Cablegate: Ethiopia: Parliamentary Reforms Demonstrate a Step

VZCZCXRO9904
PP RUEHROV
DE RUEHDS #2032/01 2060607
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 250607Z JUL 06
FM AMEMBASSY ADDIS ABABA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 1735
INFO RUCNIAD/IGAD COLLECTIVE
RHMFISS/CJTF HOA
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC
RUEKDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC
RHMFIUU/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 ADDIS ABABA 002032

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR AF/E
LONDON, PARIS, ROME FOR AFRICA WATCHER

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PGOV ET KDEM
SUBJECT: ETHIOPIA: PARLIAMENTARY REFORMS DEMONSTRATE A STEP
IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION

REF: ADDIS ABABA 01743

1. (SBU) SUMMARY. In early 2006, the Ethiopian government,
in conjunction with donors, commissioned international
experts from four parliamentary democracies (United Kingdom,
Canada, Germany, and India) to develop a set of parliamentary
procedure reform recommendations for the Ethiopian House of
People,s Representatives. The resulting proposals focused
largely on creating opportunity for participation by minority
parties and dispersing parliamentary procedural powers among
parties. Though the ruling EPRDF called for roundtable
discussions with opposition political parties on the
implementation of the proposals, the two largest opposition
parties refused to join forces at the negotiation table. The
resulting package of reforms met international experts'
recommendations, but not the ambitious opposition parties'
objectives. The reforms represent a tangible example of the
GoE addressing major complaints of the opposition that
contributed to the November violence. END SUMMARY.

--------------------------------------------- ---
EXPERTS DEVELOP 20 POINT LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS
--------------------------------------------- ---

2. (U) During the first quarter of 2006, former
parliamentarians and parliamentary clerks from the United
Kingdom, Canada, Germany, and India were commissioned to
analyze the Ethiopian House of People,s Representatives
(HPR) rules of procedure. The project was undertaken because
of severe opposition criticism that the rules had been
changed by the ruling party during the session of parliament
preceding the election of the opposition. The second reason
was the Prime Minister's commitment to the USG and the Troika
to continue the EPRDF dialogue with the opposition to address
the agenda items raised by the opposition: parliamentary
rules; rule of law; and the media. The goal of the analysis
was to assess the rules of procedure and code of conduct and
to recommend improvements to align them with international
democratic standards. In order to develop their
recommendations, they worked closely with the Speaker and
Secretariat of the HPR to understand the most recent

SIPDIS
procedural rules and the new code of conduct implemented
following the May 2005 parliamentary elections. Following
the completion of the study, these experts issued a 120-page
document that outlined best practices in each of their
respective parliaments, as well as a set of 20
recommendations for the GoE to consider that would bring the
HPR closer to internationally accepted parliamentary
procedures.

3. (U) The set of 20 recommendations addressed a number of
concerns regarding involvement of opposition political
parties in the legislative process. Currently, opposition
political parties in the HPR hold 153 of a total of 547
seats, a significant increase from before the May 2005
elections, when the opposition held only 12 seats.
Nevertheless, there is widespread recognition that the
opposition has largely been procedurally marginalized in
parliamentary agenda setting, despite its increased
representation. The recommendations of the experts addressed
this and other issues with the following suggestions:

a. Instead of the current 'Coordinating Committee,' which has
no opposition representation, a joint working group which
handles procedures and internal affairs should be set up, and
should include representatives from all parties.

b. Form a proportionally-represented elders, committee to
help prepare agendas, as well as oversee the administration
and budget of the parliament.

c. Make a provision for additional Assistant Deputy
Speakers--one or more of whom does not come from the ruling
party--in addition to consider creating another Deputy
Speaker position for the opposition.

d. Allow one of the important committee chair positions to be
occupied by an opposition member. Committee chair and deputy
chair positions should be distributed among parties,
reflecting parties' relative representation. Committees
should also be expanded to involve more parliamentarians.

e. Develop procedures to allow minority parties to

ADDIS ABAB 00002032 002 OF 004

participate in committees, so that committees function in a
non-partisan manner.

f. Allow debate on opposition-proposed items at least one
afternoon every two weeks.

g. Allow individual members to table motions or amendments to
bills.

h. Allow all parties to debate the GoE,s plans for the
upcoming year, following the PM,s statement. The opposition
should be allowed to propose amendments and the discussion
should end in a vote.

i. Allow a weekly question and answer session in which
parliamentarians can address all GoE ministers.

j. Allow significant time to discuss the budget in plenary
session, and allow budget expenditures to be considered in
all standing committees.

k. Clarify requirements for parliamentarians to make public
declaration of relevant financial interests

--------------------------------------------- ----
GOVERNMENT CALLS FOR NEGOTIATIONS WITH OPPOSITION
--------------------------------------------- ----

4. (SBU) Following the completion of this study and review by
the GoE, the ruling Ethiopian People,s Revolutionary
Democratic Front (EPRDF) met with opposition parties to
discuss the experts, suggestions, prior to the bill's
submission to parliament. The GoE intended that this meeting
include all the major opposition parties collectively,
including the Coalition for Unity and Democracy Party (CUDP),
the Unified Ethiopian Democratic Force (UEDF) and the Oromo
Federalist Democratic Movement (OFDM). However, when
approached, the CUDP agreed, whereas a coalition of the UEDF
and OFDM refused. Dr. Beyene Petros, the leader of the UEDF
party, told Charge that he felt they would &get a better
deal8 from the EPRDF if UEDF did not negotiate alongside the
CUDP. When asked to elaborate further, Beyene was vague, but
hinted that the CUDP would not be strong enough to pressure
the EPRDF. In a meeting with opposition leaders on June 24,
A/S Frazer and Charge urged the opposition parties to work
together and focus on those fundamental issues included in
the expert recommendations (reftel). Despite these
suggestions, the opposition parties chose to negotiate
separately with the EPRDF, rather than together. The CUDP,
together with the EPRDF and its allied parties, held talks
from June 19-21, and the UEDF and OFDM followed on June 22,
23 and 26.

5. (SBU) Following each party's round of talks, the two
negotiating groups reported differing degrees of satisfaction
on progress. The CUDP concluded their discussions with a
formal agreement and a joint press conference with the EPRDF
on points on which they agreed. In a later meeting with
Poloff, CUDP party leader Temesgen Zewdie stated that, &it
would be wrong to say we got everything we wanted, but we
made some gains.8 This contrasts with the UEDF/OFDM round
of talks, which finished without an agreement. However, not
only were the UEDF/OFDM more inflexible in pushing for the
key issues proposed by the experts, but they also chose to
use the talks as a forum for proposing 92 separate points of
their own, beyond those recommendations of the international
experts. In the end, the UEDF/OFDM insisted on four key
issues which were not met: 1) that the quorum to advance an
agenda be reduced to 25 percent of the HPR (the percentage of
seats occupied by the opposition); 2) that restrictions on
their ability to visit their constituents be lifted (reftel);
3) that the power of the Speaker of the House be reduced; and
4) that the opposition have more input on HPR budget and
financial matters. Despite the disagreement, local media
reported that the UEDF/OFDM and EPRDF had reached consensus,
which Beyene claimed was EPRDF "propaganda" intended to
discredit the UEDF/OFDM before their constituents. Indeed
when the reform bill was presented to parliament for
ratification on July 5, the result was 264 votes 'for,' five
'opposed,' and 79 abstentions. From the opposition parties,
most of the CUDP (including the leadership) voted in favor of
the bill, while the UEDF and OFDM abstained.

ADDIS ABAB 00002032 003 OF 004

-------------------------------
THE RESULT: A GOOD FIRST STEP,
-------------------------------

6. (U) Following the approval of the parliamentary reform and
code of conduct changes, Poloff met with Secretary of the
Parliament Tesfaye Abera to confirm which international
expert recommendations had been implemented. In reference to
the international experts, list of recommendations above:

a. Though the 'Coordinating Committee' was kept, an
additional Consultative Committee was created that will
oversee the agenda setting. Though the total number of
parliamentarians in the committee was not outlined, the bill
did specify that the opposition should participate in
proportion to their representation in parliament.

b. The administration and budget of the parliament will be
handled by the Consultative Committee.

c. Nothing was specified regarding the creation of Assistant
Deputy Speaker positions, which is inconsistent with the
constitution.

d. A new 'Accounts Committee' was created, which will be
chaired by an opposition party, with the mandate to oversee
GoE expenditures. Additionally, the number of members in all
committees was increased from 12 to 20. Nothing was
specified in the bill about opposition members occupying
chair or deputy chair positions in existing committees.

e. Despite the increase in committee members, nothing was
specified in the bill regarding minority parties'
participation.

f. The opposition will have one hour per month to forward
topics for discussion in parliament, rather than the proposed
one afternoon every two weeks.

g. The requirement for the forwarding of an agenda to the
house floor has been reduced from 51 percent of votes to 33
percent. Individuals can forward an agenda through the
Consultative Committee referred to in point 'a', but at least
one-third of this committee must agree on the topic.

h. Nothing was specified in the bill regarding debate on the
GoE,s plans for an upcoming year.

i. A weekly question and answer session in which
parliamentarians can address all GoE ministers was
established. Questions must be submitted in advance and in
writing to the Speaker. The opposition may question the
ministers.

j. Nothing was specified in the bill regarding discussion
time for budget in plenary.

k. Nothing was specified in the bill regarding
parliamentarians declaration in public document of relevant
financial interests

7. (SBU) Secretary Tesfaye stressed to Poloff that this is
only the &first step8 in parliamentary procedural reform;
many years were needed to reach the level of development in
the parliaments from which the experts had come. He felt
that this was a significant improvement and that, over time,
the parliament would reach all of the recommendations, but
that &it cannot be done all at once.8

--------------------------------------------- ----------
COMMENT: NEGOTIATION A GOOD SIGN, BUT GOE COULD DO MORE
--------------------------------------------- ----------

8. (SBU) The four parliaments that were reviewed all have
different features. The Ethiopian HPR now meets all
standards that are reflected in the four parliaments and all
major recommendations of the experts. The GoE reached out to
opposition parties in order to hammer out differences before
a proposal reached the house floor. Some in the opposition
grumbled that these negotiations, which were widely
publicized in the local press, were simply an image ploy by
the EPRDF. However, with three-quarters of the seats in
parliament, the EPRDF and affiliated parties were not

ADDIS ABAB 00002032 004 OF 004

required to negotiate in order to pass a bill of their
choice. It was less encouraging that, despite Post's
repeated urging that opposition parties take advantage of
this negotiation opportunity and work together to present a
unified and cohesive front, the UEDF and OFDM chose to not
coordinate with the CUDP. Furthermore, the UEDF and the OFDM
chose to pursue an all or nothing, strategy towards the
negotiations, rather than recognizing, as the CUDP did, that
it is the first, but certainly not the last, time that the
procedures will be discussed by parliamentary groups.
Regarding the reforms that were passed, the GoE might have
gone further, particularly on those points that sought to
bolster minority party inclusion. The ruling EPRDF did
provide more space for opposition parties to operate, thereby
easing some of the current political tensions. However, as
noted, more could have been accomplished and might have been
had the opposition been more skillful and the EPRDF more
flexible.
HUDDLESTON

© Scoop Media