Opinion depot

Ethiopia rejects 'biased' EU report on May's elections


Coat of arms of EthiopiaImage via Wikipedia
The Ethiopian government has rejected as biased the findings of a European Union report on May's parliamentary elections.
The EU concluded that the polls failed to meet international standards 
and were marred by serious flaws.
However, the Ethiopian foreign ministry said the EU's election observer mission had itself failed to meet Ethiopian or international standards.
It added that the report was flawed and based on preconceived ideas.
"This report amounts to yet another biased political indictment against the democratization process in Ethiopia and the victimisation of the country," said the ministry in a statement.
It accused the EU of "excessive focus" on the fact that the elections further consolidated the power of the governing EPRDF party.
The ministry says this demonstrated that the mission was "primarily preoccupied with the results of the elections and fate of the ruling party rather than the actual conduct of the elections".
In May, the EPRDF trounced the opposition, with only one opposition MP elected to the 536-seat parliament.
The ministry also accused the EU of succumbing to pressure from the rights group Human Rights Watch (HRW).
Last month, HRW issued a report accusing the government of withholding aid from opposition supporters.
Aid
The EU report was released in Brussels earlier this month after the head of the mission was refused a visa to travel to Addis Ababa.
An African Union observer mission found that the polls broadly reflected the will of the Ethiopian people.
Relations between the EU and Ethiopia soured in the aftermath of 2005 elections when the government accused the then chief observer of siding with the opposition and contributing to violent protests that ensued.
The EU, one of Ethiopia's biggest donors, froze its aid to the country. Normal relations and financial support have since resumed.
The BBC's Uduak Amimo in Addis Ababa says it remains unclear what impact the EU report will have on aid and ties with the Ethiopian government.


Ethiopia needs you Haile Gebrselassie, so does the London 2012 Olympics

Haile Gebrselassie during FBK-Games 2009Image via Wikipedia
“His smile makes athletics smile,” Haile Gebrselassie’s manager Jos Hermens once told me.
The memory of this perfect observation flickered again on Sunday when 
it felt impossible not to harbour a twinge of sorrow about the great man’s unhappy, emotional announcement, after pulling out during the New York marathon, that he was retiring from competitive running with immediate effect. It wasn’t just Haile’s smile which had just evaporated.
It was not just that it seemed hard to imagine no longer charting an unparalleled sporting career which I had been privileged to watch and chronicle for 17 years since marvelling at this freakish little Ethiopian kid seemingly bouncing on his toes like a sprinter for 25 laps to win his first world 10,000m title in Stuttgart.
No, it was more than that; it actually felt like an empty day for the sport itself, like the loss of a constant shaft of sunshine in a landscape which has become so disfigured by doubt and cynicism. Athletics can ill afford to lose both purity and pure genius.
It did not seem right to hear that the greatest of athletes had limped away forlornly on New York’s Queensboro Bridge and then punished himself with tears of recrimination in a press conference room. This was no way to go.
Sport is mercilessly unsentimental about things like that, you can shrug. It rarely offers dream goodbyes for dream athletes. Yet Gebrselassie deserves so much better than this anti-climactic ending and, after Sunday’s initial shock, I am happy to still be persuaded that he will change his mind about retirement and that a rather more fitting bow may yet still await him in London 2012.
If his closest advisors, like Hermens, are right in believing that the 37-year-old was simply acting on distressed impulse on Sunday, so crushed was he by having to succumb to a knee problem after his hardest pre-race preparations for years, and that he could yet have a change of heart, then why shouldn’t London be back on the agenda?
Gebrselassie has always acted from the heart and is incredibly hard on himself. He has had to pull out before or during several big races, through injuries and illness, in the past few years and each time he has sounded guilty, clearly hating the idea that he was somehow letting people down. New York was the final straw.
Only the good news is that there have been previous ‘final straws’. It is hard not to forget how crestfallen he seemed after struggling home ninth in his first crack at the London Marathon. He was going to quit then too but within two years was world record holder.
This year alone, admittedly betwixt more injury setbacks, he has won the Dubai Marathon in a hardly sluggish 2hr 6min 9sec and clocked his best half-marathon time for two years in winning the Great North Run. So it was little wonder that even in the week’s build-up to New York, he had been reiterating his ambition to run for a third gold medal, following his two 10,000m triumphs in Atlanta and Sydney, in London.
Yes, of course even should he now go back on Sunday’s announcement, the odds must be very long on Gebrselassie winning gold in London. Yet since he still rues his decision to withdraw from the Beijing Olympic marathon – as an asthmatic, his fears that the pollution there would be too oppressive proved unfounded and he ended up breaking the world record in Berlin soon after – he must not leave his matchless career with one final regret
For even if he did not win, he would give himself the unmissable chance, in front of thousands of cheering supporters on the capital’s streets, to cross the line (whether it be in front of Buckingham Palace or, as I earnestly still hope, the Olympic Stadium itself) to a reception befitting one of the great Olympians.
On Tuesday he tweeted to the world (funny how Twitter seems to be the only repository left for brief, honest reflections from celebrities) that “now it is time for me to think about a lot of things. I still love running. I will always run. Just give me some time to think things over.”
Of course, we will, Haile. Just think it over and then tell us it is not over quite yet. Your country needs you, London needs you and your sport needs you. Just one more for the Olympic road…

Ethiopia: Final Report on the House of People's Representatives and State Council Elections

European Union (Brussels)
10 November 2010


document
The executive summary of the final report of the European Union's Election Observation Mission to the 2010 House of People's Representatives and State Council elections in Ethiopia:
Coat of arms of EthiopiaImage via Wikipedia
The 23 May 2010 elections were held in a generally peaceful environment, as unanimously called for by all stakeholders. The relatively quiet election campaign by both the opposition and the incumbent, the Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), grew in intensity in the very last stages of the campaign. Although, the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) largely managed the electoral process in an efficient and competent manner, its handling of the consolidation process was less praiseworthy. The electoral authorities failed to dispel the opposition parties' lack of trust in their independence. While several positive improvements were introduced since the 2005 elections, there were negative developments in the practical application of the legal and electoral framework. As a result, the electoral process fell short of international commitments for elections, notably regarding the transparency of the process and the lack of a level playing field for all contesting parties. Insufficient efforts were taken to ensure a more equitable and representative electoral process.
The Ethiopian Constitution and legal framework provided an adequate basis for the conduct of genuine elections in line with international and regional commitments subscribed to by Ethiopia. The Constitution, Electoral Law and other election-related regulations protect political and civil rights and allow for genuine elections, as well as the freedoms of association, assembly, movement and expression. However, the practical implementation of some laws and regulations regarding elections deviated in certain cases from the principles underlying these commitments. The electoral process was therefore constrained, as was the full, non-discriminatory, enjoyment of fundamental rights.
The changes in the legal framework together with the fragmentation of the main opposition forces in the aftermath of the 2005 elections, as well as the imprisonment of leading opposition figures and the departure in exile of one opposition leader, resulted in a cumulative narrowing of the political space within the country. The ruling party's presence throughout the country was unrivalled by opposition parties, especially in rural areas which house up to 80% of the Ethiopian population.
The NEBE registered 31,926,520 voters for the 2010 elections, out of approximately 37 million eligible citizens according to its own projections. This reflected a relatively inclusive register that included around 5 million more voters than in 2005. Voter registration was carried out in just six weeks, which is a relatively short period. Voter registration took place before the deployment of the EU EOM and was therefore not directly observed by the Mission. The lack of a centralised and computerised national voter register did not allow for any checks for multiple registrations or any audits.
The number of complaints of campaign violations, harassment and intimidation -including cases of violence- voiced primarily by opposition parties and, to a much lesser extent, by the ruling party, increased in the last weeks of the campaign. The volume and consistency of complaints against the ruling party, local administrations and in some cases the police was a matter of concern that must be taken into account in the overall assessment of the electoral process. Beyond the repeated calls for peaceful elections, greater measures to limit possible harassment and intimidation could have been taken by the government and all political parties.
The freedoms of assembly, of expression and of movement were not consistently respected throughout the country during the campaign period, generally to the detriment of opposition parties. All parties favoured door-to-door canvassing, although some rallies were held -mainly by the EPRDF. Campaign activities were generally focused on the last week of the campaign, given most parties' lack of funds.
The separation between the ruling party and the public administration was blurred at the local level in many parts of the country. The EU EOM directly observed cases of misuse of state resources in the ruling party's campaign activities. The role of the kebele's (administrative unit that comprises rural communities or urban neighbourhoods) which are used to good avail in the development of local communities should be gradually reduced in the electoral process to prevent these situations from occurring. This could also help to increase the level of trust of opposition parties in the process. Even taking into account the inherent advantages of the incumbency, the Mission considers that the playing field for the 2010 elections was not sufficiently balanced, leaning heavily in favour of the ruling party in many areas.
The NEBE decided to retain exclusive competence in the field of voter education. The EU EOM considers that the voter information provided by the NEBE was generally insufficient and that too often, political parties and local administrations were the main exponents of voter education in rural parts of the country. The exclusion of civil society organisations from voter education, together with the new and more restrictive Ethiopian Charities and Societies Law, limited the potential role of local organisations in the electoral process.
The provisions for complaints related to voting, counting and consolidation were significantly strengthened in the last five years. Nonetheless, the EU EOM considers that further measures must be implemented to ensure that they provide the opportunity for effective legal remedy on election-related complaints, in light of opposition parties' lack of confidence in the independence and neutrality of the judiciary and the police. Additionally, the channels for complaint adjudication should be rationalised to avoid that offences go unpunished.
The NEBE announced provisional results less than 48 hours after polling stations closed, thanks to a parallel system of communication allowing for the aggregation of polling station results at the national level. The consolidation process at constituency level was considered very problematic according to EU EOM observers. In 27% of cases observed, polling station results were different to those previously recorded by observers at polling stations. In several cases, incomplete or incorrect forms from polling stations were corrected or completed at constituency electoral offices. The transparency of the process was considered unsatisfactory in 40% of observed cases. Certain essential forms for the correct transmission of results to the national level were not filled in numerous constituencies.
The ruling party and its partner parties won 544 of the 547 seats to the HPR and all but four of the 1,904 seats in the State Councils. The participation rate was of 93.4%. An independent European Union Election Observation Mission to Ethiopia 2010 candidate and a candidate from one of the main opposition coalitions, the Ethiopian Federal Democratic Unity Forum (Medrek) won seats to the HPR. A candidate from a relatively smaller party, the Argoba People's Democratic Organisation (APDO), won the third seat. The APDO won three State Council seats. The All Ethiopian Unity Party (AEUP) won one State Council seat. The results indicate that the EPRDF has a practically absolute control over both the lower legislative chamber and the State Councils.
• Measures are necessary to increase the participation and capacity of opposition parties, as well as the broadening of political space in Ethiopia. The return of exiled opposition leaders as well as the release of imprisoned opposition leaders would be important steps in this direction, restoring confidence in the democratic process. The financing of political parties and of election campaigns could be reviewed together with the implementation of capacity-building programmes for political parties, their members and their candidates.
• Steps should be taken to ensure a clear separation between the ruling party and the state and to avoid the misuse of state resources during the campaign. The NEBE should be provided with sufficient resources to reduce the need to resort to local administrative structures in electoral activities gradually, with a view to create an independent and trustworthy election management body. This would help to prevent the occurrence of abuses of power and use of state resources at the local level. Furthermore, this measure could improve the level of confidence of many opposition parties in the electoral process.

EU Mission Releases Report on Ethiopia's Election

• The voter register should be computerised for future electoral processes to allow for the implementation of essential safeguards to ensure its accuracy, as well as greater transparency by providing copies of the voter register to all political parties. The NEBE could consider the creation of a permanent and national voter register.
• The NEBE should take measures to increase the transparency of the electoral process and improve the perception that some opposition parties have of its impartiality. These measures should include publishing and communicating all electoral information to the contesting parties. The NEBE should also review some Election Day procedures, notably the design of forms and the training provided to polling station staff and constituency electoral officers to improve the consolidation process.

The BBC's apology to the Band Aid Trust was far from adequate

brian

Liste ners were misled that 95% of famine relief aid for Ethiopia was diverted to the militaryYour report of the BBC's apology to Bob Geldof's Band Aid for the misleading impression given by a World Service programme alleging wholesale diversion of famine relief aid to Ethiopia, said: "Sir Brian Barder, the British ambassador to Ethiopia between 1982 and 1986, was positive about the BBC's response." (Sorry, Sir Bob: BBC's apology to Geldof over Band Aid programme, 4 November).

I did indeed welcome the BBC's "far-reaching apology to the Band Aid Trust for the seriously unfair and misleading impression given by the ... programme."

But the second part of my comment, unaccountably omitted from your report, was far from positive:

"But I am sorry that the BBC has not taken the opportunity to put it beyond doubt that contrary to the false impression gained by thousands of people hearing the programme or reporting it elsewhere in the media, the allegations of diversion reported in the programme applied only to a small amount of aid given to a limited area of Tigray then under rebel control, not to the international relief effort in the whole of the rest of Ethiopia. Although it was not the main question in the Band Aid complaint, this would have been a welcome opportunity for the BBC to put the record straight on that important issue too."

Even before the programme went out, I personally asked its producer to correct this damaging impression, but my appeal was ignored.

The BBC's official line acknowledges that the implied slurs on Band Aid were unjustified, but claims that "the ruling [by the BBC itself!] validates the main thrust of the programme's journalism" (initially described by the BBC's director general, Mark Thompson, as "robust and excellent journalism"). The BBC complaints website says: "The programme made clear that the allegations of diversion replied [sic] to aid reaching Tigray, not to the Ethiopian relief effort as a whole, and that much aid had served its intended purpose." So why did hardly anyone who heard it take away that impression? The allegations actually concerned around 3%-4% of total relief aid to Ethiopia and not any in government-controlled areas. But virtually every report in the media of the apparently sensational revelations in the programme, based on the BBC's own publicity and on the programme itself, interpreted it as alleging that up to 95% of all famine relief aid for Ethiopia in the 1980s had been diverted for military use.

That universal misinterpretation not only defamed the dedicated aid workers concerned but was also bound to discourage people from contributing to disaster relief funds in future. It isn't just Band Aid to which the BBC owes an apology, but to the British government, other donors, charities and, above all, ordinary people who gave so generously.

We still await the BBC's apology for even now repeating by implication this slur on all those who worked to save millions of Ethiopians from starvation in one of the most effective and incorrupt international relief operations ever mounted. Meanwhile, my reaction to the BBC's limited and inadequate apology so far is anything but "positive".



Haile Gebre Selassie retires after failing to finish New York Marathon

Haile Gebre Selassie retires after failing to finish New York Marathon


FROM THE ARTICLE:GebreGebremariam of Ethiopia seemed as surprised as anyone when he crossed the finish line of the 2010 New York City Marathonin first place...in his firstmarathon. "I can't believe it…read more


FROM THE ARTICLE:GebreGebremariam won Sunday’s race in his marathon debut at the age of 26. â€Å“Haile is special.Haile is king,” Gebremariam said. â€Å“So even Haile’s retiring, we have to learn so many things… read more




The Cuban swing

If there is ever a sharp turn of events in a country's internal policy, the recent Cuban government action taken to save the country from bankruptcy should stick out from the crowd. It is a typical example of a government over expansion proving to be a disaster. It is the first time when an acting communist system abruptly gave up its major principle of command economy managed by the doctrine of so called proletarian dictatorship. What happened in this case is the system reaching its final stage where it literally fails because the state nationalized every sector of business where the total working population depended on a government salary coupled with the ever crippling subsidies and benefits widely delivered equitably. The reason is evident; it is about giving away more than one takes and making the cycle not only monotonous but also damaging in nature. A state without an efficient taxing system will definitely have its budget compromised. There needs to be a vibrant middle class that can enhance growth as the back bone of the economy. 

The new development must create a growing curiosity in most of us tempting to question what this means to the globalization of the world economy. It seems Cuba has learned the hard way, mainly from the Chinese transformation, that it is possible to contain, manage and even create accelerated growth of privately owned businesses under a command economy with a communist leadership at the top. Apparently, emerging world  economies have come to understand this fact in a dramatic speed while it is still hard to predict the future prospect of this venture.

The USA has been criticized for being too harsh on Cuba citing the expansion of trade relations with China, a country that is no less communist in structure than Cuba. It may be that the impending soul search by Cuba may bring about the expected improvement in the dire relations of the two closely watched neighbors. This is a good time to utterly say Cuba has been the best laboratory to test and prove the unavoidable failure of a controlled system. However, this development will not sway the focus from the internal politics that is becoming ever controversial in the US, namely, the role of the government in running the country's business environment. It is widely debated the problems a big government can cause are bound to be damaging in terms of spending. At the same time, we don't hear much about what a large sized corporate world can do to its own people. As good as entrepreneurship sounds like a daunting solution to bring about a successful economic growth, the devil is in the details of doing it. A reasonably sized government can be a shelter not only for those who need protection but also to smoothly integrate the business world to function in a way the rule of law prevails. But who is to say what size is the best? As the world moves to the center, no one should be left behind.

Updated 10/28/10 from the Editor's desk

RSF: African journalists still seeking freedom


2010 World Press Freedom Index 

Five decades after independence, African journalists still seeking freedom

Horn still worst off, censorship hits Sudan and Rwanda, prison death mars Cameroon

With many African countries marking the 50th anniversary of their independence, 2010 should have been a year of celebration but the continent’s journalists were not invited to the party. The Horn of Africa continues to be the region with the least press freedom but there were disturbing reverses in the Great Lakes region and

East Africa. Eritrea (178th) is at the very bottom of the world ranking for the fourth year running. At least 30 journalists and four media contributors are held incommunicado in the most appalling conditions, without right to a trial and without any information emerging about their situation. Journalists employed by the state media – the only kind of media tolerated – have to choose between obeying the information ministry’s orders or trying to flee the country. The foreign media are not welcome.

In Somalia (161st), the media are not being spared by the civil war between the transitional government and Islamist militias, and journalists often fall victim to the violence. The two leading Islamist militias, Al-Shabaab and Hizb-Al-Islam, are gradually seizing control of independent radio stations and using them to broadcast their religious and political propaganda.

The temporary lifting of prior censorship on the print media in Sudan (172nd) was just a smokescreen. It has fallen 24 places and now has Africa’s second worst ranking, partly as a result of the closure of the opposition daily Rai-al-Shaab and the jailing of five members of its staff, but above all because of the return of state surveillance of the print media, which makes it impossible to cover key stories such as the future referendum on South Sudan’s independence.

Rwanda (169th), where President Paul Kagame was returned to power in a highly questionable election, has fallen 12 places and now has Africa’s third worst ranking. The six-month suspension of leading independent publications, the climate of terror surrounding the presidential election and Umuvugizi deputy editor Jean-Léonard Rugambage’s murder in Kigali were the reasons for this fall. Journalists are fleeing the country because of the repression, in an exodus almost on the scale of Somalia’s. Surveillance of the press and a decline in the climate for journalists during the May elections account for Ethiopia’s continued bad ranking (139th).

Violence against journalists, arbitrary police arrests and intelligence agency abuses explain why Nigeria (145th) and the Democratic Republic of Congo (148th) are still in the bottom third. Uganda (96th) fell a relatively modest 10 places but the murders of two journalists in separate incidents in September and the recent increase in physical attacks and arrests of journalists are fuelling serious concerns about the climate for the media in the run-up to next year’s elections.

Cameroon (129th) fell 20 places as a result of newspaper editor Bibi Ngota’s death in prison and the continuing detention of two other editors. Côte d'Ivoire (118th) also fell a few places due to the harassment of newspapers such as L'Expression and Le Nouveau Courrier d'Abidjan and the temporary ban on local retransmission of French TV station France 24 in February.

Gambia (125th) and Niger (104th) were neck and neck last year at a 137th and 139th thanks to the predatory behaviour of their respective presidents, Yahya Jammeh and Mamadou Tandja. But press freedom in Niger has improved markedly since Tandja’s overthrow in February, accounting for its 35-place jump, although the situation is still very uncertain.

Uncertainty is also the dominant feature of another country in transition, Guinea (113th). It fell 13 places because of a massacre on 28 September 2009 but a new government that could show more respect for press freedom is still seen as a possibility.

After two difficult years, Kenya (70th) has recovered a respectable position.

Chad (112th) is also leaving behind the fraught period in 2008 when a state of emergency was imposed, but the level of freedom allowed the press is still insufficient.

Angola (104th) has an acceptable ranking although the situation has been soured by a Radio Despertar journalist’s still unsolved murder in September 2010.

After sharp falls in 2009, Gabon (107th) and Madagascar (116th) have recovered some of the lost ground thanks to a decline in tension. But Madagascar’s transitional authorities need to show more respect for the press by ceasing to jail journalists (such as those of Radio Fahazavana) and ceasing to close down news media.

Zimbabwe (123rd) has again made some slow progress, as it did last year. The return of independent dailies is a step forward for public access to information but the situation is still very fragile.

Two more African countries have entered the ranks of the world’s top 50 nations in terms of respect for press freedom. They are Tanzania (41st), although certain stories such as albinism continue to be off-limits for the press, and Burkina Faso (49th), even if justice still has not been rendered in the case of Norbert Zongo, a journalist who was murdered 12 years ago. The relative positions of the African countries in the top 50 have also changed. They are now led by Namibia (21st), which has recovered its former pre-eminent position, while Cape Verde (26th) has caught up with Ghana (26th) and Mali (26th). South Africa (38th) has fallen five places, in part because of attacks on journalists during the Football World Cup but above all because of the behaviour of senior members of the ruling African National Congress towards the press. ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema, for example, expelled BBC correspondent Jonah Fisher from a news conference on 8 April, calling him a “bastard” and “bloody agent.” And the government plans to pass two bills that would endanger press freedom, one creating a media tribunal and the other restricting the disclosure of information.

-- In the rest of the world : Europe falls from its pedestal, no respite in the dictatorships “Our latest world press freedom index contains welcome surprises, highlights sombre realities and confirms certain trends,” Reporters Without Borders secretary-general Jean-François Julliard said as his organisation issued its ninth annual index today. “More than ever before, we see that economic development, institutional reform and respect for fundamental rights do not necessarily go hand in hand. The defence of media freedom continues to be a battle, a battle of vigilance in the democracies of old Europe and a battle against oppression and injustice in the totalitarian regimes still scattered across the globe. “We must salute the engines of press freedom, with Finland, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland at their head. We must also pay homage to the human rights activists, journalists and bloggers throughout the world who bravely defend the right to speak out. Their fate is our constant concern. We reiterate our call for the release of Liu Xiaobo, the symbol of the pressure for free speech building up in China, which censorship for the time being is still managing to contain. And we warn the Chinese authorities against taking a road from which there is no way out. “It is disturbing to see several European Union member countries continuing to fall in the index. If it does not pull itself together, the European Union risks losing its position as world leader in respect for human rights. And if that were to happen, how could it be convincing when it asked authoritarian regimes to make improvements? There is an urgent need for the European countries to recover their exemplary status. “We are also worried by the harsher line being taken by governments at the other end of the index. Rwanda, Yemen and Syria have joined Burma and North Korea in the group of the world’s most repressive countries towards journalists. This does not bode well for 2011. Unfortunately, the trend in the most authoritarian countries is not one of improvement.” European Union loses its leadership status Reporters Without Borders has repeatedly expressed its concern about the deteriorating press freedom situation in the European Union and the 2010 index confirms this trend. Thirteen of the EU’s 27 members are in the top 20 but some of the other 14 are very low in the ranking. Italy is 49th, Romania is 52nd and Greece and Bulgaria are tied at 70th. The European Union is not a homogenous whole as regards media freedom. On the contrary, the gap between good and bad performers continues to widen. There has been no progress in several countries where Reporters Without Borders pointed out problems. They include, above all, France and Italy, where events of the past year – violation of the protection of journalists’ sources, the continuing concentration of media ownership, displays of contempt and impatience on the part of government officials towards journalists and their work, and judicial summonses – have confirmed their inability to reverse this trend. Northern Europe still at the top Several countries share first place in the index again. This year it is Finland, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland. They have all previously held this honour since the index was created in 2002. Norway and Iceland have always been among the countries sharing first position except in 2006 (Norway) and 2009 (Iceland). These six countries set an example in the way they respect journalists and news media and protect them from judicial abuse. They even continue to progress. Iceland, for example, is considering an exemplary bill, the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI), that would provide a unique level of protection for the media. Sweden distinguishes itself by its Press Freedom Act, which has helped to create a particularly favourable climate for the work of journalists, by the strength of its institutions and by its respect for all those sectors of society including the media whose role in a democracy is to question and challenge those in positions of power. Ten countries where it is not good to be a journalist In recent years, Reporters Without Borders drew particular attention to the three countries that were always in the last three positions – Eritrea, North Korea and Turkmenistan. This year, a bigger group of ten countries – marked by persecution of the media and a complete lack of news and information – are clumped together at the bottom. The press freedom situation keeps on deteriorating in these countries and it is getting harder to say which is worse than the other. The difference between the scores of the “best” and worst of the last 10 countries was only 24.5 points this year. It was 37.5 points in 2009 and 43.25 points in 2007. It is worth noting that, for the first time since the start of the index in 2002, Cuba is not one of the 10 last countries. This is due above all to the release of 14 journalists and 22 activists in the course of the past summer. But the situation on the ground has not changed significantly. Political dissidents and independent journalists still have to deal with censorship and repression on a daily basis. Freedom is not allowed any space in Burma, where a parliamentary election is due to be held next month, and the rare attempts to provide news or information are met with imprisonment and forced labour. Finally, in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Mexico, countries either openly at war or in a civil war or some other kind of internal conflict, we see a situation of permanent chaos and a culture of violence and impunity taking root in which the press has become a favourite target. These are among the most dangerous countries in the world, and the belligerents there pick directly on reporters such as French TV journalists Stéphane Taponier and Hervé Ghesquière, who have been held hostage in Afghanistan for the past 300 days. Economic growth does not mean press freedom The BRICs – Brazil, Russia, India and China – may all be at a roughly similar stage of economic development but the 2010 index highlights major differences in the press freedom situation in these countries. Thanks to favourable legislative changes, Brazil (58th) has risen 12 places in the past year, while India has fallen 17 places to 122nd. Russia, which had a particularly deadly preceding year, is still poorly placed at 140th. Despite an astonishingly vibrant and active blogosphere, China still censors and jails dissidents and continues to languish in 171st place. These four countries now shoulder the responsibilities of the emerging powers and must fulfil their obligations as regards fundamental rights. Heavy falls The Philippines, Ukraine, Greece and Kyrgyzstan all fell sharply in this year’s index. In the Philippines this was due to the massacre of around 30 journalists by a local baron, in Ukraine to the slow and steady deterioration in press freedom since Viktor Yanukovych’s election as president in February, in Greece to political unrest and physical attacks on several journalists, and in Kyrgyzstan to the ethnic hatred campaign that accompanied the political turmoil. The changes are unfortunately often deceptive. Some countries have risen sharply in the index this year but in fact all they have done is recover their traditional position after a particularly difficult if not disastrous 2009. This is the case with Gabon, which rose 22 places, South Korea (+27) and Guinea-Bissau (+25).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 






RSF: African journalists still seeking freedom

Ethiopian Dam Controversy




So far detailed news and research reports have come from third parties such as the BBC and those closely associated with making studies on the environmental aspects of the Gibe III Dam project. The most recent on YouTube video is titled "Ethiopian Damns Controversy". I hope it is not meant to pass any derogatory message other than a mere spelling error. Be that it may, the Ethiopian side, including the interviewees from the Salini company presented their views in a somewhat unprofessional manner if they meant to defend their planned project. To refer to a few, the Salini Construction Company spokesperson concluded by saying the river basin dwellers will simply die when the project is done, while the other rather more dignitary representative of the government mentioned about the fact that even insects being in harms way when one walks. The prime minster stated the building  of the Gibe Dam(s) will protect the lower river basin residents from the life threatening impacts of the perennial flood. I don't know how much of a detailed environmental study was made from the Government's side but understandably, based on the history of donors for such projects, the possible end of such a study is usually the killing of the project. Ethiopia has major internal pressures not to abide by that assessment due to not only the fact that this would delay the construction by a matter of years, but also it may cost the ruling party its handle on power.

The controversy is apparent but in my inadequate knowledge to say the least, the Ethiopian government could have handled this matter in a more diplomatic manner. It has secured the displacement of 10s of thousands of the population before starting the Gibe I and II(according to the study report). The government could have made its own assessment about what it takes to prevent the lower river basin residents who make their livings by making use of the spoils of the seasonal  flood. Guaranteeing a way to protect the population, I believe could have paved the way to building the dams without major hurdles. If the planing is based on the feasibility of doing it, this could also be shared with the concerned to produce a common ground. If the government is reading the signs that the study group is geared to stop the over ambitious project due to the hasty attitude of the government in terms of time, there is still room for in depth discussions on how to tackle the issue, unless of course, the study group is politicizing the matter, which I think most probably is the case. Things have changed since the times of Gibe I and II era. The clear cut but controversial stands of the government specially from the stand points of the external viewers has changed the otherwise warm relations between the current government and the west. As such, the regime is inclined to look to the east, specially China. This may have triggered the disagreement over such a grandiose project that is believed to outlive any government in terms of its contribution to the betterment of the poverty stricken population. I give credit to the tireless effort made by the government to make this a reality. I am also impressed with the donor environmental study group by the level of knowledge they demonstrated about the Omo river and its impacts to the population that depends on it. My suggestion to both sides is to understand the urgency that they need to work closely for the ambitious progress to be materialized.


From the Editor's desk.

Ethiopia: Official says climate change causing migrations


Ache warned, at the Seventh African Development Forum, that the situation would become critical in coming years as the impact of global warming worsens.

'We want people to understand that this impact (migration and displacement) was taking place now and that our efforts to mitigate climate change should be for to day and not for tomorrow' he said.

According to him, more and more climate change-related disasters, such as flooding and drought, were striking Africa, throwing increasing numbers of people on the move in search of new livelihoods.

He noted that the migration was causing many problems, including conflicts over scarce resources and security risks.

Ache cited the Mbororo tribe in the Congo basin, which had become nomadic because of climate change-related disasters and migrated widely within the region, even across borders.

'In some countries, they (Mbororo people) are accepted but in others, they are not because of security and conflict issues,' he said.

'Climate change is already undermining the livelihoods and security of many people, exacerbating income differentials and deepening inequalities. Over the last two decades, the number of recorded natural disasters has doubled from some 200 to over 400 per year. Nine out of every ten natural disasters today are climate-related,' he said.

He warned that as temperatures rose further and land became increasingly less pr oductive, urbanization in Africa will also accelerate, generating additional competition for scarce resources and public services in cities.

Other experts at the forum also warned that incidences of vector-borne diseases will increase as a result of climate change, as will the cost of food and energy.

In the end, this will cause increased social and political conflicts, which on the surface will be difficult to trace to climate change, they said.

Addis Ababa - Pana 16/10/2010


Blog Archive