Ethiopia: Persecution of political opponents dressed in judicial robes
By: T. Demeke Abebe
On February 16, 2007, new chronicle would be added to the dismal political and legal history of Ethiopia. We would be hearing the final verdict of the pending Court case against the opposition members and supporters who have been charged with the capital offences of “conspiracy and treason” to overthrow the “constitutionally” elected government of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, through inciting, organizing and conducting acts of street violence and insurrection. In the mean time, hundreds of the indicted opposition leaders, members and supporters have been incarcerated for over a year in appalling prison pending the court verdict to be passed on them on february16 2007. Should the defendants found guilty on all counts of the alleged capital offences they have been indicted for, they would face rigorous punishment life imprisonment or death penalty, as enshrined under the Ethiopian criminal code
To begin with, it is well know fact that the government of PM Meles Zenawi never assumed his incumbency through a democratic election as a means of peaceful transition of power. He and his TPLF/EPRDF party started of as a liberation movement came to political power they held for the past 16 years though violent and protracted civil war they successfully wedged to overthrow the Communist Military regime of the Derg that ruled Ethiopia for 17 years. The author does not, however, want to waste ink and paper discussing who came to power, when and how.
Standing at this critical juncture, it is up to all of us, as Ethiopian citizens to ask an important question. What good would come out of the pending political trial for the nation? Shklar made profound research that discerned the meaning, nature, purpose and legal effect of political trials. Accordingly, I would venture to look into some the most important findings of the author about the common features of political trials. Based on her systematic assertions, I would attempt to reflect my own views on the nature and characteristics of the pending political trials in Ethiopia against the opposition leaders, members and supporters.
Shklar defines political trial as “a trial in which the prosecuting party, usually a regime in power aided by a cooperative judiciary, tries to eliminate its political enemies. It is the pursuit of the policy of destruction, or at least the disgrace and disrepute, of a political opponent.” The author elaborates, “Most political trials follow Goebbels’ famous dictum, “trials should not begin with the idea of law, but with the idea that this man or these men must go.” What distinguish, most if not all, political trials is that they scorn the principle of legality – nullem crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali – that “there shall be no crime without law, and no punishment without crime”, rendering criminal justice hollow. More often than not, in political trials, either one or both may be lacking. Most often the alleged criminal act is missing; since persecution aims at preventing future dangers, either criminal act will be falsely charged, or legally innocent acts will be misinterpreted so as to seem criminal. Hence, laws may be invented on the spot or by analogy. Rules may be so vague (or judicial interpretation makes them so vague) that virtually any public action can be construed to appear criminal act of conspiracy, treason or insurrection. That is what is commonly known as “constructive treason”.
Political trials have been endemic in our civilization. Shklar traces back to the intellectual history of Europe that opens with the trial of Socrates (who was forced to choose between taking the poison chalice and going back to the people and tell them that his was wrong in teachings them to question the perpetuity of the power of the monarch. The persecution of Socrates had a poignant ending, for he chose to take the poison than deceive the people). We have been trying real and fancied traitors and subversives ever since. Similarly, what occurred in the aftermath of the WWII, in the Moscow trials, their subsequent counterparts, as well as in the various Nazi and Soviet “people’s courts” proceedings had nothing to do with justice because their essential aim was elimination, terror, propaganda, and re-education. These regimes were repressive and notorious for their scorn and disdain for legality and justice.
In democratic societies, political trials are considered to be outmoded and out fashioned. The Bill of Rights and the other protections offered by the Constitution in force, as well as the restrictive definition of treason, render successful prosecution for treason virtually impossible”, Shklar observed. On the contrary, political trials are still being widely exercised in many totalitarian regimes to eliminate political opponents. As a matter of fact, it would not be exaggeration to state that political trials have mushroomed become distinguishing features of undemocratic and repressive regimes of Africa. So far, we have been spectators of wicked theatres of political prosecution (persecutions, rather to speak) staged in Uganda, Zimbabwe and, presently, in Ethiopia that targeted at eliminating leaders, members and supporters of opposition politicians.
Political trials are not uncommon in Ethiopian history as well. To mention but few, we recall the execution of those who led the 1953 Coup attempt against the Monarch. General Mengistu Neway, was punished by hanging, in Addis Ababa, at Tekle Haimanot Square. His brother, Germame Neway, the then provincial governor of Hadiya, much venerated by the peasant for his visionary leadership, and ardent supporter of abolition of the feudal serfdom system that impoverished the rural population, was also arrested and killed, for his involvement in the coup attempt. The manner in which he was murdered was particularly ruthless. The Imperial Guard, then called Kibur Zebgna, dragged his bare corpse (post-mortem) on the streets of Addis Ababa behind a military truck before he was eventually hanged at St. Georges Square in Addis Ababa, then called Arada. Similarly, other compatriots, including General Tsigie Dibu, Lij Eyassu Abaténa, Workneh Gebeyehu, were all savagely murdered in the after math of the attempted 1953 attempted coup. Even though it could be argued that this was extra-judicial killing or summery execution, I would prefer to argue that it was a political trial in its rudimentary sense, for the order to commit the executions came in the form of imperial ordinance. We do also recall the 1990 political trial of the twelve high ranking military officers who plotted a coup against the Military regime of the Derg, led by Colonel Mengistu Haile Mariam. The Special Military Tribunal (Court Martial as some prefer to call it) that was set up to try the case passed guilty conviction on all of the accused. Eventually, the “convicted felons” were executed by a firing squad.
In the aftermath of the May 15, 2005 election that concluded with Chaos and confusion, in a rather surprising move, the ruling EPRDF party has resorted to a campaign of terror abandoning pragmatic liberalism it used to preach to have to stand for. As a result, once again, we have an important political trial pending before Court in which some 100’s opposition leaders, members and supporters of the opposition are awaiting verdict for criminal charges of treason, political conspiracy to overthrow a constitutionally establish government through violence and insurrection instituted against them. The EPDF deliberately chose to frame the indictment under the title of criminal act of “treason” to ensures that accused would receive capital punishment – rigorous (without parole) life imprisonment or death penalty – enshrined under the Ethiopian Criminal Code. In them mean time, they have been locked in jell for more than a year without any right for release on bail. The measures demonstrate deep-rooted disdain and paranoia of the ruling EPRDF regime toward the principle of legality. This is, more or less, a case of history repeating itself.
As Shklar, puts it more succinctly, more likely than not, the judges appointed to preside over such types of political trial may be totally hostile to the accused or will be subservient to the prosecution, the evidence false, the accused bullied, the witnesses prejudices, and rules of law and procedure must be ignored or trampled on. Hence, the acts of the accused are willfully misinterpreted or invented in order to achieve, by hook or by crook, the ultimate target of conviction for concocted felony charges. The obvious end result of this futile political (illegal) exercise would be “purposive miscarriage of justice’, Shklar concludes.
Likewise, it is undisputed fact that current legal system of Ethiopia is riddled with fundamental structural deficits and staggering fallacies. To begin with, the Constitution does not represent the voice of the people of Ethiopia. It was drafted, debated and approved by delegates hand picked by the EPRDF and who lacked the true mandate of the people. As a result, the drafting as well as the drafting process was concluded without any meaningful debate except endorsing a number of awkward articles that only satisfied the whim and vim of the Prime Minister and his ruling party EPRDF. In the past 16 years, i.e., from 1991 – 2007, the opposition held less than 3 % of the 547 sits in the parliament. The representation and participation of the opposition political parties in the regional State as well as Federal Parliaments is insignificant. Furthermore, the appointment, tenure and removal from office of judges at regional State and Federal Courts are never free from the influence of the ruling party that swarmed the existing rubberstamp parliament. Hence, the process is hardly immune from political considerations of the ruling party.
One of the worst deficits in the Constitution and the overall legal system of
Ethiopia is that the Chairman of the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia, Mr. Kemal Bedi, is endowed with a concurrent power of being the President of the Federal Supreme Court. Hence, even if the opposition intended to resort to the Court to appeal on cases involving election irregularities that they believed the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) had failed to address satisfactorily, the hearing of the case would be presided and decided by the Chairman of the NEBE who would reappear, this time round, to judge his own adversaries only disguising himself in a judge rob. This ludicrous situation in effect reduces the entire institution of the Supreme Court to the pathetic level of being subservient to the executive. Still worse, judiciary can not avoid the awkward situation of being a judge on its own cause. Under this circumstance, it can hardly be conceived that the most important legal principle that ensures free and fair trial – independence of the judiciary – would be guaranteed. In short, we do not have constitutional and other statutory guarantees in Ethiopia that could deter the executive from abusive interpretation of the law. Accordingly, the current political trial in Ethiopia – the trial of elimination of political enemies – can only be a destructive device as it would end up in the enlistment of the judiciary in the ranks of a persecuting order.
Consequently, like the criminal proceeding of the Moscow trials, their subsequent counterparts, as well as the various Nazi and Soviet “people’s courts”, mentioned above, the pending criminal proceeding at the ruling EPRDF regimes Kangaroo courts in Ethiopia had nothing to do with legality and justice. It is clearly a relentless campaign of revenge against the opposition. The culmination of the pending court drama against the opposition is not difficult to predict. It is quite explicit that these criminal charges against the opposition figures are politically motivated persecutions aimed at eliminating dissenting voice from the face of the Ethiopian political platform. The essential aim of the tramped up criminal suits of conspiracy and treason against leaders and members of the opposition is persecution and elimination of political opponents and terrorization of the people not to even dream to express their opposition to the government. It is also a propaganda maneuver to show to the international community that due process of the law is up held and the right of the accused to a fair trial is ensured (unlike the previous regimes that eliminated their opponents through summery executions). And, it is a desperate attempt to re-educate the people that the EPRDF is an invincible political and military force that is determined to stay in power for decades to come.
In conclusion, the attempt of the EPRDF to use the law and the ever feeble judiciary as an instrument of terror, of percussive elimination of political opponents, and of revolutionary re-education, is all but a futile practice of diversion and confusion. In other words, it is a zero-sum political gimmick, for neither Ethiopian Citizens nor the entire world community would expect anything from this hallow political exercise but blatant miscarriage of justice, to say the least. The pending political trial against the opposition would only confirm the totalitarian nature of the EPRDF regime. Last but not least, the pursuit of retributive judicial proceeding that abandons the basic principles of legality in criminal cases would succeed only in further weakening of the constitutional order, in violating personal freedom and in perpetuating hostility and vengeance, rather than mutual tolerance and reconciliation, among the peoples of Ethiopia.
* The author is based in the US. He can be reached at [email protected]