Resignation of the Prime Minister: Beginning of Collapse to EPRDF or of Reform?

(Recap the Past Decades of EPRDF's Rule)

It all started when the Ethiopian national election ended in crisis 13 years ago. But, it became very interesting when the beginning of an end of an era gives a hint with the resignation of a Prime Minister for the first time in Ethiopia's experience. 

On the 15th of February 2017, expected yet surprising breaking news hit Ethiopian media. The Prime Minister wrote a letter of resignation from both his premiership of the country and chairmanship of the ruling coalition of Ethiopian People's Democratic Revolutionary Party, EPRDF. Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn's resignation was expected because it was rumored; and, it was also surprising because the news came earlier than the long-awaited EPRDF conference which is a feast of reshuffle. The resignation is a combination of both lack of his competency and manifestation of internal dispute within the coalition. 

Thirteen years ago, the contested national election in 2005 ended in crisis when the government jailed leaders of major opposition group - Coalition for Unity and Justice (CUD), civil society members and journalists. It was followed by massive closure of the free press and civil society. What started in a de facto repression became de jure when the House of People's Representatives (HPR) that was overwhelmingly dominated by EPRDF passed two proclamations in 2009. One of the proclamations is the infamous Anti-Terrorism Proclamation (ATP), which used as an excuse to jail thousands of politicians, activists, journalists and bloggers. The other is Charities and Societies Proclamation (commonly known as CSO law), which restricted the working space and finance source of civil societies consequently forcing out many civil rights organizations. 

የኢትዮጵያ ስርዓተ ናሙና እውን (ከሕግ አንፃር) ፌዴራላዊ ሊባል ይችላል?

(ይህ ጽሑፍ በ1992 ከታተመው "Ethnic Federalism in a Dominant Party State: The Ethiopian Experience 1991-2000" ከሚለው የሎቪስ አለን ጥናት ውስጥ ካለ ንዑስ ርዕስ ተቀንጭቦ የተተረጎመ ነው።)

በሽግግር መንግሥቱ ግዜ የታተሙት ዐዋጆች ሁሉ ክልሎች እና ንዑስ ክፍሎቻቸው የማዕከላዊ መንግሥቱ ምንዝሮች እንደሆኑ ተመልክቷል። የሽግግር ምክርቤቱ ለብሔሮች ‹የራስን ዕድል በራስ መወሰን› የሚል ቃል በስተቀር የክልሎች ሥልጣን የተገደበ ነበር። የኢትዮጵያ መንግሥት ያልተማከለ፣ አሀዳዊ፣ ወይም ፌዴራላዊ ስለመሆኑ ምንም አይታወቅም ነበር። የ1987ቱ ሕገ መንግሥት ግን ይህንን ግራ መጋባት ቀርፎታል። አሀዳዊውን ስርዓት በመተው ፌዴራላዊውን እንደሚከተል በግልጽ ያስቀምጣል (አንቀፅ1)። ይሁን እንጂ በኢትዮጵያ የፌዴራል አወቃቀር ላይ በርካታ እንግዳ እና አሻሚ ነገሮች አሉ። ይህም ከነባር ፌዴሬሽኖች የፌዴራል ኅልዮት እና አተገባበር አንፃር ይገጥማሉ ወይም ይጋጫሉ የሚለውን የመደምደሙን ነገር  ከባድ ያደርገዋል። የመገንጠል መብት፣ ለፌዴሬሽኑ አባል አገረ-መንግሥታት ፈንታ ሉዓላዊነት "ለብሔሮች፣ ብሔረሰቦች እና ሕዝቦች"  መሰጠቱ፣ ገለልተኛ የሕገ መንግሥት ፍርድ ቤት አለመኖር፣ እና ጠንካራው የሥራ አስፈጻሚ አካል ለዚህ ውስብስብ ባሕሪው ተጨማሪ ምክንያቶች ናቸው።

የክልሎች ሥልጣን ተቃርኖ

በኢትዮጵያ ፌዴራል አወቃቀር ግልጽ የሆነ አያዎ እንዳለ ብዙ ጸሐፊዎች አስፍረዋል። በአንድ በኩል ብሔር ብሔረሰቦች እና ሕዝቦች የተወሰኑ ሁኔታዎችን አሟልተው የመገንጠል መብት ተሰጥቷቸዋል። ይህ ከሌሎች የፌዴራል ስርዓታት በተለየ የፌዴራሉ አካላትን ነጻነት የተለጠጠ ያደርገዋል። በሌላ በኩል፣ የአባል አገረ-መንግሥታቱ ሥልጣን በአንፃሩ በጣም ውሱን ነው። የክልል መንግሥታቱ ሥራቸውን ለመሥራት በፌዴራል መንግሥቱ ላይ ጥገኛ ናቸው። በብሬዝኬ እንደተገለጸው፣ ሕገ መንግሥቱ "ጥቂት የራስን ዕድል በራስ የመወሰን መብቶችን መድኅን" ያቀርብና፣ እስከ መገንጠል በሚለው መካከል ምን እንዳለ ስላልተገለጸ፣ ጠባብ የራስን ዕድል የመወሰን ቅርፅ እና የተገደበ የባሕል ነጻነት ያጎናፅፋል።"

ዱካቼክን ጨምሮ የተወሰኑ የፌዴራሊዝም አጥኚዎች የመገንጠል መብት አንድን አገረ መንግሥት ፌዴራላዊ ለመባል እንዳይበቃ ያደርገዋል በማለት እስከመከራከር ይደርሳሉ። የመገንጠል መብት ዜጎች ለማዕከላዊ መንግሥቱ ያላቸው ታማኝነት ቀስ በቀስ እንዲቀንስ ያደርገዋል። በተጨማሪም፣ ክልሎች ኅብረቱን የመልቀቅ ነጻነቱ ሲኖራቸው፣ በማዕከሉ እና አገረ መንግሥታቱ መካከል ያለው የፖለቲካ መዋቅር ከፌዴሬሽን ይልቅ የላላ ንዑስ ብሔራዊ ቁጥጥር ያለው ኮንፌዴሬሽን ዓይነት ይሆናል። ሉዓላዊነት ለብሔር ብሔረሰቦች እና ሕዝቦች መሰጠቱም ቢሆን ብሔረሰቦች ከፌዴሬሽኑ ብቻ ሳይሆን ከክልሉ አገረ መንግሥታት ሳይቀር እንዲገነጠሉ ሊያደርግ ይችላል። ይህ ያልተለመደ ሕገ መንግሥታዊ ስርዓት ከመሆኑም ባሻገር የሚመስለው አንድም የፌዴራል ስርዓት ዛሬ ላይ የለም። የመገንጠል መብት መኖር ኢትዮጵያን ፌዴራላዊ ለመባል አያበቃትም የሚለው እንደ አስተያየት ሰጪው ይወሰናል። ሌሎች የፌዴራል ስርዓቶችን ብንመለከት፣ አንዳንድ የዘውግ ቡድኖችን ወይም ክልሎችን የመገንጠል መብት የሰጡ ስርዓቶች አሉ። ነገር ግን እነዚህኞች ከሕገ መንግሥት ድንጋጌዎች ውጪ የተሰጡ ናቸው።

የኃይሌ ገ/ሥላሴ ችግሩ፣ በሀብት መክበሩ!

ሻለቃ ኃይሌ ገ/ሥላሴ የዛሬ 8 ዓመት ገደማ፣ በመስከረም ወር 2003ቱ የኢሕአዴግ ጉባዔ ላይ ተገኝቶ ንግግር አድርጎ ነበር። እናም "እናንተ ፖለቲካውን ሥሩ፣ ንግዱን ለኛ ተዉልን" የሚል ንግግር አድርጓል። ንግዱን አልተዉለትም። ሆኖም ምንጩ በሚታወቀው ሀብቱ እየተፎካከራቸው ነው። እነርሱ በወቅቱ የፈለጉት በሕዝቡ የሚወደደውን ሰው ወደ መድረካቸው በማምጣት ከሕዝባዊ መውደዱ መሻማት/መፎካከር ነበር። ከዚያ ቀጥሎ ለመጀመሪያ ግዜ ክብረወሰን ሲሰብር የለበሰውን ቲሸርት ለወቅቱ ጠቅላይ ሚኒስትር በሥጦታ አበረከተላቸው። መብቱ ነው ግን ይህም አልበቃው፣ በአትሌቲክስ ሜዳ ክብረወሰን ሲሰብር ከተሰማው ደስታ ይልቅ እዚያ መድረክ ላይ በመገኘቱ የተሰማው ደስታ እንደሚበልጥ ተናገረ። ይሁን። ዞሮ ዞሮ ግን ኃይሌ ለዚህ ሙገሳው በምላሹ የጠየቀው 'ውለታ' "ንግዱን ተዉልን" የሚል ብቻ ነበር። በርግጥ ከዚያ በፊት "የአገር መሪነት ማን ይጠላል?" የሚል ቃል ለአዲስ አድማስ ተናግሯል፤ የግንባሩ አባል ቢሆን የሆነ የአመራር ቦታ የሚከለክሉት አይመስለኝም። ሆኖም ከዚያ በፊት የነበረው የፖለቲካ ልምድ ግን የቅንጅት አመራሮችን በሽምግልና ሥም ይቅርታ ያስፈረመው የአገር ሽማግሌዎች አባልነት ብቻ ነበር። 

ኃይሌ ገብረሥላሴን በመተቸት ለመጻፍ ስንጀምር "ኃይሌ ለአገር ውለታ የዋለ፣ ከአትሌቲክስ ጡረታ ቢወጣም በኢኮኖሚው መስክ ብዙ ሰው ለመቅጠር የበቁ ኢንቨስትመንቶች ላይ የተሠማራ" የሚሉ ማባበያዎችን ማስቀመጥ እንደ ደንብ ተቆጥሯል። እኔ ይህን አላደርግም። ለትችት የሚቀርቡት ሰዎች ስለአገር ምንም ውለታ ያልዋሉ ሰዎች ናቸው ማለት አይደለም። ሁሉም የአቅሙን አዋጥቷል። ኃይሌም ቢሆን በፍትሕ ዓይን ከማንም አይበልጥም። አሁን በኢትዮጵያ ያለው ተቃውሞ ደግሞ የፍትሓዊነት ጥያቄ ነው። የፍትሓዊ አስተዳደር፣ የፍትሓዊ ውክልና፣ የፍትሓዊ የሀብት ክፍፍል፣ የፍትሓዊ ዳኝነት፣ ወዘተ።

ከሁለት ዓመት በፊተ፣ በሕዳር ወር 2008 ቢቢሲ ሬድዮ ላይ ቀርቦ የነበረው ኃይሌ "ዴሞክራሲ ለአፍሪካውያን ቅንጦት ነው" ብሏል። 'ዳቦ ይቅደም' ማለቱ ነው። ሆዱን ያልሞላ ሰው ነጻነት አያስፈልገውም ከሚለው "የባርነት ለዳቦ" አስተሳሰብ ጋር የተስተካከለ አባባል ነው። አንድም በድሃ መሳለቅ ሲሆን፣ አንድም ደግሞ በዘር መፈረጅ ነው። ኃይሌ ለመናገር ያለው ድፍረት መልካም ነበር። የሚያሳዝነው ለሚናገረው ነገር ይዘት እና ውጤት ቅንጣት አለመጨነቁ ነው። ብዙ ሰዎች በሱ ንግግር የሚበሳጩት ካለው ሕዝባዊ ተቀባይነት አንፃር ንግግሩ ተፅዕኖ ስለሚያሳድር ነው። 'ከነጻነት ዳቦ ይቀድማል' የሚል መልዕክት ያለው ንግግር ሲያደርግ፣ ለሕዝቡ ጭቆናውን ለልማት ሲባል ቻሉት ማለቱ ነው፤ ለመንግሥቱ ደግሞ ሕዝባችሁን ዳቦ እየሰጣችሁ፣ ብትረግጧቸው ምንም አይለይም እያለ ነው። ነገሩ ከዘረኛ ነጮች አመለካከት ጋርም ይሠምራል። ለቅኝ አገዛዝ የተሰጠው አስተያየት (ማብራሪያ) ተመሳሳይ ነው። አፍሪካውያን ድህነት ይዘው እንጂ የምዕራባውያኑን ልብስ ቢያጌጡበት ያምርባቸዋል። የተመጣጠነ ምግብ ቢበሉ ይስማማቸዋል። እንደ ሕዝብ ሉዓላዊነታቸው ቢከበርላቸው ደስ ይላቸዋል። አፍሪካዊ ስለሆኑ የቅንጦት አይሆንባቸውም። ልማትና ዴሞክራሲም የሚጣረሱ ነገሮች አይደሉም። ሁለቱንም ባንዴ ማቅረብ ይቻላል። አፍሪካውያንም እንደሌላው ሁለቱንም ባንዴ ቢያገኙ አይጠሉም።

ከሰሞኑም በድጋሚ ኃይሌ አወዛጋቢ መልዕክቱን በድጋሚ አስተላልፏል። በኢቢሲ ከፓስተር ዳንኤል ጋር ቀርቦ የተናገረው ንግግር ውስጥ የሚያስቆጣ ይዘት ያላቸው ንግግሮች ደንቅሯል። ለምሳሌ "የውጭ እንትን ያለበት… የሚታይበት ነገር" በማለት የገለጸው እና በኋላ ሲተነትነው የግብጽ ስፖንሰርነት አለበት ለማለት እንደፈለገ የሚያስታውቀው ንግግሩ አንዱ ነው። ኢትዮጵያውያን በቂ ብሶት የሌላቸው ይመስል የመንግሥትን ፕሮፓጋንዳ ሰምቶ የውጭ ተልዕኮ አስፈፃሚዎች ሥራ ማስመሰል ተገቢ አይደለም። የውጪ ኃይሎች ኢትዮጵያ ውስጥ ያለውን ተቃውሞ ሊደግፉ ይችላሉ እንጂ ሊፈጥሩት አይችሉም። አለቀ። 

ሲቀጥል ደግሞ "ቤት በመዝጋት፣ ትራንስፖርት በመዝጋት" መቃወም "የትም አገር የሌለ" ነገር ነው። ብሎ አጣጥሎታል። በመሠረቱ ኃይሌ ብዙ አገራት መሔዱ እውነት ነው። ነገር በሔደባቸው አገሮች ውስጥ ያለውን የፖለቲካ ስርዓት፣ ለተቃዋሚዎች ተሳትፎ የሚሰጡትን ቦታ እና የሕዝብን ጥያቄ የሚያስተናግዱበትን መንገድ ያጠና ወይም ለማጥናት ግዜ ያገኘ አይመስለኝም። 

ሕዝቦች ወይም የሕዝብ ክፍሎች ጥያቄ ወይም ቅሬታ ሲኖራቸው፣ ሲያሻቸው በመሾምና በመሻር፣ ሲያሻቸው ፖሊሲ በማስወጣት እና በማስከለስ የሚኖሩበት ዘመን ላይ ነን። የኛው መንግሥት ደግሞ መጀመሪያ በነፍጥ ራሱን ሾመ፣ በመቀጠል ፍትሓዊ ባልሆኑ የምርጫ ሒደቶች ሥልጣኑን አስቀጠለ። የሕዝብ ወኪል ማኅበራትን እና ሚድያዎችን አደከመ። በዚህ መንገድ ተናጋሪ እራሱ፣ ፖሊሲ ቀራጭ እራሱ፣ ሁሉ ነገር ራሱ ከመሆኑ የተነሳ የተቃውሞ መንስዔዎቻችሁን ሳይቀር እኔ ራሴ ነኝ የምነግራችሁ አለ። ሕዝቦች በድርጅት የጀመሩትን ተቃውሞ አደናቀፈ። ድርጅቶች ፈርሰውና ተዳክመው ዜጎች በየፊናቸው መቃወም ቀጠሉ። 

ኃይሌ የተቃወመው የሠላማዊ ትግል መንገዶችን ነው። በመሠረቱ በሠላማዊ ትግል ሦስት ደረጃዎች አሉ። የመጀመሪያው ማግባባት ነው፤ በጽሑፍ፣ በሠልፍ… ብዙ ተሞክሮ ሰሚ አልተገኘም። ሁለተኛው፣ አለመተባበር ነው፤ መንግሥት መር ጥፋቶች ሲፈፀሙ የነዚያ ተግባራት አካል ላለመሆን ብዙ ተሞክሯል፣ እየተሞከረም ነው። ግን ሦስተኛውም ተጀምሯል። ጣልቃ መግባት፤ መንግሥት ለጥያቄዎች መልስ አልሰጥም ሲል እና ችግሮች ከድጡ ወደማጡ እየገቡ ሲያስቸግሩ ጣልቃ ገብቶ ይበቃል እንደማለት። ይህ ደረጃ ችግሩ እነርሱን ስለማይነካቸው ብቻ ሠላማዊ ትግሉን የሚቃወሙት ሰዎች የችግሩ ጥልቀት ባይገባቸውም ጫፍ ጫፉ እንዲታያቸው ማድረግ ነው። ችግሩ ከማይገባቸው ሰዎች መካከል የናጠጡ ሀብታሞች ይገኙበታል። 

በመሠረቱ የኃይሌ ችግር የብቻው አይደለም። የሙለር ሪል ኢስቴት ባለቤት አቶ ሙሉጌታ ተስፋኪሮስ ከአንድ ታዋቂ የጀርመን ጋዜጣ ጋር ባደረጉት ቃለ ምልልስ "ኢትዮጵያ ለዴሞክራሲ ዝግጁ አይደለችም" ብለዋል። የሚገባቸው መልስ ከላይ ለኃይሌ ከተሰጠው የተለየ ሊሆን አይችልም። ጥያቄው 'ሀብታሞችን ከሕዝባዊ ተቃውሞዎች ተፃራሪ የሚያቆማቸው ምንድን ነው?' የሚል ነው። 

ለመልሱ ደጋግሜ ወደጠቀስኩት የአሴሞግሉ እና ሮቢንሰን 'Economic Origin of Democracy and Dictatorship' የሚል መጽሐፍ ላይ ያገኘሁት ኅልዮትን ልዋስ። የኢኮኖሚ ልኂቃን ሁሌም የአምባገነንነት ደጋፊዎች ናቸው። የሀብት ክፍፍል በሰፋ ቁጥር ሕዝቦች ያምፃሉ። ይህ ዴሞክራሲ በግዚያዊነት ለውጥ ሊያመጣ ይችላል። ነገር ግን አሁንም የኢኮኖሚ ልኂቃኑ የመንግሥት ግልበጣ ደግፈው በኢኮኖሚ የብቻ የበላይ የሚያደርጋቸውን አምባገነናዊ ስርዓት ያቆማሉ። ማለትም ከድሀው ብዙኃን እጅግ የራቀ ሀብት ያላቸው ባለፀጎች ባሉበት አገር ዴሞክራሲ አይፈጠርም፤ ቢፈጠርም አይፀናም። ኃይሌ ገ/ሥላሴ እና ሌሎቹም ባለፀጎች ኢትዮጵያ እና አፍሪካ ለዴሞክራሲ እንዳልተዘጋጁ የሚናገሩት ወይም እንዳይዘጋጁ የሚፈልጉት የኢኮኖሚ ልኂቅነት ጥቅማቸውን (privileges) ለማካፈል ስለሚቸግራቸው ነው። 

አሁን ኃይሌ በይፋ ፖለቲከኛ መሆን እንደሚፈልግ እየተናገረ ነው። ፖለቲከኝነት የሕዝብን ውክልና አግኝቶ ጥቅማቸውን ለማስከበር የሚሠራበት መሆኑን ተረድቶ፣ ይህን የኢኮኖሚ ልኂቅነት ቦታውን እስከመታገል መድረስ መቻል እንዳለበት ከአሁኑ በይፋ ያስብበት ዘንድ ጊዜው አሁን ነው። 

An African Portrayal of Adwa!

A few years ago, there was a movement by African media leaders to create an African narration of itself. The proposal aimed at reversing the racist or colonial perspective of Africa and telling African stories in African way.

To understand this, I usually think of ways of things are done at home, Ethiopia. Let me give you an example from home. Foreign media or any reference of an Ethiopian is so strange until that Ethiopian learns about it. In my little experience of travel and even in reference of foreign media, I found myself usually referred as someone whom I am not. The wikipedia page that has my profile, for example, reads my story as Hailu's, my father. Jokes aside, foreigners usually referred to me by my father's name mostly, and by my grandfather's name seldom. They call it Sur Name or Family Name while we have no such thing. I want to be called in my own way, the cultural way I have lived. But no one cares because the standard is set in the European way. 

We Ethiopians preserved the Ethiopian way of name-system We preserved it because we were not colonized. Things would have continued in multiple different/diverse ways in Africa and elsewhere if there were no colonization. 

In Adwa, Ethiopians defeated Italian colonizers but I don't really believe we lived through our independence. The governments of Ethiopia are manipulated by European powers since then. Migration, importing innovations, and our very perception of white people made us submit to white or European supermacy. The European way is taken as the best way, the norm.  However, some things of our own have survived  until today. (By the way, "our own" way in itself is not pure invention of our own. It may be adoptation of something or modification of it through years until we forget the origin of it.)

One of the survived traditions exists our name-system. Even it was debated in parliament during the emperor's time. Fortunately, the parliamentarians of the time rejected the proposal to adopt European system and resumed the local name system. I'm not saying the Ethiopian name system (calling a person with her/his given name and adding her/his father's given name, and grandfather's given name respectively after the given name of a person to write a full name) is a perfect one nor a system that lived forever in Ethiopia. (In fact, I can't deny that sometimes I see family name system as tribal.) Anyway, what I wanted to write about is ours has evolved with its own bureaucracy and it always feels OK to do things in one's way. When I want to be referred by my name, and not by what foreigners think my family name is, it is an appeal to decide who I am.

Black Panther is awed by many because it is almost all blacks' movie. However, in my opinion, had had an African country that hasn't been colonized and remained hidden from the colonizers' indirect influence existed, it would have a chance to evolve even in a very different way than it is imagined in this movie. The movie, of course is produced to western audience, in a way that impresses black westerners. As a person who lives in a country where there is very little black/white race division, I couldn't see Black Panther more than just another super hero movie. But, what if it was authored, directed and produced by people who have actual experiences of being never colonized? 

Addis Ababa is not a good place to think of because it is trying to look like everyone else except Africans. I refer to my own experience of rural life two decades ago in Northern Shoa to imagine what a developed African nation, without colonial powers influence, would look like. Every item I saw there was made of resources found in that environment. The 'tefir' bed, that is made of leather ropes and wood without using a single nail attaching the woods; the cooking pan made of clay; the drinking cup, 'shikina', made of calabash; the plate, 'erbo', made of grass leaves; the house itself and everything is different and friendly to the environment. Imagine this to evolve and get advanced without any outside influence. It can be a lot of things but the possibility for it to look like as it is portrayed in Black Panther is very unlikely. 

Anyway, what I'm trying to explain is that it may not be better but it is always different when genuinely Africans portray themselves. I will use one more example to explain what I'm saying. 

In Ethiopia's traditional paintings, people's are usually painted two-eyed if they have done good and one eyed if they did evil. The traditional painting of Adwa, for example, displays two groups of warriors: one group is two-eyed and these are the colonialism-defenders; the other group is one-eyed because they have done evil things by trying to conquer Ethiopia.

No Diplomacy, No Dependency!

I believe all changes must come from within Ethiopia. It is the people of Ethiopia who should have the chance to have the ultimate say to make decisions on its fate. However, realities on ground give foreign powers disproportionate opportunity to interfere in internal affairs; and often times they use it to consolidate powers of authoritarians. World conventions, pacts, partnership values and etc. are lip services to let the hopeless mass hope for a promise that will never be fulfilled, letting citizens settle down while diplomats continue empowering authoritarians to consolidate power through their support.

In post election 2005, foreign powers supported EPRDF financially to rise up after a wave of public protests. Similarly, today too, foreign powers and most of their diplomats in Ethiopia are in favor of the status quo with EPRDF (which is dominated by TPLF) because of mainly the following reasons:

1. Fear of the Unknown

Horn of Africa is capital of crises. Somalia is statess for decades, South Sudan is home of conflict, Eritrea and Sudan are disobedient to the west. Kenya has no strong force and Djibouti is a small partner. Ethiopia, with 100 of millions of population, is a place where no one wants to take the risk of destability. Besides, it hosts a lot of refugees from Eritrea, South Sudan and Somalia. No one wants her to add tens of million of immigrants to the rest of the world. (By the way, the aid to host refugees in Ethiopia goes to National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS) and it is the very institution that represses the whole nation with the money it has.)

The Sensational OPDO and Popular Reactions

(A note inspired by a Facebook post of Yemane Mitiku)

The people in social media and beyond are perplexed about what is going on within EPRDF. Almost all assumptions are made based on the news that reached the public from what is happening behind closed doors. However, it can be reached at a point where we can be sure there is internal struggle which is manifested in a lot of issues that resulted in personal cults of team Lemma Megersa of OPDO and sometimes Gedu Andargachew of ANDM. Herebelow, I put what I have observed from commentators why people appreciate the sensational progress OPDO in standing against widely accepted TPLF's supremacy as well as why they reject it.

Who Rejects Team Lemma and Why?

1. Those cadres who want to protect TPLF's supremacy within EPRDF and the Federal State;

2. Those OPDO cadres who want to submit to TPLF and replace current leaders of OPDO;

3. Those activists who don't know political games apart from their hates to a group and affection to the other;

4. Those people who want to be champions of the other possibility - to say "I told you so" in any case when TPLF wins over OPDO;

5. Those people who honor TPLF/EPRDF more than it deserves to be - these people think every complicated step is a designed conspiracy by TPLF/EPRDF as if it (TPLF) had been using well designed strategies to suppress dissents previously instead of using violence;

6. Those opposition groups and figures who think change can only be possible through their touches and blessings; and,

7. Those people who think the way to change is black and white, as if one way or no way is the solution and as if there is no evolutionary way nor alternative ways exist to make changes.

Who Romanticizes Team Lemma and Why?

#QilintoFire case victims responded to EHRC report

On 11th of October 2017, the State-run Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has written the long awaited report of its investigation of rights violation against Qilinto Fire defendants as per the request of the 19th Bench of Federal High Court at Lideta. On the five pages of report, EHRC revealed scars left after tortures during investigation against 16 defendants among 38 people charged under the same case. The report also revealed flogging marks left on the defendants’ backs, breaking of fingers, scars left after nail-pierced body parts and uprooted finger nails of multiple defendants. Here below I will jot down the torture scars listed in the report and will follow what the defendants have written in response:

1. Kebede Chemeda – a scar on his right hand; breaking in his right hand thumb
2. Ibrahim Khamil – a scar on his right leg; a scar on his left hand; scar-marked left from handcuffs
3. Agbaw Setegn – large scar on his left leg thigh; a scar on his right leg; a sign of nail piercing on his left leg; sign of flogging on his back
4. Tofik Shikur – a scar on his right hand; uprooting of both thumbs of his legs’ nails; a scar on his left hand
5. Shemsu Seid – signs that look like remains of flogging at his back
6. Misbah Kedir – Scar-marks left from handcuffs; a large scar on his right hand; a small scar on his left hand; scars on both of his right and left legs thighs; breaking of his right hand’s pointing finger
7. Fitsum Getachew – Right hand injury
8. Temesgen Markos – breaking of his right hand and a scar; large scars on both of his legs
9. Ashenafi Melese – scars on both of his right and left legs; breaking of his right hand’s ring-finger
10. Kassa Mohammed – deep scar on his right hand; injury on his head
11. Sisay Batu – a scar on his right hand
12. Abduldafar Asrat – uprooting of both of his legs’ thumbs’ nails
13. Dereje Merga – six scars on his left leg; scar-marks left from handcuffs on both of his legs
14. Tofik Ferha – a scar on his left hand; scar-marks left from handcuffs
15. Omar Hassan – uprooting of right leg thumb’s nail; uprooting of nail of next to thumb in his left leg
16. Seifu Girma – a scar after nail piercing on his left back shoulder; scars on both of his legs

Victims’ Responses

In a five pages of letter smuggled out of prison, the defendants have drafted their opinions on their case, complaints on their current treatment by prison admins and also their response to EHRC’s investigative report. Their response to EHRC’s report is mixed with feelings: they are partly glad EHRC didn’t deny it all as it is a culture in state institutions (at least in perceptions of citizens), on one hand; and, they think it revealed only a small part of what was done against them, on the other hand. Here is what they said:

1. EHRC didn’t include all human rights violations perpetrated against us
2. EHRC didn’t request for the accountability of perpetrators of the violations apart from forwarding ‘proposals’ of further investigations in obvious fear of the executive powers
3. EHRC’s proposal for Addis Ababa Police Commission and Medical Center to further investigate the violations is like giving the violators of our rights an exit from being held accountable
4. Regardless of all these, we are GRATEFUL to EHRC because it gave us a document that proves our confession to police according to Criminal Code Procedure 27/2 was forced and that it was not genuine confession

Screenshot of from the letters by the victims.

The victims also made calls to all media, human rights organizations, activists, diplomats and every citizen who is concerned about justice to follow their case.