2005.

Let me conclude by thanking the Development Committee for all the assistance to, and the understanding for my country.

I Thank You.