Creating Enabling Conditions For Upcoming Elections

As Ethiopia gears up to hold the 7th general elections, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s (PhD) offer of reassurance to lawmakers that the elections, tentatively slated for June 1, 2026, will be held as scheduled in spite of security challenges, has set the stage for a defining moment in the country’s democratic journey. Coming at a time of deep political polarization, regional unrest, and fragile national cohesion, the announcement is seemingly intended to project confidence and resolve. Yet, it also raises critical questions: Can Ethiopia conduct a credible, inclusive, and peaceful election amid ongoing instability and eroded trust in institutions? What conditions must be met to make the polls meaningful rather than merely procedural? These questions go to the heart of Ethiopia’s struggle to reconcile democratic aspiration with the realities of its fractured political landscape.

Ethiopia’s electoral process has long been intertwined with its turbulent political history. The 2018 political transition ignited hopes for democratic renewal, following decades of tightly controlled politics. However, those hopes have since dimmed under the weight of conflict, fragmentation, and authoritarian drift. The postponed 2021 elections—which were not held in some regions—exposed the logistical, political, and security obstacles that still haunt the country’s path toward genuine democratic governance. Today, as the next polls approach, many of those same challenges remain unresolved or have even deepened.

The foremost challenge is security. The government’s determination to hold elections nationwide collides with a sobering reality: large parts of Ethiopia remain insecure or under the shadow of conflict. In Amhara, persistent clashes between federal forces and local militias have disrupted governance and daily life. In Oromia, armed insurgencies and counterinsurgency operations continue to claim lives and displace civilians. The Somali and Benishangul Gumuz regions face intermittent instability tied to political grievances and border tensions. Meanwhile, parts of Tigray are still struggling to recover from the devastating war and its humanitarian aftermath. Conducting elections in such conditions is not simply a logistical problem—it is a matter of legitimacy and safety. Ballot boxes and voter cards mean little when citizens cannot move freely, when polling stations risk attack, or when displaced populations are excluded.

Political fragmentation and lack of consensus are also contributing factors. Ethiopia’s political class remains bitterly divided. Opposition parties are fragmented, many have faced restrictions or intimidation, and some operate in exile. Accusations of harassment, arbitrary arrests, and limited media access persist, undermining the credibility of the political process. The National Election Board of Ethiopia (NEBE), once hailed as a symbol of reform, now faces mounting criticism from opposition groups who accuse it of bias and lack of independence. Without a broad-based political agreement on the rules of engagement, the next elections risk deepening divisions rather than healing them. Institutional weakness further compounds the problem. Effective elections require functioning local administrations, professional security forces, and a judiciary capable of resolving disputes fairly. Yet many local governments are paralyzed by insecurity or political interference, while the justice system struggles with credibility and capacity. The NEBE itself faces resource constraints, logistical hurdles, and the daunting task of registering tens of millions of voters—many of whom live in areas affected by displacement or poor infrastructure. Unless these institutions are strengthened and insulated from political manipulation, the credibility of the process will be in serious doubt.

Equally serious is the erosion of public trust. Ordinary Ethiopians, weary of conflict and political instability, increasingly doubt whether elections can bring meaningful change. Cynicism is spreading as citizens see promises of reform overshadowed by violence, repression, and unfulfilled pledges. In regions where armed groups or local elites hold sway, voters may feel coerced or disempowered. If people perceive elections as predetermined or irrelevant, voter apathy could undermine participation, while contested outcomes could trigger renewed unrest.

Still, postponing elections indefinitely is not a viable solution either. Doing so risks entrenching authoritarianism and feeding the narrative that democratic processes must wait for “perfect conditions” that may never come. Ethiopia must, therefore, strike a difficult balance: upholding the constitutional timeline while ensuring that the process is credible, inclusive, and secure enough to reflect the people’s will. That balance will require both political courage and pragmatic compromise.

Meeting these challenges requires taking a host of essential, enabling steps. To begin with the government must attach priority to peacebuilding as an electoral prerequisite. National elections cannot succeed against the backdrop of open conflict. A serious effort must be made to secure ceasefires or negotiated arrangements in conflict-affected regions, allowing for safe voter registration and campaigning. Peace should not be treated as a separate track from the elections—it must be integrated into the electoral roadmap. Engaging community elders, religious leaders, and civil society organizations in local peacebuilding is sure to help reduce tensions and create minimal conditions for participation. Efforts to address security concerns can only succeed where political dialogue is revived and institutionalized. The National Dialogue Commission offers one potential forum, but it must be empowered and inclusive. Bringing together ruling and opposition parties, regional representatives, and civic groups to discuss electoral conditions, security arrangements, and confidence-building measures is critical. A pre-election political pact—covering issues like equitable media access, guarantees for freedom of assembly, and releasing jailed political party leaders/members—could go a long way toward restoring trust.

Furthermore, it is paramount to ensure the independence and strengthen the capacity of the NEBE. This includes assuring adequate funding, transparency in voter registration, and impartial recruitment of local election officials. The NEBE should collaborate closely with regional administrations, civil society, and international partners to enhance transparency and build confidence. Establishing a credible conflict-resolution mechanism for electoral disputes before the polls will also be essential to prevent post-election violence. Efforts to strengthen the electoral board need to be complimented by measures aimed at protecting civic space. A free press, active civil society, and open debate are indispensable to any democratic process. As such the government ought to refrain from using security laws to stifle dissent and instead view criticism as part of a healthy political ecosystem. Media outlets must be allowed to cover the elections freely, and civic groups should be empowered to conduct voter education, observation, and monitoring activities.

Prime Minister Abiy’s insistence on holding the 2026 elections as scheduled may reflect a commitment to constitutional continuity. But timelines alone do not define democracy—trust, fairness, and peace do. Unless Ethiopia addresses its security crises, political polarization, and institutional fragility, the upcoming elections could deepen instability rather than consolidate progress. Ethiopia stands at a crossroads: it can either turn the 2026 elections into a genuine step toward reconciliation and renewal, or it can risk repeating the cycles of exclusion and conflict that have marred its past. The choice is clear—and the work must begin now.