BY BLAIN BISET,
Addis Ababa — Ethiopia’s Anti-Terrorism Proclamation is once again
stirring debate in this Horn of Africa nation as lawyer Temam Ababulga
challenges the 2009 law in the highly-publicised “Muslim terrorism”
case.
Ethiopia’s Federal High Court will deliver the judgment in the case,
where 29 Muslims were arrested in July on charges of terrorism, on
Thursday Dec. 6.
Ethiopia has had Muslim demonstrations since the beginning of the
year, as members of the religious community have protested against what
they say is government interference in their religious affairs. Around
one-third of the 84 million people in this predominantly Christian
nation are Muslim.
The dispute reached a head in July when 29 leaders of the Muslim
community were arrested during a meeting, and charged under the
Anti-Terrorism Proclamation. Under the decree, peaceful protest and
dissent can be considered terrorism, and critical reporting by the media
is seen as encouraging terrorism.
“We believe that the proclamation is not constitutional,” Temam told IPS.
Human Rights Watch has also repeatedly criticised Ethiopia’s
anti-terrorism decree. Leslie Lefkow, the rights watchdog’s Africa
specialist, told IPS that there are a number of human rights concerns in
the proclamation.
“The definition of ‘terrorist acts’ is so broad that it can be used
to prosecute a wide range of conduct far beyond what can reasonably be
considered terrorist activity, such as legitimate peaceful protest and
dissent, and protected speech,” she said.
In addition to rights organisations, the United Nations and foreign
governments have criticised the proclamation for its broad
interpretations of terrorism. Almost 200 people were imprisoned under
this proclamation in 2011 alone, mostly members of the opposition,
journalists and activists.
Amnesty International’s Claire Beston agreed that the proclamation
was unconstitutional. “The constitution guarantees the rights of freedom
of expression and freedom of association, including, explicitly, the
right to peacefully protest. As the Anti-Terrorism Proclamation places
restrictions on these rights, it does violate Ethiopia’s Constitution,”
she told IPS.
Under Article 25 of the proclamation, parliament has the power “to
proscribe and de-proscribe an organisation as a terrorist organisation.”
This is another violation of the constitution, according to Temam.
“By implementing this proclamation, parliament has given up on the separation of power,” he said.
Other constitutional provisions that have allegedly been violated
fall under the article concerning the collection of evidence. Article
23.1 states that intelligence reports with information obtained by the
police or secret services with evidence against terrorist suspects may
be used in court “even if the report does not disclose the source or the
method in which it was gathered.”
“The court has no choice but to release my clients,” said Teman,
noting that article 13 of Ethiopia’s constitution specifically rules out
charges that are not constitutional.
Ethiopia’s late Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, who died in August after
ruling the country for 21 years, defended the proclamation in February.
He told parliament that the proclamation was copied word for word from
other countries: “We took from America, England and the European model
anti-terrorism laws. From these we have chosen the better ones…the
proclamation in every respect is flawless. It is better than the best
anti-terrorism laws.”
There are several other ongoing anti-terrorism cases. These include
the cases of award-winning journalist Eskinder Nega and opposition
leader Andualem Arage, who are currently appealing their sentences.
They were arrested in 2011 for alleged acts of terrorism and for
trying to start an Arab Spring against the Ethiopian government. They
were also accused of being active participants in terrorist groups such
as the outlawed group Ginbot 7. Eskinder was sentenced to 18 years
without parole and Andualem to life without parole.
A verdict is also expected soon in the so-called “Al-Qaeda trial”
where 11 people are being prosecuted for alleged ties with the
international terrorist organisation and its Somalia affiliate
Al-Shabaab.
Meanwhile, Beston does not expect the court to declare the
Anti-Terrorism Proclamation unconstitutional. “It is highly likely that
the proclamation will continue to be used to silence government
opponents and critics,” she said.
Lefkof said that continued use of the anti-terrorism proclamation would have a negative impact on Ethiopian society.
“This is part of a larger crackdown on independent voices in
Ethiopia, and it is a profoundly worrying trend. Rule based on
oppressing fundamental human rights is a precarious and short-term
strategy that will only harm Ethiopia and its people over the long
term,” she said.
Temam said he did not believe that Ethiopia needed the Anti-Terrorism
Proclamation to prosecute people allegedly involved in terrorist
activities.
“The current laws should be sufficient to charge terrorists and
therefore I believe we will succeed in proving that this anti-terrorism
proclamation is unconstitutional,” he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment