December 15, 2007

Some Reflections on the Progress of Ethiopia’s Infant

Democracy and the Upcoming Woreda/Kebele Elections

and Beyond

By Tesfaye Habisso

“ The key element in the exercise of democracy is

the holding of free and fair elections at regular

intervals enabling the people’s will to be expressed.”

[Universal Declaration on Democracy, IPU Members

in 1997]

Ethiopia’s brief experiment in democracy since the last decade and half or so has not yet been as successful when compared to its noteworthy achievements in the areas of infrastructure development, economic growth (GDP) and the provision of social services. The pace and progress of our infant democracy has so far been full of fits and starts, the periodic elections often marred by violence and accusations and counter accusations of vote rigging and fraud by the protagonists in the political marketplace, in particular the ruling party. The level and quality of political accountability, competition, freedom and equality still remains a lot to be desired. Thus, our democratisation process is still work in progress, a project for the future, whose success depends on the joint responsibility of all stakeholders: the political forces and the wider society in the country.

Today, with the recent announcement of the upcoming woreda (district) and kebele (urban and rural community associations) polls, and also the holding of regional and federal parliamentary snap elections to fill the vacant seats created due to the CUD’s boycotting of joining these legislative assemblies in the wake of the May 2005 election debacle, by the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEBE), the election season is soon to be formally upon us. Subsequent to this announcement by the NEBE, the Southern Ethiopia Peoples Democratic Movement (SEPDM) and the Tigrean People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) have already declared their preparedness to field more than 790,000 and 11,000 candidates respectively in these elections, and the other national and regional parties are expected to follow suit sooner or later. If we are not careful, soon legions of eager politicians representing different political parties, independent office seekers and their acolytes will be scurrying here and there engaging in all manner of conduct and for some of them, all manner of misconduct, in their energetic pursuit of office. People will soon be claiming that their opponent, whom heretofore we all thought was a relatively honourable person, now sits at the left hand of the Devil.

But the real issue is, for what purpose is the party candidate running or being fielded and the independent candidate taking part in the election drama? Being in politics for the sake of politics is pitiably selfish. One should only engage in politics if one seeks to move to a more elevated and productive plane—that of governance. And governance implies public service. A politician who is not capable of good governance is like getting into a new car that has no engine. While it looks good, it gets you nowhere. Thus, we should ask all potential politicians—party candidates as well as independent office seekers--, “Are you a politician because you have something to contribute or are you involved because you are looking for a secure employment or for something to take away for your own selfish ends and interests? Are you there because you like the sound of the title “Honourable MP” and because the sound of sirens has become an intoxicant to your ears? Or are you seeking office so that you can help our elderly folks get the necessary old-age care, help the adults and the youth find work to feed their families their daily bread and because you feel unequalled exhilaration when you see healthy, well fed children smile as they walk, books in hand, on their way to school?”

Now that the election season is soon to overwhelm us, we all have a choice to make. Will our politics be small and selfish or will it be visionary, and will it be beneficial to those whom we purport to serve?

These are some of the vexing questions before us all, political parties and independent candidates. These questions are freighted with great importance. Thus, may we answer them with all the wisdom we can summon? Because Ethiopia is a recently minted democracy, our responsibility to hold fair, free and credible elections acceptable to all contestants in the nation’s political arena peacefully and bring good, democratic governance to our people is indeed acute. We may not face any greater collective responsibility for the remainder of our lives. In an older, well-established democracy, the relevant institutions and political culture have had time to root themselves in the social fabric of these societies. In such a situation, where the people err by electing bad leadership, the nation or community can endure because democracy has become a way of life. The dividends that have previously bestowed have built a reservoir of goodwill to see the people and this noble concept through the lean years.

When a democracy is young, as in our country, however substandard, flawed elections or a period of poor governance can give a mortal blow and wreak havoc to the democratic experiment. The ugly aftermath of the May 2005 national and regional parliamentary elections is a glaring instance in this regard. The process of democratisation is not much different than the growth of a human being. Hardship an adult can endure may be fatal to an infant. We, as leaders of our State and communities, are the appointed guardians of a precious infant, Ethiopia’s democracy. Like any decent parent, we must place the survival and well being of that child above our own narrow interests. No decent parent feeds himself/herself until he/she can eat no more but let his/her child starve.

We as elected officials, we as government officials, we as community leaders and stalwarts, are among Ethiopian democracy’s founding fathers and mothers. Let us be as good parents to democracy as to the children of our own flesh, fibre and blood. Let us not let democracy be orphaned. When democracy is new, that is precisely when it must prove itself to the people, to the poor masses. If it does not produce noticeable fruits in the form of bread and butter—basic necessities of life such as shelter, clothing, food, healthcare, education, etc.-- and a modicum of safety, security, employment and freedom, the population, because it does not have a deep grounding in this form of government, may well decide the tree is barren and turn to something else that appears to have a more immediate yield. Cynicism, demagoguery, mistrust and selfishness creep in where faith and hope should reside. In such an atmosphere, democracy may be in jeopardy.

Here I will say something that at first seems to contradict what I have said before and that is, Ethiopia’s history indicates that it can survive for some time without democracy. In fact, democracy is the sole guarantee for Ethiopia to survive as one nation of many nations—a multi-nation federal state. However, history—and the large gulf that separates Ethiopia’s reality from its potential—is conclusive proof that a country cannot flourish in the long term without embracing political democracy and the economic empowerment of the individual and the group/community that democracy implies. This thing called democracy is a complex, and at times, an ungainly animal. From afar, it looks like an inefficient form of governance; but up close, it is the most practical one.

Under a dictatorship, it is easier to render and implement decisions. One person—a dictator/ leader—and his cabal say yes or no, do or don’t. Matters are settled by a decree with lightning speed. Arbitrariness is the backbone of such an arrangement. No need to engage a legislature or the populace at large or worry about the courts and the legality of what is proposed. The minute a despot speaks, the matter is over. These are, I am afraid, what we observe happening in some Ministries and public agencies today where many hundreds of experienced government employees or civil servants are suddenly and unexpectedly laid off by despotic ministers and their servile advisors without any in-depth operational and manpower analysis and devoid of any meaningful participation of the target groups and the wider labour force in general, the situation further aggravated by the absence of any civil servants unions to defend and protect the social and economic rights of these civil servants. These are, indeed, scary times for the many thousands of civil servants that pitifully await the outcome of an exercise known by the funny acronym “BPR” [Business Process Re-engineering]—a concept that is neither understood well and engrained in the hearts, minds and behaviours of the bosses nor fully grasped yet by their poor subjects—the civil servants. Thus, fear and uncertainty is what is reigning today at the various public agencies in Ethiopia, a sort of “the Damocles Sword” hovering over the heads of many helpless civil servants. Just visit the Ministry of Transport and Communications and the various agencies under its jurisdiction (Road Transport Authority, Postal Services Agency, Civil Aviation Authority, Ethiopian Telecommunication Corporation, etc.), for example, to understand the sorry plight and cries of many hundreds of civil servants laid off or indefinitely removed from their jobs since last July but funny enough receiving their monthly salaries, including the recent salary increments generously doled out to them by the federal government, without contributing anything to their respective former employing agencies. There is nothing as dehumanising to any public employee, or for that matter for any employee, as collecting monthly remuneration without doing any work. What is the logic of creating such an idle capacity in the various public agencies when many of them still lament about the shortage of experienced and skilled labour? What cost-benefit analysis has been done before reaching at such unilateral and undemocratic decisions? If these civil servants have literally ‘retired on their jobs’ the proper and logical course of action to be taken would be to recruit and train sufficient qualified personnel in time and then facilitate the former’s speedy retirement in collaboration with the Social Security Authority and not to float them indefinitely and still pay them their remunerations every month. A democratic government does not and cannot endanger the dignity of its citizens; it should never, ever dehumanise its citizens, least of all its long time civil servants.

Understandably, those who are lucky enough to be retained by their employers, for reasons known only to the benefactors, seem completely bewildered, shocked and overwhelmed by fear of not knowing what the future holds for them, and not knowledgeable, skilled and enthusiastic enough to provide the required efficient and effective service delivery to the public as promised by the BPR and Strategic Planning lofty ideals and well-intended but not yet well understood modern concepts and practices. Yes, neither the authors nor their helpless students fully comprehend the complex and complicated nature of these modern but alien concepts and business practices imported from abroad. Every public agency and official seem absolutely confused but relentlessly fret to graft these modern ideas and practices to our archaic bureaucracy and our outmoded attitudes as civil servants. Many today retort that the so-called “confusion square”at the Gotera junction is being fixed by the Chinese engineers but who will do away the ‘confusion’ that is rapidly creeping in the various Ministries and lower level public agencies? What is the difference, for example, between what you observe today at some of the public offices—government agencies, land administration bureaus, kifle ketemas, kebeles, etc. and what you witness at the noisy and disorganized marketplaces or shopping centres of Markato? How long does it take, for instance, a person to process and pay government taxes to the numerous tax collecting agencies in Ethiopia? In certain cases, one has to literally beg the tax collectors to receive what he/she owes to the government on time. Just visit the some of the customs offices, the service rendering agencies, the kifle ketemas, the kebeles, and the Road Transport Authority bureaus, and you will understand the severity of the problem and the ordeals that we as law-abiding citizens daily face in our genuine efforts to fulfil our obligations to our government.

The most worrying aspect of this distressing and bad governance situation is that, this type of governance/government, over time, leads to total oppression, widespread malfeasance and worst of all, the misdirection of our country’s future. Above all, a developmental state such as ours, or any other state for that matter, cannot function without an efficient, effective and ethical bureaucracy; it cannot deliver the necessary goods and services to the general public in time. With government of such a capricious and closed nature, you reap that which you sow.

On the other hand, constitutional democracy and its associated checks and balances are the best form of government because they recognize the flaws in the human character. If we were all saints, government would be unnecessary, as social theorists contend. No, democracy does not work because we are angels and saints. It is necessary because it is the form of government that best restrains the demon in us all. That demon goes by many names—ambition, greed, self-interest, patronage, cronyism, ethnocentrism, corruption, are just a few names.

Just having the democratic forms and institutions are inadequate in themselves. The people with whom these institutions are entrusted must contain the values of democracy in their hearts and minds. A constitution is but a piece of paper and a piece of paper, no matter how special the words inscribed therein, is easily shred. The real constitution that begets good, democratic governance is not found in the piece of paper, it is found in the spirit and thoughts and philosophy that gave rise to what was written. What I am saying is that, for the constitution to be real and genuine it must be written in your mind, your heart, your behaviour. So also the BPR, Service Delivery, Vision, Mission Statement, Strategic Planning, etc. tirelessly and most often trumpeted by the Capacity Building Ministry, the Public Service Commission and every government official and office today, without fully comprehending the technicalities, intricacies and complexities of their nature in the first place vis-à-vis our backward bureaucracy and our outmoded attitudes as public officials and civil servants.

Moreover, seeking the welfare of the masses must be the primary step, the motivating force to any meaningful structure or conduct of government. For good governance and democracy to take hold, the answers to two questions, “Why do you run for office” and “Why will the people elect you” must be the same. Dissatisfaction and trouble reign wherever and whenever the answers are different. If you run for office because you wanted to enrich yourself but the people elected you because they thought you would bring them better social services, surely, some sections of the population/community will be disappointed. Something has to yield in this situation because you cannot serve two masters—you must either serve them or yourself. Either you will have to change your ways or they will have to accept your self-aggrandizement but both cannot get what they want. Where there is such a fundamental discord between the elected official(s) and the electorate, contention will be your pardon. Conversely, where there is general harmony of interests, you have established the essential foundation for good governance.

You as political leaders of the State can and must be the primary example of good governance to the people. The people may not always be in contact with national officials, but, if you do your work properly, you must be in close contact with your community. By doing your jobs, you not only become the best exemplar of grassroots democracy you become democracy’s protector.

In order to serve this vital function, you must have a vision for your State, your Community. If you do not have a vision or a capability as well as sufficient time and energy and vigour for improving or serving your community, you should seriously think about pursuing another vocation. This one may not be for you. Of course, state and local government cannot do everything but you must work with and for the people to bring them the vital services within your mandate to deliver.

What the people need from you is not shrouded in mystery. It is easy to discern their needs and concerns provided you care enough about those who elected you. They are looking for improvement in health care for their families, education for their children, better infrastructure, economic growth and employment—food.

As I said before, you cannot do all of these yourself. But you do have some funds and manpower to address some of their concerns. To the extent you control assets, set your budgets to meet the social service priorities of your community. Move around your State, your Community; take time to express your vision for improving it to your people; let them express their ideas and concerns to you. Listen to their cries, discern their concerns and needs. Some of their ideas will be good, don’t tarry in accepting these ideas. Embrace their good ideas to refine and improve your thinking and your programmes. Accepting someone else’s ideas is not weakness. It is wisdom. If you do follow this tack, your supporters will continue to give you support. Those who once opposed you, will begin to think better about you. Those who hated you, will begin to respect you. Just by listening with an open ear and honest heart, you have taken an important step toward good governance that uplifts the spirit and well being of the entire community.

In this regard, remember not to shun or harass and persecute your political opposition. Do not mistake electoral politics for military warfare. These people are your political opposition not your mortal enemies. Only one person can win an election. But if the election is done fairly and credibly, we all stand to gain something from it. However, if we turn elections into a form of warfare, there is no true winner or loser. We all suffer in the end. Even the so-called winner loses. Given the sharpness of the electoral warfare, even the winner cannot quickly divorce himself from the combative spirit that governed during elections. Once a person gains power by any means, he becomes convinced that his opponent will try to steal that power by any means.

This type of victory is no victory at all. This type of psychology is not conducive to good governance and the progress of democracy. In such a situation, a person sleeps with one eye open and one foot on the floor. No matter how high or soft the bed, no one can find comfort in such an arrangement. Thus, it is better to make peace after the elections and the best way to obtain post-election peace is never to engage in pre-election warfare. Better a person erect and live in a modest house in peace than build a large mansion only to destroy half of it.

Remember that your political opponents are human beings with brains and reason. They cannot be wrong on all issues all the time no more than you can be right all the time. Your opponents are entitled to respect and dignity. Listen to them, give them adequate political and economic space as well as proper support, financial and other. Do not starve or humiliate them. Always remember you are not perfect. Even the good decisions you make are not perfect and have their flaws. Often the solutions of today’s problems are the parents of tomorrow’s challenges. No one has a monopoly on truth and knowledge. Accept in good faith the constructive criticism of your political opponents.