In a move described by observers as a profound irony, a new draft proclamation intended to ensure government transparency and the public's right to information was itself discussed in a restricted, "secretive" session. Although the House of Peoples' Representatives labeled the event a "Public Consultation," reports indicate the meeting was tightly controlled, excluding the broader public and barring journalists from reporting on the proceedings.

The consultation, organized by the Standing Committee on Democratic Affairs on May 13, 2026 (Ginbot 5, 2018 E.C.), was characterized by a source as "extremely limited and far from public view". While specific media professionals and representatives of professional associations were invited, they were strictly prohibited from recording audio or video. Furthermore, participants were explicitly told they were attending as "spectators" rather than journalists permitted to report on the event. Of the private media outlets, only EBS was reportedly invited to attend.

The restrictive nature of the meeting stands in stark contrast to the stated goals of the draft proclamation. According to the explanatory document accompanying the draft, the new law is designed to break the "culture of secrecy" within government institutions and replace it with accountability and transparency. The document even critiques the previous 17-year-old Freedom of the Media and Access to Information Proclamation (No. 590/2000), stating it failed largely because government officials mistakenly believed that maintaining a "good image" required hiding information.

However, the House of Peoples' Representatives appeared to replicate the very culture the new law seeks to dismantle. By following a strict pre-registration process and limiting participation to a predetermined list of officials and individuals, the committee bypassed the democratic norm of open public hearings.

Industry experts who attended the session expressed concern to Meseret Media that such an exclusionary approach undermines trust in the legislation. They argued that if a law meant to protect the right to information is debated in secrecy, it bodes ill for its future implementation across government agencies. Ultimately, the closed-door discussion serves as a stark reminder that in Ethiopia, the journey toward genuine freedom of information remains a significant challenge, often stalled by the gap between legislative rhetoric and practical execution.