Q. But the opposition parties need to have a level playing field and clearly they said there was no level playing field.

This is the result of the culture of complaint, which we observe in many African countries; it is not new. They do have the level playing field; they have been granted everything that the ruling party was given. They were given air times, newspaper spaces; they were allowed to move freely to organize their constituency and their supporters and the capability of lodging complaints against any government official involved in alleged wrong doings. They were accorded with all the democratic instruments that the ruling party has. If they turned their back on the democratic process, it is not the problem of the system, it is their problem. I do not think the government, the organs of the constitution, as well as the whole process should take the blame for the failures of the opposition. If they felt that withdrawing from this election was the most tactical move, it their decision and not that of the government, or anybody for that matter.

Q. They allege that they had difficulty fielding and registering their candidates and they suffered intimidation and harassment when they campaigned. And these claims have been supported by international organizations such as the Human Rights Watch.

The problem with Human Rights Watch is they report without verifying facts; have you asked if they have representatives here? Have they verified the allegations? Have they sent delegates to investigate?

Q. Yes, they said they have sent investigators to the places and investigated the allegations for three weeks.

That is absolutely wrong. They do not have the right people on the ground; they only claim to, and that is what they do everywhere when they accuse us off human rights violations. For instance, in Mogadishu they do not have anybody on the ground, and yet they accuse us. When they accused us of human rights violations in Ogaden, they had no one there either. This is a culture of allegation as they do not have any verification mechanisms or structures. They only report on whatever has been told to them by the opposition and that is the modus operandi for them.

Coming back to your earlier question, look at how the opposition views the relevance of the local elections. The majority of them do not believe that the local elections are relevant. They do not care to register or field their candidates as much as possible because they do not see local authorities as important and useful. They do not accept the fundamentals of decentralization and local authority. I think the fundamental problems lie there.

Q. On what grounds do you say this?

Because I know that they reject decentralization; they rejected our devolution of power to the grass roots.

Q. I would like to take you back to three years ago when you said, “The only way out for poor countries like Ethiopia is democracy”. Whether or not the oppositions participated in elections, the credibility of democracy is established when you have diverse views in the market place of ideas and policy alternatives in governance structures. When you have a city government that is 99.9pc controlled by one party, do you think it helps the country to be democratic?
 

Why not?

Q. Because you only have one view; there is no policy debate.

Look at Japan; one party stayed in power for more than 40 years. This did not make Japan a less democratic society. In the developed countries, to having one party in power for a long time does not negate democracy, so long as it is the will of the people.
 

The EPRDF believes Ethiopia is a multinational and multicultural society composed of diverse people. And we cannot say that these people have a uniform attitude or opinion on every issue. There are various opinions and issues in our society. The EPRDF believes that Addis Abeba is no less diverse than any part of Ethiopia. The test for the new administration will be how it is going to accommodate all the diverse views found in Addis. As long as it gives sufficient space for all these ideas, then even the power controlled by one party will remain a democracy. If it stifles dissent in Addis, then you can call it an undemocratic administration.

Q. Doesn’t it bother your party that those who did not vote for the EPRDF will not have their voices represented in the city council, as well as in the different governance structures?

It does not mean that the new administration will serve only those who elected the EPRDF. It is going to be an administration of the city, and the city will work to satisfy all the people of Addis.

Q. The incumbent redefined the arrangements of electoral structures during this election, as opposed to the ones in the past. Each kebelle will have a hundred and something officials instead of 15 or so. As a result, political parties need to fill 3.5 million candidates, which really stretched their limits and put the ruling party at an advantage.

If 30 parties are not capable of building equal capacity that matches one party, then it should be the problem of those 30 parties. However, we did this because our constitution requires us to adhere to the principle of direct democracy, which satisfies direct participation of the public at large. You cannot exercise direct democracy at the federal parliament where you have only 547 seats. Direct participation is possible at the grass roots level; the more there is direct participation, the greater is the chance of local administrations to catering to the interest of the public. This is the fundamental constitutional obligation that we have respected.

Q. The constitution was ratified in 1996, yet you just started looking into it now. But you have been in power all these years.

There are a lot of constitutional prerogatives that are not widely applied. We will be applying them in due course.

Q. The EPRDF has 3.5 million candidates that run under its platform during these elections. If you were to pay 100 Br to each candidate as an allowance for transport during the campaign, the total  cost would be close to four million Birr. Who foot the bill?

You do not understand the concept of what direct participation means at the grass roots level. Why should we pay for a person to compete in his own kebelle; he has no additional cost we are required to cover.

Q. Now that you have control of Addis Abeba both in the city council, district level and kebelle levels, what should the public expect in the next two years? Will there be a big bang?

I do not think there will be a big bang. But the whole weight of the EPRDF will be utilized to fight poverty in Addis Abeba and ensure good governance. Not only will the elected officials for Addis be on the front line, but the entire EPRDF as well.

Q. After what you called a renewal process of the EPRDF five years ago, the party tried to work in Addis Abeba on housing and infrastructure. This has, however, been questioned as there seems to be no real commitment by the EPRDF. Is it a damage control exercise for the neglect committed during the first decade of its rule?
 

I do not see it as damage control interest on the part of the EPRDF. There are fundamental things that we subscribe to; the people of Ethiopia have been victims of poverty and backwardness. We believe that Ethiopians do not deserve to live in this situation for we have every potential to get rid of poverty and realize our best hopes. The EPRDF is engaged in the construction of houses and the development of micro and small enterprises out of its deep conviction that the people of Addis should benefit from them. We want to make sure that the city grows fast and the people of Addis are the main beneficiaries.

Q. But in the past, when you were trying to develop Addis Abeba, which is 80pc slum, you have had two shortcomings: You had a complete disregard of the concept of property rights, and your record on the rule of law was not that pleasing.

First, let me straighten the facts. We were not showing any disregard to property rights. I think you can compare us to any of the governments in the past. There is no comparison in what we give as a form of compensations to the loss of properties due to dislocations.

Q. But you made mistakes when you relocated people?

We did not make mistake here; we had consulted and discussed with them. If you expect to renew a city without clearing slums, I do not think you can get space for better housing as well as for real estate development. Without clearing the slums, the city remains the same for an indefinite period; we do not want to see this. Whenever there is an issue related to compensation, we will compensate. That has been the principle with which we have been guiding ourselves in the past and it will remain so in the future.

Regarding the rule of law, we believe we have not disregarded any law. I can assure you this is a government which deeply believes that rule of law is a central element of democracy. It has been respecting the rule of law in the past and it will continue to do so in the future. This does not mean we will stop fighting against those who break the law.

Q. Tell me your view of the caretaker administration that has administered Addis Abeba for the past two years. Are you happy with its performance?

Yes. The caretaker administration helped the city to come out of the crises. I think it has done its job. The caretaker administration is composed of neutral professionals who have positive attitudes about development, the people, and the democratization process. They worked without having any party backing or structured administration. I look at it from the context of their caretaker role; these professionals committed themselves to doing the job, at a time when those elected had declined to take their responsibility. They have shouldered the burden and they have tried their level best. I do not think there is room for complaints around here. They deserve praise.

Q. Was there anything that you would have liked them to achieve.

The EPRDF as usual is interested in fast economic growth, and deepening the reforms. We would have liked to see democratization go much faster than it is now.

Q. The Prime Minister said several times in public that he would love to be relieved from his responsibilities after all these years. As a result, there are speculations.

Let me tell you what the Prime Minister has said so far and what the party believes. He has expressed his personal desire and he also expressed that he is a soldier of the party. He will be deployed to any work the party would like him to do.

Q. Isn’t that a conflicted signal?

I think that is the right signal that he can give. He is a loyal soldier and leader of the party who is exemplary in everything.

It is for the EPRDF to decide on each one of our fates because we are soldiers of the party. I do not think that we, as individuals, can decide where we work; the culture of the EPRDF is such that any member takes his assignment whether it is to his liking or not and delivers on his task. That has been the case in the past and it will remain so in the future.

The party does not believe that the Prime Minister has finished his job. None of us believes that; he has a lot to do and he is capable of doing a lot of things. The party knows its strategic interests and we will adhere to them.

Q. You give me the impression that you and the party would like the Prime Minister to continue for another term?

Why not?

< Previous