In a move that many in the Amhara community see as a blatant assault on political freedom, 16 Amhara activists—labeled as “terrorists” by state authorities—were presented today before the Federal High Court as part of the so-called Lideta anti-terrorism proceedings. These charges, deeply rooted in a narrative constructed by Honorable Yohannes Ayalew, appear designed less to deliver justice than to marginalize voices seen as opposing the government’s policies.
Central to the prosecution’s case is the testimony of Captain Atenafu Masresha, a deputy commander of the 57th division whose account of a three-day clash between Amhara Fano in Gojjam and ENDF in western Gojam’s Dega Damot near the infamous Feresbet has become the lynchpin of the allegations. Meshesha’s narrative. The reliance on a couple military commander’s and civilians testimony, without corroborative or concrete evidence from independent sources, underscores the political motivation behind these charges.
The court session was marked by a barrage of pointed questions from prosecutors and defensive cross-examinations that, rather than clarifying the truth, seem intent on solidifying a pre-determined verdict. With additional military witnesses scheduled for May 15, questions remain over whether new testimonies will simply reinforce this skewed narrative. Critics argue that the judicial process, as it stands, is less about unearthing factual evidence and more about legitimizing a sustained campaign against those challenging state policies—a campaign that has seen heavy-handed tactics, including the use of drones and heavy weaponry over the past two years, particularly in the Amhara regions.
Amid growing outcry, both locally and internationally, observers are quick to label these proceedings as a political witch hunt—a clear attempt to silence voices that demand accountability and justice. The deployment of security forces and the selective use of military testimonies point to a disturbing trend where charges of terrorism are wielded not in the pursuit of genuine public safety but as a potent tool for political repression. For the families, activists, and community members of the Amhara, this trial update is yet another chapter in a long history of state-sanctioned intimidation aimed squarely at stifling dissent and erasing a vibrant political identity.\
As the trial unfolds and more testimonies emerge, the spotlight remains on the Federal High Court. For those who share the growing concerns about the government’s biased approach, these proceedings are a stark reminder of the ongoing struggle for political freedom and human rights in Ethiopia. The community waits, with bated breath, questioning whether justice can ever prevail when the very mechanisms meant to safeguard it have been co-opted by a political agenda.
In related discussions, many are calling for independent investigations and for voices from across the nation to reject the framing of political dissent as terrorism. The dialogue now turns to how such biases can be dismantled—and what steps must be taken to restore genuine democratic accountability in Ethiopia.
