Decision- Making in the EDA

By Fesseha Nair

I have read an article entitled , ” Condemnation Or Invitation” posted on 16^th May 2010 in Nharnet by Asfaha Woldemicael.  Mr. Asfaha’s article was respond to  Ibrahim Tada’s article that was published in Awate.com posted on 9^th May 2010.

In his article, Mr. Asfaha has included a piece of feedback to my open letter to the EPDP leadership.  First, I would like to thank  Brother Asfaha for his prompt reaction to my letter to the EPDP leaders. What I understood from his arguments is that the decision making in EDA is not  correct, therefore I have given the title of my article, “ Decision- making in the EDA”

If I want to comment on his accusations , I would like to start  explain the method of decision making in Eritrean Democratic Alliance. Here are some definitions of the decision amking:

The EDA decision making formula is that all agreements and decision are to be arrived by general consensus among all member EDA organizations, when general consensus couldn’t be reached,  decisions were to be taken on the basis of sufficient consensus. Sufficient consensus is defined as a process of reaching agreement that would take us to the next step. This means that there had been sufficient agreement between the EDA member organization during the election of the preparatory committee. During the meeting of the election EPDP representatives were present. They disagreed in the election of the preparatory committee , their objections were recorded in the protocol of the meeting. Here, The EDA leadership has taken the process of sufficient consensus where the majority 10 member organizations agreed and one disagreed.

Sufficient consensus means that if the 10 organizations agree the rest can get stuffed. One organization cannot hinder the process of the conference from moving forward.

To make you clear the process of the preparation was based on the agreement signed during the congress of the EDA in 2008 and the following steps were taken accordingly:

1. EDA in its 2008 congress agreed to convene national conference inside one year.
2. The EDA Central Committee has given this assignement to Executive Committee
3. The EC conducted local and joint workshops
4. The results of these workshops were compiled and were discussed at the joint workshops in Addis.
5. The joint workshop has come out with recommendations on the various issues.
6. The EDA EC met and discussed on who of the civil society organizations will participate to prepare the conference. The EDA- EC decided that the case of the civil society must be examined based on their belief on the EDA and their resistance against the dictator.
7. When the research was ready, the EDA EC called for a meeting and in this meeting they decided that 8 civil society organizations were qualified according their fulfilling of the requirements.
8. A meeting for preparatory committee was held where all the 13 of the EDA political organizations( because  at that time the three mergers , EPP, EDP and EPM were represented by three representatives meaning the decision as one organizations was not implemented) and 7 representatives from civil organizations( one was unable to participate because of time inconvenience) representatives met and discussed on preparation of  the conference.
9. When the preparatory committee was elected the EPDP leadership rejected the election
10. Dialogue has conducted between the EDA 10 organizations and the EPDP delegation in Addis for a month but has reached an agreement.
11. EPDP declared  that it has drawn itself from the conference but remain as EDA member in all other activities.

Quoting one of Mr. Asfaha’s statements,

“ Even a fool knows that;  EPDP was waiting to participate in the selection of the preparatory committee”

I think you have no information that at the selection of the preparatory committee was taken at the presence of the EPDP but the decision were taken by sufficient consensus while the ePDP representative disagreed; as I mentioned above. I see from your arguments you lack information from your own organization. You are totally out of the process. The issues of conflict between the EPDP leadership and the other EDA leadership is simply of personalities not organizational therefore, I have written an open letter to the leadership in order that the constituents of this organization must realize they have lost their time working for the conference with their colleagues all the time in the past but because of wrong decision of their leadership they withdrew their participation in the conference. The EPDP constituents must persuade their leaders that their past efforts have run in vain because of their wrong decision.

The writer of this article has full confidence on the EPDP constituents and hope that they remedy the conflict created by leadership personalities either in EDA of the 10 organizations or the EPDP.

Why did EPDP drawn its activities from the conference while it has gone all the way on preparing the conference? Its constituents have participated actively in all activities of the conference.

Mr. Asfaha in his piece said ,

“ Nevertheless, until our voice in the Alliance is respected and the condemnation on us lifted, we have little or nothing to do with the shenanigans of the few select EDA leaders.”

On whose behalf are you speaking , Mr. Asfaha? How did you come to this conclusion without assessing the joint activities that were conducted and still alive? How do you prove that the EPDP is not respected by the EDA?  Have you the evidence that the EDA member oragnizations have condemned the EPDP?

I will let the EPDP members in Sweden judge if that has happened. I myself has been active to help the EPDP emrgence by cooperating with them in all their activities. I also persuaded the other members to cooperate with them. The EPDP has a great place and respect by all the member organizations in the level of their grassroots but I don’t know the individual leaders. It is this chemistry of the grassroots that keeps the channel of communication between the EDA and EPDP at this time and still there is hope that the EPDP reconsider its decision and come to platform where all the people will participate.

Mr. Asfaha further said,

“ Some may say the leadership of the Alliance never condemned us. That being the truth, we know those who openly categorize us with the enemy camp are bedfollows in the dirty game with the EDA leadership. Besides, this volunteer crew proudly declared their loyalty to the same leadership that is in the epicentre of the controversy.

Dear brother,  whom are pointing fingers? No one has categorized the EPDP with the enemy camp. What do you mean by dirty game with the EDA? Do you mean that the 10 organizations constituents are playing dirty games, what are these dirty games , can you clarify us? Who are these volunteer crew declaring their loyalty to a leadership in the epicentre of controversy? Mr. Asfaha you are out of control and frustrated.

Mr. Asfaha continued,

“ Despite the unacceptable conduct of the EDA leaders, we see particular websites giving them strong cover to insulate them from blame. This is not opinion. It is fact.”

Mr. Asfaha jumped now to the websites or the social media and accused them why they give coverage to such leaders of EDA with unacceptable conduct.

Who are you Mr. Asfaha to prescribe the conduct of the EDA leadership, who are you to give certificates on leaders conduct? Mr. Asfaha the EDA leaders want no insulation or coverage, they work openly before the people. There are no secrets and blames. The media do their jobs of investigation and expose the truth to the public.  Why are you afraid from Awate. Com? Perhaps it may be because it hosts all Eritreans with different views and reviews for example Ali Salim or Ibrahim Tada because of this you want to muzzle Awate.com.

Short URL: https://english.farajat.net/?p=755

Posted by farajat on May 17 2010 Filed under Articles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry