AU’s Obasanjo Arrives in Mekelle amid Renewal of Tensions

The recent arrival of African Union (AU) High Representative Olusegun Obasanjo in Mekelle underscores renewed tensions between the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) and the Ethiopian Federal Government regarding the implementation of the November 2022 Pretoria Agreement. This agreement, formally titled the Agreement for Lasting Peace through a Permanent Cessation of Hostilities, aimed to end the two-year Tigray War by establishing a framework for disarmament, restoration of federal authority, humanitarian access, and transitional justice. While large-scale hostilities have ceased, significant provisions, particularly concerning the withdrawal of non-federal forces, resolution of territorial disputes, and the operationalization of transitional justice mechanisms, remain largely unfulfilled. This article examines the legal and practical challenges impeding the agreement's full implementation and the implications for Ethiopia's federal structure and long-term stability.

The visit by African Union (AU) High Representative Olusegun Obasanjo to Mekelle, the capital of Ethiopia's Tigray region, signals a critical juncture in the fragile peace process initiated by the November 2022 Pretoria Agreement. This diplomatic engagement comes amidst reports of renewed tensions between the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) and the Federal Government of Ethiopia, primarily stemming from persistent disagreements over the accord's implementation. The Pretoria Agreement, officially known as the Agreement for Lasting Peace through a Permanent Cessation of Hostilities (CoHA), was hailed as a landmark African-led initiative to end a devastating two-year conflict that claimed countless lives and caused widespread humanitarian suffering.

While the agreement successfully brought an end to large-scale conventional warfare, its subsequent implementation has been characterized by significant challenges and partial progress. Key provisions, including the disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) of TPLF combatants, the withdrawal of foreign and non-federal forces from Tigray, the restoration of essential services, and the establishment of transitional justice mechanisms, have encountered considerable obstacles. This article delves into the legal framework of the Pretoria Agreement, analyzes the specific points of contention hindering its full realization, and explores the broader implications for Ethiopia's constitutional order and the pursuit of sustainable peace.

The conflict in Ethiopia's Tigray region, which erupted in November 2020, was rooted in escalating tensions between the federal government and the TPLF, then the ruling party in Tigray. The war led to a severe humanitarian crisis, marked by mass civilian casualties and widespread reports of atrocities. The African Union, with former Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo as its High Representative, played a pivotal mediation role, culminating in the signing of the Pretoria Agreement on November 2, 2022, in South Africa.

The Pretoria Agreement established a comprehensive framework for peace, encompassing several critical components. These included an immediate and permanent cessation of hostilities, the orderly disarmament of TPLF combatants, the withdrawal of foreign and non-federal forces from Tigray, the restoration of federal authority and essential services in the region, unhindered humanitarian access, and the development of a national transitional justice policy. A follow-up Nairobi Declaration on November 12, 2022, further detailed the sequencing of disarmament and humanitarian corridors. The agreement explicitly anchored its principles in the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) and relevant AU policy frameworks.

Despite the initial success in silencing the guns, the implementation of the Pretoria Agreement has been fraught with legal and practical difficulties. A primary point of contention revolves around the concurrent withdrawal of foreign and non-federal forces (specifically Eritrean troops and Amhara militias) and the disarmament of TPLF combatants. While the agreement stipulated that TPLF heavy weapons would be handed over concurrently with the withdrawal of these forces, concerns persist over their continued presence in contested areas, including Western Tigray. This lack of full withdrawal undermines trust and complicates the TPLF's commitment to complete disarmament, which, though initiated, has been described as a lengthy process.

Another significant challenge lies in the restoration of federal authority and the resolution of territorial disputes. Ethiopia's 1995 Constitution establishes an ethnic federal system, delineating powers between the federal government and regional states. However, the practical application of this federal structure has often been centralized, with the federal government wielding substantial influence. The Pretoria Agreement's provisions for restoring federal authority in Tigray, including control of federal institutions and representation in federal bodies, are intended to align with the FDRE Constitution. However, unresolved territorial control issues, particularly in areas claimed by both Tigray and Amhara regions, continue to impede the full restoration of constitutional order and the return of internally displaced persons (IDPs).

The transitional justice framework, a crucial element for long-term peace, also faces substantial hurdles. The agreement envisioned a comprehensive national transitional justice policy consistent with the FDRE Constitution and the African Union Transitional Justice Policy Framework. While the Ethiopian Federal Government adopted a national Transitional Justice Policy (TJPE) in April 2024, which includes mechanisms like truth-seeking, reparations, and institutional reforms, its implementation has been criticized as virtually non-existent. Skepticism abounds regarding the political will to genuinely pursue accountability for atrocities committed during the conflict, with a perceived lack of independent oversight and enforcement mechanisms, including the AU-led Monitoring, Verification and Compliance Mechanism (MVCM). The TPLF has also raised concerns about unilateral legal measures by the federal government that are not grounded in the Pretoria Agreement, further eroding mutual trust.

Finally, humanitarian access, though improved since the agreement, remains a concern. The CoHA explicitly called for unhindered humanitarian access to Tigray. While some routes have opened and services have been partially restored, the humanitarian response has been slower than needed to address the immense needs of the population. The legal obligation of the Ethiopian government to ensure protection and assistance to its citizens, including IDPs, under international humanitarian law and instruments like the African Union's Kampala Convention, remains paramount.

The renewed tensions surrounding the implementation of the Pretoria Agreement highlight the complex legal and political landscape governing post-conflict transitions in Ethiopia. For legal practitioners, the situation underscores the critical importance of clear, unambiguous drafting in peace agreements, robust monitoring and compliance mechanisms, and genuine political will from all signatories. The partial implementation of key provisions, particularly regarding the withdrawal of non-federal forces, resolution of contested territories, and the operationalization of transitional justice, creates a volatile environment that risks undermining the fragile peace.

Moving forward, sustained and concerted efforts by the African Union, supported by the international community, are essential to press for the full and faithful implementation of the Pretoria Agreement. Practitioners should closely monitor developments related to the Transitional Justice Policy of Ethiopia, advocating for its independent and victim-centered application. Furthermore, attention must be paid to strengthening federal-regional relations within the constitutional framework to prevent future disputes and ensure equitable governance. The long-term stability of Ethiopia hinges on addressing these outstanding legal and political commitments to foster lasting peace and reconciliation.