Ethiopian Review Readers Forum

Author

Comment

Aug 18, 2005 - 11:46AM

woyanne is going after Gomes and Clarke!

The Ethiopian Herald
August 17

Gomes, Clarke: Neutral observers or hidden dealers?

Many of the tabloids in the country these days are telling us about the “ secret document they get from EU chiefs”. Nothing has been said in contravention of these reports by the concerned body. What is the puzzle, then? Why did Ana Gomes and Tim Clarke give deaf ear to such reports? Is there a hidden deal?

Observation purpose

There is no question that the EU observation mission arrived here being invited by the government. It is also commendable that it accepted the invitation to observe Election 2005 Ethiopia.

It is believed that any observation mission has a reason to observe an election. It can be to determine whether donor conditions of a “free and fair” election were met. It can be to observe how effective domestic monitoring has been or to assess the political climate. Some international missions observe because of a domestic political agenda or a focus on a larger international issue. It is impossible to ensure that all international observation is nonpartisan, but integrity requires that each mission fully disclose the purpose of its mission in its reporting, as well as what they intend to do with their findings.

Article 5(3) of the Memorandum of Understanding signed in March this year between the Government of Ethiopia and Chief of the European Mission for election observation in Ethiopia says that “ The EU agrees to ensure that the election Observer Mission respects the country’s sovereignty, and the laws and regulations including the code of conduct for the election process.” But looking at the series of wrong actions taken by Ana Gomez and Tim Clarke, I can’t be sure that the two have a serious commitment to supporting democracy in Ethiopia.

The observers observed

International observers serve as an integrity mechanism in the elections they observe. This is done by watching the process and noting integrity problems. At the same time, international observers are assessing the elections and making a judgment on its competitiveness, freeness and fairness. To act as an effective integrity mechanism, the international observation itself must be done with integrity, otherwise it can aggravate the problems of the elections under observation. The actions of Ana Gomez and Tim Clarke in Election 2005 Ethiopia appears to be like a tourists taste for the exotic than helping real democracy in Ethiopia. Let’s look at some of their partial moves which this writer feels immoral.

First comes Ms. Ana Gomez who has been in Ethiopia since March 18, 2005.She leads the European Union Election Observation Mission in the country. In her arrival here I was expecting from her to be neutral through out the election process. But to the disappointment of many of the people in Ethiopia, she becomes very rude in her handling of the situation. In the first week of her arrival she visited some of the polling stations in the Amhara state. Her reports then were very positive showing the reality on the ground. Roughly, after a month of her arrival, however, she was hijacked by the opposition party leaders. Then she was pouring every “don’ts” in the election process. Some times looking like the British General sitting on the Ashanti Stool during the colonial Africa and ordering the subjects to wash his legs.

She meets Hailu Shawel of CUD in several occasions. The multi-millionaire Derg official Hailu Shawel managed to properly handle her. He lobbied her in the most comfortable hotels. Given her sudden disappearance and aggressive nature and Hailu Sahwel’s lust for power, the later did everything possible to get every secret of the missions’ intentions. The recent disclosure of “the secret deal” in a speech delivered by Hailu Shawel to the extra-ordinary meeting of The All Ethiopian Peoples Unity Party (AEUP) convened in a close session was not a sudden incident for many of us closely following the questionable stature of Ana Gomez. The weekly tadloid Addis Admas ( an Amharic weekly) on August 13, 2005 published the full speech of Hailu Shawel at this emergency meeting. There he says that “ We ( the opposition) have seen the secret document that is written right after the election day by the European Union Observers concerning the election. In that document the EU observers having visited polling stations in the rural areas and in Addis Ababa concluded that opposition party has won the election.”

None of us have seen that document which Hailu Shawel had the privilege. Despite the fact that the national electoral board of Ethiopia has announced the winner party legitimate to form a government is EPRDF, CUD’s Hailu Shawel is telling us that Ana Gomes is going to throne him. He nestles up to her. Some reliable sources leaked to this writer that she is promised to be paid up to 20% of the money collected from the diaspora provided she writes a critical observation on elections, at least, in the Amhara region and the way the state media behaves in the post election period. Will it happen? We shall wait and see.

The other person who is working with the opposition leaders under the rose is Mr. Tim Clarke. He has shown the most oscillating posture throughout the election process. He is not a man of integrity in his dealings with the election. His views are changing now and then. He went to the extent of denying what is on the record. Tim is a friend of CUD’s Dr. Birhanu Nega as Ana Gomez is to that of Hailu Shawel. Can you believe that a reception party was organized by him to celebrate CUD’s clean sweep in Addis Ababa? This is not a joke. Right after the election day Tim Clarke has prepared a reception at his residence. It was a Night Party exclusively designed and staged for the opposition party leaders and more specifically for the CUD leaders. One of the hard cores of CUD members who used to work at European Com mission, Ato Maeregu Bezabih, facilitated the event. Every kind of drinks, meals and music marked the festivities of that day. In a sovereign nation he managed to speak ill of the ruling party elected by the people behind its back. What kind of diplomacy is this?

Besides this Tim Clarke has been determined to give a fresh lease of life in the opposition’s political bankruptcy. Last month I attended a reception in one of the Embassies here in Addis Ababa. I do not want to mention the name of the embassy here. But it is the Embassy of the most respected country in Europe. Tim Clarke was also invited. Unusually he was very late at the reception. A European Union chief being very late at the reception, can you imagine that?! This is not the point, however. The most amazing scenario was for me with whom he arrived at the reception. CUD’s Dr. Birihanu Nega escorted him. Indeed, amazing!!! The ‘big’ man with a friendly gesture to only one party leader in a hot post election scenario!!! What can one expect from him, then? An impartial report? We will see.

Tim Clarke has been doing his level best to help his friends in the CUD. He was working hand in glove with them. While he condemns EPRDF’s party leader, Bereket Simon in an open letter unfairly, he advises each and every CUD leader “ you guys grow up”.

Does this comply with the code of conduct?

I believe that international observers are part of the process in all the elections. Even when playing a passive role, the fact that observers are present, observing, analysing and intending to issue a public assessment of the process, will affect that process. This is why observation can be an effective integrity mechanism. But what I observe of Tim Clarke and Ana Gomez is the lack of integrity. They appear to be strategists for the opposition political leaders. Taking all the words of the opposition political leaders, they say the threat of war hangs over the Ethiopian sky like a sword of Democles.

I am not an expert to evaluate the competence and professionalism of them throughout the election process. But from the evidences I have portrayed above there objectivity and impartiality is extremely questionable. Under article 4(a-l) of the code of conduct of international election observers in Election 2005 Ethiopia, they are supposed to demonstrate a high-level of impartiality throughout the election process. Article 4(L) of the code says that “ at all times during the mission, including during the leisure time, each election observer should show the fullest respect to this code of conduct and refrain from engaging from overt or covert activities that undermine the credibility of the election process.” But they didn’t meet what is demanded of them under this article.

Jorgen Elklit and Palle Svensson, in What Makes Elections Free and Fair, argue that international observers need to take into consideration the broader democratic transition of the country in their assessment of the elections:

Observers should also evaluate the election in the context of the specific democratic-transition process. Will the election— despite possible ‘technical’ shortcomings— stimulate further democratization by increasing respect for political freedoms, strengthening adherence to the election law, enhancing political contestation through broader access to relevant resources, involving more people in the political process, or improving the quality of the political debate?

Although some would categorize this as a ‘political’ judgment, it can be argued that it legitimately falls within the domain of election observation. If Gomez and Clarke are to view Ethiopia’s election not as an isolated event but as part of the democratization process, they cannot avoid considering whether and how it contributed to that process.

Temegen

Aug 18, 2005 - 12:14PM