The National Dialogue Commission of Ethiopia was established by law as an independent and autonomous institution, mandated to operate free from any external interference. Although proclamation No. 1265/2014 does not specify every operational procedure, it grants the Commission broad authority to set its own rules, decide on participants, and determine agendas, with safeguards to uphold impartiality.

Critics argue that public appointments and government funding compromise independence. However, in Ethiopia’s context, public representation can enhance legitimacy, while the use of public funds—properly managed with accountability—can reinforce autonomy. Ultimately, the Commission’s Independence rests on its legal foundation, its internal safeguards, and its national ownership, which are essential for effectiveness and impartiality.

The Ethiopian National Dialogue Commission is mandated by law to prepare recommendations and implementation plans, support relevant bodies, and monitor progress. Its authority, however, relies largely on the cooperation of the government, institutions, and the public.

The government has expressed political will and commitment to the dialogue process by establishing the Commission through law. To ensure outcomes are acted upon, the Commission must remain independent, transparent, and inclusive so that its recommendations gain legitimacy and acceptance.

Even if some recommendations face challenges in implementation, the Commission is empowered to inform the public and maintain Accountability. In this way, it is not a passive actor but an institution with the mandate to influence, support, and monitor the execution of dialogue outcomes.

National dialogue addresses fundamental issues that directly affect people’s lives, rights, and access to resources. Excluding the public from such debates would ignore the very groups most impacted by conflict and deprivation.

Relying only on politicians or mediators is not sufficient, as their views may not fully represent society’s diverse voices. Ensuring public participation allows citizens to speak for themselves through their representatives, strengthens legitimacy, and prevents a narrow set of actors from dominating the process.

The Commission is therefore mandated to engage the public inclusively and transparently, making the dialogue process credible, nationally owned, and responsive to the people’s real needs.

Political parties are key stakeholders in the dialogue. While some were initially reluctant, many have since joined the process, submitted agendas, and engaged in negotiations. Others remain cautious, citing concerns about impartiality, government capacity, or unresolved grievances.

The Commission is working to ensure all parties can participate on an equal footing — from agenda-setting to representation on steering committees. Success depends on parties’ willingness to engage sincerely for the common good, rather than standing aside. The Commission continues to create opportunities and extend efforts to bring every party into the process.

1. Inclusivity is a core principle of the national dialogue. The Commission believes conflict parties, including armed groups and the government, should be represented at the table, since they have specific agendas that must be addressed.

Participation, however, requires setting aside the use of force. The dialogue is designed to provide a lawful, constructive space where disputes can be tested and resolved through discussion rather than violence.