The consent of the governed

Our muted puzzlement in December 2005 following the EPRDF’s announcement it would charge the leaders and members of the opposition with the crime of genocide is now turning into a deranged retroactive scream in our heads.

Five months in politics is a lifetime. Since December, Berhanu Nega and his fellow political dissenters now rendered criminal defendants have decided not to fight the EPRDF’s charges in court. By filing incendiary charges impossible to fight in a Third World courtroom, the EPRDF seems bent on sending the nation on a historical collision course. Unfortunately for Ethiopia, an entire people’s outcry—in the country and abroad—has not forced a reckoning in the rank and file of the EPRDF.

But how does one defend against the charge of genocide? All precedent tells us is that those who commit genocide—the Hitlers, Stalins, Pol Pots, and Milosovics have never been tried, found guilty, and sentenced in courts set up by their own people. Our very own Mengistu falls in that category. Also, the convictions have always required the United Nations or the Allied Powers after the Second World War to set up monstrous tribunals that have attempted to give some semblance of timely, and non-retributive justice administered to the most responsible mass killers. Immensly perplexing is how in the world could people who are not part of a government’s security apparatus or acting on behalf of such entity be charged of the crime of genocide when they have not committed such act or do not have the means to commit it? The EPRDF has thrown us in a bizarre world where those who have done the killing have charged those whose only crime is to demand an end to tyranny through peaceful means.

The questions were far too circuitous for our linear non-legal minds so we decided to Google around. Dozens of web pages later to be stored in Google’s search caches for posterity and possible review by the U.S. D.O.J. our laymen minds had no option but to reach the indubitable conclusion that the EPRDF’s genocide and treason charges have no basis in logic, precedent, and perhaps most important, love for country. Self-preservation has compelled the EPRDF to create pitiful courtrooms in which university professors, human rights advocates (Professor Mesfin and others), at least four prominent lawyers (Dr. Yacob Hailemariam, Mr. Bertukan Demeksa, Daniel Bekele, and Netsanet Demissie), fourteen independent journalists, elected parliamentarians, and average Ethiopians who dared to voice their political dissent are fighting for their lives. The EPRDF’s courtrooms are sham-filled edifices of tyranny.

We tried to understand genocide and how that crime is adjudicated in domestic and international arenas by looking at ten genocides that have taken place in our lifetime. In all these instances, the perpetrators of crimes against humanity are those in power. The EPRDF’s world, as in many cases, is a parallel world where hype is turned into reason and hyped reason into governance. More than anytime, ethiopundit’s oft-repeated advice to not believe the hype has hit the collective conscious of Carpe Diem Ethiopia like a ton of bricks.

Bear with us.

Germany, Nuremberg Trials (1945-49)

The mother of genocide trials also known as the Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, held between 1945 to 1949 in Nuremberg, Germany, tried 24 of the most important captured leaders of Nazi Germany as well as lesser war criminals and medical doctors who participated in Nazi human experimentation. Most were tried and found guilty of war crimes and the crime of genocide(over 6,000,000 just counting the Jewish holocaust). Those charged with the crime of genocide in Nuremberg, Germany, were members of the Nazi government or acting on behalf of the Nazi government.

Cambodia (1975-79) This month, twenty-seven years after the brutal Khmer Rouge was ousted, the current Cambodian government with the collaboration of United Nations is attempting to close the chapter on the Khmer Rouge’s killing spree that left two million Cambodians dead (the most conservative figures put it at 1.7 million) . The gruesome Cambodian story is recounted in a recent Washington Post story story and it seems likely the first defendants from the Pol Pot regime may appear in court as early as 2007. In any case, those who will be charged with the crime of genocide in Cambodia are members of the Cambodian government and/or security agents acting on its behalf.

Ethiopia (1978)

By 1997 the EPRDF managed to file charges of genocide, war crimes, homicide, and willful injury against 5,198 members of the Derg regime (2,952 in absentia). The number of dead Ethiopians during the Derg’s 17-year rule are in the hundreds of thousands but the genocide portion—the Red Terror killings number approximately 10,000. The achievements of the Special Prosecutor's Office are many but it has shown us that justice delayed is justice denied--seriously folks it has been more than 15 years since the demise of the Derg! The delays are starting to become worse than the crimes. In any event, those charged with the crime of genocide by our very own EPRDF were all members of the Derg regime or agents that killed on its behalf.

Rwanda (1994) The extermination of an estimated 937,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus carried out by two extremist Hutu militia groups, the Interhamwe and the Impuzamugambi during a period of 100 days from April 6 to July 15, 1994 has come to be known as the Rwandan genocide. The Interhamwe (responsible for the majority of the killings—up to 800,000)—were led by Colonel Theoneste Bagosora, the architect of the genocide. His death squads ranged at will across the country, and any church or place of refuge that refused them was simply taken down. In 1994 the Security Council established an international tribunal in Arusha, Tanzania (ICTR) and the trials are still ongoing. Similar trials are being conducted in Rwanda under the modified traditional communal system known as the Gacaca. In total, up to 10,000 villages are expected to hold Gacaca trials by next year to hear the cases of more than 100,000 suspects. More than 200,000 Rwandan citizens have been chosen from local communities to sit on judicial panels that will preside over these trials. In any event, those charged with the crime of genocide were either acting on behalf of the Rwandan military, its security agents, or the forces these two entities unleashed.

Bosnia (2001) Slobodan Milosovic was charged of the crime of genocide by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague. The charges included one count of genocide, one count of complicity with genocide, and an additional 27 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity arising from the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina between 1992 and 1995. The charges are based on Milosevic’s "command responsibility" as President of Serbia and his alleged participation in a joint criminal enterprise. The charges covered the shelling of Sarajevo; the mass murder of thousands of Muslim men and boys at Srebrenica, both UN-proclaimed "safe areas;" and for the Omarska detention camp. The tribunal charged Milosovic and other Serbian officials for the death of approximately 10,000 Bosnians.

India, Gujarat Trials (2002) In February 2002 government-sponsored massacres led to the deaths of more than 2000 muslims in Gujarat, India. While the outcome of the trials has done little to bring the perpetrators of the crime responsible before an Indian court, Human Rights Watch and Concerned Citizens Tribunal of Gujarat published detailed reports holding a Gujarat provincial minister and his government responsible for the killings. The Asian Legal Resource Center’s written submissions to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights should be read with Ethiopia in mind:

For their part, the authorities in Gujarat have demonstrated how utterly the system can be brutalized to further violate the rights of victims. In Gujarat, the same police force responsible for the atrocities has been charged with investigating the cases going to trial, and the government responsible for what occurred has been appointing the prosecutors. Although the National Human Rights Commission explicitly recommended that the Government of India permit independent agencies to investigate the cases, hear the trials in other states and provide witness protection, these recommendations were unheeded. (Emphasis ours).

Those charged with the crime of genocide in Gujarat, India, were members of the Indian government.

Sudan, Darfur (2003- ) In February 2003 two rebel groups attacked Sudanese government forces and installations and the government retaliated by recruiting and arming an Arab militia (the Janjawit) to do its dirty work. The government launched an aerial bombardment campaign to support the ground attacks by the Janjawit. The conflict has resulted in the mass killing and displacement of non-Arab villagers in the Darfur region of Western Sahara and the United Nations estimates that 180,000 people have died in the fighting and two million others have been displaced (although a recent British Parliamentary Report estimates that over 300,000 people have already died.) Fast forward to January 2005 and the Security Council’s International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur found that the Government of Sudan and the Janjawit are responsible for serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law accounting to crimes under international law but that the government had not pursued a policy of genocide in Darfur. It nevertheless identified 51 individuals responsible for human rights violations and recommended an immediate trial at the International Criminal Court. Possible indictments will be handed upon members of the Sudanese military and other agents of the Sudanese government. Note: the tragedy in Darfur is reaching historic proportions. This site provides daily updates on the ongoing humanitarian crisis.

Congo (2004) In Congo, fifteen senior army and police officials stood a genocide trial in 2004 for their suspected role in the disappearance six years ago at Brazzaville's river port of hundreds of refugees who were returning from the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo where they had fled the previous year due to the civil war in Congo. The Congolese court found the 15 defendants were not individually responsible for committing war crimes, genocide, or crimes against humanity in relation to the events in 1999. But the court ordered the Congolese government to pay 10 million CFA francs (15,000 euros, 18,500 dollars) to the relatives of 86 of the missing refugees. The court dismissed the damages claims of the families of another 102 of the missing refugees. The decision left the families of the dead bitterly disappointed but on its face, the court tried to reach a somewhat Solomonic decision. But let’s not get too far off the topic—again, the refugees were killed by the Congolese government or by agents acting on its behalf.

Liberia (2006) As if the havoc he unleashed in Cote d’Ivoire before seizing the Presidency in Liberia was not enough, during his tenure as President from 1997 to 2003, Boston jail house escape artist Charles Taylor managed to commit several heinous acts including arming and training rebels (the Revolutionary United Front—RUF) in Sierra Leone. More than 50,000 people were killed and in 2003, a United Nations justice tribunal issued a warrant for his arrest charging him of war crimes in Sierra Leone. The charges against the former despot include killings, rape, and all sorts of violence against women and children. Taylor is now facing tthe music in a Sierra Leone courtroom. The killings were all carried out by members of the Liberian government and/or its agents.

Iraq (2006) The butcher of Bagdad finally got what was coming to him when Iraq’s authorities charged Saddam Hussein of committing genocide against 180,000 Kurds in northern Iraq in the 1980s. Saddam’s savage Operation Anfal against the Kurds in 1988 included the use of mustard gas and nerve agents which killed and maimed rural villagers and drove them out of their homes en masse. Kurds were subjected to forced displacement and illegal detention involving thousands of civilians where homes and houses of worshippers were leveled without reason or military necessity. Those who exterminated the Kurds were members of the Iraqi government.

_________________________________________________________

You get where we’re headed. So let’s go there and try to draw some conclusions:

Ethiopia (2005-2006)

In May 2005, Ethiopia conducted its third parliamentarian elections. A few days after the polls closed, the opposition had won an unprecedented number of seats in the federal legislature and had also swept the Addis elections. Then the process unraveled. It soon became clear the EPRDF was not going to give up its power. The electorate, aware that the election was rigged and its votes stolen in broad daylight, did what every electorate does: it voiced its protest. In June and November 2005 government security forces whose identity is shrouded with utmost secrecy shot at random and their bullets found the youngest and even non-protesting folks on the street. In its wake, the EPRDF left more than 80 dead in Addis Ababa alone. The numbers in the rural areas are unknown. Crackdowns led to massive roundups and detentions at Dedessa and Kaliti. Insanity has reigned in the country and charges have been finally been brought forth--but in the parallel world of the EPRDF, genocide and murder charges will be brought against . . . the victims!

The questions we must ask and answer:

Are those charged of committing genocide in 2005 members of the Ethiopian government or its agents? NO! What is the number of Ethiopians killed by the CUDP: ZERO!

When Bereket Simon compared the Ethiopian democratic movement with the Interhamwe, no one knew the metaphor was intended to plant seeds in Ethiopia and abroad to subsequently justify possible post-election crackdowns. The oft-repeated EPRDF reference to the Rwandan experience is deceptively erroneous: the Interhamwe was a government-sponsored mob and was not a civilian campaign that rolled out of control—it was, as Human Rights Watch described, a campain in which the early organiziers were military and administrative officials. The Rwanda genocide was a state-sponsored killing and the EPRDF's disengenous analogy was designed to create fear among the governed to ultimately justify bogus genocide and treason charges.

When asked for the immediate and unconditional release of the Kaliti detainees, Meles Zenawi, in sardonic pretense that fails the giggle test says he respects the independence of Ethiopia’s judiciary and that the judicial process is out of his hands. Foreign observers take this statement at face value, say hi to Ato Hailu Shawel in jail and depart from Addis. Meanwhile, the prisoners of conscience are rotting away in jail charged with crimes they never committed.

The day a judge convicts any of the 84 prisoners of conscious will be a day that will live in infamy for Ethiopia and Ethiopians. The EPRDF can end the eternal condemnation of a people it claims to lead. The solution is in its hands: end the sham trials poste-haste and let Ato Hailu Shawel, Dr. Berhanu Nega, W/o Bertukan Demksa, Drs. Yacob and Mesfin, Daniel and Netsanet, and all prisoners of conscience spend Fasika with their families as free men and women. Then give the leaders of the CUDP the option to take their seats in Parliament and City Hall. If they refuse to do so, respect their choice, and call for immediate or early parliamentary elections.

In the end, the only thing that matters is the consent of the governed.

___________________________________________________________

In addition to Ethiomedia's and Ethiopian Review's standing vigils, the advocacy sites below are must reads:

Save Nega.org, Free Yacob, Advocacy Ethiopia, Daniel Bekele's Freedom Blog, E-Law.org

Bealu Girma: Now, at this Moment

He came to class reeking of the brothel where he had spent the night and of the Katikala that still sloshed in his body. He was a drunk fool, my history teacher, a man small both in stature and in mind and prone to hurling insults at his students in the cruelest words he could conjure in the Amharic language. He was unashamed to discharge audible bodily vapors so putrid those of us condemned to his class learned to hate our own language.

But then there were those rare moments of sobriety that more than made up for the daily gaseous inferno. A lucid clear-eyed man would bounce from the door to his desk in his heavy platform shoes and bark a perky "endimin aderachuh!" to a room of adolescents who never figured how to deal with the malevolent moods of an alcoholic teacher. A torturous gilmiCHa-filled roll-call later, the tiny man would ceremoniously reach for a crumpled paperback from a crumpled overworn jacket. He would then launch into a dramatic reading from Oromay, the recently published novel by Bealu Girma.

He told us he read Bealu Girma "for both content and form" ("le fere negeruna l'aTaTalu.") The year was 1983 and the teacher's occasional reading of possibly the most controversial Ethiopian novel of all time kept his students who were no more than fifteen years of age, riveted. As we sat lost in Bealu's tempestuous world of love and war, none of us knew the novel had already unleashed forces that ultimately took from Ethiopia's literary scene a writer whom Reidulf Molvaer, contemporary chronicler of Ethiopia's writers, describes as "the most consistently good writer Ethiopia has produced." (Black Lions: The Creative Lives of Modern Ethiopia's Literary Giants, 1997).

I have always wanted to write about Bealu Girma—my favorite Ethiopian novelist—but found writing about him extremely challenging. For starters, out his six novels (Kadmas Bashager (Beyond the Horizon), Yehilina Dewel (The Bell of Consciousness), Yeqey Kokeb Teri (The Call of the Red Star), Haddis, Derasiw (The Author), and Oromay ("Now, at this Moment"), I have only read three—Kadmas, Haddis, and Oromay. Second, the novelist's personal life and work deserve separate volumes of their own. Bealu's life and death are of Shakespearean proportions: Julius Caesar comes to mind—much like the Roman emperor's unprecedented expansion of his empire by his sheer ability to bend the will of men, the Ethiopian author reached the apogee of creativity by his ability to gain almost a cult following that allowed him survive unscathed through much of his career despite his persistently harsh criticism of the societies in which he lived. (In addition to his novels, Bealu Girma served as editor for newspapers and magazines including Menen, Addis Reporter, Addis Zemen, Yezareyitu Ityopia, and The Ethiopian Herald , much of this while serving as a high-ranking official at the Ministry of Information). Also, like the conqueror of Gaul, Bealu was murdered by erstwhile admirers and colleagues. And who can ever forget Almaz? Much like Calpurnia, Caesar's beautiful wife who foresaw the emperor's death, Bealu's wife, Almaz, known to be of striking beauty, had warned her husband to stay home on the day of his abduction and disappearance in February 1984.

His fascinating biography is recounted in Molvaer's Black Lions. Bealu Girma was born in 1938 or 1939 in the province of Illubabor, Bealu's natural father was an Indian carpenter from Gujirat, India, who remained in Ethiopia after he fell in love with an Ethiopian woman, Bealu's mother. Bealu's father returned to India when Bealu was very young but a determined mother ensured that her son received an excellent education, first in Illubabor and subsequently in Addis Ababa, at Princess Zenebework Secondary School. Bealu's excellent grades earned him a scholarship at General Wingate Secondary School. He went on to graduate from Addis Ababa University and then moved to the United States where he earned a masters degree in journalism. In the early 1960s he returned to Ethiopia and soon thereafter joined the Ethiopian Ministry of Information.

While his work as editor of some of the most respected papers and magazines earned him respect as a journalist, it was at the Ministry of Information where Bealu found a lifelong career as a civil servant. His high-ranking position at the ministry allowed him to gain powerful allies and enemies, including Ethiopia's dictator Mengistu Hailemariam. Throughout his career, Bealu's associations with his allies and admirers allowed him to write critically and uncensored during both the Haile Selassie and Mengistu regimes, and it was through his association with these allies that Oromay was subsequently born.

The novel that led to his untimely death in the hands of the Derg (he was only 45) has its progeny in his earlier and critically acclaimed novel, Haddis . The word Oromay, uttered by an Ethiopian of Eritrean descent in Haddis means a questo punto—Italian for "now at this moment." The moment in Oromay was 1982, during the planning and execution of the Red Star Campaign ( yeqey kokeb zemecha)—the Derg's most sustained offensive in Eritrea planned jointly by Soviet and Ethiopian generals. The naming of the campaign "Red Star" was after Bealu's earlier novel of the same name. In an effort to project an image of force and finality, Mengistu had taken his entire senior military apparatus and cabinet level ministers to Asmara for several months in marathon planning and conference sessions. Bealu, who was invited to Asmara, remained in the city for three months where he was granted interviews with several high ranking Derg officials.

According to Molvaer, Mengistu Hailemariam granted Bealu several interviews and may have even read and approved earlier manuscripts of the novel. He must have because the book starts with a prologue by Mengistu himself in which the dictator states that the book was written in the spirit of making Ethiopia's revolution complete and the realization of a Worker's Party in Ethiopia. Mengistu signed his foreword with his standard shibboleth Ye Ityopya Abyot le zelalem yenur! ("may Ethiopia's revolution live forever!")

With Mengistu's introductory praise for the book, one would expect writing that hails the life and work of the dictator. But what pours forth in next 370 pages (Kuraz Publishers, 1^st Edition) led to Bealu's murder in the hands of Mengistu's security apparatus, all editors at Kuraz Publishers sacked, and the book pulled from every bookseller in the country. According to Molvaer, officials were even snatching the book from anyone seen with it. (In our class, my teacher stopped reading from the novel, but to his credit, switched to Kadmas Bashager). In Oromay, Bealu identified members of the Derg under altered names yet whose identities were readily apparent to most readers at the time. Bealu's mockery of Mengistu whom he identifies as "the Comrade Chairman" and refers to as The Man (Sewiyew), and whose Asmara speech he reproduced with subtle parodic alterations was astounding and many are convinced Bealu made an error in judgment to believe the former dictator would tolerate the author's vituperations. The novel's protagonist's (Tsegaye Hailemariam) impressions when he first saw Sewiyew in the Addis Ababa-Asmara flight sets the author's sardonic tone vis-à-vis the dictator (all translations mine):

The protocol officer loudly announced "the Comrade Chairman!" All racket, chatter, and whispering in the plane came to a sudden hush. One could have heard a needle falling. A voice of a man's man. A smile that comes from the heart and strikes like lightning. Extreme politeness that almost breaks the spirit . . . The Man! He wore a lovely military uniform. When I saw him, I was washed with feelings of strength and self-confidence. Even though men who lead nations are mere mortal beings, I am always surprised by their ability to make men respect, love, and fear them. I see them as larger than life. Perhaps it is because they have their people's consent to be their protectors or maybe because they carry on their shoulders the pride of their people. I don't know. But in any event, for these or other reasons, I tend to respect people in power. And my colleagues who have observed this in me talk about me behind my back and say, "there he goes wagging his tail when he sees a person in power." May God curse them! I'm not a person who wags his tail! Even though I don't know much about myself, I know I don't wag my tail! (Oromay, 18).

The novel is an excellent read and its underlying story of its protagonist's love for two women ("Tsegereda Me'akel Hager" (Rose of the Central Land) and "Key Kokeb" (Red Star) set in the background of the military campaign, and his ultimate loss of both women recounted a recurrent theme in Bealu Girma's novels about the recklessness of man not just in the affairs of the heart but also in his inability to rule wisely.

Bealu's disappearance in February 1984 was preceded by the abrupt withdrawal of the book from the market and its subsequent banning in Ethiopia. Bealu's liquidation in the hands of Mengistu's security agents was confirmed after the downfall of the Derg and reading about it in Mengistu's own words is downright chilling (See Seifu Negussie's interview in Chewata, January 2003).

Hands down, Bealu Girma is Ethiopia's best creative writer. It is difficult to summarize Bealu's work within the parameters of this short piece but I can say that three of his novels I have read unravel intricately spun narratives without being convoluted; complex yet accessible characters that are deeply flawed but are almost never beyond redemption. And rare among Ethiopia's novelists, Bealu took great pains to create multidimensional female characters that are never two-sided or subservient to the whims of men or the situations in which a male-dominated society places them. Bealu Girma's novels are unquestionable labors of love created by a man who left us enduring tomes of Ethiopic literature.

A celebration of Bealu's work and achievements is timely. Writers, whether they are journalists or creative writers, are able to put into words the hopes and aspirations of the generation in which they live. Bealu did just that. He has single-handedly inspired hundreds of Ethiopian writers to test Ethiopia's ability to tolerate dissent and its willingness to respect the freedom of expression—the foundation on which the altar of democracy is built. Like him, many have paid with their lives. Bealu Girma left us six incredible novels but more important, a legacy of defiance, courage, and opposition to tyranny. I am reminded of James Baldwin's comment "the obligation of anyone who thinks of himself as responsible is to examine society and try to change it and to fight it—at no matter what risk. This is the only hope society has. This is the only ways societies change."

___________________________

• A first draft of this posting (our 40th) appeared in the [first] November 2006 issue of The Big Issue Ethiopia. Special thanks to Andrew Heavens of Meskel Square for inviting me to write for a promising magazine and a wonderful idea to get kids to “work and not beg.”

• A short ETV interview with Bealu Girma can be seen on youtube here.

• I am grateful to one of my favorite bloggers, Yagerlig of Redeem Ethiopia, for his help on this piece (Molvaer's account was indispensable--thanks for sharing it).

• We miss the Wonqette. The internet is a vapid region without her prolific writing. Her blog inspired us to create Carpe Diem Ethiopia.

• Very much obliged to Fikru Halebo for linking our previous positing in his awesome blog Enset. His writing and blog inspires us to keep our “eyes on the prize.”

Five Years

Above image (Ground Zero)

September 10, 2001, 11:50PM

It always feels good to leave the city to the restless souls who never seem to know the difference between dusk and dawn. I could barely keep my eyes open as the train whisked my exhausted body away from the office. It was a few minutes before midnight and I couldn’t wait to get home to see the tots snoring in their miniature beds. I longed to kiss their tiny brown foreheads and to whisper in their ears how much their father loved them.

My wife was up, nursing. Our apartment still smelled of the empty agelgil that bore traces of the Ethiopian lamb her grandmother had laboriously cooked, frozen, and packed in Addis Ababa barely 48 hours ago. I salivated, just thinking about the tender and spiced Ethiopian lamb. We had celebrated the new year (our EnQuTaTash) with our friends, including the entire CDE team, around the leathery agelgil. I placed a couple of calls to Addis to wish a few members of the family a happy new year and fell asleep staring at the image of my wife with our son in her arms.

And then we woke up to pure hell, and inherited a new world.

We dedicate this posting to the 2948 people who perished on September 11, 2001. Our prayers are with the thousands of families who have endured the pain and agony of losing a loved one on that day, including the 3000 children who lost a parent in NY, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. We also dedicate this to Michael Dublin Marh, an awesome friend, an awesome human being, an awesome American. Watching the towers come down was a horrific experience.

Wegenoch, enkwan aderesachuh.

They're Allowed to Take Notes

Critically acclaimed author of Wax & Gold and Greater Ethiopia: The Evolution of a Multiethnic Society is a brilliant man who clearly loses sleep over Ethiopia. Donald N. Levine’s scholarly work, articles, and interviews speak volumes of his rejection of tyranny, admiration of the Ethiopian mind, and his optimism in the ability of Ethiopians to ultimately live in a democratic society. The conclusions he reached more than four decades ago on the foundations of Ethiopian unity seem dead-on to our unscholarly minds:

the unity of the Ethiopian experience rests initially on three pervasive patterns: (1) a continuous process of interaction of the differentiated Ethiopian peoples with one another; (2) the existence of a number of pan-Ethiopian culture traits; and (3) a characteristic mode of response to the periodic intrusion of alien peoples and cultures. (Greater Ethiopia)

Professor Levine’s identification of democratic cultures in traditional Ethiopian society is highly relevant to the development of Ethiopian democracy and his scholarly contributions to Ethiopian interdisciplinary studies are immeasurable. We nevertheless find ourselves in full agreement with Dr. Yonas Gondemo (Ethiopian Politics 6/21/06 posting) and Zewge Fanta (Addis Voice 8/22/06 posting) that Levine’s recent attempt to offer his good offices resulted in utter failure. After all, when push comes to shove, even a shimagele (an elder) must eventually pull all the stops and identify the offender. Levine’s attempted arbitration has neither served the victims of human rights abuse—the detained prisoners of conscience, nor the development of the rule of law in the country he so loves. Dr. Gondemo put it best:

Professor Levine, most things in life are gray. We have to consider the pros and cons, weigh the different alternatives and take the slightly better choice when arriving at a solution. But there are also choices with no shades of gray, a solid black or a solid white, simply right or wrong, just or unjust, true or false. I do not belong to any political party, but I do know that there are no gray areas when it comes to intimidation and killings.

Possibly reacting to these lucid voices of reason (or, hopefully, his own), in a recent posting on Ethiopian Review (September 6, 2006, reproduced in its entirety below), Levine gives us a remarkable insight into Ethiopia’s courtroom where “treason” and “genocide” trials are taking place and where the last nails in the coffin of Ethiopian democracy are being ceremoniously placed. Levine’s piece goes a long way to expose the farcical nature of the ongoing prosecution of the Kaliti detainees and also fully corroborates reports of prisoner abuse and prosecutorial misconduct reported by Amnesty International and our very own Ethio-Zagol. As you read Professor Levine’s report and learn how the EPRDF’s prosecutors are making a mockery of the rule of law, we ask you to also be critical of his analysis and the conclusions he draws. Unclear to us is how Levine catalogues a laundry list of vile abuses by the prosecution yet writes “[although] the court has at times been at fault, in a number of respects the court has shown fairness and responsiveness to the rights of the accused.” It seems to us that a court that allows this type of sham to continue is not a court that should be given the power to judge the fate of men. Dismissal, it seems to us, is the only remedy that should be available to a court that sits in judgment over the lives of other humans.

We ask our readers to focus on part D of Levine’s report titled “Fair and Responsive Conduct on the Part of the Court” in which he states, among other things, “the court proceedings have been open to the public” and “domestic and international observers have been permitted to take notes.”

Is the professor halfway serious? We are reminded of the Apartheid regime’s 1963 public trials of Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu, and fourteen other leaders of the African National Congress who were charged with 200 acts of sabotage designed to ferment “violent revolution.” The Rivonia Trials were open to the public yet that trial and the resultant conviction that sentenced Mandela to life in prison at Robin Island received instant condemnation by the United Nations Security Council and unleashed the process of sanctions against South Africa for almost three decades.

We do not mean in any way to compare Levine’s arguments with those forwarded by the Apartheid regime (we know Levine abhors racism and tyranny) but his point on the EPRDF’s allowing for public trials needs to be placed in proper perspective. Taking his point further, if a government’s fairness and responsiveness (we assume to the rights of the accused) is measured by its willingness to allow its citizenry to witness deliberations, Saudi Arabia’s criminal trials and beheadings that are open to the public would be deemed “fair and responsive.”

As to Levine’s point about observers taking notes, we should say the obvious: How in the name of heck is that tied to justice? Also, what is the point of observes taking notes if the public, legal professionals and members of the academia are not allowed to publicly (on television, radio, and the written media) comment and criticize all the prosecutorial abuses Levine points to? But then, in typical Levinesque exactness, responding to two of his critics, he states:

The problem with the trials is not inappropriate court procedure. Nor is it about robust defense. Ethiopians do know a lot about Meles's court system. It was not for lack of good defense that Prof Asrat, Ato Mekonnen Dori, Dr. Taye and numerous others languished in prison for years (and as you well know, it is not good defense that got them out)... The issue about the jailed oppositional leaders is not a legal, but a political one. Focusing on the flaws of the proceedings alone is tantamount to playing into Meles's game.

It seems to us Levine’s piece is actually a focus on the flaws of the proceedings alone and by extension, a play into Meles’s game. Regardless, Levine’s observations should be read in conjunction with with Meles Zenawi’s and Bereket Simon’s pronouncements of sheer amounts of damning evidence against the accused. Zenawi’s December 3 or 4, 2005 awkward exchange with Inigo Gilmore is one for the ages and is captured at 02' 40'' (the entire video is must see):

Zenawi: . . . there is tons of evidence they called for inserruction and that will be presented to an open and independent court in less than a week.

Gilmore: What is this evidence that you have?

Zenawi: [looking to the ceiling, counting God knows what] Oh, we have video evidence, we have audio evidence, we have written evidence, and we have witnesses. Over seventy witnesses.

The video then cuts to Engineer Hailu Shawel who says: “If they can produce it, let them, because there is none.” There has been none and if there is, it is completely undercut by Professor Levine’s observations. Professor Levine’s reporting is incredibly helpful and we hope he will next do what we are convinced his conscience undoubtedly tells him: to call for the immediate and unconditional release of all prisoners of conscience and an end to the charade currently underway in the country he loves.

___________________________________________________

On the Trial of the Kaliti Detainees

Further response to the critic of Getz #5

Donald N. Levine

September 6, 2006

In my June 18 response to the engaging letter of Tibebu Bekele, published in Addis Fortune two weeks earlier, I commented on problems of Ethiopia's judiciary. Regarding the trial of the Kaliti detainees I said, "If legitimate procedures are not respected by the Government... I shall be among the first to voice disapproval."

Now that the court has recessed until October, it may be appropriate to comment on what has transpired to date. As noted in my Public Radio interview of August 8, 2006, my assessment rests on an independent analysis of notes of the trial proceedings. The notes were obtained from a variety of sources. A non-Ethiopian graduate student who has worked in a major Chicago law firm carried out the analysis. A summary of the main findings of his analysis follows.

Based on that analysis I conclude that to this date those procedures appear to have been neither speedy nor consistently fair. The major source of unfairness has been the conduct of the prosecution. Although the court has at times been at fault, in a number of respects the court has shown fairness and responsiveness to the rights of the accused.

A. Obstructionist delays by the Prosecution

1. The prosecution has repeatedly delayed court proceedings by being late.

2. The prosecution has repeatedly delayed court proceedings by being unprepared, which delays rulings on other matters before the Court.

3. The prosecution frequently introduces new evidence, which was not previously produced to the defendants' attorneys.

B. Unfair procedures on the part of the Prosecution

1. The prosecution repeatedly refuses to produce copies of evidence for the defense.

2. The prosecution frequently presents evidence not included as part of the initial charges.

3. Evidence against the defendants is presented in suspect ways. Video, audio, and documentary forms of evidence have been taken out of context, edited, and distorted in an extremely prejudicial manner. That the chief prosecutor was accused of tampering with or fabricating documentary evidence--and effectively tried to hide this by presenting the evidence at the last minute and without producing copies to the defense--is in keeping with the prosecution's conduct throughout this trial.

4. The prosecution's arguments often rely upon hearsay, speculation and, frequently, outright deception. The Action Aid defendants are referenced elliptically, implicated in evidence unrelated to them, and almost never receive copies of the evidence being used against them. The arguments against CUD members presented in Court are so far afield from the actual evidence, often in direct contradiction with the evidence presented, that those proceedings verge on the comical. One glaring example: at one point during the trial of July 13, Ato Shimelis stopped to summarize several CUD press releases by saying "in nearly every speech they say they support peaceful struggle, but essentially they are promoting violence."

5. The prosecution frequently fails to link evidence with specific defendants or charges.

C. Unnecessary delays due to Court rulings

1. The prosecution has not been held accountable for its habitual delay of proceedings, including late arrival, lack of preparedness, and introduction of new evidence without producing copies for the defense.

2. The Court has delayed ruling on motions from the defense for copies of evidence.

D. Fair and responsive conduct on the part of the Court

1. The court proceedings have been open to the public.

2. Domestic and international observers have been permitted to take notes.

3. The defendants have been permitted to speak.

4. The Court has become responsive to requests from the defense to have copies of the video evidence shown to defense counsel. On August 4, albeit belatedly, a court order set a time limit of two weeks for the prosecution to produce copies of video evidence to the defense.

5. Although the Court has often provided the prosecution great latitude in the presentation and admission of evidence, the Court did rule the prosecution's third, heavily edited videotape inadmissible despite vehement protest from counsel.

6. When asked to provide relief to the defendants from ill treatment or prejudicial acts by third parties while defendants are in State custody, the Court has generally obliged by calling third parties before the bench for an explanation. At times this resulted in improved treatment of the detainees. The court may also have been responsible for the decision to hospitalize Professor Mesfin Woldemariam for pneumonia treatment last month, but this effort seems in vain now that he is returned to Kaliti Prison where coldness, dampness, poor sanitation and hygiene, and various species of vermin exacerbate his condition. After Dr. Berhanu Nega was returned from hospital to Kaliti Prison against doctor’s advice in June, the High Court ruled on 19 July that he be relocated in a less crowded and better ventilated cell in Kaliti Prison. When no improvement resulted, it was presumably due to the independent authority of third parties. Confining Dr. Berhanu Nega to extremely punitive conditions or journalist Iskinder to solitary confinement are actions over which the court may have little jurisdiction, but the judicial system certainly does.

E. Unfair conduct on the part of the Court and demonstrable irregularities with the proceedings

1. The Court does not consistently demand that the prosecution produce copies of new evidence in advance of trial presentation.

2. The Court often allows the prosecution to introduce new evidence not included in initial charges without furnishing a copy for the defense.

3. If the Court should provide the defense comparable latitude in the presentation of evidence it would indicate a higher degree of fairness to these proceedings. Failure to do so would suggest that the Court conducts this trial in a manner favorable to the prosecution.

F. Controversial conduct on the part of the defendants

It should be noted that some of the flaws in the proceedings noted above might have been reduced if the defendants, other than those involved in the civil society group Action Aid, had availed themselves of legal defense. Excellent lawyers had volunteered to provide counsel for them pro bono, and it is hard to imagine that some of the irregularities noted above would not have been corrected had all the accused taken advantage of those resources.

COMMMENT

No ordinary court case, the trial against selected opponents of the EPRDF regime has divided the Ethiopian body politic as has no other issue since the time of Emperor Susneyos. One would expect the Ethiopian judicial system to go to great lengths to demonstrate its integrity both to Ethiopian citizens and to international observers. Its failure to do so reflects, at the very least, a lack of capacity to mount a fair and speedy trial. The urgent need to upgrade that capacity would seem to call for the concerted contributions from Ethiopian legal processionals in the Diaspora as well as those at home. Ethiopians traditionally are distinguished by a high regard for judicial fairness and the rule of law; distortions introduced by the Derg and largely maintained under the EPRDF regime are arguably most un-Ethiopian.

Of all flaws in this trial, I consider the most dysfunctional to be that noted under B.5 above: the prosecution's repeated failure to link evidence with specific defendants or charges. Lack of adequate differentiation has been the hallmark of these proceedings from the outset. While the Government appears, at best, to possess hard evidence incriminating one or two individuals of one or two categories of action that are arguably illegal, it has included several dozens of individuals under a broad range of criminal accusations. It is this feature of the proceedings that opened up to ridicule what could and should have been a serious juridical process.

During this period of recess, it would behoove the Ministry of Justice to re-assess those charges more carefully and demonstrate to the world the high level of legal competence that Ethiopians manifest at their best. That would lend greater speed and fairness to the final sessions of this trial and thereby enable Ethiopians to get back to working together to make their beloved land a better place. If such action were to be matched by a willingness of defendants to avail themselves of counsel, that desired outcome would be facilitated even more.

P.S. Since writing the above, I have had the benefit of critical responses from two readers who are highly accomplished Ethiopian academics. One of them faulted my statement for not pursuing the legal issues with more diligence and penetration. He recommended: begin the piece by clarifying your principled stand on the judiciary, judicial process and the trial, what your sense of a fair trial and process is, what your expectations were initially, why you took the principled stand, how you "evolved" to the position you currently hold based on "hard evidence" (notes, analysis) and what you think should happen. Also... stress the fact that your conclusions and evaluations are based on universally recognized values of due process and fairness, and not merely the idiosyncratic conclusions of note takers, analysts, etc.

The other reader faulted me for taking the legal issues too seriously, claiming that such concerns were beside the point since the trial itself must be viewed essentially as a political rather than a legal matter.

The problem with the trials is not inappropriate court procedure. Nor is it about robust defense. Ethiopians do know a lot about Meles's court system. It was not for lack of good defense that Prof Asrat, Ato Mekonnen Dori, Dr. Taye and numerous others languished in prison for years (and as you well know, it is not good defense that got them out)... The issue about the jailed oppositional leaders is not a legal, but a political one. Focusing on the flaws of the proceedings alone is tantamount to playing into Meles's game.

Although the two critics proceed in opposite directions, I think they both raise profound issues, which I hope can be discussed further.

can our generation be heard please?

It is perfectly human to express fury at those who defile you and your beliefs. The marketplace of ideas invites vitriol and that’s precisely what the 2005 Ethiopian elections produced. Unlike individuals, however, a government’s response to criticism and insult must be tamed and reflective—it must be conducted within a set of transparent rules designed to factually refute the criticism while taking great care to protect the very right to criticize and insult. We must state the obvious: a citizenry’s belief that it is free to express its disagreement with its rulers is a central and most fundamental aspect of a democracy.

A prime minister’s gratuitous speech that “democracy goes on unperturbed” is not what convinces the governed that democracy has finally arrived at their nation’s doorsteps. Nor are the random acts of parliamentary opposition to majority rule and equally random ruler tolerance of it sufficient to quench a people’s thirst for intellectual liberty.

Democracy does not require brilliant leaders to help usher hope to a battle-weary conflict-ridden society. It needs the likes of George Washington and Nelson Mandela who teach the governed that relinquishing power is an eternal gift to their people.

Democracy will not arrive in a nation via Troika-led diplomatic maneuvers. The exchanges of learned “friends of Ethiopia” including Donald Levine, Christopher Clapham, Herman Cohen, and Paul Henze, while educational, won’t do it for us either. Its sacred promises will not be delivered by powerful American lobbyists or lawyers. Nor will its secrets be unlocked by way of insults posted on a government website and in chat forums.

Notwithstanding Carpe Diem Ethiopia’s previous disagreements with the EPRDF for scoffing at Ethiopia’s history and flag, democracy, really, has nothing to do with the green, yellow, and red—whether adorned with a scepter-bearing lion or an ominous blue star. They can scorch both of them at a Demera bonfire. The desecration of national, historic, and religious symbols, however, is as pitiful as our irrational responses to those acts.

Democracy is not just about casting ballots. Nor does it merely take the drafting of a constitution and creation of institutions in which democracy can flourish.Constitutional protections are important but are not determinative. The British never bothered to write a constitution. The US’ guarantees of freedom and liberty are so broad that the notion of individual freedom is rewritten almost every decade in response to evolving domestic and international realities. On September 10, 2001, even the most ardent American right-winger could not have predicted the sweeping passage of a Patriot Act.

When we claim to be ruled under a constitution, the safeguards penned by its framers cannot be guaranteed by the governed. That responsibility falls squarely on rulers. A constitution must restrain rulers who have not only consented to become servants of their own written laws but also educators on the judicious exercise of power. The rulers serve under those laws, not over them. And they must rule by example. If they breach protections, they teach the governed to defy laws; if rulers engage in acts of fraud, they teach the governed to defraud; if they kill, the governed learn to murder. Affirmations of the existence of the “due process of law” and “rule of law” are only as good as the deeds and actions of those in charge of protecting these fundamental rights. We should state yet another palpable fact: the very reason for constitutions and their lofty promises is ultimately to restrain the monstrous powers of governments.

At its core, democracy is a simple proposition: it's about hope. It is a phenomenon that unravels during the most critical moments in a nation’s history when folks, through their own volition, get together and commit to leave a better society for their children. Democracy is a lightening rod of reason that strikes the hearts of the wisest to make a solemn compact to provide hope for the governed on whose behalf they supposedly speak.

The promise of democracy takes the momentary suspension of reality borne out hundreds of years of conflict and suspicion so pervasive in our culture. The governed don’t ask much. They need to be convinced that those who claim to lead them will make a collective decision: that human life is sacred—that despite the humble circumstances from which we could be born, each member of the governed matter. The Locke/Jefferson formulation chills the napes of the writers at Carpe Diem Ethiopia: that certain truths are self-evident; that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Democracy is the promise of a social order that teaches its children that being an Amhara is not synonymous with colonialism or an Oromo just a victim of it; that we are all more than what our non-optional DNA makeup makes us. It’s about Ethiopia looking at herself in the mirror and asking who am I, where was I, and where am I going? And it’s about the reflection saying you will go as far as your collective hopes and aspirations. Just find what they are. And seize the day by its horns.

Photograph courtesy of David Blumenfeld (c)David Blumenfeld/www.blumenfeld.com, who may be contacted at david@blumenfeld.com. Check his site for powerful photography on Ethiopia and the Middle East.