Opposition Political Parties in Ethiopia:
Which Way Forward?
The political history of modern Ethiopia has been marked by
oppressive regimes which effectively stifled all voices of dissent, and
opposition against their absolutist and tyrannical rule was suicidal. Opposition, by and large, was unthinkable,
or when it existed it was frequently equated with an act of treason. Political opponents were presented as
anti-people and enemies of the nation, and faced severe punishment that most of
the time entailed physical elimination or disappearances for good as in
Ethiopia of the 1970s and 1980s.
The Neway brothers (General Mengistu Neway and Dej. Girmame Neway) who
spearheaded the first time outright opposition against the imperial /feudal
order and attempted to oust Emperor Haile Selassie I from the throne by force
in 1961 were mercilessly killed and hanged as common criminals at St.
George square in Addis Ababa by the security forces of the imperial
regime. University and high school
students who from time to time rose up against the oppressive policies of the
imperial regime and demanded a democratic order through peaceful demonstrations
and raised the slogan "land to the tiller" were harshly suppressed by
the security forces of the Emperor. Tilahun Gizaw, the then President of the
University Students Union of Addis Ababa, was murdered in cold blood in one of
the streets of Addis Ababa (Afincho ber) in 1969 for his vocal anti-feudal
stance, and subsequently more than one hundred students, amongst those who
poured out in large numbers to observe his funeral ceremony on the second day
of the latter's murder, were gunned down by a contingent of the imperial guard
(actually, a mock funeral procession was planned where students who gathered at
the University campus at Sidist Kilo were to carry an empty coffin and march to
the streets of Addis Ababa in order to incite the people against the
government). Even peasant communities
in Tigray, Bale, Gojjam, Ogaden, Sidamo, Gedeo, Hadya, Wolayta, etc. who rose
up against the injustices and excesses of the feudal landlords of the day and
also demanded justice, tax waivers due to successive crop failures, self-rule,
autonomy and rights over land, etc. were not treated with consideration but
harshly suppressed, some as in Tigray and Gojjam were even bombed by the air
force.
Many others who from time to time dared to challenge the
imperial regime perished in like manner, until 1974 when Emperor Haile Selassie
I was humiliated and ousted by military force from his throne and mysteriously
killed thereafter by the very forces who killed, wounded and maimed many
thousands of Ethiopians in the past, zealously protecting his regime from
falling into the wrong hands or the commoners. It was the military which in the
end removed the Emperor and usurped the people's power by declaring a
provisional military government in 1974/5, which in fact lasted longer than a
decade and half extending up until 1991 when it was in turn toppled by the
EPRDF. During its seventeen years of
tyrannical rule and dictatorship, the military government on its part massacred
many hundreds and thousands of Ethiopians, alleged and genuine members of those
political parties which vehemently opposed military rule and fought for the
latter's demise, such as the EPRP, OLF, ONLF, WSLF, EPLF, TPLF, EDU, ARDUF
etc. and which operated in a semi-clandestine manner in different regions of
the country. Other political groupings
such as the All Ethiopia Socialist Movement (AESM), Labour League (WOZ),
Marxist-Leninist Revolutionary Organization (MALERID), Ethiopian Oppressed
Peoples’ Revolutionary Struggle (ECHAT/OLF) and ALF (Afar Liberation Front),
which flirted with the military government as allies, or "coalition of the
willing", so to say, in the struggle to 'realize a socialist
Ethiopia' in the Horn of Africa, soon lost favour in the eyes of the
ruling Provisional Military Administrative Council (PMAC) and were eventually
treated as strange bedfellows and consumed by the flames of the very revolution
that they "critically" supported: Many of their leaders were killed;
others were kept behind bars for long years; a few escaped and fled the country
landing in Europe or the USA; some of them who prostrated and submitted to the
sole leadership of "Comrade" Mengistu Haile Mariam were co-opted by
him to join the so-called Workers Party of Ethiopia (WPE) under Colonel
Mengistu’s sole guidance and personal grip. The aforementioned four or five
political organizations were also subsequently disbanded and declared illegal
through a decree that gave birth to the Workers Party of Ethiopia (WPE) under
the chairmanship of "Comrade" Mengistu Haile Mariam, as the sole
party to lead or guide a socialist revolution and transformation in Ethiopia.
The end result of this revolution is, of course, well-known to everyone at home
and abroad: utter political, economic and social crisis that ultimately
witnessed the crumbling of the WPE and the military government as a house of
cards in 1991.
All the aforementioned
political groups also fought against each other at different times and places
and lost many of their militant youth and supporters due to these senseless
skirmishes. Many others were also decimated
because of internal party squabbles and mutual distrust amongst themselves. How
many perished in such mysterious and despicable ways, no one can tell for sure.
Thus, legalized and peaceful opposition politics is a
relatively new phenomenon in Ethiopia.
For the first time in the long and chequered history of Ethiopia,
opposition politics was, willy-nilly, sanctioned and opposition parties were
legally allowed to operate in the country in the wake of the demise of the
military junta ("Derg") and the subsequent assumption of political
power by the victorious Ethiopian Peoples Revolutionary Democratic Front forces
(EPRDF) in 1991 (though most of their activities especially outside Addis Ababa
were seriously curtailed). Nevertheless, opposition politics was legalized by
the Transitional Period Charter of 1991 and subsequently by the Constitution of
the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia in 1994/5. Consequently, a legal
regime (Political Parties Registration Proclamation No. 46/1993 as Amended by
Proclamation No. 82/1994) was set in place requiring all political parties to
get registered by the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEB), which was
established as its primary function to conduct periodic and regular elections
in the country. Accordingly, numerous political
parties mushroomed at the local, regional and national levels in the newly
established federal state, even though many of them were very weak parties and
existed only in name.
Since the legalization of opposition parties in Ethiopia,
three national elections were held in 1995, 2000, and 2005. The first national election was boycotted by
the majority of opposition parties alleging numerous impediments in the way of
opposition parties, both before and during the election period, created by the
ruling party (EPRDF) and its affiliated regional parties. Anyway, at the first
national election, the EPRDF won 483 (89.94%) parliamentary seats out of the
total number of 537 seats while the other political parties, mostly affiliated
to the ruling party, secured 46 seats.
Independent candidates won the remaining 8 seats.
The second national election was held in the year 2000
under a more stable and relatively peaceful atmosphere than the previous one
and was contested by all opposition parties and was also "certified"
to be free and fair by local and
international observers that observed the 2000 elections, though there were
some irregularities in the Southern Region which were subsequently rectified by
the NEB. In this election, the EPRDF won 481 parliamentary seats (87.93%) while
the opposition parties, due to lack of funds and often weak organization,
contested only 20 percent of the seats to the federal parliament and secured 53
seats, and independent candidates won the remaining 13 seats. The total number of parliamentary seats had
increased to 547 by this time to accommodate the representation of some ten or
so minority ethnic groups that were not represented during the first national
election because each group's population numbered less than 100,000 and was not
sufficient enough to constitute even one single constituency for representation
as required by the electoral law.
Opposition parties also held 10 percent of the seats in the Southern
Region's national regional assembly and approximately 25 percent of seats in
the Addis Ababa City Council (until the Prime Minister dissolved the entire
council in October, with no dates set for new elections).
The third and the first ever free, fair and
peaceful general election that was hailed by all international and local
observers as such was held on May 15, 2005. More than 90% of registered
voters cast their votes on that historic day, braving very long queues and
painful hours of standing at the polling stations. However, as what counts at
the end is not the voters but those who count the votes, the disagreement that
abruptly flared amongst the ruling party and the major opposition parties
regarding the outcome of the election, that is, the number of votes secured by
each one of them in the polls, degenerated into deadly civil disturbances and
chaos, resulting in immense destruction of human life and property.
Whatever the case, opposition parties were able to secure more votes than ever
before in this election, though the major opposition party, the CUD, decided
not to join the legislature and also refused to take control of the Addis
Abeba City Council where it had a sweeping victory--winning 137 seats out
of the total of 138. The full account of this general election has been already
recorded by many observers and institutions, and I do not intend to dwell upon
it any further at this juncture.
While we reflect on
the urgent need for strengthening the practice of democracy and opening up the
political space further for opposition parties, I strongly believe that a
serious rethinking and reassessment on the responsibility and attitude of the
ruling party, and the opposition parties in the Ethiopian political marketplace
is timely and necessary. As we all
fully well know, one of the most difficult concepts for political parties in
Ethiopia, both the incumbent as well as the opposition, to comprehend is that
of the "loyal opposition" or legal opposition, as it actually means.
This concept is a vital one, however. It means, in essence, that all sides in a
democracy share a common commitment to its basic values, rules and procedures.
Political competitors don't necessarily have to like each other, but they must
tolerate one another and acknowledge that each has a legitimate and important
role to play. Moreover, the ground rules of the society must encourage
tolerance and civility in public debate. As the charismatic leader and elder
statesman Nelson Mandela once said: “..One of the most effective weapons in
dealing with different opinions is tolerance-the ability to take criticism and
not personalize it, even if a prominent individual is specifically identified
and becomes a target for criticism. Tolerance is one of the best ways to solve
major national issues.”
When the election is over, the losers accept the judgment of the
voters. If the incumbent party loses, it turns over power peacefully. No matter
who wins, both sides agree to cooperate in solving the common problems of the
society. The losers, now in the political opposition, whether it consists of one
party or many, can continue to participate in public life with the knowledge
that their role is essential in any democracy worthy of the name. They are
loyal not to the specific policies of the incumbent government, but to the
fundamental legitimacy of the state and to the democratic process itself.
As the next election comes around, opposition parties will again
have the opportunity to compete for power. In addition, a pluralistic society,
one in which the reach of government is limited, tends to offer election losers
alternatives for public service outside the government. Those defeated at the
polls may choose to continue as a formal opposition party, but they may also
decide to participate in the wider political process and debate through
writing, teaching, or joining one of many private organizations concerned with
public policy issues.
Yes, the concept of the
loyal or legal opposition is central to any functioning democracy. It means
that all sides in political debate, however deep their differences, share the
fundamental democratic values of freedom of speech and faith, and equal
protection under the law. It means, in
essence, that all parties in a democracy should be equally committed to the
basic values, rules and procedures of democracy. Parties that lose elections step into the role of
opposition--confident that the political system will continue to protect their
rights to organize and speak out. In
time, their party will have a chance to campaign again for its ideas, and the
votes of the people.
As mentioned here above, political competitors do not
necessarily have to be the best friends unto each other, but they must tolerate
each other's legitimacy. The right of
the minority (opposition) does not depend on the good will of the majority (winning
party). The losers in an election must
not be, or feel, threatened. On the contrary, they must feel comfortable to
continue participating in public life.
The role of opposition is essential and equally important in a
democratic state. In fact, it is nowadays widely believed that democracy cannot
only function properly without opposition parties, but dies without these
parties. "In a democracy, the struggle between political parties is not a
fight for survival, but a competition to serve the people." [USIA
Document]
We need to
make a genuine effort to create a tolerant culture of democracy-- a political
culture which is fundamentally non-violent and in which no one party or group
expects to win or lose all the time. Such a culture is built upon a societal
consensus not about policy, but about the process and framework of democratic
political life: that the will of the people is the basis of governmental
authority; that all individuals have a right to take part in government; that
there shall be periodic and genuine elections; that power changes hand through
popular suffrage rather than intimidation or force; that political opposition
and minorities have a right to express their views; and that there can be loyal
and legal opposition to the government in power. Furthermore, support for
democratisation must be coupled with support for development in order that
socio-economic as well as civil and political rights are respected.
The term "the
opposition" is always used as opposed to the incumbent government. In the generic sense, "the
opposition" opposes and checkmates the incumbent government with the
objective of extracting good governance.
The last decade or so of
our experience in Ethiopia has proven that the opposition's Achilles heel lies
in its constant rivalries and fragmentation.
Thus opposition unity has so far remained a farfetched vocabulary. The
spontaneous rise and fall, and eventual disintegration of the much talked about
Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD) is just one example. The fact of the
matter is that not one opposition party in the current composition of Ethiopian
Parliament can have an impact on decision-making or influence proposed
legislation tabled in parliament. The
irony is that even when all opposition parties, which have won some seats in
the 2005 elections, combine their manpower, experience and support it will
still be but a mere fraction of the overwhelming and massive support enjoyed by
the EPRDF party due to the privileges of incumbency and its historic role as a liberation
front turned to a dominant party and thus its consequential
representation in parliament. To ignore
and defy this reality by entertaining and pursuing a confrontational style and
language as well as approach of opposition, as advocated by a few die-hards in
the Diaspora, is to defy and ignore the realities, with dire consequences for
the fragile democratisation process in the country as a whole and for the
opposition in particular.
The smooth governance of
any country depends on the opposition being responsible, and a responsible
opposition does not scream and shout, and use bad language or emotional and
unreasonable arguments (demagogy), merely for the sake of opposition and
newspaper or television coverage but shows great responsibility and an earnest
attempt in trying to influence policy and decision making. It means that
private discussions with government Ministers and ruling party leaders can take
place, influencing and advising on policy issues where and whenever necessary,
cooperating in parliament where it is for the benefit of the country and its
people and to make available to parliamentary committees all the necessary
experience and knowledge of its members. Whereas open, peaceful clash of ideas,
debate, and objective criticism is necessary for building a democratic culture,
unprincipled political belligerence and confrontational style of politics has a
smack of selfish ambition for nothing but power, not altruism; power as an end
and not as a means to serve the Ethiopian people. This must be avoided by all means and by all mature politicians,
both in the ruling party and the opposition in general.
On the other hand, the
ruling party and government must, first and foremost, show its deep commitment
to transform itself from a liberation movement and a semi-authoritarian regime
to a democratic political party and government, and open up the political space
further for the opposition parties to operate freely and without any hindrances
and impediments to their peaceful activities, such as campaigning, fundraising,
holding political rallies and meetings etc; seek the advice and opinion of
opposition leaders on major policy issues; show utmost magnanimity towards the
opposition in general and reciprocate in sincere and positive gestures towards
the latter so that opposition parties would eventually evolve into a
constructive and responsible bloc becoming genuine partners in the process of
nation building, and not be forced or pushed to pursuing the path of violence,
belligerence or insurgency.
In a country that currently
suffers from severe problems in the areas of galloping inflation, shortages and
insecurity in food items, potable water and electricity, low economic
development, deficiencies in rule of law, political and economic governance,
etc., all the political parties being responsible and constructive is indeed
crucial. A belligerent, confrontational and uncompromising posture and style of
politics by those in the ruling party as well as the opposition would be
sufficient not merely to paralyse our country but also to cause panic among our
domestic and foreign investors and the development partners. Sadly, political struggles in this country
so far are primarily driven by the desire to be in power for power's sake and
the ultimate desire to cling to it at any cost, than any meaningful concern for
policy alternatives and the general public good.
As we in Ethiopia have
embarked upon a process of democratisation for the first time, after more than
a century of absolutist monarchical rule and seventeen years of military
tyranny, and thus are new converts to democracy and its values, rules and
procedures, inevitably, not all political organizations/parties respect their
declared commitments. And not all understand properly the significance and
essence of peaceful and democratic operations and bounds. We are all learners
in democracy. In this learning process, some learn fast; some take more time to
learn; some simply do not want to learn. This naturally affects, to some
degree, the smooth transition of our country and nation to fuller and
participatory democracy. In time, however, we are all convinced that all will
come to appreciate the fact that democracy is a learned and not an inherited
system, and it can evolve as an organic outgrowth of development and survive
only if the duties of living together in one human society, in one economic and
political community, are given proper consideration and respect, and on our
genuine commitment to regular and respectful dialogue with all parties and
interest groups. No democratic right is absolute, and one major limitation of
such a right is respect for the rights of others. Ignorance or neglect of this
interconnection between democratic rights and duties endangers the very basis
of democracy.
Furthermore, what the
opposition bloc must fully understand is this: the dynamics of the Ethiopian
political landscape is such that, it might take many, many more years for any
worthwhile and credible opposition to evolve and become a reality in Ethiopia—an
opposition bloc, party or parties with the capability of ‘blackmail’ or
‘coalition’, as social theorists contend.
It should not be overlooked that "given the existence of a dominant
party [EPRDF], which is a coalition of ethnic parties, and the ethno-territorial
nature of politics", as well as the kind of electoral system in place (the
single-member-constituency or the first-past-the-post electoral system),
opposition parties, which are already fragmented and organizationally and
financially weak, will surely face tremendous difficulties in their struggle,
even if all limitations on their activities were removed completely by the
ruling party, to evolve in a short period of time into a meaningful and strong
opposition to the EPRDF, which has enjoyed and still enjoys the full advantages
of being an incumbent political party since the last 17 years or so, and be
able to checkmate government or influence decisions in parliament. However, those opposition parties which
realize this situation and choose to play a constructive role as ‘loyal’ or
legal oppositions will develop into worthwhile opposition parties in the
future. This will surely happen if they
diligently and patiently work and invest for the long-term realization of their
dreams. It will happen eventually and
is needed to counter the current domination of the political landscape by the
EPRDF ruling party.
Be this as it may, the
present trend which clearly attests to the proliferation of too many weak
parties across the country's political arena is not also promising for viable
opposition parties to evolve in the near future. Ethiopia at present has about
70 or more registered political parties among which a few are national parties
(about 10 or more of them claiming multi-ethnic base) and the rest regional as
well as local ethnic parties, as the National Electoral Board has recently
announced to the general public. The
truth of the matter is that this proliferation of parties does not augur well
for Ethiopia. There is no evidence of
parties emerging to address policy issues that have not been taken care of by
either the incumbent party and government or the existing opposition
parties. What we see is focus on
disagreements; that when people or self-declared leaders no longer like each
other, or seek to emerge as political leaders in their own right, they form
their own new parties. Some of these parties survive as long as those who
created them are able to finance and lead them. Others simply disappear when
the election season is over or when their sponsors are no longer able to assist
and guide them. The story of Rainbow Democratic Movement and that of the
Ethiopian Democratic League can be cited in this regard; they were active
during the pre-May 2005 national elections but have melted away after the
elections.
Parties
that stand the test of time are those based on solid principles and
issues. That is in part what attracts
large numbers of followers and financial contributions from those who see their
aspirations embedded in the manifesto of a particular party. Ultimately, in politics the bigger the
entity the better its chances of success and survival. And the fewer the
parties, the more mature the politicians and the more meaningful the political
process. People need alternatives, yes;
but they also need political direction, and the emergence of more and more
parties only serves to confuse the voters more. And, besides, there are hardly any new ideas that these parties
are introducing to our political marketplace.
They are simply short of ideas, content to say nothing at all or to
repeat what others have said before and we already know and are long bored and
tired of hearing. A close look at the
leadership marketplace will tell you that there is really no need for new
parties. And there is certainly no need
for parties to split up. What we need
to see now is parties recognizing the obvious; that they are too small and too
weak to stand alone and the best way forward for them would be mergers, alliances,
cooperation and coalition. If they want to achieve better and more results and
sooner, opposition parties should pursue this path and the path of responsible
and constructive opposition politics, that is, to play the role of the
loyal or legal opposition and to abide by the rules of the game. All other options are destined to fail.
Legal or ‘loyal
opposition’, however, does not mean that government will not be
criticized. It only means that it will
be criticized objectively and constructively with the objective of extracting
good economic and political governance for the public good. A responsible opposition is not just an
opposition party vehemently criticizing the ruling party and government at
every occasion and forum simply for the sake of criticizing and
discrediting its achievements and magnifying its failures. A responsible opposition will support
government where their actions contribute towards the benefit of the people of
Ethiopia and will give the necessary credit where due, and will assist the
incumbent government in tackling major national problems that the country faces
from time to time, but it will also not allow government to act when it
believes that the government's actions or decisions will be to the detriment of
Ethiopia and her people.
Thus, I am at no loss to
conclude that the country's well-being will be better served when those who
claim to have the welfare of Ethiopia and her peoples at heart fully adopt and
abide by the fundamental values, principles, rules and procedures of democracy
as well as a strong spirit of reconciliation, compromise, tolerance and
political magnanimity, if not complete unanimity on basic national issues.
Opposition parties in Ethiopia must realize that to wrest political power from
the ruling party is indeed an uphill task that requires long years of hard work
and sweat. After all, no opposition worldwide can expect the incumbent party
and government to hand over power on a silver platter. They need to organize
and strengthen their structures to struggle and fight peacefully with sound ideas
and programmes that may secure them the support of the majority of the voters
and the whole people. The use of force and violence to wrest power from the
ruling party and government is simply self-destructive and suicidal. Violence
begets more violence and bloodshed, even civil war and destruction, not peace,
democracy and prosperity.
On its part, the ruling
party has to show great tolerance and magnanimity towards opposition
parties; remove all limitations on opposition parties that circumscribe their
activities especially lack of sufficient freedom to operate at the grassroots
level, campaigning, holding political rallies and meetings, etc.; accelerate
democratic reforms and strengthen democratic institutions as well as conflict
resolution mechanisms and also create a conducive environment that does include
and not exclude all opposition parties to participate in the political process;
allow them to operate peacefully and smoothly throughout the country and to
participate in the periodic national elections with utmost freedom and
fairness, as required by any democratic election and political system. Besides, a sincere public call or invitation
by the government must be made to the OLF (Oromo Liberation Front), the ONLF
(Ogaden National Liberation Front), the EPRP (Ethiopian People's Revolutionary
Party) and all other dissident rebel groups and appropriate, trustworthy
mechanisms/arrangements put in place so that these groups could renounce their
armed struggle and join the political process in a peaceful manner.
Finally, to discuss
democracy and democratic elections in Ethiopia today is to talk about the
future, about hopes and fears. We are still at the stage of democratisation,
embarking upon a process which, over the past decade or so has been taking
place in fits and starts, will lead us to a more open, participatory, less
authoritarian society sooner rather than later. We have not yet reached a stage
where we can claim to have realised any semblance of a stable and sustainable
democratic system of government which embodies, in a variety of institutions
and mechanisms, the ideal of political power based on the will of the people.
Further, little in the present or the past in Ethiopia promises the success of
any such thing, yet people today want democracy and many believe it is the only
possible solution to the twin ills of poverty and misrule. Let us all struggle
peacefully and persistently to achieve the two fundamental freedoms of
democracy and economic development our peoples have yearned for a very, very
long time. The road to those goals is bound to be rocky and tortuous but there
is no other way. As Dennis Austin states,
"No society becomes democratic without pain; no state
achieves economic development without struggle."[Dennis
Austin:1995].