ERITREA- Intl court says Ethiopia “liable” for violation of law

Dec 20, 2005 (ASMARA) — Following is the text of press statement in English issued by Eritrean Ministry of Foreign Affairs, published by Eritrean Ministry of Information’s “Shabait” website on 20 December:

On Monday, 19 December 2005, the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission (EECC) at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague released its fourth set of awards in the substantive phase of its proceedings. The fourth set of Awards dealt with a variety of different Eritrean and Ethiopian claims, the most important of which were (on Ethiopia’s side) the claim that Eritrea violated international law by supposedly closing the ports of Assab and Massawa and confiscating Ethiopian property, and (on Eritrea’s side) the claims that Ethiopia looted and destroyed towns in Eritrea’s western zone; seized property in Ethiopia belonging to Eritreans living elsewhere; and violated the diplomatic protections of Eritrea’s ambassador to Ethiopia.

The EECC dismissed Ethiopia’s claims to Eritrea’s ports and awarded recovery for Eritrea’s western zone claims, non-resident property claims, and diplomatic claims.

Ethiopia’s claims to the Ports of Assab and Massawa

The Claims Commission rejected all of Ethiopia’s claims regarding the ports of Assab and Massawa. Ethiopia had argued, for example, that as a landlocked state it had a right under international law to use the port of Assab; this argument was rejected. Concerning Ethiopian property abandoned in Assab at the beginning of the war, the commission noted that Eritrea had, in fact, kept the port open and running for Ethiopia’s use for some time after the war began. The Commission concluded that these circumstances are not consistent with the claim that there was a taking [by Eritrea] of Ethiopian property resulting from closing of the port… [All ellipsis as published] The record does not establish any taking of Ethiopian public or private property in violation of international law.

The EECC noted, additionally, that Eritrea did not block humanitarian aid to Ethiopia at any time.

Eritrea’s claims concerning violations of international law in the western zone

The commission found Ethiopia liable for considerable damage to Eritrean towns in the western zone during the course of the occupation. In Teseney [western Eritrea], the commission cited the widespread burning and looting of private homes and public buildings by Ethiopian soldiers and civilians. It denounced the Ethiopian army’s slaughter of livestock as its troops withdrew, saying:

The commission was struck by the extensive evidence of this gratuitous, and patently unlawful, slaughter and burning of the goats, sheep, donkeys and cattle so critical to the survival of rural civilians.

Regarding Alighidir [western], the commission noted the “clear and convincing evidence of unlawful destruction of property”:

Declarants consistently attested to seeing Ethiopian soldiers looting and burning houses and animals in the village during the second occupation. Several of these declarants attested to seeing, at a distance, Ethiopian soldiers at the large new cotton-processing plant when the plant and its stores of cotton were detonated and burned…. Therefore, the Commission finds that Ethiopia, in violation of its obligations under applicable international humanitarian law, permitted the widespread and severe looting and burning in the village of Alighidir and the burning and detonating of the nearby cotton factory and its stored cotton.

The commission made similar findings about destruction and looting in Guluj [western], noting that civilian personnel looted the shops and houses of Guluj, and military personnel then destroyed domestic animals and burned the structures until there was little left in the town.

About Omhajer [southwestern], likewise, the commission noted that the town had been looted and stripped of anything of value and that domestic animals had been destroyed.

In Tokombia [southwestern], Ethiopia was held liable for extensive looting and destruction of buildings during the occupation; in particular, the commission cited the destruction to the police station and the newly modernized Rothman tobacco plantation.

Regarding Molki town [southern], the commission found that Ethiopia was responsible for widespread looting.

The damage to the town of Barentu [western] was even more extensive, with the commission noting the “widespread breaking, entering and looting of houses, business establishments, and government buildings in Barentu.” The commission singled out the clear and convincing evidence of Ethiopia’s detonation of the Sub-zoba [region] police station, the courthouse, the Gash-Setit Hotel, and a bakery.

Abuse of civilians: Rape

The commission discussed at length the rape of Eritrean women in Teseney and Barentu, citing the testimony of two Eritrean doctors as “detailed and credible”:

The commission is satisfied that there is clear and convincing evidence of several incidents of rape of Eritrean civilian women by Ethiopian soldiers in Barentu and Teseney, which evidence has gone unrebutted by Ethiopia.

Abuse of civilians: Ethnically based expulsions

The commission also granted recovery for the “forced expulsion based solely on ethnicity” in Gash-Barka Zoba [region]. Numerous eyewitnesses testified to the Ethiopian army’s expulsion of indigenous Eritreans in the town of Awgaro [western]. After Awgaro was forcibly emptied of its inhabitants, the Ethiopian soldiers looted and burned the town:

Many declarants described finding Awgaro in ruins when they finally returned to it. Eritrea supported, its witness testimony with, among other things, an NGO report of thousands of Eritreans being forcibly expelled in May 2000 from Awgaro and neighbouring small towns. Overall, the evidence consistently indicated forced expulsion based solely on ethnicity.

Non-resident Eritreans’ property

Another of the Eritrean claims addressed by the commission concerned Ethiopia’s confiscation of property owned by Eritreans living either in Eritrea or in third states. During the proceedings, Eritrea submitted extensive evidence concerning confiscation or forced sale of Eritrean-owned real estate, business properties, and vehicles. The commission found that Ethiopia failed to safeguard the property of Eritreans who lived outside Ethiopia during the war, saying that “a cumulative network of economic measures” created by the Ethiopian government caused non-resident Eritreans to lose “all or most of their businesses or immovable property.” The commission recognized, in particular, the claims of Eritrean truck owners whose vehicles were taken when they were caught inside Ethiopia at the beginning of the war.

Diplomatic immunity

The commission found Ethiopia liable for a number of violations of the rights of Eritrean diplomats living in Ethiopia at the start of the war. It held that Ethiopia illegally searched the persons and luggage of the Eritrean ambassador and other diplomatic staff, confiscating the ambassador’s property. Ethiopia also violated international law by “entering, ransacking, searching and seizing the Eritrean embassy residence, as well as official vehicles and other property” in Addis Ababa.

(Shabait/ST)