Seeking Transitional Justice Through Reconciliation in a Troubled Transition: The Legitimacy, Performances, and Limits of the Ethiopian Reconciliation Commission

Abstract

The Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (“EPRDF”) succeeded the ruthless Marxist Derg regime in May 1991 and ruled Ethiopia for nearly three decades until May 2018. Beginning in 2015, however, the EPRDF regime witnessed the outbreak of unprecedented violent popular protests due to various grievances which profoundly resulted in the ambiguous demise of the regime in 2018. Subsequently, the so-called new “reformist coalition” emerged from within and took some initially commendable political and judicial measures. To address Ethiopia’s challenges, which are rooted in its contested past and current troubled political situation, the Ethiopian Reconciliation Commission was established in December 2018, for a three-year term, as a key transitional justice measure through which the country sought to investigate the root causes of past violence and conflicts, probe historical injustices, and ensure peace and reconciliation.

Such Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (“TRCs”) have proliferated as a standard global measure for effectively addressing challenges of conflict and post-conflict settings. The role of TRCs is particularly important in reconciling deeply divided societies that have experienced ethnopolitical conflicts. But there is a persistent lack of certainty and empirical assessment about the actual processes and impacts of TRCs, especially in illiberal contexts. When the Ethiopian Reconciliation Commission is viewed by conventional standards, there are serious gaps regarding the manner in which it was established, how its material and temporal jurisdiction is determined, and how it maintains its independence and autonomy. Nevertheless, this topic is not treated seriously in light of the comparative experiences of other relatively successful jurisdictions. Therefore, this Article attempts to address how the Ethiopian Reconciliation Commission emerged and fared in Ethiopia’s constrained and unstable political environment. Specifically, this Article argues that given Ethiopia’s prevailing, precarious political situation, pursuing restorative justice through the Reconciliation Commission was a step in a positive direction. However, a closer assessment reveals that its establishment process was deeply flawed given that it did not involve the participation of important wider actors, has been a hollow process, was implemented in a top-down and exclusionary manner, and was manifestly driven by instrumentalist motives rather than as a reflection of honest political commitment to genuine political and societal reconciliation. Ultimately, these factors culminated in an institution whose legitimacy, credibility, and performance are questioned. This fact became palpable when the Commission was unceremoniously dissolved in March 2022 without achieving any of its declared institutional goals and was replaced with the National Dialogue Commission. Ultimately, this Article recommends that Ethiopia carefully learn from other “successful” TRC experiences and from its own past failure when erecting similar TRC institutions that aim to transform the country from the reigning political abyss to a peaceful, reconciled, and democratic polity. Until TRCs are established based on correct diagnoses of prevailing problems and can be adequately supported by negotiated, inclusive, and genuine political commitments, the proliferation of transitional justice institutions in different names will fail to successfully address Ethiopia’s multifarious challenges.

Keywords: Transitional Justice, Reconciliation, Ethiopia, TRC Legitimacy

JEL Classification: k3, K30,