Alternative forum for implementing the tenets of HR 2003

By Amare

Aug 1, 2007

Ethiopians who have been struggling for political reform and change but who have become disillusioned with the opposition that appears fixated on nothing but getting rid of the PM Meles’s government, should take special note. They should not argue themselves into a corner and end up tacitly undermining the improvements and the gains realized, however small, instead. They must look beyond the ‘let-us-remove-Meles’ mentality if they want to see Ethiopian society evolve into a truly civil society and have a direct stake in the policy- and decision-making processes.

In light of the HR 2003 raging controversy, I wish to highlight the existence of two realms of politics in Ethiopia, the formal and the non-formal. Although these two realms often converge, they are in fact different. Ethiopians who (owing in large part to the 2005 election and its aftermath) are disillusioned with electoralism and the political parties might want to engage in the non-formal realm instead. There is much need for consolidating this sphere if we are keen on ushering in participatory rather than simply procedural democracy.

In this regard, the recent achievement of the elders group can be cited as an example of a participatory democracy. They have promoted a new discourse and practice of participatory democracy based on the customs and traditions of Ethiopia. Indeed, this sage group, I would venture to argue, may well become a catalyst for the creation of an autonomous public sphere that allows for alternative views of development and democratic participation to be aired.

There is a need to sharpen the counter-discourse of alternative development strategies and to consolidate the practices of participatory democracy. The autonomous public sphere outside of political parties and elections needs to be expanded. There will be occasion in the future to re-engage with the formal political realm either during future elections or on specific causes.

With the above prelude, I would call all interested citizens both at home abroad to give due consideration to the immense benefits that would accrue to Ethiopia should we pursue the new path charted by the elders.

I have read HR 2003 critically and agree that it has many good points in it. Incidentally, this is what Prof. Ephrem Issac, one of the elders, has also alluded to during a recent VOA interview.

What do the proponents of HR 2003 want to see realized? Is it not seeing the implementation of the tenets of HR 2003 on the ground? If so, would it not make absolute sense to utilize the already opened channel of communication via the elders? What do they lose if the elders were to take up the issue and initiate a dialogue with the government on the tenets of HR 2003 and the modalities of its implementation?  If the true intention of the proponents of HR 2003 is to help Ethiopian society evolve into a truly civil society and have a direct stake in the policy- and decision-making processes, and if this noble goal could be realized through dialogue and discourse, why insisting on the passage of HR 2003 by the US congress? 

It is my wish that the proponents of HR 2003 reexamine their intentions and enlist the advice and help of the elders in seeing to it that an honest dialogue is initiated between them and the government based on mutual respect and Ethiopian traditions. In so doing, they can mobilize the financial and human resources of the Diaspora for GOOD of Ethiopia and their labor would not be in vain.