Commission’s free hand, comprehensive studies promise durable peace: Scholars
With brief conflicts originating from reckless handling of identityrelated questions reaching to their peaks, scholars say that the new Administrative Boundaries and Identity Issues Commission could possibly dry up their root causes given its ascertained independence and cooperation from House of Federation and (HoF) other pertinent organs.
The FDRE parliament had recently come to media spotlight as it heatedly debated, as one may call it a historic session, on proclamation enacted for the establishment of Administrative Boundaries and Identity Issues Commission last week with the majority of the-547 seat parliament voting in favor, 33 in opposition and four abstentions. Responding to the establishment of the Commission, Dr. Sisay Mengeste, Asst. Prof of Human Rights and Federalism in Addis Ababa University (AAU), says: “There is nothing wrong with establishing a Commission that scientifically appraises issues relating to identity and administrative boundaries.
The Commission’s mandate is to present evidences that help pertinent bodies including (HoF) make correct decisions.” To him, the powers and duties of the Commission never stand in contradiction with either HoF or the Ministry of Peace, but its existence serves to ensure durable peace in the country. Dr. Sisay, however, sees few challenges ahead of the new Commission’s path. Firstly it has to be organized with people beyond any suspicion. “Selection of people that will be assigned to the Commission ought to be carried out wisely.
Otherwise, it will become source of further disputes.” As the problems are manifold, it has to fairly decide on its priorities secondly, he adds. Most importantly, state administrators’ cooperation to the Commission is very important, he stressed. “I’m not saying this out of the blue; recommendations of the Commission can have impact on the states. It may have impact on budget allocation, resource and political power. In such cases, individuals who have lavish personal and group interests could attempt to deny access to teams assigned to gather data on issues of identity and administrative boundary.
Or they may attempt to misinform members of study teams.” Also, Dr. Getachew Kassa, a social anthropologist with the AAU comments that the challenges that may originate from the ethnic political entrepreneurs will not be that easy. Pertinent bodies have to, therefore, wisely recruit scholars that work for problems to get lasting solution, he reiterates. “There might be persons and groups that may stand on the losers’ side when scientific solutions could be drawn by the Commission.” To him, not few political elites manipulated identity and boundary issues to their advantages so far.
Conflicts between and among people living around artificial boundaries are natural. Often, source of conflicts are access to resource— pasture for instance. But currently the conflicts are seen transcending to questions of territory, Dr. Getachew notes. “In such cases, the said politicians fan the flame focusing on their personal or group advantages.” The Commission’s independent studies, however, could help draw both short-term and long-term solutions, Getachew underscores.
Bearing in mind the importance of independent professionals, such entity needs to attract anthropologists, economists, geographers, historians, demographers, among others, he adds. “But as questions pertaining to identity and boundary are so delicate, the handling has to go with a lot of wisdom and should fall in a safe pair of hands.” For his part, Dr. Sisay adds that previous studies on questions of identity shelved at the House of Federation could serve as springboard for further achievements.
“We do not have to always start from the scratch; the Institute for the Study of Ethiopian Nationalities had conducted studies some three decades ago— which can be used as reference.” In addition, recent studies by the HoF and other bodies can offer further insights, he adds. Prof. Brhanu Nega, chairperson of Patriotic Ginbot 7 Movement for Unity and Democracy says: “The Commission has been formed. The thing is to freeze all issues relating to identity and boundary until the Commission carries out studies and come up with reports.
And at the end of the day, it is government’s responsibility to make sure peace prevails in this country.” The Commission is said to have objectives like coming up with “neutral, highly professional and peaceful solution to problems of identity and boundary since conflicts with administrative boundaries are a cause of great instability.” Previously, legitimate questions of peoples on administrative boundary and identity issues was met with thoughtless responses that had been galvanized with glossy statements as if such issues were properly addressed constitutionally.
Diametrically opposite to this fact, the problems piled up than ever climaxing to level of drawing states to brief conflicts, as stated by the Office of the Prime Minister released on the rationale of the Commission’s establishment. Arguing as people have all the rights to question on matters relating to the issues, the statement goes to say that unless scientific intervention is made, by a Commission equipped with the right budget and human capital, the threats are sure to take a wider scale which eventually lead to state collapse.
Parliamentarians who counter argued on the establishment of the Commission put their premises saying that the issues should be resolved at states’ level. And at times when debates reach a stalemate, it is up to the HoF to make final arbitration. However, other members refuted the claim as none of the constitution’s articles will be violated, nor the Commissions’ establishment goes against the jurisdictions of the HoF or other government bodies.
The constitution does not declare to be effective in retroactive. And disputed identity and boundary issues have roots as far back as 1992, as one parliamentarian argued. The Constitution came to force in 1995. The noble objectives of the commissions would bear fruits with keen cooperation from the HoF, Ministry of Peace as well as states is the minimum requirement, the scholars’ agree.
The Ethiopian Herald, December 28/2018
BY WORKU BELACHEW
