By Yohannes Gebresellasie (PhD)
Debates are expressions of freedom of speech in a democratic society; however, some inexperienced debaters often times than not tend to get into emotions especially when they are challenged with and confronted by challenging questions from experienced politicians.
Here at home, we have seen democracy taking place in an unprecedented manner. As a result, all contending political parties have been using all media outlets to pass their election messages across to the public at large. We have also witnessed candidates aspiring for the highest political power debating freely. That is also a sign of freedom of speech and democratic right.
In any electoral process anywhere, any candidate must comprehend his or her rights and responsibilities during the electoral process and that includes debates. Rights and responsibilities go hand in hand and they are two sides of the same coin.
Therefore, responsible candidates are always aware of their rights and responsibilities and they are not carried away with emotions or irresponsible behavior. Instead, they become very careful and prudent when performing debates and on public appearances especially in front of the media because the whole public is watching and judging their behavior, their characteristics and their general performances.
We have witnessed recent debates here at home and most of them were fair enough; however, some of them were way below the required standard and unexpected from a layman let alone from one aspiring to represent the interest of the public at large. Here, I am referring to some comments made by some opposition party candidates against representatives of the governing party on few of the debates.
I was especially shocked to see a learned opposition candidate making a personal attack and trying to defame a candidate representing the government in place who possesses a very high caliber and who has done an admirable service to our nation, a much admired and highly respected not only nationally and regionally but indeed internationally by intellectuals and world leaders alike.
If this kind of incidence happens in countries with civilized political experience, that person who made such comment will automatically be expelled or disqualified from the debate.
This is because that kind of behavior emanates from lack of substance or mere ignorance or both. Unethical and uncivilized personal attack or statement against a challenger has nothing to do with any democratic and civilized debate because it is simply foolish and unacceptable least to say. Providing alternative and useful agendas, programs pertinent to the developmental endeavor of the nation and the public at large has everything to do with a democratic debate.
Few opposition candidates baseless finger pointing and personal assassination on personalities and not focusing on issues is therefore a sign of uncivilized, inexperience and vacuum or hollow arrogance based on hate and retribution and when that comes from a person who claims to have high level academic background, one questions where that person got that so called education. Education is supposed to help sharpen one’s attitude, behavior and personality and not to advance arrogance and egotism.
Therefore, political candidates aspiring to represent the interest of the public at large must focus on issues, substances, programs, strategies and tactics to help their nation and the public at large and not on cheap personal attacks, insults and unethical comments that can backfire and that can have detrimental and regrettable effect on their own personalities.
Candidates are judged by those who cast votes and those who cast votes want among others gentle, intelligent and wise candidates. They want to see and hear substance not insult; so one has to be careful not to insult the intelligence of the public at large.