Abadula Gemeda: No Entity Can Deny Ethiopia Sea Access

• Former Speaker Abadula Gemeda asserted that no entity can prevent Ethiopia from securing sea access.
• He criticized the original loss of Ethiopia's maritime outlet, stating it resulted from decisions by a few individuals without broad consultation or formal legal deliberation.
• Abadula alleged historical adversaries, including Egypt, supported internal forces to deny Ethiopia sea access.
• He questioned the constitutional authority of the transitional government to make such far-reaching decisions before the adoption of a constitution.
• Abadula praised the current government's peaceful negotiation efforts to regain sea access, emphasizing its long-term national importance.

He firmly believes that it is fundamentally impossible to perpetually isolate Ethiopia from the sea, reinforcing the idea that this issue will remain a central focus of national policy.

Former Speaker of the House of Peoples' Representatives (HPR), Abadula Gemeda, has unequivocally declared that no entity possesses the authority to permanently deny Ethiopia access to the sea. This assertion highlights a profound national aspiration, which Abadula frames as an enduring issue that cannot be simply dismissed. His statements underscore the critical importance of a maritime outlet for Ethiopia's long-term economic prosperity and strategic security, characterizing its historical loss as a major national setback.

Abadula Gemeda specifically criticized the process through which Ethiopia became landlocked, arguing that the pivotal decisions were made by a limited number of individuals. He emphasized that these choices occurred without the benefit of broader national consultation or robust deliberation within a formal legal framework. This perceived lack of due process and widespread input, according to the Former Speaker, rendered the original decision-making illegitimate and ultimately detrimental to the nation's fundamental interests.

Delving into the historical context, Abadula Gemeda posited that Ethiopia's historical adversaries have consistently worked to prevent the country from securing sea access. He alleged that these efforts included actively supporting forces operating from within Ethiopia itself. He described a strategic shift by these adversaries: after repeated military attempts to defeat Ethiopia failed, they reportedly redirected their strategy toward backing what he termed "internal collaborators" to achieve their objectives.

As specific examples of such alleged external interference, Abadula cited Egypt's purported role in supporting the formation of both the Eritrean Shabia movement and the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF). He contended that these developments ultimately contributed to a series of decisions that significantly undermined Ethiopia's national interests, culminating in the loss of its vital maritime access and the subsequent challenges it faces as a landlocked nation.

A central pillar of Abadula Gemeda's critique focuses on the legal and constitutional legitimacy of the decision-making process that led to Ethiopia's landlocked status. He explicitly stated that no formal decision regarding the issue of sea access was ever reached through proper discussions or agreements concluded within a recognized legal forum. This absence of adequate national debate and formal deliberation, in his view, fundamentally compromises the validity and legitimacy of the original outcome.

Furthermore, Abadula raised significant questions concerning the constitutional authority of the transitional government that was in power at the time these critical decisions were made. He argued that, despite the absence of a fully established constitutional order, a limited number of individuals proceeded to make choices with profound and far-reaching implications for Ethiopia's national interests. These decisions, he stressed, were made without the necessary broad public consultation, representing a critical flaw in the process that ultimately deprived Ethiopia of its maritime outlet. Lawyers advising on Ethiopia's international agreements or national resource policy should scrutinize these constitutional and legal frameworks.

Despite the historical grievances, Abadula Gemeda expressed commendation for the current Ethiopian government's proactive approach to securing sea access. He specifically praised their efforts to achieve this objective through peaceful negotiations, emphasizing a strategy built on mutual interests and a "give and take" methodology. This forward-looking stance suggests a recognition of diplomatic solutions as the appropriate and effective path forward for resolving this long-standing national issue.

The Former Speaker reiterated his firm conviction that Ethiopia's aspiration to regain a maritime outlet is an enduring and non-negotiable national priority. He concluded with a powerful statement, asserting that it is fundamentally impossible to perpetually keep Ethiopia cut off from the sea, thereby reinforcing the idea that this issue will remain a central focus of national policy and strategic planning for the foreseeable future.

Lawyers advising on Ethiopia's international agreements or national resource policy should scrutinize the constitutional and legal frameworks underpinning any decisions regarding sea access, particularly given historical challenges to the legitimacy of past decisions on this matter. Compliance officers should note the emphasis on due process and broad consultation for significant national policy shifts.

Source: Original reporting via ENA