The National Commission of Ethiopia held meeting on agenda collection and identification in Oromia during 16 -24 December in Adama Town, which concluded its deliberations on 25 December 2024. Participants of the meeting were community representatives; political parties; government organs; influential personalities; CSO representatives; and various institutions. Information circulating from the Dialogue Commission indicate that there were over 7,000 community members and over 1,700 other stakeholders (political parties, renowned figures, religious leaders etc.).
His Excellency Professor Mesfin Araya, Commissioner of the Commission, emphasized during the closing session that the Dialogue is meant neither for arbitration nor debate or reconciliation but it is the forum where everyone is the winner in forwarding useful ideas for the future of our country.
During the agenda collection and identification sessions, inputs gathered from participants circulated over the media. Different political parties forwarded their versions of agenda items mostly considering them as the national agenda. Among them was Prosperity Party Oromia branch that cited above 12 points they considered are essential for peace and reconciliation in the country. For example, they cited among others, the continuation of the present Federal System of Administration without any major alteration but sticking to the general principles therein.
Among the other political parties, the Amhara National Movement (ANM) asserted in their priority agenda items that the Federal System must be based on geographical suitability for different factors and psychological makeup of the residents of those areas.
The agenda collection and identification meetings were underway in different parts of the country of which the current one in Oromia was the last in the series. The collected and identified agenda items from Oromia Region and others taking part at country level was submitted to the National Dialogue Commission on Thursday December 24, 2024.
The identified and collected agenda items were diverse in nature reflecting interests of different entities. The very idea that the Dialogue Commission entertained diverse issues to bring to the fore is a progress for tolerance towards difference of opinions. In the process of narrowing down the differences, it is yet advantageous to entertain inclusivity with equal opportunity for all to air their interests and concerns. We believe, the observably contrasting differences among the entities could be narrowed down in the course of the dialogue to be held during the countrywide deliberations.