Short-Lived Victory: A Case of Mistaken Progress

 (Befekadu Hailu)

My friends and myself, who passed through Maekelawi's torturous experience, along with others campaigned and had the government decide to close the most notorious Detention Center that live three regimes and almost half a century in Ethiopia. In February 2019, Five years after I was detained and tortured in Maekelawi, I went to the closing Center to fetch my laptop confiscated five years before. I arrived while the name tag of the Center was being shattered and one of the uniformed guards said to me, “you have this place closed”; I shrugged like ‘proudly’. That little moment gave me a sense of victory, telling me that the activism and its subsequent sacrifice was not in vain. I felt we actually effected a change. Six years later, I started to doubt it all retrospectively. 

The political transition that started six years ago is known by many as ‘the change’ (lewtu in Amharic), but what really explains it is ‘the violence’ (newtu in Amharic). 

How Did We Get Here? 

I have gotten the chance to take part in the Human Rights Forum 2024 hosted by The Carter Center in the third week of May 2024 in Atlanta, US. In my keynote address, I have spoken to participants with my reflection on the works of human rights defenders based on my experience in Ethiopia. I don’t know how resonating my speech was to the audience but it was my moment to pause and reflection. 

Telling the story of how fast we dived from optimism to pessimism, I said: 

“After 2018, the growing expectations of human rights defenders were dashed by a false promise of change. 

“Retrospectively speaking, Ethiopian HRDs are not the only ones to lose momentum for a false promise of change. In the MENA region, most of the revolutions of 2011 have led to worse crises in their respective countries.  

“Ethiopia's neighboring Sudan had had a very exciting street revolution against Omar al-Bashir’s 26 years of dictatorship. A couple of years later, two power mongering generals are waging war on each other and their people. In all their defense, the Sudanese activists have tried their best to ensure the establishment of a civil government but it was not as easy.  

“The point is - we, human rights defenders, can force changes in protests or pressures; but, our commitment to maintain the changes with principles remains weak. We get fragmented, our priorities fast change, we retire early, we get burned out, we trust people in power forgetting that power corrupts people, and most importantly we forget that there won’t be democratization without the institutions. Then, we have the changes stolen and regret them.”

The Oligarchy of the Harari

 Befekadu Hailu

Most of the world countries' constitutions begin with the phrase "We the People…"; the constitution of Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) begins with "We, the Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples of Ethiopia…" This is not accidental. The constitution is deliberately framed this way so that the government look at the people of Ethiopia in the eyes of the collection of groups, but no collection of individuals. But, if you think this makes the Ethiopian constitution the worst, you are wrong. Constitutions of regional states in Ethiopia are actually the worst manifestation of its intent. The Harari state, its constitution, and the administrative methodologies are good examples of how the FDRE’s constitutional philosophy is manifested in regional constituencies.

Why Harari?

The Harari Regional State seems to be a gift to the Harari people. Sidama, Wolayita, and other ethnic groups with millions of population size have no chance of becoming regional states, while members of the Harari ethnic group, which has a few tens of thousands of people, have become a state. (I would like to point out that I refer to the region as a state with ownership of specific ethnic groups because that is the spirit of their constitutions.)

The history of Harar is often overlooked as the history of Ethiopia follows the path of power in the Christian kingdom. Harar has more to say about the relationship of Islam and Ethiopia than Nejashi, the Abyssinian king who welcomed the first Islamic pilgrimage where followers of Mohammed fled from the persecution of the ruling Quraysh tribe of Mecca in the 7th century. Harar is a world heritage city that has existed for over a thousand years. Before the conquest of Menelik II, Harar has a continuous rule at least 72 named successive Sultanates. The people who are associated with Harar’s ancient civilization ('the natives') are the Harari ethnics. The Harari ethnics are people with a rich history and cultural heritage. However, in today's Ethiopia, they are a minority.

During the Census in 2007, there were only 15,863 members of the Harari ethnic group out of a population of more than 183,000 in Harari; they make up only 9 percent of the region's population. (There was a total of 31,722 Harari ethnic members at the time, including those  live out of the region; half of them live outside Harari). More than 103,000 Oromos and more than 41,000 Amhara ethnic members live in the region. But the region belonged only to the Harari people, both spiritually and legally. Members of the ethnic group may be the president of the region. The regional state has two chambers, and only members of the Harari ethnic group can be members of one of them, Harari National Council. It is not also necessary to be a resident of the region to be a member of the National Council. Members of the Harari ethnic group living out of the region are allowed by the state constitution to vote and be elected to the Council.

Article 50/2 of the Harari Constitution states:

"The members of the National Council of the Harari are elected from among the Harari ethnic groups living in the region and outside of the region." (my translation)

By the way, the Harari people living out of the region have the right to vote and to be elected wherever they live. This way, they may be able to become members of two distinct administrative districts at the same time. The next article, 51/2, states that the People’s Representatives Council (the other chamber) has no significant power other than to approve the president nominated by the National Council. In this way, being born into the Harari ethnic group is the only way to become president of the region. What makes democracy the best of all systems is that it does not close the door on the opportunity of any citizen or resident of the country from becoming president. In a democracy, citizenship or permanent residence is a more important element than ethnicity. This makes the Harari region a test of Ethiopia's ethnic federalism and its compatibility with democracy.

 

The Oligarchy of the Harari

What is the administrative category of the Harari region? In his book ‘Politics’, Aristotle mentions six political categories. Like his teacher Plato, Aristotle was not a fan of democracy. Plato (as he argued in his book ‘Republic’) believes it is a 'philosopher who has to be king, or the king has to become a philosopher’ (philosopher-king) to establish working order. In the same philosophy, Aristotle categorized three kinds of empires based on their contribution to a common interest.

First, there is monarchy (one-man leadership for the common good), second, aristocracy (the leadership of a few for the common good), and third, polity (majority leadership for the common good). However, when all three forms of government degenerate or corrupt, the monarchy will be a tyranny (one man's leadership for personal interest), the aristocracy will be an oligarchy (the rule of the few for their own benefits), and polity will be a democracy. For Aristotle, democracy is the rule of many for their own benefits; a corrupted version of the rule of majority for the common good.

Democracy is not the best system in the world. As Winston Churchill pointed out, ‘it is the best of those who have been tried’. But we can debate it is multiple times better than oligarchy. Democracy, as many say, do not actually bring majority rule. That’s an overstatement. It is rather a system where majority consent is usually granted. In any case, it is the most widely accepted, and constitutionally granted system for Ethiopia. However, by any standard, the administration in Harari regional government is not a democracy, but an oligarchy.

 

Protection of the Minority Groups

Harari people are rich in history and culture. There is a real concern that ethnic minorities like Harari and others may be oppressed and/or assimilated by other dominant cultures and civilizations. However, it would be unfair to establish a system that would reverse the democratic process in order to preserve the identity, history, and heritage of the Harari people. So how can one solve this dilemma?

Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious or Linguistic Minorities, adopted by General Assembly Resolution 47/135 of 18 December 1992, reaffirms in its Article 1/1 that:

“States shall protect the existence and the national or ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identity of minorities within their respective territories and shall encourage conditions for the promotion of that identity.”

Article 1/2 reads:

“States shall adopt appropriate legislative and other measures to achieve those ends.”

These articles show that it is the responsibility of governments to protect the rights of minorities. But does these justify undermining rule with majority consent? No.

When the Declaration was passed, its intention is protecting minorities from marginalization by hegemonic groups.  Harari has that risk; Abdullah Sherif, in his article published on Ethiopia-Insight, "Harari without Hararis", wrote:

“the issue of who gets to govern over Harar might be philosophical arguments about true democracy and equitability for some communities. For Hararis, it is an existential matter. ”.

The author's response to the dilemma, however, does not take into account the injustices of minority rule over a majority. Harari ethnics may have a strong historical contribution to the historical city of Harar, but in no way the current members of the group deserve superior entitlement over other legal residents of the region. Legacy rewards are not compatible to a democratic system.

 

The Tale of Two Constitutions

Although the member states of Ethiopia were created by the central government itself, it is important to assume that the power source of the federal government is the member states. However, as long as the member states are living under the shelter of unity, they must also be abided by the FDRE’s constitution. Article 9 of Harari’s constitution, accordingly, recognizes the supremacy of the constitution of the FDRE. In comparison to regional constitutions, FDRE’s constitution is liberal. On the contrary, Harari’s constitution falls short from recognizing universally respected rights such as ‘universal suffrage’.  

The Harari constitution violates the equal rights of its residents. While the Harari people are given the right to vote and be elected for the Harari National Council whether they are permanent residents of the regional state or not, non-Harari ethnics will never vote or be elected to the Council. This Council has the highest authority in the region. The constitution states that only the Harari ethnics can decide on the right to the secession of the regional state.

According to Article 49 of Harari’s constitution, the region has two chambers: The Peoples' Representatives and the Harari National Council. This is unusual for other regional states in Ethiopia. Many federal systems, including Ethiopia, have two (bicameral) councils, which balances their common and individual administrative interests. For example, in the House of Peoples' Representatives in FDRE are elected from each election districts. The House of Federation, on the other hand, gets its members from representation by regional governments (technically representing each nationalities). The Harari National Council, on the other hand, was established to provide special political privilege to the Harari ethnic members. If we are forced to put these in parallel, the National Council may resemble the House of Federation; however, other ethnic groups are not represented at the National Council of Harari.

The right to vote and to be elected by all citizens is one of the most important aspects of democracy. The majority give consent to their representatives or single citizens get consent of the majority to represent the whole only when universal suffrage enacted. Universal Suffrage not only ensures the right to equality but also helps the government to resemble its citizens.

Article 38 of the Harari State Constitution provides for the right to vote and to be elected in line with international conventions; it does not allow discrimination of anyone on the basis of race, gender, national origin, ethnicity, or other backgrounds. However, Article 50 denies the same right of non-Harari ethnics to vote members of the National Council and gives the Council the most important roles in the government; the right to nominate the president of the state and to secede from the federation is vested in the Council (Article 39/5/a of the Harari State Constitution). "Once the request for secession is approved by a two-thirds vote in the Harari National Council," the federal government must hold a referendum within three years. Ninety percent of the region's population has no say in such a fundamental decision. The regional council of peoples representatives, too, has no authority in regard to secession.

Let’s assume Harari secedes from Ethiopia; it would never seem to be possible for 90 percent of the population to be ruled by 9 percent of its population in the new sovereign-to-be. Our times do not allow any sovereign state to discriminate against its citizens based on ethnicity.

Although the Peoples' Representatives Council in Harari is, in principle, constituted by all Harari residents, its seats are actually divided between the Oromia ruling party (OPDO or ODP or PP) and the Harari National League parties. They call this quota system "fifty-fifty." This seems something that can easily be resolved through democratic elections. 

 

Democracy and Federalism

Nationalities and cultures that have a large number of speakers and are historically, culturally, and/or economically dominant or privileged have the potential of assimilating others. Minority groups must be protected. Harari ethnic members have a serious risk of being assimilated. But the region also needs a government that has the consent of the majority.

The late prime minister of Ethiopia Meles Zenawi argued that 'democracy is not optional for Ethiopia'. He also often argued Ethiopia cannot exist without the federalism. However, democracy certainly contradicts Harari's administrative principles. Furthermore, the thought in Harari’s administration is rooted in the philosophy of the ethnic federalism, i.e. nativism and natives’ privilege over other legal and permanent residents. If the Harari’s did not have a state created for them, the offer the ethnic federalism would have for them is a status of “special zone” or “special woreda”. 

“Special Zone” or “Special Woreda” alternatives as a means of minority protection somewhat work for people living in rural settlements with little mix with other ethnic groups. The Harari, on the other hand, are urban dwellers; they are always expected to live in harmony with others. The government they form should always be inclusive and representative of the people who live in the same territory. This makes the dilemma even complex.

Democracy has ‘Affirmative Actions’ as a means of protection of minority groups. The best way to ensure the survival issue of Harari ethnics as a collective and exercise democracy is ensuring affirmative actions in form of promoting and preserving the language and culture of Harari people; not making their elites governors of the regional states. The current system doesn’t require majority consent for leadership, it clashes with universal and constitutional rights. Even though the constitutional provisions of Harari, its administration and, philosophical argument for it are all reflections of FDRE’s constitutional framework, it just doesn’t work in a democratic framework. 

[This story is published in Amharic on today's issue of the weekly Feteh Magazine.] 

ሐሳብን የመግለጽ ነጻነት እስከ ማበሳጨት

“ሐሳብን የመግለጽ ነጻነት ምንድን ነው? ማበሳጨትን ካላካተተ፣ ሕልውና የለውም፡፡” ~ ሰልማን ሩሽዲ

፩ - ማበሳጨት

‹‹በመስከረም ወር 1997፣ ዢላንድስ ፖስተን የተባለ የዴንማርክ ጋዜጣ ነብዩ መሐመድ ላይ የሚሳለቁ ካርቱኖችን ይዞ ወጣ፡፡ የዚህ ሕትመት ዜና በመላው ዓለም እንደተሰማ በየቦታው ያሉ ሙስሊሞች ቁጣቸውን በአደባባይ መግለጽ ጀመሩ፡፡ የተቃዋሚዎቹ ምክንያቶቻቸው ሁለት ናቸው፤ አንደኛ፣ ነብዩ መሐመድን በምስል መግለጽ በእስልምና ሃይማኖት አይፈቀድም የሚልና፤ ሁለተኛ፣ ካርቱኖቹ በጥቅሉ እስልምናን እና ሙስሊሞችን ከሽብር ጋር አቆራኝተው ይገልጻሉ የሚል ናቸው፡፡  ሠላማዊ ሰልፎችና ሕዝባዊ ተቃውሞዎች በጋዜጣው አዘጋጆች እና በዴንማርክ መንግሥት ላይ ተቀሰቀሰ፡፡ ከነዚህ ውስጥ አንዳንዶቹ ሕይወት እስከመቅጠፍ የዘለቀ አመጽ የተቀላቀለባቸው የተቃውሞ ሰልፎች ነበሩ፡፡ ካርቱኖቹ ግን በመላው ዓለም በሚገኙ በሌሎች ጋዜጦች ላይ ለዢላንድስ ፖስተን ጋዜጠኞች የሞራል አጋርነት ለማሳየት በሚል ሰበብ ድጋሚ ታትመው ይበልጥ ተሰራጩ፡፡›› (Paul Sturges, 2006)

ሌላ ምሳሌ እንውሰድ፡፡ አንድ ወንድ “‹ሴቶችን ማስተማር የአገርን ሀብት ማባከን ነው፤ ስለዚህ ሴቶችን ማስተማር ካለብን የቤት አያያዝ፣ ምግብ ማብሰል እና ልጅ አስተዳደግ እናስተምር እንጂ ሌላ ‹የነጭ ኮሌታ› ሥራ የሚያስይዝ ትምህርት ማስተማር የለብንም› የሚል አስተያየት ሲሰጥ በቴሌቪዥን ተላለፈ፡፡ ይህን ተከትሎ የከተማው ሴቶች የተቃውሞ ሰልፍ አደረጉ፡፡ ወንድ አሽከርካሪዎች የሚነዷቸውን መኪኖች ሰባበሩ፡፡ ወንዶችን እያሳደዱ ደበደቡ፡፡” በዚህ የፈጠራ ታሪክ ውስጥ የአስተያየት ሰጪው ሐሳብ ሴቶቹን አበሳጭቷቸው ይሆናል፡፡ ነገር ግን ለአመጹ እነርሱን አነሳስቷቸዋል ብሎ መደምደም ከባድ ይሆናል፡፡ አማጺዎቹ ሴቶች ስሜታቸውን መቆጣጠርና ሐሳቡን በሐሳብ መመከት ካልቻሉ ድክመቱ የነርሱ የራሳቸው ይሆናል፡፡

የዴንማርክ ፍርድቤት የፈረደውም፣ እኔ በላይኛው አንቀጽ አመጸኞቹ ሴቶች ላይ የሰጠሁትን ዓይነት ብይን ነው፡፡ “እርግጥ ነው ስዕሎቹ የተወሰኑ ሙስሊሞችን ማበሳጨታቸው አይካድም፤ነገር ግን የካርቱኖቹ ዓላማ ሙስሊሞችን ማንኳሰስ አልነበረም›› ብሏል ፍ/ቤቱ፡፡ ሲያብራራውም፣ “ስዕሎቹን አመጽ ወይም ቦንብ የመወርወር ድርጊት በእስልምና ሥም እየተደረገ ነው፤” በሚል መረዳት የካርቱኖቹ ተመልካቾች ድርሻ ነበር ብሏል፡፡ የዴንማርክ ፍርድ ቤት ብይን ለካርቱኒስቶቹ ያደላ ቢመስልም ካርቱኒስቶች ራሳቸው ላይ ቅድመ ምርመራ እንዲያደርጉ ክስተቱ አስገድዷቸዋል፡፡ ነገር ግን የአንድ ሐሳብ (expression) አንባቢ፣ ተመልካች ወይም አድማጭ የራሱን ስሜት መቆጣጠር ድርሻ የራሱ መሆን ካልቻለ ቢያንስ የሆነ ሰውን የማያበሳጭ ሐሳብ ማፍለቅ በጣም አስቸጋሪ ስለሚሆን፣ ‹በነጻ› ቀርቶ ሐሳብን መግለጽ የሚባለው ጉዳይ ራሱ አይኖርም፡፡

“…ማን አለ እንዳንተ፣ ታማኝ?”

የሆነ ጊዜ የሰማኋት ቀልድ ትዝ አለችኝ፤ አንዳንድ የተቃዋሚ ተወካዮች ፓርላማ ውስጥ በነበሩበት በዚያ በደጉ ጊዜ ነው አሉ፡፡ አንድ ተወካይ የሻዕቢያ መንግሥት ላይ ሊደረግ ስለሚገባው እርምጃ ሲናገሩ እንዲህ አሉ፤ “አሁኑኑ ገብተን ድምጥማጣቸውን ማጥፋት አለብን፡፡ አለበለዚያ ካደሩ አይቆረጠሙም፤ እነዚያ ወያኔዎችም ያኔ ሲመሠረቱ ሳንጨፈልቃቸው ዝም ብለናቸው ነው ዛሬ አናታችን ላይ…” አሉና ያሉበት ቦታ ትዝ ሲላቸው ድንግጥ ብለው ወደአቶ መለስ መቀመጫ አማተሩ፡፡ አቶ መለስ በጥሞና ያዳምጣሉ፤ ተወካዩ እንደደነገጡ “…ልጨርሰው ወይስ ትጨርሰኛለህ?” አሉ ይባላል፡፡

የሕወሓት/ኢሕአዴግ ወታደሮች አዲስ አበባ ደርሰው “ሲቪል” መንግሥት ከመመሥረታቸው አስቀድሞ “እኩይ” ናቸው በሚል ሲቃወማቸው የነበረ እና እስካሁንም ስክነቱ ያልተለየው አክቲቪስት ታማኝ በየነ ነው፡፡ የታማኝ የአክቲቪስትነት ሪከርድ ከኮሜዲያንነቱ የሚመዘዝ ነው፡፡ በቀልዶቹ ቢጀምርም አሁን ግን በጣም ‹ሲሪዬስ› ነው፡፡ አሁን እነቪኦኤ፣ ዶቸ ቬሊ፣ ኢሳት በየቤቱ እንደሚደመጡት ከደርግ ማክተሚያ ቀደም ብሎ ብዙ ሰው በየቤቱ ‹ድምፂ ወያነ›ን በድብቅ ያደምጥ ነበር፡፡ የፕሮፓጋንዳ ሚዲያዎች አመል ነውና ያው ውሸታቸው አይጣል ነው፡፡ ታዲያ ታማኝ አዲስ አበባ ዩንቨርስቲ ቀርቦ የምሩን ሲቀልድ ‹እዚህ ቦታ ይሄን ያክል ሻለቃ ጦር፣ እዚያ ቦታ ደግሞ ይሄን ያክል ሻለቃ ጦር ደመሰስን ይላሉ፡፡ ሲደመር ግን ይሄን ያክላል፡፡ ቆይ እኔ የምለው ወያኔዎቹ የሚደመስሱት ጦር ከጠቅላላ ጦሩ በለጠ እኮ፤ ከየት እያመጡ ነው የሚደመስሱት?› ዓይነት ቀልድ ተናግሮ አላገጠባቸው፡፡ ከዚያ በድምፂ ወያነ መልስ ተሰጠው፤ “ቁጥሩን አዲስ አበባ ስንደርስ እናወራርዳለን” የሚል፡፡ ዛቻ የሽፍትነት ዘመንም አመል ነበረች፡፡

ግንቦት 20/1983 - ኢሕአዴግ አዲስ አበባን ሲረግጥ፣ ሲ ኤን ኤን ካነጋገራቸው ሰዎች አንዱ ታማኝ በየነ ነበር፡፡ “በመሣሪያ ተከበናል፣ ምንም ሠላም የለም…” የሚል ነገር ለጋዜጠኛው ሲነግረው ይታያል፡፡ ታዲያ ታማኝ ሁኔታውን በቀልድ ሲያስታውስ “ጓደኞቼ ከውጪ ደውለው ‹ሲ ኤን ኤን› ላይ አየንህ ሲሉኝ፣ ወዲያውኑ እንግሊዝኛዬ እንዴት ነበር?” አልኳቸው ይላል፡፡

ታማኝ ከአዲሱ ስርዓት ጋር አብሮ መኖር በማይችልበት ሁኔታ የተቀያየመው፣ ካልተሳሳትኩ የወቅቱ ባለሥልጣናት፣ እነታምራት ላይኔ በተገኙበት ስታዲዬም ውስጥ በቀለደው ቀልድ ነው፡፡ እንደማስታውሰው ቀልዱ በማንነት ላይ የተመሠረተ እና ለኢሕአዴግ የማንነት ብያኔ የማይበገር ዓይነት ቀልድ ነው፡፡

#HRDay2013: Ethiopian government must reveal who, why, where and how citizens in jail are imprisoned

I always come across through Siye's statement in that he mentioned ‘the prison [in Ethiopia] speaks Oromiffa' - to mean most of the prisoners are Oromos. When my friends and I visited journalist Wubshet Taye before he was moved to Zeway, he told us the same thing. Many Oromos are imprisoned. That's not the question! The question is why are they imprisoned?

Is it because they committed crimes? Is it because they believed Oromia should secede? If so, it's their constitutional right. Is it because they were working with OLF? In fact, had people were allowed to work legally against a system that they don't legitimize then they wouldn't have any reason to do it underground with an ‘illegal group'. And we the people, at least, deserve to know the detail.

Ethiopia has signed the African charter for human and people's rights. The concept of ‘people's rights' is unique to Africa and concerns about the rights of groups including ethnics. It's, therefore, the duty of the government to unconditionally respect these rights and our right to know if they are protected or not.

This is not the only problem. In the last September, on the public demonstration called by UDJ party, a girl appeared with a slogan that reads ‘My father is not a terrorist'. We talked to the girl and no one knows her father and even the case he was jailed. Given the history of government's brutality on its critiques, we can't help analyzing this “terrorist" as one victim of the conspiracies made against innocents.

Ethiopian prisons are like ‘bermuda'. There is no independent institution that knows what's going on in there. It is the government itself that's capable of doing this.

I know this sounds ridiculous to most of you but as people who believe in peaceful struggle, we don't have an option other than trying hard to push the government reveal the prison information. In the end, I hope we will have a little picture of what is happening in Ethiopian prisons.

Therefore, this is my call for Ethiopian social media activists to hold this question up through the months between the past and the coming international human rights days.

Ethiopian prisons must release periodic reports to the public on who (specially groups the prisoners are from), why they are jailed, where and how they are held.

We have the right to know if our prisons are places where citizens are corrected for the mistakes they have made in life; not a place where citizens have to pay for standing differed with ruling party.

#HRDay2013፤ ከሰው በታች የሆኑ ሰዎች አሉ ብለው የሚያምኑ ኢትዮጵያውያን አሁንም አሉ

ከጥቂት ሳምንታት በፊት ነው፤ አምስት ኢትዮጵያውያን ሰብሰብ ብለን እራት እየበላን ነበር፡፡ አንደኛው በኢትዮጵያ ውስጥ ካሉት ‹‹ነጻ›› የጋዜጠኞች ማኅበራት የአንዱ ፕሬዚደንት ነው፡፡ በጨዋታችን መሐል የተናገረው ነገር ሁላችንንም አስደነገጠን፡፡ በዚህ ዘመን እንዲህ የሚያምን “ዘመነኛ” ሰው አለ እንዴ!?

ሰውዬው ያወራልን ሌሊት ወደጅብነት ስለሚለወጡ ሰዎች ነው፡፡ በዚህ ጊዜ ሁላችንም አፍረን ስናፈገፍግ ከመሐላችን አንዱ “እንዲህ ዓይነት ነገር እውነት ነው ብለህ ታምናለህ?” ብሎ ጠየቀው፡፡ እሱ ሆዬ በሙሉ መተማመን እኛን እንዳላዋቂ በመቁጠር ሌሊት ወደጅብነት የሚለወጡ ሰዎች እንዳሉ ያስረዳን ጀመር፡፡

ይህንን ትዝታዬን የቀሰቀሰው ትላንት ጋዜጠኛ Masresha Mammo የጻፈው ማስታወሻ ነው፡፡ ርዕሰ ጉዳዩ የተለየ ስለነበር እኔ ግን ለዚህች ጽሑፌ የሚጠቅመኝን ገንጥዬ አጣቅሳለሁ፡፡ ማስረሻ እንዲህ ይላል፤

‹‹…ተወልጄ ያደግኹት ከእንጦጦ ተራራ ስር ቀጨኔ በምትባል ሰፈር ውስጥ ነው፡፡ […] ቀጨኔ ላይ ያለው ማኅበረሰብ ወደአዲስ አበባ የተሰደደው የተሻለ ኑሮ ፍለጋ ሲል አልነበረም፡፡ ቡዳ ነው የሚል ስም ስለተለጠፈበት ‹ልጆቻችንን በልተው ጨረሷቸው› በሚል ግድያው ስለበዛበት ነበር፡፡ አንድ ቀጥቃጭ አባቱ፣ ወይም ሸማኔ ወንድሙ፣ አሊያም ሸክለኛ እናቱ በዚሁ ሰበብ ሲገደሉበት፤ በምላሹ እሱም ደሙን ተወጥቶ ይሸሻል፡፡ ይሰደዳል፡፡...