Dr. Yacob Hailemariam, vice-chairperson, UDJ

Dr. Yacob Hailemariam was elected last week vice-chairperson and head of foreign affairs of the Unity for Democracy and Justice (UDJ) party. The party, which consists of many members of the leadership from the Coalition for Unity and Democracy Party (CUDP) or Kinijit as it was formerly known, held its first congress last week and elected its chairperson and four vice-chairpersons.
 

Dr. Yacob spoke to Bruck Shewareged on the tasks and the challenges facing them.  Excerpts:

Now that you have held your first congress and elected the party's leaders, what would be your immediate task?

I would like first to mention that the founding conference was successful and very transparent. In fact, we believe that, perhaps, that was the most democratic election ever held in this country. It was transparent. People were free to express their ideas and opinions and to define their positions etc. Elections were held fairly and judiciously.

What we are out to accomplish in the short run is really to re-establish our party in different zones, and in different regions. The first objective will be to open up offices, recruit members, and regroup people who have scattered after the Kinijit (CUD) leaders were imprisoned. Literally the party was banned. People went different ways. So we have to regroup those former members, recruit new ones and open offices in different regions, towns, rural areas.

Secondly, on the international front, the same thing has happened. As you know, there has been a division within the former Kinijit. The majority of supporters are still with us. We have also to regroup them, and to reconstitute everything that had already existed during the Kinijit days.
They are more or less in place. But they need to be firmed up. That's having to do with Ethiopians in the diaspora.

We have also cultivated a lot of friendship with foreign parties and foreign NGOs in Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia and South Africa. And that friendship has to be renewed. Basically this, in short, what we plan to do.

Your party claims to be heir to the former Kinijit (CUD). The other group are led by Eng. Hailu Shawel (former Kinijit leader) also claims to be the heir apparent to Kinijit. On what basis can you claim to be the rightful descendant of the former Kinijit/CUD party?

We claim that we are the legitimate heirs of the former CUD on several potent arguments. Firstly, legally, we are the constituent party. We are the ones who descended from the old party. There were others that went astray. We believe that Eng. Hailu suspended four of the top leadership, which, we believe, was illegal. And it was in voliation of party rules.

So we don't believe that the suspension was legal. We believe that the leadership has remained intact from the days of CUD. The first vice president assumed the positions of president on the basis of the party rules.

Other members of the leadership are also intact. The majority of the Supreme Council are still with the Unity party. And the majority of the executive members of the former CUD party are still with us, the Unity party.

Therefore, we believe that we are the legitmate heir morally, at least. We have kept the objectives and the emblem of the CUD party intact. We have remained faithful to the objectives, and our struggle, as has always been, remains peaceful. We have accepted the constitution, as we had done in the past.

Basically, except for the legal structure, it is a continuation of the CUD party.

Right after the CUD leadership was released from prison, there was a schism amongst the leadership, resulting in the formation of basically two parties, to the disappointment of your supporters. What went really wrong after prison? Why weren't you able to compromise?

It is, of course, very disappointing. In fact, it is heartbreaking that the former CUD fell apart after our release from prison, that we could not really keep it intact as it used to be.

Well, it didn't really fall apart, of course. But it was mortally weakened because of the differences within the leadership. The rank and file have always been loyal. It has always been intact. The popular support, in fact, to this day is still intact. Many people come and tell us in private that they are still with us, despite the disappointment that they faced.

The problem, basically, was a question of personal clash between some members of the leadership. That was really the source of the problem. It has nothing to do with policy or ideology. It was conflict amongst a couple of people in the top leadership, of which we're ashamed. We're heartbroken like our supporters.

There were attempts at reconciliation, but these had failed.

Several people, including myself, tried very, very hard to close this schism. But we had not been successful and we are terribly sorry that we let our people down.

We hoped and promised to revive the spirit of CUDP. And we remain faithful to the commitments we made to our people, for democracy, respect of human rights, justice etc. We will try to be worthy of the trust and of the love that we had won from the Ethiopian people.

One of your former colleague, Dr. Berhanu Nega, has been repeatedly making inflammatory statements, including resolving to violent means of struggle. Won't that cast a negative image upon you, i.e., Dr. Berhanu being closely associated with most of you in the party leadership?

It is true that Berhanu played a very significant role in the early days of the CUDP. And he is very much associated with CUDP. But on many occasions, he has declared unequivocally that he has no contact with us, that he doesn't subscribe to the means of struggle that we've embraced, i.e., peaceful struggle.

By the way, people misunderstand us when we talk of a peaceful struggle. We don't mean that we are pacifists. We'll be actively engaged in peaceful struggle, observing the law. When protests are warranted, we will protest. When demonstrations are warranted, we'll go on demonstrations. When a call on the people would warrant it, we'll call on the people to take action. But they will always be peaceful.

There is a very basic difference between Berhanu and us. The venue he chose for bringing democracy and justice to Ethiopia is not something we subscribe to. As a human being, as an individual, he has the right to espouse his own ideology, his own philosophy. But we don't agree with it.

Berhanu has made it very clear that he had separated himself from the Unity party and its philosophy. So there is really no reason why we would be associated with Dr. Berhanu.

How is the process of registration going on? Is it really going well with the electoral board?

So far, we really had no substantial obstacle. Of course, we have had one, which is not really mortal. We could not hold the party's congress at the Imperial Hotel, a very appropriate venue.

So we had to hold it in our office. It went very well. There were, of course, minor problems. We had invited diplomats and dignitaries but our office being Spartan as it is, we could not bring diplomats to that little office. We had to adjust some of the programmes. That was a problem for our party. Otherwise, there had been no serious difficulties.  

The law requires us to have 1,500 signatures that we should file with the electoral board. We have done that. Actually, we have gathered more than 7,000 signatures from at least seven regions. The general assembly has been held. Elections have been held. Now, we're going to go to the electoral board and present these documents.

We have gone strictly by the law. There is really no imaginable reason, no reason whatsoever, that the board would reject our application.

But isn't the fact that you were barred from holding the congress at a public place indicative of what might come to?

I really would not like to speculate at this moment. I want to think on the positive side. And I believe and trust that the electoral board will exercise its responsibility that was entrusted to it by the Ethiopian people independently. We met the board several times, and they've assured us that they are independent, that they will execute their constitutional duty independently and subject to their conscious only. We hope they will do that. This is going to be a test for the electoral board.

We've been very, very legal in our approach. As you know, there are several lawyers within the Unity party. We've been very meticulously legal  and followed all the legal prescriptions. So there is no reason imaginable, that the board will reject our application except for political reasons. It's going to be a test for them.

Can you tell us more about the party congress and the election? There is also the question of the small number of young people being included in the leadership?

We believe that the congress was very successful. There were representatives from remote parts of Ethiopia, including Gamo, Afar, many party of the South, the Amhara region, Tigray etc. Basically the majority of the Ethiopian regions were represented in the congress.

There was a good number of representation in the congress of women and young people. The congress was very transparent and free.  People could express their views, whatever they felt even if it was against the executive. As I said earlier, this was perhaps the most democratic congress ever held in this country.

As for the question of youth, they are represented in the different structures of the party. We have the executive, the national council and the general assembly. There are a couple of young people in these bodies. There are a couple of young people within the executive. For instance, the chairperson is a brilliant young lady. We elected her on the basis of one of her qualifications being young and a woman in addition to her qualifications. Mind you, we do not compromise qualification because of gender and age. She is extremely qualified. She happens to be young and female which we embrace very, very enthusiastically. We're very happy about it.  

This is unprecedented in Ethiopian history. No Ethiopian party can ever point out that its chairperson has been a woman. Let alone chairperson, there hasn't been any woman very close to the top of the executive.

In addition, there are several young people within the national council. In the executive, there are older people like me. It is a matter of time that we will be handing over and younger people will take over.

Let's come to the structure of the party. Isn't having four vice- chairpersons too cumbersome, and too loose to manage?

The positions that we have assigned to vice-chairpersons are very important ones. One of these is having to do with organizational affairs headed by Eng. Gizachaw. It will have its work cut out in terms of establishing offices in different regions of the country, and in organizing the different aspect of the party itself. So, it is a very important office.

Then comes the foreign affairs headed by me. As you know, there are nearly two million Ethiopians abroad. They have a consuming interest in their country and believe that they are part and parcel of Ethiopia.

As you might have realized during our incarceration, they were very active. They were fighting day and night trying to secure our release. And they have also been involved in the affairs of their country as deeply as any of us here. So they are very important factors. We thought that we should assign very important position to work with them.

Then comes the public relations. As you know, it is a very important office. And especially now, since our party is the continuation of the old CUD party, we have to reinstate what is in the hearts of the Ethiopian people. That will require a lot of work on the part of the public relations office which will be headed by Dr. Hailu Araya.

The last one is finance and administration, which is headed by Ato Temesgen Zewdie, a parliamentarian. That also, we believe, is a very important function.

Therefore, we thought that they should have each the vice-presidential position. Each of them will have a deputy. So I don't think there is anything wrong with that. In fact, some other organizations are emulating our structure.

 Can you mention one?

It has already been emulated by one party, i.e Eng. Hailu's party.

You have around 40 parliamentarians in your party even before it has official recognition or a certificate from the electoral board. How are you going about to use their potential? I mean, is it advantageous for you to have more than forty MPs?

It is, indeed. Parliament members have several privileges which I, as a simple citizen, do not have. So they are going to be very useful in our work, going to different regions, meeting people, and so on. One thing is that they cannot be easily harassed as anybody would be because they have immunity from arrest and harassment.

Secondly, they are already known by their constituencies. They have been very useful and they will continue to be very useful. They have the parliamentary experience which is very important. They are conscious of the law of he country since they are the lawmakers. They have been very helpful in starting the Unity party. We believe that they will be a lot more useful when it comes to organizing the different regions and recruiting members.
Let's also not forget that we have to respect the people who elected them. They represent the people. Some of them have assumed executive roles. Others have been elected to the party's council. They assumed these positions in the party, firstly, because they are capable, and secondly, out of respect for the people who elected them.

You know, I lived in the United States for a long time, and I came to understand that a congressman is the most important person in any city or region.

I know that parliamentarians are not given that much respect in this country. They must be respected because they represent the people. Unfortunately, to us, the ministers are perhaps the most important people in our country. People who have government appointments are regarded as very, very important, and accorded honour and respect.   

But who should really get the first respect? It should have been the representatives of the people. But that's not the attitude.

In fact, your paper has written about the humiliation that parliamentarians have to go through when they are going to parliament. The ones who are primarily humiliated are not the parliamentarians but the people they represent. It is really a shame, a national shame, that they should be treated the way they are being treated.

Taking off their shoes? Being searched? It is not just humiliating them. It is humiliating the people whom they represent.

On Tuesday, you attended the press conference called by four parties and two individuals to announce the formation of a dialogue forum. Are we to assume from the fact that you attended the event, that once your party get the legal certificate, you are going to join the dialogue form?

Really, you should not be assuming that because this is something that the party leadership have to discuss. It has to be approved by the council if we are going to join the forum. I was there just as an observer, and no more. My presence there should not be interpreted as anything more than being there to witness what was happening. As you may remember, I haven't said a word, I didn't say anything. We are not members of the forum. If we were to be members, first we have to be legally registered, and then the council has to approve it. So it is not a foregone conclusion that we are going to be members.

The next national elections are just two years away. What will be your preparation? And in which constituencies are you going to run?

As it stands now, we're going to run for parliament, given all other things being equal. I mean, parties are there really for running for parliament or offices or to represent people. So we're going to do that. We have a lot of work cut out for us before are run. We have been in disarray. We have to reorganize. We are already doing that.  The successful congress was an example.

But the election is going to be a test case for Ethiopia. It is going to be a very important election, perhaps more important than the 2005 election. The 2010 elections may actually determine the very survival of this country. If that election is not free and fair, we cannot count on having a country actually as such.

Concluding from what I hear and I know, if there is no free and fair elections, it will be a terrible disaster for this country.

You're afraid of some kind of implosion?

That cannot be ruled out. Yes, there may be an implosion. It's going to be a test for the survival of the country as such. The authorities will have to think very seriously about this.

I'm not the only one who is saying this. I've heard the same thing from different quarters. Even international opinion is on the same line. I'm sure the leadership has heard this already. The forthcoming elections have to be free and fair. Otherwise, we might expect an implosion.

Do you really expect the 2010 elections will be any different from the 2005 ones? And do you think the people will be enthusiastic for elections again?

Sure, the lethargy that we have seen during the recent local and by-elections (April 2008) was as a result of the fact that parties did not participate in them.

The ruling party, EPRDF, run against itself. So there was really no reason for people to come out enthusiastically and vote. They had really no choice. There was only one choice, EPRDF. That was it.

The situation now is much tighter and much more closed than it was in 2005. If we consider the press law, the law governing civil societies, the law governing parties, they are very discouraging. They are very tight. They have closed the political space practically, if not completely. There may be a little bit breathing space.

I think it would behove the leadership that this cannot go on. What they had seen during the last election was the lethargy that people displayed because of frustration. What does frustration breed? Frustration breeds violence. People don't go on being frustrated forever. Sooner or later they react violently.

The fact that there has been nothing, that no sentiment was expressed during the last election, that there was no uprising, that there was no sign of violence should actually worry the EPRDF-led government more than people would express their sentiment.

There is a lesson that we can draw from Ethiopian history. The king imposed more tax on the people. The people took it with some grudge, although the king's closest officials were worried. Then the king imposed another set of tax measures on the people the very next day. There was overt resentment towards the king's move. And his officials were seriously worried. Then  again for the third day in a row, the king imposed another stiff tax on his subjects.

The next day, he asked his closest officials about the reaction of the people. This time around, the officials were relaxed and told him that there was no problem since the people said nothing, expressed no resentment whatever. Then the king told them that it is time to revoke all the additional taxes levied on the people in the past three days. He told them that when the people keep quiet like that, or if they don't react at all, then it means a serious problem ahead of them.

The fact that people said nothing, stayed home and did not vote is not an encouraging sign. Actually, it is a very bad sign. It is a sign of frustration. And frustration creates implosion.