“ነፃ በወጣ አገር ውስጥ የነፃ አውጪ ስሜት ይዞ መንቀሳቀስ ተቀባይነት አይኖረውም።” – የሺዋስ አሰፋ

Filed under: የዕለቱ ዜናዎች |

“ነፃ በወጣ አገር ውስጥ የነፃ አውጪ ስሜት ይዞ መንቀሳቀስ ተቀባይነት አይኖረውም።” – የሺዋስ አሰፋ

 

 

11 Responses to “ነፃ በወጣ አገር ውስጥ የነፃ አውጪ ስሜት ይዞ መንቀሳቀስ ተቀባይነት አይኖረውም።” – የሺዋስ አሰፋ

  1. Foreign dominance is still all too common in Ethiopia.
    EPRDF was and still is a despotic government .
    EPRDF is a cancer that need to be removed, reformed or not EPRDF is still a cancer.
    Many Ethiopians are dieing because the government is denying them their rights to get security law and order in their country.
    Economy of Ethiopia is being looted by OPDO now.
    Basic necessities such as food , shelter and medical attention is denied for those that don’t support “REFORMED” EPRDF now.

    Try telling that the millions of internally displaced people and the 10’s of millions Ethiopians that live in fear of being displaced.

    Yusuf
    May 20, 2019 at 7:04 am
    Reply

  2. No need to hold election 2020 while the constitution is not abolished. To hold the election 2020 in time, many current social media activists are calling for the people of Ethiopia to hold public civil disobedience starting summer 2019 until all of Woyane’s ethnic based Constitution is abolished.
    1

    Aweznem
    May 20, 2019 at 9:59 pm
    Reply

  3. You describe Ethiopia as a free country. But you don’t want to mention about the subjugation and exploitation of the Ethiopian nations and nationalities like the Oromo, the Sidama, Somali, Afar, Hadiya, Gamo, Walait, Gambella and other peoples of Ethiopia. You are trying to promote still such policies. For example, according to your political programs the Oromo people and other subjugated nations of Ethiopia are going to give up their political achievements of the last 50 years. But it is ridiculous. In your primitive and discriminative  acts you have already locked afaan Oromo again in the boxes of the country sides. The wishes of the anti-Oromo elements like the arogant Girma Seifu and the latent racist Angergachew Tsige and their friends are now on a table. They want to decide on the fate of afaan Oromoo by referendum. What is about Amharic? Who have decided Amharic as a national language of Ethiopia? Was it decided by referendum?  With this bold and naive assertion you are going to play with fire. Such maneuver will eliminate not only  your political programs which is anti-Oromo and full of latent racism, but also yourself.

    The Ethiopian peoples have been suffering from man-made political syndrome of a century old which was created by greedy politicians all the times so far. All these politicians have never cared about collective and individual rights. That is why we are still struggling against all sorts of odd ideologies,  mentalities and thinking. The century old struggles of the peoples in Ethiopia have produced most of the political organizations like TPLF, OLF, ONLF, SLF and EPLF. No one of them were created by default or by accident.

    The current ethnic federal structure of Ethiopia is the political arrangements which were mainly constructed and promoted by the beloved Oromo intellectuals and OLF leaders like Gelassa Dilbo,  Lenchoo Lataa,  Dima Nagawo and others. The TPLF has accepted it by making few modification. The TPLF tried to implement it at least nominally after banning the OLF, in order to win the hearts of the Oromo nation. Therefore, the main shareholder of this federal arrangement is the OLF, the freedom fighter. Accusing the TPLF in regard of the federal structure is unfair. The TPLF must be accused for shortcomings of the implementation and wrong boundaries.  Thus, this federal structure was not implemented at the free will of the TPLF. It is a fruit of the century old bitter struggles of the Oromo nation and other subjugated nations. Consequently, accepting these federal arrangements is a must for all stockholders. 

    Gamadaa
    May 21, 2019 at 1:21 am
    Reply

  4. The country is in a civil war and disintegrating , all the Federal and regional governments of Ethiopia has failed.

    Ethiopia is a failed state where foreign dominance is a reality , the Ethiopian government leaders at all levels are not willing/unable to perform their major duties and responsibilities thus hindering others in the Ethiopian society from performing their duties and responsibilities as Ethiopians.

    It is a matter of few months time before all Ethiopians suffer as Gedeo people are suffering now.

    Tsegachew
    May 21, 2019 at 6:35 am
    Reply

  5. “ነፃ በወጣ አገር ውስጥ የነፃ አውጪ ስሜት ይዞ መንቀሳቀስ ተቀባይነት አይኖረውም።”

    አንተ ጎፋሬ፣ አርበኛዉ

    ብርሃኑ መቼም በሄደበት ቦታ ሁሉ ሰው ገፊ ነውና፣ መጀመሪያ ፓርቲህን አስፈረሰህ፤ ከዚያ የአዲሱን ፓርቲ መሪነት ጨበጠና አንተን ወደ ጥግ ገፈተረህ ልክ አርበኞች ግንባር ላይ እንደሠራው ማለት ነው። የሠራብህን አዘናግቶህ ስለነፃነት ያስወራህ ጀመር እርሱ ፖሎቲካውን እየሠራ?
    የሌላውን ሰው ነፃነት ማቆም እንደማትችል አዉቀህ እንደ አህያ ማናፋጥ አቁም። ያንን ወያኔም አልቻለዉም።

    David Clark
    May 21, 2019 at 8:30 am
    Reply

  6. You describe Ethiopia as a free country. But you don’t want to mention about the subjugation and exploitation of the Ethiopian nations and nationalities like the Oromo, the Sidama, Somali, Afar, Hadiya, Gamo, Walait, Gambella and other peoples of Ethiopia. You are trying to promote still such policies. For example, according to your political programs the Oromo people and other subjugated nations of Ethiopia are going to give up their political achievements of the last 50 years. But it is ridiculous. In your primitive and discriminative  acts you have already locked afaan Oromo again in the boxes of the country sides. The wishes of the anti-Oromo elements like the arogant Girma Seifu and the latent racist Angergachew Tsige and their friends are now on a table. They want to decide on the fate of afaan Oromoo by referendum. What is about Amharic? Who have decided Amharic as a national language of Ethiopia? Was it decided by referendum?  With this bold and naive assertion you are going to play with fire. Such maneuver will eliminate not only  your political programs which is anti-Oromo and full of latent racism, but also yourself.

    The Ethiopian peoples have been suffering from man-made political syndrome of a century old which was created by greedy politicians all the times so far. All these politicians have never cared about collective and individual rights. That is why we are still struggling against all sorts of odd ideologies,  mentalities and thinking. The century old struggles of the peoples in Ethiopia have produced most of the political organizations like TPLF, OLF, ONLF, SLF and EPLF. No one of them were created by default or by accident.

    The current ethnic federal structure of Ethiopia is the political arrangements which were mainly constructed and promoted by the beloved Oromo intellectuals and OLF leaders like Gelassa Dilbo,  Lenchoo Lataa,  Dima Nagawo and others. The TPLF has accepted it by making few modification. The TPLF tried to implement it at least nominally after banning the OLF, in order to win the hearts of the Oromo nation. Therefore, the main shareholder of this federal arrangement is the OLF, the freedom fighter. Accusing the TPLF in regard of the federal structure is unfair. The TPLF must be accused for shortcomings of the implementation and wrong boundaries.  Thus, this federal structure was not implemented at the free will of the TPLF. It is a fruit of the century old bitter struggles of the Oromo nation and other subjugated nations. Consequently, accepting these federal arrangements is a must for all stockholders. 

    Gamadaa
    May 21, 2019 at 10:53 am
    Reply

    • Why do not you write about the 100, 000 Gedeo people displaced by the OLF. This is a pure ethnic cleansing which is seemingly supported by the so called change agents Abiy and Lema Begebeya. What about the more than 11 banks robbed and hundreds of civilians murdered in daylight by the backward and narrow OLFites. What about the theater made by the narrow olfites while celebrating Abiy`s one year in office at the millinium hall. You shamless people recognized all your cousins in office but ignored Demeke Mekonnen simply because he does not share your oromo blood. You guys are the most primitive people I ever know.

      meseret
      May 26, 2019 at 1:01 am
      Reply

  7. የኢትዮጵያ ዜጎች ለማኅበራዊ ፍትህ ፓርቲ (ኢዜማ) ፕሮግራም እይታ – በወፍ በረር

    ”ቤት ለምቦሳ ፥ እምቦሳ እሰሩ” ወይስ ”ያው በገሌ”?

    ከስሙ በመነሳት የኢዜማ ትኩረት ዜግነትና ማህበራዊ ፍትህ መሆናቸውን መገመት ይቻላል። ይህም ቢባል ስለፓርቲው ምንነት በበቂ ሁኔታ ለመረዳት ከሁለቱ ጠቋሚ ቃላት በዘለለ ፕሮግራሙን በሙሉ ማንበብ ያስፈልጋል። እኔ ከዚህ ማህበራዊ ገጽ ላይ አግኝቼ አንብቤዋለሁ። እውነት ለመናገር እንደጠበኩት አይደለም። ላስረዳ።

    ኢዜማ ”ዜግነት” የሚለውን መሰረታዊ ሃሳብ ያነሳው የ”ዘር”ፖለቲካን እንደማይቀበል ለማሳየት መስሎኝ ነበር። ፕሮግራሙን ሳየው ግን ያገኘሁት ተቃራኒውን ነው:: የሚከተለውን ከፕሮግራሙ በቀጥታ የተወሰደ ክፍል እንመልከት::

    ”የኢዜማ የፖለቲካ ፕሮግራም በወሳኝ መልኩ ያልተማከለ አስተዳደር (ፌዴራላዊ) ሥርዓትን መከተለን ምርጫው ያደረገ ነው፡፡”

    ይህ ”ምርጫ” ያልተጠበቀ አይደለም። ኢዜማ ምርጫ አደርግሁ ይበል እንጂ ከፌደራሊዝም ሌላ ምርጫ አልነበረውም። ዋናው ጥያቄ ግን ምን አይነት ፌዴራሊዝም የሚለው ነው። ከላይ ያየነው ጥቅስ ይህን ጥያቄ አይመልስም። ይህ ማለት ግን ኢዜማ ሊያቆመው የሚፈልገውን የፌዴራላዚም አይነት በፖለቲካ ፕሮግራሙ ውስጥ አልገልጸም ማለት አይደለም። በጉዳዩ ላይ የሚከተለውን ይላል።

    ”1.1.1. ኢዜማ የሕገ መንግሥት ማሻሻያ መደረግ አለበት ብሎ ያምናል፡፡ሕገ መንግስቱ የግለሰብ መብትን የመብቶች ሁሉ የማእዘን ድንጋይ አድርጎ እንዲወስደው፣ የቡድንና የወል መብቶች ከግለሰብ መብቶች የሚመነጩ መሆናቸውን የሚቀበል፣በዘር ወይም በእምነት ላይ ያልተመሰረተ፣ ያልተማከለ ፌዴራላዊ አስተዳደር እንዲኖር ይስራል”

    አንደገባኝ ከሆነ በስራ ላይ ያለው ህገመንግስት ፌደራሊዝምን ያዋቀረው በ”ብሄር ፥ ብሄረሰቦችና ህዝቦች” አስፋፈር ላይ ስለሆነ የተባለው የሕገ መንግሥ ት ማሻሻያ የሚደረገው በዚሁ ህገመንግስት ላይ ነው ማለት ነው።

    ኢዜማ ያለውን ህገመንግስት መቀበሉ ጥሩ ጅምር ነው። ያለውን ማሻሻል አንጂ ከዚህ በፊት በሰፊው ይባል አንደነበረው በተወሰነ ደረጃም ቢሆን ተቀባይነት ያለውን ሀገመንግስት አንዳለ ለመተካት መስራት ጊዜና ጉልበት ከማባከን በተረፈ ግጭትን ባባባሰ ነበር። ህገመንግስቱን መቀበል ከህገመንግስቱ ደጋፊዎች ጋር ለመነጋገር፥ ለመደማምጥ፥ አምኖ ለማሳመንና አቅዋም ለማስለወጥ እንዲሁም አብሮ ለመስራት በር ይከፍታል። ይህ ደግሞ መበረታታት ያለበት ተግባር ነው::

    ከላይ 1.1.1. ስር የሰፈረው “የቡድንና የወል መብቶች ከግለሰብ መብቶች የሚመነጩ መሆናቸው” የሚለው በተቃራኒው ይሁን አይሁን ወይም ሁለቱም በአንድ ጊዜና ቦታ ሊከበሩ የሚችሉ ወይም የተለያዩ መብቶች ይሁኑ አይሁኑ ብዙ የንድ ፈሃሳብ ክርክርና ውይይት የተደረገባቸው ወደፊትም ሊደረጉባቸው የሚችሉ ጉዳዩች ናቸው። ይህ አንድ ሰፊ ጥናት ተደርጎበት ለማስተማሪያነትና ለማጣቀሻነት የሚያገለግል ሰነድ ሊዘጋጅበት የሚችል ነገር ነው። ለእንደዚህ አይነት ስራ ኢዜማ አንድ የምሁራን ቡድን ሳያስፈልገው አይቀርም።

    አሁንም አንደገባኝ ከሆነ የኢዜማ ፍላጎት “በዘር” ላይ ያልተመሰረተ ፌዴራሊዚም ማቆም ነው። ይህ ከሆነ በ1.2.1 ስር “የአስተዳደር አካባቢዎች አወቃቀር መርሆዎች — መልከአ ምድራዊ አቀማመጥን፣ የሕዝብ አሰፋፈር ለአጠቃላይ አስተዳደራዊና ለልማት ሥራዎች አመቺነትን፤ ቋንቋ፤ ባህል፥ ስነልቦናዊ ቁርኝት እና ታሪክን፤ የሃብት ስብጥርና ፍትሃዊነት
    ለብሔራዊ መግባባት አመቺ ሁኔታ መፍጠርን፤ መሠረት ባደረገ ሁኔታ ይሆናል” የሚለውን ምን አመጣው?

    ኢዜማ “ዘር” የሚለው ምንን እንደሆነ ግልጽ አስካላደርገ ድረስ በስራ ላይ ያለው ህገመንግስት “ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች” ያላቸውን መሆኑን መገመት ይቻላል። ህገመንግስቱ “ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች” ያላቸውን በአንቀጽ 39 (5) ስር ይተረጉማል።
    ትርጉሙ አንደሚከተለው ይነበባል።

    “ሰፋ ያለ የጋራ ጠባይ የሚያንጸባርቅ ባህል ወይም ተመሳሳይ ልምድ ያላቸው፣ ሊግባቡበት የሚችሉበት የጋራ ቋንቋ
    ያላቸው፣ የጋራ ወይም የተዛመደ ህልውና አለን ብለው የሚያምኑ፣ የሥነ ልቦና አንድነት ያላቸውና ባአብዛኛው
    በተያያዘ መልክዓ ምድር የሚኖሩ ናቸው”

    ሙሉ ለሙሉም ባይሆን ከላይ በቁጥር 1.2.1. ስር የሰፈረው የኢዜማ የአስተዳደር አካባቢዎች መርሆዎች “ቋንቋን፤ ባህልን፥ስነልቦናዊ ቁርኝት እና ታሪክን” አስካነሳ ድረስ በስራ ላይ ካላው ህገመንግስት አንቀጽ 39 (5) ዝርዝር ጋር የሚጋራው ብዙ ነገር አለ። ይህም የ”ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች” ክልላዊ አደረጃጀት በመቀበል ነው። ይህ ከሆነ የ<> ላይ ላልተመሰረተ ፌደራሊዝም አንሰራለን የሚባለው ምንድነው?

    ችግሩ ያለው ህገመንግስቱ ያቆመው በ”ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች” ላይ የተመሰረተ ህገ መንግስት የፈጠረውን ሃገራዊ ጉዳት በፖለቲካ ሃኪምነት አናድናለን በሚል ጉዳት ያሉትን ሀገመንግስት አንዳለ ይዘው ያለውን ጉዳት የሚያባብስ ተጨማሪ አደረጃጀቶ ማምጣታቸው ነው። አነዚህም “መልከአ ምድራዊ አቀማመጥ፣ የሕዝብ አሰፋፈር ለአጠቃላይ አስተዳደራዊና ለልማት ሥራዎች አመቺነትን፤ . . . የሃብት ስብጥርና ፍትሃዊነት ለብሔራዊ መግባባት አመቺ ሁኔታ መፍጠር” የተባሉት ናቸው።

    እግዚኣብሄር ያሳያችህ! በ”ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች” የተዋቀረን ፌደራሊዝም በሚገባ መምራት አቅቶን አየተንገዳገድን ይሀ ፌደራሊዝም አንዳለ ሆኖ ሌሎች አምስት ወይም ስድስት አዲስ የፌደራሊዝም አደረጀጀቶች አክለንበት ተያይዘን ገደል ስንገባ። እነዚህ ተጫማሪ የተባሉ የፌደራሊዝም አደረጃጀቶች እየተዳከመ ያለውን ሃገራዊ መግባባት አጥፍተው በማን አንሼነት ማለቂያ የሌለው ሃገር አቀፍ የማያስፈልግ አተካራና ፍትጊያ በመጨረሻም የሃገርን መፍረስ የሚያስክትሉ ናቸው። እንዲያው ለነገሩ ማን ነው በየትኛው አደረጃጀት ስር የሚገባው? ይህንንስ የሚወስነው ማነው? እንዴትስ ተግባራዊ ይሆናል? በማን? ያልተመለሱ ምናልባትም ሊመለሱ የማይችሉ ጥያቄዎች ይሆናሉ።

    በነገራችን ላይ የቤልጅም ብሄርተኞችን እያወዛገበ ሀገሪቱንም ለማፍረስ በቋፍ ያደረሳት በቋንቋ ፌደራሊዝም ላይ የተጨመሩ ሁለት ማለትም የመሬት አቀማመጥ (ጂኦግራፊያዊና) ማህበረሰባዊ (ኮሙኒቲ) አደረጃጀቶች ናቸው:: ከዚሁ ውዝግብ የተነሳ ቤልጅም ውስጥ አንድ ም እንኳ ሃገራዊ ፓርቲ መመስረት አልተቻለም:: ይህ ብቻ አይደለም – ብሐራዊ ሚዲያ የለም:: ሃገር አቀፍ ምርጫ ተደርጎ መንግስት ለማቆም ችግር ይፈጠራል:: ከምርጫ በኋላ ያለሃገራዊ መንግስት ከአምስት መቶ ቀናት በላይ በመቆየት ቤልጀም ርከርድ ይዛላች:: እኛስ የምንፈለገው እንደቤልጀም መሆን ነው:: አስቡት! ከሰማንያ በላይ ብሄር ብሄረሰብ ባላበት ሃገር የተወሳሰበ ሌላ ፌደራላዊ አደረጃጀት ጨምረብነት የት እንደምንደርስ!

    ኢዜማ በዘር የተመሰረተ ፌዴራላዊ አስተዳደር አልቀበልም – ፕሮግራሜም ተዛብቶ የ”ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች” ፌደራሊዝም አንደምደግፍ ተደርጎ ቀርቦአል የሚል ቢሆን ተጨማሪ መረጃዎች እናቅርብ።

    በፕሮግራሙ 1.3 ስር አሁን በስራ ላይ ያለው ህገ መንግስት ያቆመው የፌደሬሽን ምክር ቤት ያለስም ለውጥ አንደሚኖር እንደሚከተለው ተገልጻል።

    “የፌዴራሽን ምክር ቤቱ በአስዳደር አካባቢዎች በእኩል የሚወከሉበት እና የአስተዳደር አካባቢዎች በሚኖራቸው ብሔረሰቦች ብዛት አነስተኛ ቁጥር ላላቸው ብሔረሰቦች ተጨማሪ ውክልና የሚሰጥ ሆኖ አስፈላጊው ድጋፍ እንዲያገኙ ህጎችን የማመንጨት፤ ሕጎችን የመገምገም፤ አፈፃፀማቸውን የመከታተል ሃላፊነት ይኖርበታል፡፡”

    እዚህ ላይ ፍላጎታችን የምክር ቤቱን አዲስ ስልጣን መመርመር ሳይሆን እንደ ተቋም በአስተዳደርዊ ክልል የሚገኙ <> የሚወከሉበት መሆኑን ማሳየት ብቻ ነው ። ባጭሩ አሁን አእንዳለው የፌደሬሽን ምክር ቤት የ”ብሄረሰቦች” ቤት ነው ማለት ነው። ይህ የሚያሳየው ኢዜማ የ”ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች” ፌደራሊዝም አራማጅ መሆኑን ነው:: ይህ ከሆነ አሁን ያለውን ፈደራሊዝም የ”ዘር” ምናምን እያለ ማጣጣሉ ትርጉም የለውም። ይባስ ብሎ ሌሎች ተጨማሪ አደረጃጀቶች ይዞ ብቅ ማለቱ አሳሳቢ ችግር ነው።

    ይህ ብቻ አይደለም:: አሁን ያለው ህገመንግስት የተቀበለውን ህዝበ ውሳኔ እንደዋነኛ መሳሪያነት እንደሚጠቀምበት በተላይዩ የፕሮግራሙ ክፍሎች ጠቁሟል:: የ”ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች ፌደራሊዝም” የሚቀበል እንደምሆኑ መጠን የመገንጠል ህዝበ ውሳኔንም ይቀበላል ማለት ነው:: ይህ ደግሞ በ 1.1.6. ስር ከሰፈረው ” የኢትዮጵያን የግዛት አንድነት ሊገሰስ የማይችልና የማይገሰስ መሆኑን” ከሚገልጸው በቀጥታ ይጋጫአል:: “ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች ፌደራሊዝም” እና ህዝበ ውሳኔን ተቀብሎ ስለሀገራዊ የግዛት አንድነት ማውራት አይቻልም::

    ኢዜማ የ”ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች” ፌደራሊዝም አራማጅ እስከሆነና ህዝበ ውሳኔ እስከተቀበለ ድረስ በፕሮግራሙ ውስጥ የጠቀሰው የህገመንግስት ማሻሻል አያስፈልገውም። የቡድንና የወል መብቶች ከግለሰብ መብቶች የሚመነጩም ሆኑ አልሆኑ መብቶቹ ከላይ በቀረበው አይነት ህገመንግስታዊ ተቀባይነት ካገኙ ከብሄርተኞች ጋር ያለው የአደረጃጀት ልዩነት አውነትም ልዩነት አይደለም ማለት ነው። የዜጋ ፖለቲካ የሚባውም ቱሻ ነው ማለት ነው።

    ኢዜማ “ብሄር፥ ብሄረሰብና ህዝቦች” የተደራጀ ፌደራሊዝምን እስከ ህዝበ ውሳኔ ስለሚቀበል ይህን ፖለቲካ የ”ዘር” ፖለቲካ – የመስመሩን አራማጆችን ደግሞ የ “ዘር” ፖለቲከኞች አያለ መጥራት አይኖርበትም። አመራሩም ሆነ አባላቱ አነዚህን ቃላት ክመጠቀም ተቆጥበው ፖለቲካውን የብሄር ፖለቲካ አራማጅቹን ደግም ብሄርተኞች ሊሏቸው ይገባል ባይ ነኝ። አለበለዚያ የአስተሳሰብ ወጥነት የጎደለውና እምነት ሊጣልበት የማይችል ድርጅት ተደርጎ ሊታይ ይችላል።

    ይቀጥላል።

    Dinaw Demissie
    May 21, 2019 at 1:00 pm
    Reply

  8. Corrected.

    ካላፈው የቀጠለ –

    አሁን ደግሞ ኢዜማ የመረጠውን ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓት እንመልከት:: ይህን ስናደርግ ኢዜማ እንዲኖር የሚፈልገውን ፌደራላዊ ስርዓት የሚመሰረትበትን ማለትም ”መልከአ ምድራዊ አቀማመጥን፣ የሕዝብ አሰፋፈር ለአጠቃላይ አስተዳደራዊና ለልማት ሥራዎች አመቺነትን፤ ቋንቋ፤ ባህል; ስነልቦናዊ ቁርኝት እና ታሪክን፤ የሃብት ስብጥርና ፍትሃዊነት ለብሔራዊ መግባባት አመቺ ሁኔታ መፍጠርን . . . ” በአዕምርዋችን ይዘን መሆን ይኖርበታል:: ምክንያቱም ለዚህ ዓይነት ፌደራሊዝም የሚሻለው ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ወይስ ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት መሆኑ መነሳቱ ስላማይቀር ነው::

    ኢዜማ በፕሮግራሙ መግቢያ ላይ የሚከተለውን ይላል::

    ” ከፍተኛው የመንግሥት ሃላፊነት በሕዝብ ቀጥታ ምርጫ የሚመረጥ ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓት እንዲሆን አበክሮ ይሰራል፡፡ ”

    እርግጥ አሁን በሚሰራበት ህገ መንግስት የተቋቋመው የሀገራችን ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት (አንዳንዶች ድብልቅ ይሉታል – ምክንያቱም ጠቅላይ ሚኒስትርም ፕሬዚዳንትም ስላለው) በሚያስፍር ሁኔታ የህዝብን መብት የረገጠ ነበር:: ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት ኖሯቸው እንደኛ የህዝብን መብት የረገጡ – አሁንም እየረገጡ ያሉ ጥቂት የማይባሉ ሃገሮች አሉ::

    የኛና ጥቂት የማይባሉ ሃገሮች ፓርላሜንታዊ አስተዳደር የህዝብን መብቶች በገፍ ቢጥሱም ተመሳሳይ ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት ያላቸው በርካታ ሃገሮች ግን የህዝቦቻቸውን መብቶች አክብረውና ፍላጎቶቻቸውን በሚገባ አሟልተው አስተዳድረውበታል:: አሁንም እያስተዳደሩበት ይገኛሉ:: ለዚህ ማስረጃው የተዋጣለት ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት የሚከተሉ አውስትራሊያ – ካናዳ – ዴንማርክ – ህንድ – ጀርመን – ፊንላንድ – ጣልያን – ግሪስ -ፖርቹጋል – ስዊዘርላንድ የመሰሉ ሃገሮች መኖራቸው ነው::

    ከላይ እንዳየነው ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት እኛና መሰሎቻቸን መብት ረጋጭ ሃገሮች ስለተቀላቀልነው በራሱ የህዝብን መብቶች ለማክብርም ሆነ ፍላጎቶቻቸውን ለማሟላት የማያስችል ስርዓት ነው ወደሚል የተሳሳተ መደምደሚያ እንዳያደርስ መጠንቀቅ ያስፈልጋል::

    የሃገራችን ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓትም በዲሞክራሲ፥ በህግ የበላይነትና በጠንካራ ነጻ ሚዲያ ከተሟላ ከላይ እንደተዘረዘሩት ሃገሮች ሊሰራ የማይችልበት ምክንያት አይታየኝም:: ስለሆነም ኢዜማ ፕሬዚዳንታዊ ስርአት ያስፈልጋል ሲል አዲስ የተለየ ነገር ለማምጣት ብቻ ብሎ ያደረገው እንዳይሆን መጠንቀቅ ይኖርበት ይሆናል::

    ዝርዝር ውስጥ መግባት ሳያስፈልግ ”ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓት” እንደ ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት የህዝብን መብቶች በሚረግጡ እንዲሁም ፍላጎቱን ማሳካት በተሳናቸው እና መብቶች በማክበር በሚታወቁ ሃገሮች የተሞላ ነው:: ከዚህ አጠቃላይ እውነታ የምንረዳው ስርዓቱን በራሱ የጭቆና አስተዳደርን እንደማያስወግድ ወይም እንደማያመጣ ነው:: እንደ ፓርላሜንታዊው ስርዓት ሁሉ የተሟላ እንዲሆን ዲሞክራሲ፥ የህግ የበላይነትና ጠንካራ ነጻ ሚዲያ ያስፈልገዋል::

    ኢዜማ ‘ ‘ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓት” የመረጠበትን ምክንያት ወደፊት በሰፊው እንደሚያስርዳ ይጠበቃል:: ዝም ብሎ ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት አልሰራም – ወይም አይሰራም – ስለሆነም ለውጠን እንሞክረው ሊለን አይችልም:: ጊዜው የሙከራ አይደለምና:: በተለይ ዲሞክራሲና የህግ የበላይነት በሃገሪቱ ከሰፈነና ጠንካራ ነጻ ሚዲያ ከተፈጠረ እየተለመደ ከመጣው ከፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት በመውጣት ወደ ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓት መሄድ ለምን እንደሚያስፈልግ በበቂ ሁኔታ ማሳየት ይኖርበታል::

    ይህ ብቻ አይደለም። ኢዜማ የሚፈልገው ‘ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓት” በስራ የሚተርጎመው በፌደራላዊ ሃገር በመሆኑሥርዓቱ ተሞክሮ ከነበረው ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት የተሻለ ውጤት እንደሚያስገኝ በቅድሚያ ማረጋገጥ ይስፈልጋል። ዲሞክራሲ፥ የህግ የበላይነትና ጠንካራ ነጻ ሚዲያ ባልነበረበት ሁኔታ በሀገራችን የተሞከረው ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት የፈጠረው የጭቆና አስተዳደር ነው። እነዚህ ችግሮች ከተወገዱ ያለውን ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት በማስቀጠል የተሻለ ውጤት ማግኘት እንደሚቻል መገመት በአግባቡ ነው። አውስትራሊያ – ካናዳ – ኔዘርላንድስ – ጀርመን – ስዊዘርላንድ የተዋጣለት ፓርላሜንታዊ ና ፌደራላዊ ሃገሮች ናቸው።

    ዲሞክራሲ፥ የህግ የበላይነትና ጠንካራ ነጻ ሚዲያ ባለበት ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት በአጥጋቢ ሁኔታ እንደሚሰራ ሁሉ ‘ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓት’ም” ዲሞክራሲ፥ የህግ የበላይነትና ጠንካራ ነጻ ሚዲያ ባለበት በሚገባ ይሰራል።ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓትን በሚመለከት እንዳኩት ‘ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓትም” በሃገራችን ፌደራልዝምን ለመተግበር ተስማሚነቱ በጥልቀት መመርመር ይኖርበታል። በተለይ ኢዜማ የሚፈልገው ‘ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓት’” ካቀረበው አምስት ወይም ስድስት አይነት የፌደራላዊ አወቃቀር ጋር መሄድ መቻሉና አደጋም ካለው አደጋው ከወዲሁ ታውቆ መፍትሄውም አብሮ መታየት ያስፈልገ ይሆናል።

    ይህን በዚህ ላቆየውና ኢዜማ በፕሮግራሙ ውስጥ ስለ’ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓቱ” አተገባበር ከገላጻቸው በመነሳት አንዳንድ ግምታዊ ሃሳቦች ልሰንዝር:: ለዚህም እንዲረዳ በፕሮግራሙ ቁጥር 1.3 ስር ያሰፈራቸውን እንመልከት::

    ”በዜጎች ቀጥተኛ ምርጫ በሚመረጠው ፕሬዚደንት . . . የጠቅላላውን መራጭ 50%+1 ማግኘት አለበት። በመጀመሪያው ዙር ማንም ተወዳዳሪ ይህንን ማግኘት ካልቻለ በሁለተኛ ዙር ሁለቱ ከፍተኛ ደምጽ ያገኙት ተወዳዳሪዎች ብቻ ተወዳድረው ያሸነፈው የሀገሪቱ ፕሬዜዳንት ይሆናል።”

    ቀጥታ ፕሬዚዳንታዊ ምርጫ የሚያደርጉ ሃገሮች አሉ:: እንደኛ በብዙ ሚሊዩን የሚቆጠሩ ድምጽ ሰጪዎች ያሏችው ሃገሮች ለምሳሌ ብራዚልና ሜክሲኮ ቀጥታ ፕሬዚዳንታዊ ምርጫ ያደርጋሉ:: እነዚህ ሃገሮች ፕሬዚዳንታዊ ስርአት የሚከተሉ ብቻ ሳይሆን ፌደራላዊ ሀገሮችም ናቸው። ይህም ቢሆን ፌደራላዊ ስርአታቸአው እንደኛ “በብሄር ብሄረሰብና በህዝብ” ባለመሆኑ የምርጫ ውጤቱ ሃገራዊ ነው። በእኛ ሁኔታ የሚያሰጋው የፕሬዚዳንታዊ እጩዎች ብሄር እየታየ ድምጽ ሊሰጥ ስለሚችል ሃገሪቱ ሊኖራት የሚችለው ፕሬዚዳንት ሁሌም ከፍተኛ ቁጥር ካለው ብሄር ወይም ብሄሮች ሊሆን መቻሉ ነው። ይህ ደግም ሃገሪቱን ቀውስ ውስጥ የሚከት ችግር ነው። ስለዚህም ነው ጉዳዩን በጥሞና መመርመር የሚያስፈልገው::

    አንዳንድ ሃገሮች ቀጥታ ባልሆነ መንገድ በተመራጮች መራጮች አማካይነት ፕሬዚዳንት ይመርጣሉ:: ለዚህ አንድ ምሳሌ የተባበረችው አሜሪካ ናት:: አሜሪካውያን በቀጥታ ለፕሬዚዳንቱ የሚሰጡት ድምጽ ወደ ተመራጮች መራጮች ተመንዝሮ እነዚህ ተመራጮች ፕሬዚዳንቱን ይመርጣሉ:; ይህን ለምን ሆነ ትሉ ይሆናል። ምክንያቱ ሰፊው ድምጽ ሰጭ በክልላዊ ና ሃይማኖትን በመሰሉ ጉዳዩች በቀላልይ ድምጹን ለአንዱ ወይም ለሌላው ሊሰጣ ስለሚችል በዚህ ሁደት ድምጽ ያገኘን ተመራጭ ለፕሬዚዳንታዊ ሃላፊነት ብቃቱን በቅርብ ለማረጋገጥ ይችላሉ የተባሉ ተመራጮች በድምጻቸው የመጨረሻውን ውስኔ እንዲያደርጉ መጠበቂያ ነው:: ባጭሩ ሃገራቸውን ዝም ብለው ሰፊው ድምጽ ሰጭ ለመረጠው ሰው ላለማስረከብ ነው:: በኛም ሃገር የ ሰፊው ድምጽ ሰጭ ብቃት ጥያቀ ከተነሳበት ቀጥታ ያልሆነ ፕሬዚዳንታዊ ምርጫ ማድረግ ይቻል ይሆናል:: በህገ መንግስቱ መሰረት ጠቅላይ ሚኒስትሩ የሚመረጠው ከህዝብ ተወካዩች ምክር ቤት በህዝብ ተወካዩች በመሆኑ ቀጥተኛ ያልሆነ ምርጫ ነው::

    ለማንኛውም ”ፕሬዝዳንታዊ ሥርዓት” እና ”ፓርላሜንታዊ ስርዓት”በሚመለከት እንዳልኩት ህዝብ ፕሬዚዳንቱን በቀጥታ ስለመረጠ የተሻለ አስተዳደር ያገኛል – ቀጥታ ባልሆነ መንገድ ከመረጠ ደግሞ ለጭቆና ይዳረጋል ማለት አይደለም:: ሁለቱም ጠቃሚም ጎጂም ገጽታ አላቸው:: ዋናው ነገር ለሃገራችን የትኛው ይሻላል የሚለው ነው::

    ኢዜማ እንደሚለው ምርጫው በቀጥታ ይደርግ ከተባለ ፕሬዚዳንት ለመሆን ስንት በመቶ ይሁን የሚለው ቀጣይ ጥያቄ ይሆናል:: በተመሳሳይ ሁኔታ ፕሬዚዳንቱ ለስንት የምርጫ ዘመን ያገልግል የሚለውም አወያይ ነጥብ ቢሆንም በቀላሉ ሊፈታ የሚችል ይመስላል::

    ይቀጥላል::

    Dinaw Demissie
    May 22, 2019 at 1:02 pm
    Reply

  9. Commentator’s note: I’m surprised that Birtukan refused to resign. In fact, she appeared on the media to give a briefing on the Board’s activities as if nothing has happened. No regrets and apologies whatsoever about her wantonly indulgence at the festivity of a notable individal who’s a political contender in the coming election. Below is another observation about lack of democracy in internal party functioning. It is my opinion that she has taken internal party democracy lightly when she talked about ኢዜማ. I think her flaws are piling up.
    _____________________________________________

    Call me stupid if you like, but I believe democratization of the country is unthinkable without internal democratization of the ruling coalition and opposition parties.

    Further to the serious problems that beset the workings of ODP, ADP, TPLF and SEPDC which include absolute centralism in each of them and in EPRDF as a coalition at the expense of democracy (please note that all of them have the word democracy in their names), the changes they have introduced in their internal workings such as leadership elections are minor.

    It is vital that ODP, ADP, TPLF and SEPDC adopt democracy in their organizational practices and opposition parties emulate the same. If they do not, any partner organization in EPRDF should take the initiative and change the course of political history in the country. When OPDO and ANDM metamorphosed to ODP and ADM, they were expected to introduce internal democracy and shame and blame TPLF; but they still have the chance to breathe life on themselves before the next federal and regional elections. I guess they will pick their leaders before the said elections.

    By internal democracy I mean implementing “free and democratic election to positions of responsibility in political organizations” required by Article 38 of the Constitution.

    Not only ODP, ADP, TPLF and SEPDC and EPRDF adopt this constitutional requirement, opposition political organizations should do the same as well.

    It is surprising how the internal workings and organizational structure of the opposition is similar to that of EPRDF. It all starts with the rank and file members who have nothing to say on any thing, then there is a central committee chosen from the rank and file and the executive committee hand picked from the central committee and finally a leader(s) elected by a small group of people in the executive committee. It is a copy of the so called communist-socialist party organizational structure and functioning adopted to our situation by the radical left in the 1970s and carried over to this day. A bad organizational heritage with no place today.

    How the Ethiopian Citizens for Social Justice (ECSJ – ኢትዮጵያ ዜጎች ለማህበራዊ ፍትህ /ኢ-ዜማ/ elected its leaders is no mystery. It’s EPRDF style.

    I feel that the National Election Board has to make sure the constitutional requirement of “free and democratic elections to positions of responsibility in political parties” is met by every political organization in the country. In fact, it is incumbent upon the Board to see that this requirement is fully met. If it fails to make sure it is met, it might justifiably face criticism and even legal action for failing to discharge its constitutional responsibility. The consequence of such failure is devastating since democracy in the country begins with democratic practices within political organizations themselves. Undemocratic organization cannot respect democratic rights.

    Here is Article 38 in its entirety.

    The Right to Vote and to be Elected

    1. Every Ethiopian national, without any discrimination based on colour, race, nation, nationality, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion or other status, has the following rights:
    (a) To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly and through freely chosen representatives;
    (b) On the attainment of -18 years of age, to vote in accordance with law;
    (c) To vote and to be elected at periodic elections to any office at any level of government; elections shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall beheld by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors.
    2. The right of everyone to be a member of his own will in a political organization, labour union, trade organization, or employers’ or professional association shall be respected if he or she meets the special and general requirements stipulated by such organization.
    3. Elections to positions of responsibility within any of the organizations referred to under sub-Article 2 of this Article shall be conducted in a free and democratic manner.
    4. The provisions of sub-Articles 2 and 3 of this Article shall apply to civic organizations which significantly affect the public interest.

    The directly relevant sub-articles for our opinion are 2 and 3 which sanction that “elections to positions of responsibility within (political organizations) shall be conducted in a free and democratic manner.” Please note here that “positions of responsibility” is in plural which means all positions of responsibility without exception.

    It is questionable that EPRDF and its partner organizations ever met this constitutional requirement of “elections to positions of responsibility . . . in a free and democratic manner” in their decades of existence and practices. The same is true to opposition political organizations both in and out of the country. Now ኢ-ዜማ has repeated it. It’s time to change.

    As we know it, the leaders of ODP, ADP, SEPDC and TPLF are elected by a small number of people from the central committee of the respective organizations with little or no involvement of the rank and file members. This is not a call for the millions of members of these organizations to directly vote to “freely and democratically” elect their respective leaders but vote through reasonable and adequate number of representatives. For this to happen, they have to know who the candidates are and what they stand for which necessitates campaigns and discussions. In the meantime, the regular people will learn what the party stands for.

    Here is a concrete example to show the existing flaw. Sometime in November last year, less than forty people who form the central committee of TPLF (including some who were said to be no more in the committee) removed their leader and crowned another. Through what process was that done? Through evaluation (gemgema). Assuming that TPLF has a million members in Tigray, in the country and abroad, was there any mechanism by which the million strong participated to elect whom they call their leader? None whatsoever.

    – There was no leadership campaign among members and supporters in which candidates present what they will do if elected to lead the party.

    – There were no delegates (at least fifty thousand of them for a million members) who were to vote for the leader and back his plan at all stages of implementation and support him in case the top leadership is not happy with what he is doing. Technology has made such kind of voting possible.

    – Nobody knew what the leader elected in closed doors plans to do. Not party members, not supporters, not the Tigray people.

    – The process was like an appointment of a civil servant whose tenure is dependent on evaluation of his immediate superior. No wonder these guys do not want to leave office because they confuse their position with a position of a civil servant. A civil servant leaves office when he-she retires and they also expect to leave party position when they retire.

    This kind of “election” might have been reasonable during the civil war due to security concerns, but to maintain it for decades after security risk is removed is undemocratic and meaningless. It is a corrupt system that encourages loyalty to few groups of people rather than to millions of members of organizations and the entire population. Furthermore, it discourages the emergence of reformists with fresh ideas. If such system exists anywhere in the world, it might be only in China which is not a democratic country.

    The consequence of this in-party undemocratic practice is evident in how a prime minister is put in the highest office of the country. A small group of people from ODP, ADP, SEPDC and TPLF that form the executive committee of EPRDF elect their leader who then becomes the prime minster of the country. The other requirement to meet is election to the federal parliament in a remote local district by a few thousands of people. It is totally undemocratic. Neither the members of the organizations nor the entire population of the country has a say in this process.

    Again, the constitution says : “elections to positions of responsibility in political parties shall be conducted in a free and democratic manner.”

    Democratization of the country begins with internal democratization of organizations particularly within organizations which claim to be at the forefront of the on-going reform. ODP should show the way.

    It’s sad ኢ-ዜማ repeated the same mistake. And it happened before the eyes of the National Election Board. I expect the Board to reject ኢ-ዜማ’s application for registration because a constitutional requirement of internal party democracy is violated.

    Hamza Jemal
    May 28, 2019 at 1:28 pm
    Reply

  10. Call me stupid if you like, but I believe democratization of the country is unthinkable without internal democratization of the ruling coalition and opposition parties.

    Further to the serious problems that beset the workings of ODP, ADP, TPLF and SEPDC which include absolute centralism in each of them and in EPRDF as a coalition at the expense of democracy (please note that all of them have the word democracy in their names), the changes they have introduced in their internal workings such as leadership elections are minor.

    It is vital that ODP, ADP, TPLF and SEPDC adopt democracy in their organizational practices and opposition parties emulate the same. If they do not, any partner organization in EPRDF should take the initiative and change the course of political history in the country. When OPDO and ANDM metamorphosed to ODP and ADM, they were expected to introduce internal democracy and shame and blame TPLF; but they still have the chance to breathe life on themselves before the next federal and regional elections. I guess they will pick their leaders before the said elections.

    By internal democracy I mean implementing “free and democratic election to positions of responsibility in political organizations” required by Article 38 of the Constitution.

    Not only ODP, ADP, TPLF and SEPDC and EPRDF adopt this constitutional requirement, opposition political organizations should do the same as well.

    It is surprising how the internal workings and organizational structure of the opposition is similar to that of EPRDF. It all starts with the rank and file members who have nothing to say on any thing, then there is a central committee chosen from the rank and file and the executive committee hand picked from the central committee and finally a leader(s) elected by a small group of people in the executive committee. It is a copy of the so called communist-socialist party organizational structure and functioning adopted to our situation by the radical left in the 1970s and carried over to this day. A bad organizational heritage with no place today.

    How the Ethiopian Citizens for Social Justice (ECSJ – ኢትዮጵያ ዜጎች ለማህበራዊ ፍትህ /ኢ-ዜማ/ elected its leaders is no mystery. It’s EPRDF style.

    I feel that the National Election Board has to make sure the constitutional requirement of “free and democratic elections to positions of responsibility in political parties” is met by every political organization in the country. In fact, it is incumbent upon the Board to see that this requirement is fully met. If it fails to make sure it is met, it might justifiably face criticism and even legal action for failing to discharge its constitutional responsibility. The consequence of such failure is devastating since democracy in the country begins with democratic practices within political organizations themselves. Undemocratic organization cannot respect democratic rights.

    Here is Article 38 in its entirety.

    The Right to Vote and to be Elected

    1. Every Ethiopian national, without any discrimination based on colour, race, nation, nationality, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion or other status, has the following rights:
    (a) To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly and through freely chosen representatives;
    (b) On the attainment of -18 years of age, to vote in accordance with law;
    (c) To vote and to be elected at periodic elections to any office at any level of government; elections shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall beheld by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors.
    2. The right of everyone to be a member of his own will in a political organization, labour union, trade organization, or employers’ or professional association shall be respected if he or she meets the special and general requirements stipulated by such organization.
    3. Elections to positions of responsibility within any of the organizations referred to under sub-Article 2 of this Article shall be conducted in a free and democratic manner.
    4. The provisions of sub-Articles 2 and 3 of this Article shall apply to civic organizations which significantly affect the public interest.

    The directly relevant sub-articles for our opinion are 2 and 3 which sanction that “elections to positions of responsibility within (political organizations) shall be conducted in a free and democratic manner.” Please note here that “positions of responsibility” is in plural which means all positions of responsibility without exception.

    It is questionable that EPRDF and its partner organizations ever met this constitutional requirement of “elections to positions of responsibility . . . in a free and democratic manner” in their decades of existence and practices. The same is true to opposition political organizations both in and out of the country. Now ኢ-ዜማ has repeated it. It’s time to change.

    As we know it, the leaders of ODP, ADP, SEPDC and TPLF are elected by a small number of people from the central committee of the respective organizations with little or no involvement of the rank and file members. This is not a call for the millions of members of these organizations to directly vote to “freely and democratically” elect their respective leaders but vote through reasonable and adequate number of representatives. For this to happen, they have to know who the candidates are and what they stand for which necessitates campaigns and discussions. In the meantime, the regular people will learn what the party stands for.

    Here is a concrete example to show the existing flaw. Sometime in November last year, less than forty people who form the central committee of TPLF (including some who were said to be no more in the committee) removed their leader and crowned another. Through what process was that done? Through evaluation (gemgema). Assuming that TPLF has a million members in Tigray, in the country and abroad, was there any mechanism by which the million strong participated to elect whom they call their leader? None whatsoever.

    – There was no leadership campaign among members and supporters in which candidates present what they will do if elected to lead the party.

    – There were no delegates (at least fifty thousand of them for a million members) who were to vote for the leader and back his plan at all stages of implementation and support him in case the top leadership is not happy with what he is doing. Technology has made such kind of voting possible.

    – Nobody knew what the leader elected in closed doors plans to do. Not party members, not supporters, not the Tigray people.

    – The process was like an appointment of a civil servant whose tenure is dependent on evaluation of his immediate superior. No wonder these guys do not want to leave office because they confuse their position with a position of a civil servant. A civil servant leaves office when he-she retires and they also expect to leave party position when they retire.

    This kind of “election” might have been reasonable during the civil war due to security concerns, but to maintain it for decades after security risk is removed is undemocratic and meaningless. It is a corrupt system that encourages loyalty to few groups of people rather than to millions of members of organizations and the entire population. Furthermore, it discourages the emergence of reformists with fresh ideas. If such system exists anywhere in the world, it might be only in China which is not a democratic country.

    The consequence of this in-party undemocratic practice is evident in how a prime minister is put in the highest office of the country. A small group of people from ODP, ADP, SEPDC and TPLF that form the executive committee of EPRDF elect their leader who then becomes the prime minster of the country. The other requirement to meet is election to the federal parliament in a remote local district by a few thousands of people. It is totally undemocratic. Neither the members of the organizations nor the entire population of the country has a say in this process.

    Again, the constitution says : “elections to positions of responsibility in political parties shall be conducted in a free and democratic manner.”

    Democratization of the country begins with internal democratization of organizations particularly within organizations which claim to be at the forefront of the on-going reform. ODP should show the way.

    It’s sad ኢ-ዜማ repeated the same mistake. And it happened before the eyes of the National Election Board. I expect the Board to reject ኢ-ዜማ’s application for registration because a constitutional requirement of internal party democracy is violated.

    Hamza Jemal
    May 28, 2019 at 1:30 pm
    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.