๐‘๐„๐€๐ƒ๐˜, ๐’๐„๐“, ๐†๐Ž ๐„๐“๐‡๐ˆ๐Ž๐๐ˆ๐€๐ ๐๐€๐“๐ˆ๐Ž๐๐€๐‹ ๐ƒ๐ˆ๐€๐‹๐Ž๐†๐”๐„ ๐‚๐Ž๐๐…๐„๐‘๐„๐๐‚๐„!

๐ƒ๐š๐ฒ ๐Ÿ” โ€“ย ๐Ÿ๐ŸŽ-๐ƒ๐ž๐ฅ๐ž๐ ๐š๐ญ๐ž ๐†๐ซ๐จ๐ฎ๐ฉ๐ฌ ๐๐ž๐ ๐ข๐ง ๐ƒ๐ž๐ฅ๐ข๐›๐ž๐ซ๐š๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐ฌ

We are โ€œoff to the races,โ€ at the Ethiopian National Dialogue Conference. Today, we startedย  discussions on the 8 agenda items culminating from four years of grassroots inquiry and consultations undertaken by the Ethiopian National Dialogue Commission. The overall mood of the four thousand participants could best be described as high energy, enthusiastic and infused with excitement and great expectation.

The dialogue is conducted at four tiers culminating in a National Plenary session of 4,000 delegates.ย  There is a primary 500 delegate working group (x 8=4,000), one group per agenda itemย  (e.g., state structure, rule of law, socio-economic affairs). This group sets thematic direction and synthesizes subgroup outputs.

Each 500-delegate group is subdivided into two 250-delegate groups with the task of generating options.ย  This group conducts detailed, structured discussions on specific sub-topics within each agenda item and presents SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats). Each 250-delegate group is subdivided into five 50-delegate groups tasked withย  idea organization and consolidation.

Each 50-delegate group is subdivided into 10-delegate groups for small discussion clusters with the task of idea formation. This group enables inclusive, round-table style dialogue where individual views are aired before being consolidated at the 50- 250- and 500-delegate levels.

To support this structure, the Commission has deployed hundreds of facilitators and rapporteurs to moderate discussions and accurately record outcomes at each level.ย  The work of the delegates is supported by dozens of experts in the eight thematic areas.

In today’s discussions, delegates felt free to speak candidly and ask all sorts of questions and asked for expert clarifications. Delegates asked each other questions and offered comments with respect and civility and built on each otherโ€™s ideas. That spirit of mutual respect encouraged open and free discussions from delegatesย  across regions, sectors, and generations.

Discussions were more than exchange opinions. They asked a variety of technical questions and sought expert clarifications on legal, constitutional, economic, and administrative matters. Subject-matter experts are expected to be made available after the first day of deliberations. The Commission wanted individuals to take a first crack at the issues before engaging experts whose task is to provide knowledge-based, evidence-based information, analysis and data without taking sides.

Overall, the first day of deliberations showed a well-organized process, and open and respectful dialogue. The tone set was constructive and inclusive providing strong momentum for the conference going forward.

Working groups convened across thematic areas and worked late into the evening, some until 6:00 p.m. I expect todayโ€™s spirit of mutual respect, rigorous inquiry, and collaborative problem-solving going forward. With the momentum gained on the first day of deliberations, I am confident we will produce meaningful, implementable recommendations that will benefit all Ethiopians.

๐‹๐„๐“’๐’ ๐’๐”๐๐๐Ž๐‘๐“ ๐“๐‡๐„ ๐„๐“๐‡๐ˆ๐Ž๐๐ˆ๐€๐ ๐๐€๐“๐ˆ๐Ž๐๐€๐‹ ๐ƒ๐ˆ๐€๐‹๐Ž๐†๐”๐„ ๐‚๐Ž๐๐…๐„๐‘๐„๐๐‚๐„ ๐€๐๐ƒ ๐Œ๐€๐Š๐„ ๐„๐“๐‡๐ˆ๐Ž๐๐ˆ๐€ ๐†๐‘๐„๐€๐“ ๐€๐†๐€๐ˆ๐!

Originally posted on X:
https://x.com/AlMariam1/status/2079297197703680038

About

Professor Alemayehu G. Mariam teaches political science at California State University, San Bernardino. His teaching areas include American constitutional law, civil rights law, judicial process, American and California state governments, and African politics. He has published two volumes on American constitutional law, including American Constitutional Law: Structures and Process (1994) and American Constitutional Law: Civil Liberties and Civil Rights (1998). He is the Senior Editor of the International Journal of Ethiopian Studies, a leading scholarly journal on Ethiopia. For the last several years, Prof. Mariam has written weekly web commentaries on Ethiopian human rights and African issues that are widely read online. He played a central advocacy role in the passage of H.R. 2003 (Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act of 2007) in the House of Representatives in 2007. Prof. Mariam practices in the areas of criminal defense and civil litigation. In 1998, he argued a major case in the California Supreme Court involving the right against self-incrimination in People v. Peevy, 17 Cal. 4th 1184, which helped clarify longstanding Miranda rights issues in criminal procedure in California. For several years, Prof. Mariam had a weekly public channel public affairs television show in Southern California called โ€œIn the Public Interestโ€. Prof. Mariam received his Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota in 1984, and his J.D. from the University of Maryland in 1988.