The Ethiopian Media Authority’s decision to revoke the operating license of Wazema Media marks yet another deeply troubling milestone in Ethiopia’s accelerating campaign against independent journalism. While authorities attempt to justify the move through allegations of “ethical violations” and appeals to the vague notion of “national interest,” the broader trajectory is clear and unmistakable: the systematic narrowing of civic space and the deliberate silencing of critical and independent voices.
The closure of Wazema Media cannot, and should not, be viewed in isolation. It is part of a sustained and widening pattern that includes the shutdown of media outlets, the harassment and arrest of journalists, and the aggressive use of regulatory mechanisms to intimidate dissent. What is repeatedly presented as neutral administrative enforcement has, in practice, become a powerful political instrument—one wielded to control narratives, suppress scrutiny, and weaken public accountability.
Government action of this nature is not acceptable in any society that claims to respect democratic principles and the rule of law. The continued use of state authority and coercive power to shut down media institutions represents a fundamental abuse of government force. A government entrusted with protecting constitutional rights has no legitimate justification for using its regulatory and enforcement powers to silence journalists or dismantle independent platforms for public discourse. Yet this practice not only persists—it is becoming normalized.
By invoking loosely defined standards such as “national interest,” “incitement,” or “ethical violations,” authorities risk transforming professional media regulation into a blunt tool of censorship. These undefined concepts allow for arbitrary enforcement and selective punishment, creating an environment in which critical journalism is treated as a threat rather than a public service. Independent media exists to question power, expose wrongdoing, amplify marginalized perspectives, and report uncomfortable truths. When these essential functions are criminalized or punished, the very purpose of journalism is inverted.
The Ethiopian Constitution explicitly guarantees freedom of expression and freedom of the press. These guarantees are not symbolic; they are legal and moral commitments intended to protect citizens from state overreach. The repeated closure of media outlets through administrative or regulatory actions stands in direct contradiction to these constitutional protections. Such actions erode public trust in institutions that are meant to safeguard rights, not restrict them, and raise serious questions about the government’s commitment to its own legal framework.
Equally alarming is the growing weaponization of digital and online media regulation. Digital platforms have become indispensable spaces for public debate, civic engagement, and accountability—particularly in contexts where traditional media is already constrained. Shutting down digital outlets and online platforms does not merely silence journalists; it deprives citizens of access to alternative sources of information and weakens the public’s ability to make informed decisions in an already polarized and fragile information environment.
The Habesha is deeply concerned that Ethiopia is drifting toward an era in which media compliance is valued more than media independence, where loyalty is rewarded over integrity, and where silence is encouraged while scrutiny is punished. This trajectory weakens democratic institutions, deepens fear and self-censorship among journalists, and isolates the public from critical information at a time when transparency, accountability, and open dialogue are most urgently needed.
True national stability cannot be built through repression or enforced silence. Stability achieved by suppressing voices is fragile, temporary, and ultimately destructive. Sustainable peace and unity can only emerge through open dialogue, tolerance of dissent, respect for diverse viewpoints, and full adherence to constitutional freedoms. A government that relies on force and intimidation to manage public discourse undermines its own legitimacy and risks long-term instability.
The closure of Wazema Media should therefore prompt serious national reflection—not celebration—about the direction of press freedom and democratic governance in Ethiopia. It should raise urgent questions about how far the state is willing to go in using its power to control information and whether constitutional guarantees still hold meaningful value in practice.
The Habesha calls on Ethiopian authorities to reverse course, immediately halt the use of coercive measures against independent media, and uphold the constitutional rights they are sworn to protect. Engagement with the media community must be rooted in good faith, dialogue, and reform—not punishment, intimidation, and the misuse of government force. The survival of independent journalism is not a threat to Ethiopia’s national interest; it is one of the strongest safeguards of its democratic future.
An Urgent Call for International Intervention in Ethiopia