CUD and UEDF had made it clear in their joint press statement of July 19, 2005, that the investigation process was not designed to do justice to the people’s voice but to give EPRDF an additional chance to be able to take away more voice from the people. In the July 19 joint statement, the following points have been made clear:

1. In almost all of the panels the representatives of the Electoral Board were blatantly biased. The representatives not only had acted outside of the agreed upon guidelines, but have also ignored their impartiality by denying established truths, disregarding documentary evidence and arguing openly against UEDF and CUD representatives.
2. UEDF and CUD representatives and witnesses have been harassed, threatened, and were openly reminded of harsh days ahead of them unless they behaved properly. In some places they have been barred from appearing as witnesses and in still some instances beaten or killed.
3. It was observed that some of the panelists and presenters of cases on behalf of EPRDF were public prosecutors, justices and security officers.
4. Although it is clearly stipulated in the investigation guidelines that each complainant would be allowed to have 5 witnesses per a contested constituency. NEB panelists and EPRDF representative have, in complete disregard of the guideline, chosen to proceed with their own interpretation.
5. Documents compiled by the Electoral Board and sent to the investigating panels were incomplete thus being a cause for serious misunderstandings.
6. It is to be recalled that NEB had developed a list of items that the complainants could lodge for investigation by the panels. Accordingly, the types of complaints were marked in advance in the format of NEB had prepared for the purpose. Only these were to be used during the investigation. Instead, NEB representatives in the panels identified new complaint types that were petty and thus confusing and not strong and good enough for the panels to arrive at credible decisions.
7. International observers were not allowed to observe the decision making process in full and clearly follow the whole investigation. In addition, presentations of cases were conducted in the absence of international observers and opposition representatives.

Not only this, it is to be recalled that the June 10 tripartite declaration and the June 14 additional version to the same document was signed in order to create a conducive environment of the peaceful investigation of the election irregularities. Article 4 of the additional document of the joint declaration has been fully abrogated in complete disregard of the serious complaints lodged by CUD and UEDF, and the anti-democratic forces are set on forming a government by force. Article 4 of the additional joint declaration says:

“The signatories confirm that they stand ready to implement their 10 June 2005 declaration in an open, constructive, inclusive, and consensual manner. The signatories agree to discuss the precise modalities for implementing their declaration in a conducive environment.”

The above provision was meant to enable the people to give their witnesses without fear and to move about freely without the intimidating presence of the armed militia. It was also meant to prevent the cajoling of people on the one hand, and the imprisoning, beating and harassing them, on the other. But all this effort has been made to go down the drain. We, on our part, have done our best to play the pacifying and stabilizing role while the ruling party was fully engaged in creating tension among the people. The tension has turn seriously affected the investigation process. Consequently, the investigation process has failed. The objective was to give victory to EPRDF and this has been successfully achieved.

In their July 26 statement, NEB officials had said that representatives of opposition parties had not lodged their complaints on the spot. They said that the representatives made their complaints after they returned from the investigation places. The truth is that the representatives had lodged their complaints to the investigating committee on the spot. It was only when their complaints were rejected by the team there that they came to Addis Ababa. Some of the representatives had handed their complaints to the investigating teams in writing. Whether the complaints were lodged on the spot or at the center, the NEB has done nothing about them.

In short, the investigation process has been conducted outside the agreed declaration. It is true that during the investigation process, homes of witnesses have been burned down. Witnesses have been killed. Families of witnesses have been harassed. On July 16, 2005, Ato Wuddu Delelegn had reported to the investigation panel and complained that the local militia had threatened to kill him if he did not leave the area by July 22, the day when the investigating committee would have finished its work. He was told that the investigating committee would come to his place and that he should go there and wait. He was assured that he would not be harmed. But he was killed on July 16. Our representatives had asked to go to where Ato Wuddu was killed, together with other witnesses. Their request was denied. Instead, a team of journalists went alone to the place and came up with the drama that was presented on television yesterday and before yesterday.

Ato Belete Ejigu from Awangi Zone, Killage Constituency, was killed on July 16, 2005. The killers are Yibeyin Ayalew and Abbayneh Birara. The organizer of the criminal act is the kebele chairman.

In Arsi Negelle, the killers of member of parliament-elect have not been detained according to the law, and the Jeldu wereda murders have been rewarded.

Another murder has been committed in Gindeberet wereda. Along with the killings, innocent citizens have been beaten, imprisoned and displaced.

The ruling party is busy disseminating false propaganda through its monopolized government media against the opposition parties and pressuring them to accept the outcome of the election, whatever it may be, with grace. What does this mean? It means that they should accept the result regardless of however it is obtained.

The NEB and EPRDF have gone to the extent of discrediting decision made by conscientious election executives and judges. Some NEB officials said that final decisions can be made only at the main office. Other NEB officials said decisions can be made on the spot in the field. It is the decisions made in this state of confusion that we are being forced to accept.

During the investigation, in constituencies where EPRDF had lodged complaints to save its high level officials who were ignominiously defeated, it was decided that there should be a rerun of the election. In areas where the opposition parties had lodged complaints, their requests were rejected, with few exceptions, by a majority decision on grounds of insufficient evidence.

What does it mean when EPRDF says that the opposition parties have taken votes away from it? The security forces, the weapons, the prisons, the administration, the police are all in its own hands. How can it accuse the opposition parties when on the contrary, it is the one that rigged the election and robbed the people’s vote? The NEB, which is created by EPRDF, is sitting as a judge and making sure that its creator wins the election.

The voice of the people cannot be protected while the NEB stands as a loyal agent of EPRDF. If the people’s voice is to be respected and peace and stability to prevail, the contested constituencies must be re-examined by a neutral body or there should be a reelection in the 299 contested constituencies in an atmosphere free from beatings, imprisonment and harassment. We call upon domestic and international observers to contribute their share in participating actively and observing the reelection as they have done in the past. We issue this call in the name of the Ethiopian people who have been robbed of their voice.