Dr. Fisseha Eshetu’s Claims Under Scrutiny: A Closer Look

 

Dr. Fisseha Eshetu

By Taye Haile

Dr. Fisseha Eshetu, the CEO of Purpose Black, has recently made headlines by claiming that he fled Ethiopia out of fear of arrest by the government. He alleges that government agents threatened him and accused him of supporting the group known as Fano. However, an examination of the facts and Dr. Fisseha’s history reveals a different story, casting doubt on the validity of his claims.

To start with, Fisseha has made numerous attempts to align himself with the Prosperity Party (PP). Over time, he has written multiple letters to the Prime Minister and various ministerial offices, seeking to curry favor. This is evident in his efforts to even mimic the PP party logo for his own company. Such actions suggest that Fisseha was eager to gain preferential treatment from the government. His motivations became clearer when he requested the Prime Minister to act as the guardian of his company. This request was rightly denied, as the Prime Minister’s duty is to serve the entire nation, not to provide personal guardianship over individual enterprises.

Fisseha’s invocation of the term “Fano” raises significant questions about his intentions. Historically, Fisseha has been known to oppose Fano, so his sudden claim of being targeted for supporting them appears dubious. It seems likely that this is a calculated move designed to achieve two main objectives. Firstly, it seeks to mislead the public into believing that his departure from Ethiopia was a result of political persecution rather than business failures. Secondly, it aims to garner sympathy and support from the Ethiopian diaspora by portraying himself as a victim of governmental oppression.

Looking more closely at Fisseha’s business dealings over the years, a different picture emerges. There is substantial evidence to suggest that Fisseha has struggled to meet the contractual obligations he made with his customers. Reports indicate that he has failed to deliver the houses he promised and has mismanaged the funds entrusted to him by his clients. This financial mismanagement has likely left many customers without the homes they paid for, leading to significant financial losses.

Given this context, it becomes plausible that Fisseha is using the Fano narrative as a smokescreen to deflect blame from his own business failures onto the government. By doing so, he hopes to evade accountability for his actions and the financial harm he has caused to his customers.

In conclusion, it is essential for the public to approach Fisseha’s statements with a healthy dose of skepticism. His claims of government persecution appear to be a strategic maneuver to divert attention from his business failings and to shirk responsibility for the financial losses suffered by his customers. The Ethiopian diaspora, his company’s customers, and the Ethiopian government should collaborate to ensure that Fisseha is brought back to Ethiopia through Interpol. It is crucial that he faces legal proceedings to address his alleged misconduct and to ensure that his customers receive the justice and compensation they deserve.

By holding Fisseha accountable, we can ensure that justice is served and that such deceptive practices are not allowed to go unchecked. It is imperative for the integrity of both the business environment and the legal system in Ethiopia that individuals who engage in such fraudulent activities are brought to justice.