The Diaspora’s Dilemma (Part 2)

“The old law, which is popular law and not merely juristic law, lives on under a thin surface of modern statute law, and dominates the conduct and the legal consciousness of the people.”

Eugen Ehrlich

  Now it bears mentioning that the Court did the right thing in approving this adoption. No one is saying that our diaspora community should be barred from caring for their fellow Ethiopians.

  What we are saying is that this case could have been settled differently. Where the Court could have referred to those provisions of the law that clearly state what Foreign Nationals of Ethiopian Origin are allowed and not allowed to do.

 But instead we get a unanimous decision that tries to “fill the legal gap” by advancing an interpretation of the law that is as discriminatory as it is insular.

  We get a Court that uses a cultural litmus test to determine the character of people like Miss ጥሩነሽ በቀለ and, in doing so, contradict nearly all of the legal documents that it cited in its decision.

A Misunderstood & Weaponized Policy

 One such document is our country’s  National Children’s Policy, which outlined the supposed harms of inter-country adoption and proposed its prohibition.

  In this respect, the Court relied heavily on this document when it claimed that children raised within our culture are likely to have a “መልካም ስብዕና”. A sentiment that is as unsubstantiated as it is problematic.

 Especially since this Policy neither glorifies Ethiopian culture nor sees it as a safe haven for the healthy development of a child.

“በሕፃናት መብቶችና ጥበቃ ዙሪያ የቤተሰብና የማሕበረሰቡ አመለካከት፣ ግንዛቤና እውቀት የተለያየ በመሆኑ የሕጻናትን መብትና ደህንነት ከማስጠበቅ አኳያ ያላቸው ተሳትፎ የላቀ አይደለም፡፡”

  Instead, this Policy repeatedly calls for all stakeholders to combat those traditional attitudes (not just traditional practices) that continue to threaten the best interests of Ethiopian children.

 And although this has been overlooked by the Court, this Policy does not shy away from further linking the “best interest of the child” with urgent and much needed reforms.

 By also stressing the need to research those complex issues that are faced by Ethiopian children, a complete reading of this document would show us one thing. It would show us that we, as a community, still have a long way to go if we truly want to protect the best interests of our children.

  Another document that is referenced in this case is our Constitution, which has a lot to say about cultural tests, prejudicial thinking and other discriminatory attitudes.  

 In fact, the Constitution makes it abundantly clear that any policy developed by the state must respect a set of freedoms, rights and principles that are enshrined in it. Rights and freedoms that include the right to non-discrimination, tolerance and freedom of thought.

  And any government body that tries to discriminate on the basis of cultural prejudices and traditional prescriptions should, at the very least, be reminded by the Court that:

“ማንኛውም ሰው ያለምንም ጣልቃ ገብነት የመሰለውን አመለካከት እና ሀሳብ መያዝ ይችላል። ይህ ነፃነት በሀገር ውስጥም ሆነ ከሀገር ውጭ ወሰን ሳይደረግበት ማንኛውንም ዓይነት መረጃ እና ሀሳብ የመሰብሰብ እና የመቀበል ነጻነት አለው።”

አንቀጽ 29

  The Court, of course, did not give such a reminder. Instead, it gave a judgment that was based on a selective and narrow reading of the National Children’s Policy. A reading which, whether intended or not, side steps important principles and rights for the benefit of our cultural nationalism.

Conventions & Generalizations

  Another misleadingly cited document in this case is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

 Interestingly, this Convention not only builds on the above stated ideals of tolerance, non-discrimination and the interlinked freedoms of thought, opinion and expression. It also calls on countries like Ethiopia to make sure that children have access to information that is as culturally diverse as it is varied in its content. 

 The Court, for whatever reason, would  not only fail to mention this; it would go on to claim that the right way to raise a child is by exclusively exposing them to “የሀገሩን ባህል፣ወግ፣ልማድና የማህበረሰቡ እሴት”.

 But this Convention does not, in any way, suggest that children should be shielded from other cultures.  

 Based on the belief that a responsible citizen is someone that tolerates, not belittles, and engages, not scapegoats, different cultures and values, this Convention is in favor of a particular worldview. A worldview that pushes children to be curious and respectful, not dismissive and condescending, of :

“their own cultural identity as well as the national values of the country in which they are living, the country from which they may originate and civilizations different from their own”

Article 29

  The Court would not only overlook this, it would go on to selectively use this Convention, our Constitution and the National Children's Policy to support its cultural test. 

  So I ask you, my dear reader, does this decision still seem impartial and objective to you?

  If it still does, I come bearing a final point; a final contradiction.  

  For I am sure that there are some who still think that this Court is just doing its job. That these judges are being objective and are solely basing their decision on the exact wording of the relevant laws.

 So, if the Court is indeed such an institution, answer me this: 

 Why did these judges not mention that there is, in fact, a legal definition for “Foreign Nationals of Ethiopian Origin”? 

 If the Court is as immune to our social psychology as we think it is, why would these judges make the following assumptions about ትውልደ ኢትዮጵያንs instead of referring to the law:

“ትውልደ ኢትዮጵያኑ እና በጉዲፈቻ የሚወሰዱት ኢትዩጵያዊያን ሕጻናት የጋራ ባህል እና ማንነት ያላቸው ሆኖ በዜግነት ብቻ የሚለያዩ ስለሆኑ…”

  It is at this point that you come to realize that the highest court in the country overlooked a very important yet inconvenient fact. This fact being that the Yellow Card Proclamation does not use a cultural test when it comes to people like Miss ጥሩነሽ በቀለ.

  Instead, this 21-year-old law employs a very generous and open criterium as to who can become a Foreign National of Ethiopian Origin:

“የኢትዮጵያ ተወላጅ የሆነ የውጭ ዜጋ ማለት የሌላ ሀገር ዜግነት ከመያዙ አስቀድሞ የኢትዮጵያ ዜግነት የነበረው ወይም ከወላጆቹ ፣ ከአያቶቹ ወይም ከቅድመ አያቶቹ ቢያንስ አንዱ በማናቸውም ጊዜ የኢትዮጵያዊ ዜግነት ይዞ የነበረ የውጭ ዜጋ ነው።”

አንቀጽ 2(1)

  Meaning that this Court based its entire decision on the experiences and worldview of a select number of conservative/first generation migrants. And in doing so, it not only overlooked the law; it also ignored the lived experiences of progressive Ethiopians as well as second, third and fourth generation migrants.

  If this isn’t the definition of bias, I don’t know what is.

The Diaspora’s Dilemma

 So, what is to become of you ትውልደ ኢትዮጵያንs that fail our test of cultural purity and conservative values? Are you to be true to yourselves and become shunned or will you conform for the sake of acceptance?  

 I suspect that some of you will try to resolve this dilemma by choosing the path of conformity. Where the cost of challenging our cultural standards is so high that you think it’s better to just do what is expected than to be yourselves. 

 And although it might seem  like compliance far outweighs the cost of being unconventional, I am here to tell you that it isn't always so. That the price of complete obedience isn't just the loss of your individuality; it's also inward contempt. 

  Those of you who choose this option will, in due time, likely resent your conservative Ethiopian enclaves not just because of its conditional acceptance of you. You will resent it because of its insistence that our culture is, and will always be unrivaled, conservative and suspicious of the likes of you. 

  And whatever cultural nationalism you might exercise after your conformity, it will either be short lived or feel performative/transactional; for if all you want in your cultural life is to gain temporary acceptance and shallow validation, you will start to think that our culture is not worth exploring.

“ኢትዮጵያዊ ነኝ የሚለው ነው እንድታፈነግጥ የሚያደርግህ። መጀመርያ እራሱንም፣ ታሪኩንም ሳያውቅ የኢትዮጵያን centrality ይዞ ቪዛህን ይጠይቅሃል። ያኔ አፈንግጠህ ትሄዳለህ፣ ይሰለችሃል። እየዞረ የሌላውን ሁሉ ኢትዮጵያዊነት የመጠየቅ  መብት ያለው መስሎት፣ ሌላውን አግልሎ እራሱን ኢትዮጵያ አድርጎ የሚጠይቅ ኢትዮጵያዊ የኢትዮጵያ ጠላት ነው። የእውነት ኢትዮጵያዊ ግን ሌላውን ሰው መጀመርያ ያከብራል። በእራስህ ኢትዮጵያዊነት ከተማመንክ የሌላውን የሚያስጠይቅህ ጉዳይ የለም። አንተን ፓስፖርት ጠያቂ የሾመህ የለም።”

ሃይሌ ገሪማ

  I think a much better way to resolve this dilemma is for you to accept that cultural generalizations are, and have always been, a frail way to express one’s love of country. That no amount of cultural tests and nationalistic rhetoric can convincingly accomplish the impossible task of admiring yet simultaneously stereotyping 120 million people.  

  You, my dear diaspora, must come to the simple realization that no one can decree what being an Ethiopian is; for this culture of ours is not one-dimensional. It is, in fact, as conservative in our public discourse as much as it is diverse, complex and contradictory in its more private expressions.  

  And merely conforming to our traditional tendencies doesn't make you more Ethiopian than the next person; for cultural assimilation doesn't automatically equate with being curious about our culture. And genuine cultural engagement doesn't go hand in hand with forming an identity that is defined by exclusion. 

 You should understand that the Ethiopian psyche is informed by so much more than just cultural purity and conservatism. That there is a diverse range of thought and scholastic contributions that come from living in an ancient and multicultural country. A country that has, throughout its history, accommodated its fair share of foreign migrants and Ethiopian returnees. 

 So being a loud and conservative Ethiopian doesn't automatically make you a responsible/informed member of our culture. Regardless of what this Court, its well-socialized judges or their prejudiced cultural test says. 

 Instead, you would benefit from a curious,  empathetic and tolerant approach in your cultural engagement, for this is the only way you can truly understand a society that is informed by a diverse range of opinions and values. And once you begin to explore our society in this way, you will soon find your place in it. 

For More on the Resources Used for This Work, Visit Gudu’s Catalogue by Clicking Here.