Ethiopian Review Readers Forum

Author

Comment

Aug 1, 2005 - 2:40AM

Interview with Lidetu Ayalew

July 31, 2005

The controversy surrounding the investigation of the various alleged election irregularities reached its peak this week with the National Electoral Board (NEB) producing the final results of 435 constituencies. The ruling party, the Ethiopian Peoples' Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), has made significant gains and is already shy only of a couple of scores of federal seats to be able to form a government. The two main opposition groups, the Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD) and the United Ethiopian Democratic Forces (UEDF), are, as expected, crying foul and blaming both the Board and EPRDF for conniving in hijacking the complaints investigation process. Lidetu Ayalew was the only opposition leader who expressed misgivings about the agreement between the three parties which made possible the conduct of the investigation process as it did. His stance cost him his place as a spokesperson for CUD. Even though he now feels vindicated, he says in an exclusive interview with Zerihun Taddesse that it is crucial for the parties to hammer out a new agreement to address all the problems that he says characterized the election and the complaints investigation processes. Excerpts:

Let us start with you telling us your general view of the crisis that has engulfed our country ever since the election day of May 15, 2005.

Well, let me begin by reiterating my belief that the whole process had been fairly democratic and largely problem free until the election day. I am not saying that there were no problems. There were. But these were not so widespread as to require our boycotting of the elections. The most overwhelming problems crept up after the election day with EPRDF single-handedly committing large-scale vote rigging. Given the incipient character of the democratization process in the country, it was not surprising that this happened. What we should have done, and what we did, was to turn our attention towards correcting these irregularities with regard to vote counting. And it was also to be commended that EPRDF as well decided that there should be an investigation process to clear up these irregularities even though the culprit was EPRDF itself.

Then, the critical issue at this stage should have been about whether the planned investigation process was to be conducted in an appropriate and balanced manner or not. This did not occur. What occurred was that EPRDF, while professing that the investigation process would be transparent and impartial, was taking measures aimed at undermining and even nipping it in the bud. It used the media at its disposal to engage in a full-fledged propaganda war against the CUD. It also used excessive force to put down expressions of popular disquiet against the theft of its votes. The EPRDF was also engaged in arresting, harassing en masse officials and members of opposition parties. As a result of all these, the chances for the investigation process to rectify the problems that characterized the counting was lost.

It was under these circumstances that EPRDF and the opposition parties came up with an agreement on how to proceed with the investigation and clearing up of irregularities. In my view, that agreement completely privileges EPRDF and fails to protect the interests of both the opposition parties and the people who expressed their will through their votes. The agreement, I repeat, ensured EPRDF's victory in advance. This showed as soon as the process started. The Electoral Board, which was really the major source of the irregularities, was given the full authority to undertake and play the detrimental role in the process. That's what I was afraid and that's what happened.

The security forces have been given unlimited power to take whatever measure they deem necessary to quell opposition. They have arrested members of opposition parties who would have been invaluable to the cases of their parties in the investigation process, people working in offices and who know the cases too well. It was imperative for the parties to agree on that document that there was a level playing field. But there was no such thing. And the mistake on the part of the opposition was they gave in to the enormous pressure on them to agree on the mode of the investigation knowing full well that the final result would not be fair and balanced.

Secondly, the Board was given full authority and control over the screening, which constitutes half of the investigation process. We are saying the Board is the main source of the problems that this process was aimed at resolving. But the agreement gave the power to decide upon these problems to three people drawn from the same Board which at first created them. At least, opposition parties and observers should have been given the chance to be present when these people screen the complaints.

Thirdly, the Board was also empowered to swing decisions during the investigation itself. It's vote counts as well as those of the opposition and ruling parties, creating a triad system in which the single vote of the opposition party had to always outdone by the combined votes of EPRDF and the Board.

But what are you saying? You knew when you entered into the race that the NEB is, as you keeping call it, 'biased towards EPRDF, and that there would be problems with the election as a whole. And you have now definitely won lots of seats in parliament even if you haven't won enough to form a government. Addis Ababa is yours to administer. You have registered all these victories, but still you are talking about irregularities, harassments and the like. When and how are you going to be satisfied? Do we need a CUD or an opposition majority in parliament for you to stop talking about irregularities?

Well, we are not seeking a satisfaction that will come with more seats. We would definitely be satisfied even with less seats provided that the process is free and fair. The struggle we are now waging is not about more seats. It is about whether the will of the people, which they have expressed through their votes, is respected or not. It's about the legality and fairness of the whole process.

The contents of the agreement signed by the parties on June 10 mention issues like commitment to non-violence approach to resolve the complaints, the status and power of the Board to be the supreme authority on elections etc. But these are there in the laws of the land to which you have bound yourself by virtue of being a political party with the proclaimed aim of pursuing your cause by peaceful means.

On violence, we have never planned to pick up arms so it should not have been raised. There was no question about our commitment to peaceful struggle. That's not questionable. What is questionable has to do with the Board. No opposition party, particularly the Coalition, has ever said that this Electoral Board is capable of conducting a free and fair election. Even before the election, we even went up to the Prime Minister himself and discussed about it. And when we entered into the election, we had no illusions about the Board's bias and incapability to make the process free and fair. But we did not want to boycott the election because of this.

We wanted to achieve two things by involving ourselves in the election. The first was to be involved and give people choice, which would gain us a small number of seats. Secondly, we wanted to show the Ethiopian people and the international community how much biased and unfair the Board is by involving ourselves in the process. Even in Addis, where we have won, there were irregularities which occurred through the connivance of the Board and the ruling party. The people, however, were very determined to see to it that their votes were not tampered with and, thus, fought off these irregularities. And we have also been successful in revealing to everyone once again that the Board is not fair and free, which forced EPRDF itself to admit that the votes have been rigged and decide to conduct an investigation process to correct them. We succeeded in doing this because we got involved in the process. We couldn't have done that if we were not involved.

So, you have been sufficiently pragmatic to recognize that you could achieve only these things by involving yourselves in the process. You have achieved both your goals of effecting a change, which is significant given the number of parliamentary seats that you have won, as well as of forcing the NEB reveal itself as biased and not free, which you say you have done. But you are still talking about irregularities and other problems that attended the process. Why are you doing that? What are you saying?

What you have to understand is that we are not the only ones hankering after the investigation process. EPRDF, too, needed it because it wanted the legitimacy that follows the rectification of those glaring irregularities during vote counting. That is the reason why, when foreign observers wanted to leave having finalized their mission, EPRDF asked them to hang around and to observe the investigation process. So, what kind of political parties can we be if we are to express our satisfaction on the fact that we've won many seats, perhaps more than what we expected, and say that that's enough knowing full well that there have been irregularities and that EPRDF wants to rectify them? That would not be fair to the many voters whose votes have been stolen. Nor is it in our responsibility to do so.

But if we are to believe what you are saying, then EPRDF is making more mistakes to write off the ones it made during the counting process.

Yes, and that's EPRDF's mistake. EPRDF thinks that it can gain the legitimacy it so dearly craves by covering the mistakes it made by new ones.

And the opposition's mistake was failing to ensure that the modalities of the complaints investigation process would not be manipulated by EPRDF to suit its purpose. And my opposition to the June 10 agreement was that it was improper and imprudent to sign up to an investigation process that would solve nothing. That kind of agreement always brings you back to square one. And what we are seeing is exactly that a lot of resource, energy and time has already been spent even though the opposition and EPRDF are no more nearer to a consensus. What change has it brought? None.

You were complaining about the widespread arrest of your members, the closure of government media to you, the ban on demonstrations in Addis etc. But we are seeing signs of these being liberalized: members of opposition parties are being released, from jail the media have begun conveying your messages, the demonstration ban has been lifted. Don't these measures make the process better suited to resolve your disagreement with EPRDF?

To start with, when we were entering into the investigation process, not even one member of opposition parties was released; the media were still closed to opposition parties by explicit order from government, and the state of emergency was not lifted. The ban was only lifted after the majority of investigation work had been finalized. The majority of opposition party members - majority because many of our members are still in jail - were released only after the process had progressed so much so that EPRDF was confident that it had achieved its purpose. Even the media, which are still not entertaining opposition views as such, began to cover our press conferences only last week, at a time when EPRDF felt it had achieved more than 75% of what it sought to achieve through the process.

At the start of the investigation process, everyone including opposition members and the general public, were still under repressive measures. Take me, for instance, I am supposed to be a prominent member of the Coalition's leadership. Even today, when I was coming to you for this interview, I was being closely tailed by four automobiles. Everywhere you go, you find our members and supporters under similar conditions.

So, what do you think is the way out?

Well, we are in a very worrisome state right now. I don't think anything has changed from a month ago. There may not be outward expressions of opposition, violence etc. But we are still in the same state of mind. Both the opposition and ruling parties are still at loggerheads. The opposition parties will never accept the results as free and fair as long as the government insists on having its way. Nor will the people, who feel that their votes have been stolen. So, where's the solution?

We need to stop and think so as to arrive at a solution. EPRDF must begin to believe that it genuinely wants to resolve this deadlock. The opposition as well must decide to take a principled stand to be ready to win or lose through a process that truly reflects the will of the people. Both parties must engage in a new round of talks to hammer out an agreement that would fairly, transparently and correctly reflect the will of the people. This issue has to be willy-nilly resolved in a peaceful manner. Otherwise, it would be fruitless to involve oneself in a process that we know full well would end up in creating more disagreements and problems.

But EPRDF does not seem to be interested in changing its ways.

Well, if it continues like that, the opposition must never think of engaging in another meaningless round of talks.

What do you think they should do then?

If EPRDF continues with its stubborn position, they should resolve to persist with their peaceful struggle.

What does that mean?

It means that the opposition should continue seizing every forum to peacefully demonstrate, undertake strikes etc. EPRDF can choose to stay by usurping power, but the struggle must continue peacefully and without any bloodshed.

Are you suggesting civil disobedience?

Yes, it may go even as far as civil disobedience if you feel it's necessary. You may not go to that stage in a rush. That would probably create a havoc in the country. Prudently, as a political leader, you have to weigh your options and decide when you think it is necessary.

Are you a Negedite?

Sorry, I haven't read Dr. Negede Gobeze's book, so I can't say anything about its contents. Nor can I say anything about the person since he is not a CUD but a UEDF member. And I don't know him.

But one thing must be clear here. The opposition parties in Ethiopia are incomparably decent. We have never called on the people to come out and do something even if it's clear to everyone that this whole process is in such a crisis. We are still waiting and working to resolve it through peaceful means. Why is it then that the opposition are often described as war mongering, trouble seekers and seeking to destabilize the country through popular revolt? Has it ever done that before? No. Why didn't it do that? If there was such an opposition, it could have agitated the millions that came out in support of CUD at Maskal square on 29th Miazia to its demented purposes. But no one did. I think the opposition in Ethiopia is too responsible, too decent.

EPRDF, on the other hand, is not shouldering its duties and responsibilities as it should.

Does this peaceful struggle include boycotting parliament?

Personally, I am not saying that we should give up the seats that we won legitimately to EPRDF. I am saying we should try to get back those that were inappropriately taken from us by EPRDF.

Finally, we are a poor nation with frequent threats of drought and famine. What's more, we have also been confronted by multitudes of problems. Given all these, why don't you try to pursue a more conciliatory approach with the government and tackle these problems rather than going in a way of confrontation and troubles?

That's just what we have been saying all along. What I'm saying is that the obstacle in getting to that stage is the EPRDF. We are not fighting to get more seats but to make sure that the process is free, fair and democratic. But knowing full well that the process has not been free, fair and democratic, we would stand down from protesting if we have 530 let alone 200. Doing otherwise would not be fair. And the democratisation process in the country would be the one to suffer most. It'd dampen the enthusiasm of the people if they feel cheated, and that bodes ill for the next elections. And this would definitely kill off any chance of developing the democratisation process that EPRDF says it has toiled for.

But would that be enough reason if, God forbid, we are to find about 20 million people at the throes of starvation come next December? As you know, there are signs that widespread famine may happen again and soon. Won't you be equally to blame for that as EPRDF?

Well, if we encounter such a large-scale problem, I believe we have to give more priority to that. But put yourself in to my place. You are a politician and you see such huge irregularities happening with the election. And you also see that EPRDF itself as well as the observers agree that there have been irregularities. Would it be democratic and fair for you to say that, "well, we are in parliament and we have won Addis, that would be enough"? Can you honestly believe that such a process would be a solution to Ethiopia's woes? Tell me.

http://www.ethiopianreporter.com/displayenglish.php?id=2521

debalke

Aug 1, 2005 - 7:04AM