movement around or in and out of the region. Some people ‘inherit’ suspicion from their
parents or other family members. Expressions of dissenting opinions within the Oromo party
in the ruling coalition – the Oromo People’s Democratic Organization (OPDO) – have also
been responded to with the accusation that the dissenter supports the OLF. Family members
have also been arrested in lieu of somebody else wanted for actual or suspected dissenting
behaviour, a form of collective punishment illegal under international law.
be a pretext used to warn, control or punish signs of ‘political disobedience’ and people who
have influence over others and are not members of the ruling political party. But the constant
repetition of the allegation suggests the government continues to anticipate a level of
sympathy for the OLF amongst the Oromo population writ large. Further, the government
appears to also believe that the OLF is behind many signs of peaceful dissent in the region.
However, in numerous cases, the accusation of supporting the OLF and the resulting arrest
do not ever translate into a criminal charge. The majority of all people interviewed by
Amnesty International who had been arrested for their actual or suspected dissenting
behaviour or political opinion said that they were detained without being charged, tried or
going to court to review the legality of their detention, in some cases for months or years.
Frequently, therefore, the alleged support for the OLF remains unsubstantiated and
unproven. Often, it is merely an informal allegation made during the course of interrogation.
Further, questions asked of actual or suspected dissenters by interrogators in detention also
suggest that the exercise of certain legal rights – for example, participation in a peaceful
protest – is taken as evidence of OLF support. A number of people interviewed by Amnesty
International had been subjected to repeated arrest on the same allegation of being antigovernment
or of OLF support, without ever being charged.
Amnesty International interviewed around 150 Oromos who were targeted for actual or
suspected dissent. Of those who were arrested on these bases, the majority said they were
subjected to arbitrary detention without judicial review, charge or trial, for some or all of the
period of their detention, for periods ranging from several days to several years. In the
majority of those cases, the individual said they were arbitrarily detained for the entire
duration of their detention. In fewer cases, though still reported by a notable number of
interviewees, the detainee was held arbitrarily – without charge or being brought before a
court – during an initial period that again ranged from a number of weeks to a number of
years, before the detainee was eventually brought before a court.
A high proportion of people interviewed by Amnesty International were also held
incommunicado – denied access to legal representation and family members and contact
with the outside world – for some or all of their period of detention. In many of these cases,
the detention amounted to enforced disappearance, such as where lack of access to legal
counsel and family members and lack of information on the detainee’s fate or whereabouts
placed a detainee outside the protection of the law. Many people reported to Amnesty
International that, after their family members had been arrested, they had never heard from
them again. The family continued to be ignorant of their fate and did not know whether they
were alive or dead.
Arrests of actual or suspected dissenters in Oromia reported to Amnesty International were
made by local and federal police, the federal military and intelligence officers, often without
a warrant. Detainees were held in Kebele, Woreda and Zonal3 detention centres, police
stations, regional and federal prisons. However, a large proportion of former detainees
interviewed by Amnesty International were detained in unofficial places of detention, mostly
in military camps throughout the region. In some cases apparently considered more serious,
detainees were transferred to Maikelawi in Addis Ababa. Arbitrary detention without charge or
trial was reported in all of these places of detention.
Almost all people interviewed by Amnesty International who had been detained in military
camps or other unofficial places of detention said their detention was not subject to any form
of judicial review. All detainees in military camps in Oromia interviewed by Amnesty
International experienced some violations of the rights and protections of due process and a
high proportion of all interviewees who had been detained in a military camp reported torture,
including rape, and other ill-treatment.
Actual or suspected dissenters have been subjected to torture in federal and regional
detention centres and prisons, police stations, including Maikelawi, military camps and other
unofficial places of detention. The majority of former detainees interviewed by Amnesty
International, arrested based on their actual or imputed political opinion, reported that they
had been subjected to treatment amounting to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment, in most cases repeatedly, while in detention or had been subjected to treatment
that amounts to torture or ill-treatment in and around their homes. Frequently reported
methods of torture were beating, particularly with fists, rubber batons, wooden or metal sticks
or gun butts, kicking, tying in contorted stress positions often in conjunction with beating on
the soles of the feet, electric shocks, mock execution or death threats involving a gun,
beating with electric wire, burning, including with heated metal or molten plastic, chaining or
tying hands or ankles together for extended periods (up to several months), rape, including
gang rape, and extended solitary confinement. Former detainees repeatedly said that they
were coerced, in many cases under torture or the threat of torture, to provide a statement or
confession or incriminating evidence against others.
Accounts of former detainees interviewed by Amnesty International consistently demonstrate
that conditions in detention in regional and federal police stations, regional and federal
prisons, military camps and other unofficial places of detention, violate international law and
national and international standards. Cases of death in detention were reported to Amnesty
International by former fellow detainees or family members of detainees. These deaths were
reported to result from torture, poor detention conditions and lack of medical assistance.
Some of these cases may amount to extra-judicial executions, where the detainees died as a
result of torture or the intentional deprivation of food or medical assistance.
There is no transparency or oversight of this system of arbitrary detention, and no
independent investigation of allegations of torture and other violations in detention. No
independent human rights organizations that monitor and publically document violations
have access to detention centres in Ethiopia.
In numerous cases, former detainees interviewed by Amnesty International also said their
release from arbitrary detention was premised on their agreement to a set of arbitrary
conditions unlawfully imposed by their captors rather than by any judicial procedure, and
many of which entailed foregoing the exercise of other human rights, such as those to the
freedoms of expression, association and movement. Failure to uphold the conditions,
detainees were told, could lead to re-arrest or worse. Regularly cited conditions included: not
participating in demonstrations or other gatherings, political meetings or student activities;
not meeting with more than two or three individuals at one time; not having any contact with
certain people, including spouses or family members wanted by the authorities for alleged
dissenting behaviour; or not leaving the area where they lived without seeking permission
from local authorities. For a number of people interviewed by Amnesty International, it was
the difficulty of complying with these conditions and the restricting impact they had on their
lives, or fear of the consequences if they failed to comply, intentionally or unintentionally,
that caused them to flee the country.
The testimonies of people interviewed by Amnesty International, as well as information
received from a number of other sources and legal documents seen by the organization,
indicate a number of fair trial rights are regularly violated in cases of actual or suspected
Oromo dissenters that have gone to court, including the rights to a public hearing, to not be
compelled to incriminate oneself, to be tried without undue delay and the right to
presumption of innocence. Amnesty International has also documented cases in which the
lawful exercise of the right to freedom of expression, or other protected human rights, is cited
as evidence of illegal support for the OLF in trials.
Amnesty International also received dozens of reports of actual or suspected dissenters being
killed by security services, in the context of security services’ response to protests, during the
arrests of actual or suspected dissidents, and while in detention. Some of these killings may
amount to extra-judicial executions.
A multiplicity of both regional and federal actors are involved in committing human rights
violations against actual or suspected dissenters in Oromia, including civilian administrative
officials, local police, federal police, local militia, federal military and intelligence services,
with cooperation between the different entities, including between the regional and federal
levels.
Because of the many restrictions on human rights organizations and on the freedoms of
association and expression in Ethiopia, arrests and detentions are under-reported and almost
no sources exist to assist detainees and their families in accessing justice and pressing for
remedies and accountability for human rights violations.
The violations documented in this report take place in an environment of almost complete
impunity for the perpetrators. Interviewees regularly told Amnesty International that it was
either not possible or that there was no point in trying to complain, seek answers or seek
justice in cases of enforced disappearance, torture, possible extra-judicial execution or other
violations. Many feared repercussions for asking. Some were arrested when they did ask
about a relative’s fate or whereabouts.
As Ethiopia heads towards general elections in 2015, it is likely that the government’s efforts
to suppress dissent, including through the use of arbitrary arrest and detention and other
violations, will continue unabated and may even increase.
The Ethiopian government must take a number of urgent and substantial measures to ensure
no-one is arrested, detained, charged, tried, convicted or sentenced on account of the
peaceful exercise of their rights to the freedoms of expression, association and assembly,
including the right to peacefully assemble to protest, or based on their imputed political
opinion; to end unlawful practices of arbitrary detention without charge or trial,
incommunicado detention without access to the outside world, detention in unofficial
detention centres, and enforced disappearance; and to address the prevalence of torture and
other ill-treatment in Ethiopia’s detention centres. All allegations of torture, incidents
involving allegations of the unnecessary or excessive use of force by security services against
peaceful protestors, and all suspected cases of extra-judicial executions must be urgently and
properly investigated. Access to all prisons and other places of detention and to all prisoners
should be extended to appropriate independent, non-governmental bodies, including
international human rights bodies.
Donors with existing funding programmes working with federal and regional police, with the
military or with the prison system, should carry out thorough and impartial investigations into
allegations of human rights violations within those institutions, to ensure their funding is not
contributing to the commission of human rights violations.
Further, the international community should accord the situation in Ethiopia the highest
possible level of scrutiny. Existing domestic investigative and accountability mechanisms
have proved not capable of carrying out investigations that are independent, adequate,
prompt, open to public scrutiny and which sufficiently involve victims. Therefore, due to the
apparent existence of an entrenched pattern of violations in Ethiopia and due to concerns
over the impartiality of established domestic investigative procedures, there is a substantial
and urgent need for intervention by regional and international human rights bodies to
conduct independent investigations into allegations of widespread human rights violations in
Oromia, as well as the rest of Ethiopia. Investigations should be pursued through the
establishment of an independent commission of inquiry, fact-finding mission or comparable
procedure, comprised of independent international experts, under the auspices of the United
Nations Human Rights Council or the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment