First of all, let’s remember again we are mourning our nationals who perished at sea recently fleeing a repressive regime which even didn’t mention on its media while the world media, including OMN, reported. This is one reason we want this media to be an independent and reliable source of information relevant to our people.
Back to the OMN problem, I was upbeat too early when I read their published review as I hoped the individual at the center of the crisis would no more be in OMN and the crisis would be over for good. Sadly, the dots they present here don’t connect and I don’t think they have any interest or integrity to settle this matter at all.
The trio came up in defense of the man because apparently he can’t defend himself. This is fine! My question is: who should defend the truth?
I am particularly speechless when I see the greatest oromo historian and the person I have admired all my life choose to side with one individual in this crisis instead of finding the truth and reconciling conflicting parties for the common good of the nation. His not only a distinguished professional and insider, but above all he’s an elder (JAARSA)! The crisis shouldn’t have occurred in the first place in his presence.
In short, it is another low for OMN administrators to come up with this one-sided crap “investigation” that attempts to defeat both reason and common sense.
Bad enough that they published their twisted “finding” now they go on TV to tell nonsense to their own people back home. At least why not invite some of those who left OMN to the interview so that viewers have both accounts?
When you claim the controversial person has such a minimal position in OMN as to dominate or interfere but any challenge to him must be from “habashas” who want OMN to fail, then it is clear for everyone who is in charge.
So, we are Dr. Hamza, Dr. Solomon, Kadiro, Tigist, Mohammed, Said, Saayyo, simbirtu. OCR, Oromo TV, etc. who all became the bad “habashas”overnight. As I wrote many times before, unlike many, I would support 100% if the individual is elected board chair, i.e. I have no personal objection to him or, as a matter of fact, even some of his political views but I want the by-laws of OMN be respected TO THE LETTER in order to ensure everyone knows his role and avoids conflicts.
In my opinion, his absence from OMN leadership would restore public confidence in this media, which at this time is far from that.
How come you acknowledge that there has been interference (perceived or actual) and you failed to take disciplinary action against the individual who not only wrote and sent an email to Hamza to sign an unauthorized document or else he’s a “sitting duck”?
Are you saying that Dr. Hamza was lying to all of us or is it fine to say and do anything to him? Would Drs. Asfaw and Mohammed tolerate if they are called “sitting-ducks”?
Sadly, as long as those who left (at least Dr. Hamza) and an independent investigator haven't expressed their satisfaction with finding, this “investigation” continues to raise serious doubts about independence and impartiality of OMN.