Selam seb dehai:

This is Part three of the Adjudication Committee hearing between the Student and Committee members A, B and C.

(A): We have spent so much time talking about history...

(B): and psychology...

(C): that we forgot why we are here. We very much want to know whether there's some way for the student to reconcile with his teacher.

(A): It would be nice but with so much psychological baggage, I was wandering if that would be possible.

(B): I don't see why not. There must be a way to resolve this issue. I mean it's not rocket science.

(C): I don't know. Sometimes I sense rocket science might be easier. At least more comprehensible. Not this one. The charges are jelly like. I mean unpinnable.

(A): That's what I was thinking . Because when you listen to the student's complaint, I don't see where his sense of victimhood gives him the right to give himself a passing grade on the basis of a self conceived course, applying questionable methodology. To approve the student's request is unthinkable.

(B): Why don't we propose that another teacher, more acceptable to the student writes the questions for the Final Exam.

(C): You are assuming what's most objectionable to the student is the teacher.

(A): Well, what it could be then? After what he told us, I figure the problem was with the teacher.

(C): I think the problem for the student is the Syllabus itself.

(A): But he accepted the Syllabus when he stayed in the Course.

(B): You are thinking rationally.

(A): Let's be fair to the student and give him our proposal. We'll see what he says. I can't see him rejecting our proposal.

(C): We think we have come up with a fair proposal to resolve the matter between you and your teacher.

(Student): You mean about the grade?

(A): Yes about the grade and the Final Exam.

(Student): I am glad finally someone is beginning to see that my teacher "can't be trusted."

(C): It's not that he's not trustworthy. It's just that we want to make you feel comfortable about the process.

(Student): "Aggression Must Not Be Rewarded."

(A): We have decided to ask you whether there are other teachers in your school you think are fair.

(Student): Yes, there are several. I like X, Y, and Z. Anyone of them would do.

(C): In that case we'll ask all of them to constitute a committee of examiners.

(Student): Great. Give me three days to prepare the questions ?

(A): Actually what we had in mind was the committee would prepare the questions ?

(Student): "Aggression Must Not Be Rewarded."

(B): The questions will be based on the course material as described in the Syllabus.

(Student): My teacher "can't be trusted."

(A): Your teacher will not write the questions.

(B): Nor will he proctor the exam.

(Student): If only this had happened 16 months ago, we would have been spared a lot of anguish. I have been making this request repeatedly. But the teacher would not listen. I have been telling him, let someone else write the questions, and proctor the exams. This is a humiliating defeat for him.

(A): So when do you want to take the exam ?

(Student): Whenever the committee is ready. I don't mind if they proctor the exam. In fact in the spirit of compromise, I will even let them write their questions.

(A): You will? That's great. That's great.

(Student): As I said in the sprit of compromise, anything is possible.

(C): So our proposal is acceptable to you.

(Student): Yes it is. I will do everything you are asking in the spirit of goodwill.

(C to A: Don't bet on it. He we'll try to find a way out. Just watch)

(A): I will give the committee a copy of the Syllabus. It should help them to write the exam questions.

(Student): Fine . Give hem the Syllabus. Let them write the questions. All that I want the committee to do is to agree with my answers. As long as I am guaranteed that my answers will be accepted as correct answers, in the spirit of compromise, I won't insist writing my own questions.

(A): And who will assign a grade for the course ?

(Student): I told you that I in the spirit of compromise I will agree that the committee writes the grade. I have no objection whatsoever. I will tell them what to put down.

(B): Are you saying you will grade yourself ?

(Student): No. The committee will give me the grade. I just tell them what I want, and I expect them to give me the grade I want. It's that simple. All in the name of goodwill.

(A): I am afraid it's not that simple.

(Student): "Aggression Must Not be Rewarded."

(B): We have a problem with the terms of your acceptance to our proposal.

(Student): I told you my teacher "cannot be trusted."

(C): Your request that the committee approves your answers whether the answers are right or wrong; your demand that the committee records the grade that you have given yourself make a mockery of academic integrity.

(A): We have been fair with you more than we have been with the teacher. We bent the rules to accommodate your requests because amicable resolution to the issue is in everybody's interest.

(Student): the teacher "Cannot be Trusted."

(A): I am afraid the teacher has nothing to do with this. Leave him out.

(Student): "Aggression Must Not Be Rewarded."

(A): I think we may be wasting our time. You are telling us unless we accept your proposal to give you the power to assign yourself a passing grade, we will have no deal?

(Student): You have misread me. All I am saying is my teacher "cannot be trusted."

(B): Please, please, dear

(Student): leave the teacher out. We are trying to deal with your unreasonable request, asking us to sabotage academic integrity. This we can't do.

(C): I am afraid, the student may wish to take more time to consider the proposal with the understanding that it cannot be amended. It's take it or leave it.

(Student): "Aggression Must Not Be Rewarded."

(A whispers to C. So you think we are wasting our time? C thinks so.)

(B): Until you think through the proposal, I like to go back to something you said yesterday. I must admit I thought about it while trying to go to bed last night. You said you would blow up the building if you are not allowed to pass yourself.

(Student): Yes I did. And I meant it.

(C): I am sure you meant it. You know, it's very unlikely any academic institution will let you pass yourself based on a self designed Syllabus and methodology. You might as well accept this as a fact. So I like to go back to something you said Yesterday.

(Student): What did I say?

(C): You said that the people in the building-- and forget the villa --constitute close to 60 souls. If we exclude the teacher's people in the villa, the rest, that is 57 of them, are your people. That's what I thought. But you equivocated. I wander if you could elaborate.

(Student): Only if it's off the record. I want you to give me your word that what I say will not be part of the record. If word leaks out I will deny everything.

(C): You have our word. Everything you say on this issue will remain here.

(Student): Out of the 57 in the building, I can only call four as mine. The rest are not exactly mine. We happen to be in this thing together.

(B): What thing ?

(Student): Actually trying to take over the villa and the surrounding property.

(A): I don't see why 57 people will gang up against three.

(Student): The villa is nice. And the property faces a long and beautiful coastline.

(A): What do you need the villa for that you want to blow up so many people?

(Student): We all have our reasons for going after the villa. Some of us own houses in Edaga Arbi. Some have sentimental attachment to the sea. As I said we all have different reasons for going after the villa and the surrounding property.

(B): You implied that there are there what you call your people and others on your side. Who are the others. Do you mind telling me who's who?

(A): I, too, am curious. Please explain. Be straight with us. Aren't you all of the same nationality?

(Student): No, we are of different nationalities.

(B): Which means all 57 are from one country.

(Student): Well, well......

(A): Regardless where the people are from, including those residing in the villa, I am having a problem why you feel the need to blow them away.

(Student): It's not that I wanted to, but you people leave me no choice. Meet my demand, and everyone will stay alive.

(A): I can see, following your twisted logic you may want to blow up the villa. You may even be able to rationalize it. But blowing the building with 57 of your compatriots is hard to understand. Don't you have any feeling for your own people?

(Student): Look at it this way. If my people in the building get killed, it's martyrdom. Honor does not come cheap. There are times when people are called upon to sacrifice for the glory of the land.

(C): Strange logic. But never mind. What about the others? That's what I want to know.

(Student): Start with the Amharas. Their time is up.

(B): I know so little about African people, tell me what did the Amharas did to you?

(Student): This is playback time for one hundred years of oppression. Someone has to pay for Menelik's sins, Haile Selassie's also. And don't forget Mengistu.

(A): I don't understand. I thought they had joined you in going after the villa.

(Student): They did. As I told you yesterday, we have a long memory. Eventually we like to get even.

(C): So your alliance is temporary, I mean until you take over the villa and the surrounding properties?

(Student): Yes. The country is not big enough for both of us. As I see it, the Amharas have had their time. Now it's our turn. We have to own and control the building, the villa, and the properties, too. Right now we have one, our own right, in Menelik's Palace. You may say this is King Yohannes's Revenge.

(B): Before I go to the Oromos, I like to know whether the Amharas are not aware of your plans or not?

(Student): I am sure they do. But they can be fooled. We will make sure we control the entire army. They will do what we want them to do. All we have do is to utter one magic word to get their cooperation.

(A): What's the word.

(Student): Red Sea.

(B): Why ? They must be a nation of Sea-Farers?

(Student): Hardly. They have a fixation with access to the sea. We knew all along that we could exploit their fixation. As long as we give them the impression that we will try to recover the coastal areas we have their support. We have to go through the motions of trying to go after the Red Sea Ports to keep the Amharas quiet. Actually, if we can do it, our priority is Massawa. Asab is too far from Mekele to be of use to us. But we don't want them to know that..

(C): It's all planned out carefully. So it seems. Now what about the Oromos?

(Student): We need Oromia. We need its rich resources. Historically Oromia has been there to serve us Habeshas. This will continue, if we can help it. The Oromos have served the Amharas for a long, long time. Now they have to serve us. As long as we keep them divided, they are no threat. But the moment they unite, we will have a problem. A big one. We will make sure they don't.

(A): I am beginning to think the issue is not whether you passed or failed a course. It appears you are looking for an excuse, and it seems any excuse would do as long as you can get your hands on the villa and its surrounding properties. Is that a fair assessment ?

(Student): "Aggression Must Not....

(C): Be Rewarded."

(A): I am convinced that the student has no intention of reconciling with the teacher nor does he want to find an amicable solution to the problem. This is something we cannot accept. Too many lives are at stake. The question is what do we do next. What do we recommend?

(Student): The teacher "can't be trusted."

(B): I think on this note we better conclude this portion of the hearing. Tomorrow the committee will meet to discuss its recommendations to the School Board.

(A): This was a most unusual hearing. Indeed I learned a lot.

(B): Me too.

(C): Same here. Thank you Mr. Student.

---

Continued in Part 4