The conflicting reports made by the members of the Independent Inquiry Board in regards to the violence report is yet another indication of a nation divided. The inquiry commission was set up to issue a neutral report on what had actually transpired during the post election violence that had resulted in loss of lives as well as damage made to property. The conflicting reports made public by two of the ten- member- Inquiry Commission weeks before did lay the blame on the government stating that excessive force was used and had hinted at arbitrary killings and strangulation made by security forces. The other members of the commission that issued their report to parliament had indicated that ‘though weaknesses and mistakes on the government side were observed, it believed that the rioting was because the process of democratizations has not been instilled in the people’s mind’.
One wonders here why there is a 180 degree difference in regards to who was responsible for the carnage [the figures in both reports are the same]? This conjures up questions in regards to whether one can find an independent inquiry commission when politics is as polarized in Ethiopia. Though one cannot really tell which side’s report was grounded under neutrality, all can agree that there were problems in regards to the handling of the affair by security forces in at least in certain cases.
It also begs the question whether we can start the healing process. We have all seen the roller coaster route the country went through during the election season it started with a promise of a new chapter in Ethiopian politics where bullets would be replaced with ballots but ended with disappointments after disappointments. Do we have anything to salvage from the experience? Can we bring tolerance and compromise back to the Ethiopian political scene? These questions are anybody’s guess. But one thing is certain the government needs to start building goodwill; so far it has been dubbed an expressionist government by human rights activists, a territorial expansionist in Somalia and other labels. How much damage can a government could bear on its image?
The government should start afresh in its image building withoout antagonizing donors, partners, citizens and political adversaries as it cannot go on with impunity. Those responsible for the crimes need to be put to task; the loss of 193 lives is not an issue that should be taken lightly. Steps should be made to prevent future incidents after all the remaining eight member inquiry commission did state that ‘weaknesses’ and ‘mistakes’ were observed. A lesson should be taken granted here that establishment of the inquiry commission to find out what happened during the violence is commendable because the Ethiopian people need to know how the deaths and damage to properties happened, and who was responsible.
More precisely, the people and the rest of the world want to know whether there is any merit to the claim of the government that the opposition was responsible for the violence that had ensued - either directly or indirectly. This is where the official report by the commission has failed utterly. Members of the opposition, journalists and aid workers are facing charges, some of them emanating from the riots. Those that have heard or read both the official and unofficial versions of the report are baffled and one can easily get confused of what to think. There is one way to resolve the issue and that is allowing the public access to the verbatim testimony of the witnesses after 6,000 were interviewed and their testimonies can help shed more light on the affair than a summary. Inquiring minds would like to know whether the commission asked detailed questions, whether it asked follow-up questions or whether it alertly challenged inconsistencies between the testimonies of different witnesses. How was the inquiry done and what had transpired during the interviews are vital to clear all doubts.
Transparency after all does help in ending mistrusts and helps foster accountability in a democratic nation after all the commission did state that the rioting was because the process of democratizations has not been instilled in the people’s mind. There cannot be no better place to start but with transparency in work done by the inquiry commission.•

November 20, 2006