ELECTORAL PROCESS:ETHIOPIAN OPPOSITION SKEPTICAL

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ADDIS ABABA 002693

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/13/2019
TAGS: PGOV PHUM KDEM PREL ET
SUBJECT: ELECTORAL PROCESS:ETHIOPIAN OPPOSITION SKEPTICAL
OF GOE TALK OF INCLUSION

REF: ADDIS 2624

Classified By: CDA Roger A. Meece for Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).

Summary
--------------

1. (C) At the request of the four political parties who
drafted an electoral Code of Conduct (CoC),the National
Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) hosted a series of
discussions in order to solicit input from other Ethiopian
political parties before submitting the companion legislative
package to Parliament. The 53 political party
representatives who were present raised concerns about
whether the four drafting parties had authority to draft a
CoC, whether the NEBE or the parties were leading the
legislative process, and whether their input would be
incorporated into the document. Representatives from the
Forum for Democratic Dialogue (Forum) walked out of the
discussion shortly after it began, in protest over the NEBEs
role, and Forum leadership has showed no signs of re-joining
the talks. During the third meeting, most of the parties
expressed willingness to approve the existing CoC - which
does not contain any significant provisions that do not
already exist in Ethiopian law - but expressed concern about
the legislature package for the implementation of the CoC,
including the establishment of a "Joint Council" with
authority to investigate violations of the CoC. While the
ruling party (EPRDF) is clearly interested in engaging other
political parties in at least certain parts of the electoral
process, opposition party leaders remain distrustful of the
EPRDF and allege continued harassment of their supporters.
End Summary.


2. (SBU) Following the October 30 signing ceremony of the
preamble of the CoC (reftel),the four political parties who
drafted it - including the ruling EPRDF, the All Ethiopian
Unity Party (AEUP),the Coalition for Unity and Democracy
Party (CUDP),and the Ethiopian Democratic Party (EDP) -
asked the NEBE to host a series of discussions to solicit
input from all Ethiopian political parties before submitting
an implementing legislative package to a standing committee
in Parliament. (Note. The plan has been to incorporate the
COC into the legislative package. The COC preamble is not
technically part of the legislative package. The four
parties that drafted the COC preamble also drafted a full
COC. The preamble was signed on October 30 by the four party
leaders; the COC itself is now under consideration by the
larger group of parties, ostensibly under the facilitation of
the NEBE. End Note.) On November 4, 53 political parties
convened at the NEBE offices, and talks are ongoing.
Minister of Communication Bereket Simon gave an opening
speech encouraging parties (and the Forum in particular) to
engage in the process, and assured parties that "through
dialogue we can resolve problems." Bereket then pointed out
that while in the past the EPRDF has drafted and submitted
the CoC itself, this time the EPRDF is giving other parties a
chance to contribute, and they should seize the opportunity.

Lack of Agreement on Procedure
--------------


3. (C) The first five-hour session was spent discussing
procedural issues. One of the key concerns raised by
political party representatives was about who had the
authority to draft a CoC. Opposition parties felt that the
CoC should be drafted by the NEBE, not by political parties.
(Note: Article 105 of the Electoral Law states "The NEBE, in
consultation with concerned bodies, MAY issue a detailed
election CoC" (emphasis added). The law does not specifically
state that political parties cannot produce a COC. End
Note.) Other issues of contention were whether the NEBE or
the drafting parties were chairing the meeting (opposition
parties insisted on the NEBE),and whether opposition input
would actually be incorporated into the document, since its
preamble was signed the week before. Some opposition party
representatives felt the event was a publicity stunt designed
to make the electoral process appear inclusive. The four COC
drafting parties assured participants that the document
remained a draft and that they would accommodate changes.
Several opposition party representatives complained to PolOff
that over two-thirds of the political parties present were
not real opposition parties, but rather EPRDF-affiliate
parties. Following the procedural discussion, several party
representatives requested time to consult with their members,

ADDIS ABAB 00002693 002 OF 002


so the NEBE scheduled further discussion for five days later.



4. (SBU) During the third meeting, on November 9, the
discussion moved past procedure to substance and most of the
parties expressed willingness to approve the existing CoC,
which does not contain any significant provisions that do not
already exist in Ethiopian law. Rather, it is a compilation
of previous laws and constitutional provisions. However,
several parties have expressed concern about the package of
regulations for implementing the CoC -- including the
establishment of a "Joint Council" with authority to
investigate violations of the CoC -- which will be discussed
in future meetings. Currently, the Joint Council is
comprised of the four drafting parties, but as stated in the
draft regulation, "Founding members of the Council will
discuss and arrange conditions for political parties that did
not participate in the drafting of the CoC for different
reasons to join the Council."

Forum Walks Out...Again
--------------


5. (C) Second tier leaders from the Forum attended the
November 4 session for the first two hours, but walked out
over concern about lack of NEBE ownership of the process.
The walk-out was clearly pre-planned, as Forum members walked
out before even giving the NEBE a chance to respond to their
concerns. Forum representatives expressed displeasure with
the EPRDF for refusing to engage in bilateral discussions
with the Forum prior to discussing the CoC with the other
opposition parties. Forum representatives have not been
present at any of the following sessions, and Forum leaders
have not expressed willingness to re-join the discussion.
Hailu Araya, Public Relations Chairman for Unity for
Democracy and Justice - a member of the Forum, told PolOff
that "the CoC is not going to mean anything because the NEBE
is not going to enforce its implementation."


COMMENT
--------------



6. (C) The Joint Council is not meant to replace the NEBE
complaints process or the right to litigate, but rather to
complement both with an articulated Joint Council/NEBE/courts
division of labor. If passed into law, political parties,
candidates, and government organs would be obliged to
cooperate with the Joint Council's investigations of
complaints of violations of the CoC. Some of the measures to
be taken by the Joint Council would amount to naming and
shaming political parties who violate the CoC and force
accountable political parties to rectify violations of the
CoC. Measures to be taken by the NEBE include giving
official warning to parties that violate the CoC, denying
access to public media, prohibiting financial subsidy,
canceling candidature, and suspending political parties.
Courts would continue to be responsible for punishing
political activity around polling stations on polling day,
publishing or disseminating election results, disseminating
inaccurate information regarding political activities or
election outcome, rights of candidates or political parties,
or deliberately creating obstacles or interfering in the work
of the NEBE.



7. (C) Comment Continued: The GoE clearly wants the adoption
of the CoC to be, or appear to be, inclusive. The opposition
is jaded after several years of reported harassment,
arbitrary arrest, and intimidation by the ruling party, and
views attempts at inclusion with skepticism and mistrust.
The Forum continues to be stubborn about engaging, which
threatens to undermine already slim hopes for a free and fair
election. End Comment.
MEECE