CHAPTER ONE

Understanding Civics and Ethics

1.1. Defining Civics, Citizenship, Ethics and Morality
Civics and Ethics are understood and analyzed in different countries differently depending on the
distinct realities and challenges of states and societies. Given this, civics and ethics are separate
fields of academic study in the social sciences dealing with citizenship and morality respectively.
More specifically, while civics is devoted to the study of the legal and political rules and values
governing the relations between the individual and the state, Ethics deals with those moral rules
and values governing an individual citizens relations with other individuals and social groups.

Ethics as a separate academic filed can be limited to a study of the meaning of moral language
basing itself in another broad field known as Moral philosophy- the study of moral choices and
the arguments that spring from them. It is aboutthe study of the cultural life of an individual. In
other words, it deals with what is good and bad, with moral duty and obligation. However,
ethical principles do not have uniform application throughout the world.From this we can also
say that ethics is about the art of living seeing our life through the choices we make and
gradually we construct a work of art. In other words, we human beings are more than flesh,
bones and mortgages. We cannot solely be defined by our financial, work, social or political
status. We are not simply consumers, nor unthinking slaves in society. We are not automata,
programmed by genetic, environmental and social factors instead we have feelings, intuitions,
dreams, and ambitions. Hence, our lives are continually being shaped by the choices we make,
and by the convictions and values that underline them. In this way, our lives are like works of art:
they are what we make of them,and they say what we are. In line with thinking, Ethics is
therefore concerned with what is right or wrong, just or unjust and good or bad about peoples
ideas and then dictates how people should/should not live accordingly. It examines the choices
people make and the values and reasoning that lie behind them.
The study of ethics can thus offer two things.
1. It helps to appreciate the choices that others make, and evaluate the justification they give
for those choices.

1
 2. It involves a reflective sharpening of ones own moral awareness a conscious
examination of values and choices, of how these have shaped ones life so far, and (more
importantly) of how they can be used to shape the future.

In practice ethics tends to start by observing the moral choices people make and the reasons they
give for them. From these it produces theories about what is, or should be, the bases for moral
choice. It then returns to actual situations, to see whether the theories help to make sense of the
moral issues and to come to conclusions about matters of right and wrong. In doing this, ethics
follows scientific method, for scientific hypothesis are framed as a result of observations, but are
then tested out against subsequent evidence to see if they are adequate. For instance, you do not
have to know the term utilitarian in order to see the sense in wanting to choose what promises
to give the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people.

Citizenship on the other handrefers to the legal link between an individual and a state. More
broadly, citizenship is the state of being a citizen of social, religious, political or community
groups, locally, nationally and globally, which carries with it both rights and responsibilities,
duties and privileges, and which is guided by social values and encouragement of active
participation.It is a relationship between an individual and a state, defined by the law of that
state, with corresponding duties and rights in that state. Moreover, citizenship involves both
rights and responsibilities. Citizens are guaranteed such privileges as the right to vote, the right
of freedom speech, and freedom of religion. Citizens are also expected to obey laws, serve on
juries, help in their communities, and perform other duties.

Moralityrefers to the degree to which an action confirms to a standard or norm of

human conduct.It deals with the aspects of good and bad actions themselves depending
upon individuals act.Though people erroneously use the term morality and ethics,
interchangeably, the term morality and moral refers to the conduct itself while ethics
and ethical refer to the study of moral conduct (morality) or the code that one follows.
That means morality is about the specific human behavior (conduct) itself while ethics
is about the study of morality (i.e. what makes a particular human conduct right or
wrong, moral or immoral, just or unjust).

2
Civics and ethics, therefore, deals with the rules and values governing the relationship between
an individual and the state; and between an individual and the rest of the society.It deals with the
study of the rights and responsibilities of citizens accompanied by the necessary standards of
ethics & morality.The privileges or benefits that you are entitled to get are called your rights
while the obligations that you are required to fulfill are called your responsibilities. It is about
self government.Selfgovernment implies active participation and involvement in self
governance; not passive acquiescence in the actions of others. Selfgovernment implies also
controlling ones own actions, behaviors etc.

1.2. Similarities and differences of Civics and Ethics

Generally speaking, civics studies the political and legal aspect of the life of an individual citizen
whereas ethics is focused with the study of the cultural aspect of his/her life. Although strictly
speaking civics and ethics are separate academic fields of study they however share certain
commonalities. The followings are some examples of the common features between civics
(citizenship) and ethics (morality).
A. The issue of membership
Membership to a certain groupings is the very essence of both citizenship and morality. In the
absence of the concept of membership both lose their fundamental meanings and status as
subject matters to be studied. In citizenship study membership is meant that of individual
citizen to a political and legal community of the highest order(the state) whereas in morality
study it largely denotes to that of a cultural community tied up by common moral and value
bonds whether there is government or not. In other words, Citizenship basically needs two
parties and their relations for its existence under minimum conditionsthe state and the
individual citizen, while morality needs the relation between the individual and the larger social
group as well as the state directly and indirectly as a rule maker and protector. As such, civics
tends to focus on the vertical and artificial relation of the individual while ethics studies the
horizontal and natural relations. Put differently, citizenship needs some kind of political and legal
arrangement to determine who is a member of the state and who is not. Similarly, morality is a
value arrangement that describes and prescribes the conditions for the individual member to be
accepted as a good element as judged and rated by the society itself which is the biological and
cultural breeding ground of its members. However, under both conditions membership to a
3
certain grouping and community is an established common factor shared by citizenship and
morality. The reason is, as Aristotle also holds it, that humanity is destined by its exceptional
nature to be a social creature with an inherent duty to tie itself to a political company.
B. The issue of rights and obligations
Human beings are social animals under inherent trend to live together in a social gathering. But
this social gathering is not anywhere a haphazard and accidental aggregation of individuals
without some kind of systematized organization and common orientation. There are rather
certain unavoidable rules and procedures with lists of privileges and concomitant obligations
attached to the individual person as a condition of social attachment with the vast social
surrounding. For instance, Citizenship entails a set of rights and obligations for individual
members thus the violation or respect of which results in some arrangement of punishment or
reward by the group as well as the state. Morality on its part is nothing but a list of values
standardizing bad and good behaviors and dispositions of the individual by the larger mass or
group. Both underscore the fact that the individual person is accountable to two sets of rights and
obligations mostly set and protected by social forces out of his control.
C. The issue of institutionalized protection
Both citizenship and morality are founded on institutionalized origin, development, operation,
supervision and protection within the community. An institution here signifies a sociological
establishment and organization of people formed strictly with a degree of executive right to
exercise coercive power on the individual in the name of the community. It bases itself on certain
sets of rules and procedures accepted by the majority of the people in the community and
practices hierarchic structures to apply its control over the behavior of the individual. The
institution obtains and maintains its legitimacy to rule over the behaviors of the individual
member of the group from majority approval and its capacity to transcend itself across
generations. With the major differences in the authority of the institution, it is commonly
responsible to protect civic and moral sets of rights and obligations by applying formal and
informal supervisory mechanisms over the individual. The state through the government and all
agencies under it regulate and administer citizenship on day-to-day basis while such social
institutions like the church, family, neighborhood and others inspect morality and ethical
standards more informally. This institutional protection of citizenship and morality helps to make

4
individual relations and actions within the community predictable and subject to proportional
rewards and punishments.
D. The issue of interactive duality
Although Citizenship differs from morality in that it is formal, official, predominantly rational,
highly authoritative and regular in its operation because it finds its strength from the legitimacy
of the government and its formalized authority, both categories of social formulations have a
strong tendency to reinforce each other in application which leads to some sort ofinteractive
duality. In other words, the list of rights and duties in citizenship are officially communicated,
documented, and guarded by full time public institutions in the name of the wellbeing and peace
of the state, the people and the nation. Morality on the other hand, lists recommended
prescriptions of good behavior and denounces a long list of bad actions within the community
but it lacks formality, regularity and immediacy unlike citizenship or legal rule. Despite this
duality, however, both citizenship and morality reinforce each other as the political community
of citizens is at the same time the cultural community of human beings. Most legal rules,
restrictions and controls over the behaviors of the citizen get their origin from the moral
traditions and thoughts of the people over its individual member. For instance, homicide is as
seriously punishable crime by the law of citizenship as it is unacceptable and denounced by the
moral rule of cultural community. This implies that most legal-political rules are formalizations
of moral standards and derive their justifications for their authoritative application from them.
Similarly, moral rules function with a state back for formalization though not all the time. This
gives them a dual existence with a high level of positive interaction.
E. The relative nature of the fields
Both citizenship and morality bear a degree of relativity with morality tending to be even more
relative due to its nature. The following factors, among others, supply the reason for their
relative nature.
1.The relative nature of existing philosophy/outlook of the government
Based on sources of legitimacy of rulers and in the context of citizenship and morality
governments outlooks could be generally classified as authoritarian or democratic.Given this,
the conduct of governments makes citizenship to be a relative politico-legal concept and practice.
i.e. some states are excessively authoritarian thus in their politico-legal arrangements they give
individuals the status of subject with only obligation to respect the expectations and orders of
5
the rulers but with no privileges. Besides, under such government systems, the personal and
group beliefs, religions, cultures, values and attitudes of rulers become equated with national
values and moral standards with a wide coverage on the media and the national education
system. At present, this outlook of governments is under pressure from global standards of
behavior and norms and hence is in transformation towards democracy though exceptions are
always there. This in turn gave rise to a relatively modern citizenship and humane moral
standards of political rules. The same trend of relativity also applies to the conceptualization and
practice of morality.
2.The relative nature of levels of Civic and Moral Awareness of the citizens at large
Citizens level of awareness about fundamental civic and moral values also shapes the relative
nature of citizenship and morality. This gives us the relative nature of the two concepts not
among different societies but among citizens within the same society and state. In the strict
sense, citizenship and morality are meaningless without some kind of bottom up participation by
citizens on states affairs; its policies and rule philosophy. This participation also depends on how
far civic awareness is there among the people on political processes and ethical aspects of
citizen-state relations. Civic awareness is probably the most relative issue in the study of civics
and ethics, for there are always background factors that affect it. For example, citizens
awareness level is affected among others by the following notable factors;
Level of Income
In the analysis of why there is difference in the level of awareness among citizens regarding their
politico-legal relations with the state and moral ties with their people, it is widely believed that
their level of income really matters. i.e wealth/ income places citizens of the same state at
different positions in their access and concern about the state, government policies and the rest of
the society.

Accordingly, the upper class societywhich consists of few citizens commanding the largest
concentration of wealth and thus are stable/ comfortable in their life styles due to their privileged
economic positions in the society tend to be conservative in their political and moral dispositions
with a strong need to see only little or no change of the status quo in the political, moral, legal
and social setting. They heavily need a great degree of national stability and political
predictability in order to maintain their unchallenged advantages. They also tend to be
remarkably nationalistic with maximum loyalty to the state and the constitution as they guarantee
6
them peace and protection for their property and wealth. These citizens are close to politics and
government with keen interest areas of government policy that would greatly affect their civic
and moral positions within the state. The most important issues of interest for them are policies
of taxation, inflation, labor, environment and foreign relations in general.

The Middle class societywhich includes section of the society that economically stand next to the
upper income group on the other hand is highly dynamic and with the best opportunity to
uninterrupted rise of income as it works hard tends to be vibrant, participatory and active social
group for it consists of probably young, professional, ambitious and liberal section of the society.
It was this social group that successfully led the bourgeois revolutions in Western Europe that
transformed society in to a capitalist socio-economic and political community. The political
efficiency and determination of this group comes from its very middle position between the
richest upper income groups which seeks it to effect policy changes to its advantages. It equally
tends to master the support of the lower income group which believes that this group understands
more about the life conditions across the ordinary and helpless people.

Finally, the Lower class societywhich constitutes those large elements of society whose annual
income is extremely low and with little opportunities to leave the group tends to be scarcely
interested at what is going on at the national and regional governments. They are hardly tuned to
the media nor do they seek to access almost all information sources though they generally tend to
be law abiding citizens. The lower income group gets alerted occasionally by particular domestic
and foreign political developments and unusual events that captivate their interest and influence
their hopes for better life in the negative or the positive. Politics is too complex, elusive, and
unmanageable for them hence they want to maintain a long distance from it and strongly feel to
reject elections as meaningless to change conditions by the vote of poor people. Generally, low
income groups are grossly marginalized from the main stream of politics and moral debates
worrying little about rights and the nature of their relation with the state.
Civic Culture
Civic culture is generally defined as a trend (of behaviors, attitudes and orientations) among
citizens to be concerned about political processes and being efficacious in the political climate.
Based on this definition, residents of a given state usually demonstrate

7
participatory,passive/subject or parochial civic culture and each affects the level of awareness
they develop.
For instance, participant citizens are those with good general knowledge and understanding
about policies and government activities and thus are assertive on civic participations. This in
turn implies that in states with a proportional size of participant citizens politics has been found
to be stable, civilized and predictable though dynamic. Besides, economic progress would be
consistent/ uninterrupted and also with little or no massive report of violent conflict.
In contrast, subjects (citizens with passive civic culture) are those with inconsistent interest in
politics may be because they feel their private conditions are too good to be concerned about
politics(say join national elections) or they have largely poor general knowledge and
understanding about national politics. At any rate, this group of citizens tends to be passive in its
civic participation.

The worst case is, however, that of parochial civic culturein which we have citizens with neither
the knowledge about political developments at national level nor the interest to participate at any
level and agenda of discussion. They strongly believe that they have no power to change or affect
things even at local levels but simply observe political developments only that are local and close
to them. In other words, parochial are largely self-marginalized from politics unusually due their
day to day concern to win their daily bread which they feel has no relations with what the radio
or the television may say. They lack all the means to divert their attentions to politics and may go
to the extent of having no information about who rules the country or wins in a hotly contested
national election. They virtually have no record of visiting the polling station at all.
The general lesson to be derived from the above is thus the stability of the state and its socio-
economic developments are largely dependent on how reasonably it maintains the balance
among these three gradations of civic cultures. Moreover, a society dominated by a majority of
parochial is more likely to face even dangers of national disintegration and fragmentation.
1.3. Why study Civics and Ethics? /Goal of Civics and Ethics
1.3.1 Promoting the Culture of Civic Responsibility
Civic responsibility is the reasoned commitment to fulfill the obligations of citizenship. Some of
these obligations or responsibilities among others

8
 To respect others right.
To Vote.
To study issues.
To limit government to its constitutional limits, i.e., to make the constitution
effective.
To help ones family, neighbors etc. through voluntary service.
To evaluate peoples representatives.
To pay taxes.
To give military service when necessary.
To influence government policy.
To improve quality of government functioning, etc.

1.3.2 Enhancing and sustaining the moral and ethical values and virtues of our society.
1.3.3 To produce an effective citizens
That is, citizens who have awareness are sensitive to societal needs, problems, and opportunities.
Moreover, it is also needed that know how, skills and knowledge, the capacity for intelligent
action.

There are also several and complex real life problems that make the need to study civics and
Ethics highly imperative and hence justifiable for its problem solving profession nature.
Although the degree of their severity vary from state/society to state/society, the following
challenging societal problems can be identified as the most crucial ones demanding an
effective and constructive study of citizenship and morality to be solved. The problem areas can
be classified as legal-politico-cultural and socio-economic related ones.

1.3.4 Civic/political culture related problems

Although the desired civic culture is the one with a good level of civic consciousness in which
citizens possess a tendency to be reasonably concerned with the conduct of politics and to get
actively participated. The following are still seen prevailing as the most frequent cultural
problems in many states/society today;

9
1.3.4.1 Large Imbalance between Rights and Duties
This undesired civic culture manifests itself interalia in the following ways:
1. A good number of citizens regardless of differences of age, sex, religion, profession, etc,
are usually observed to be more concerned and conscious about their civic rights, while
they tend to forget their civic duties recognized by the constitution. An even clearer
example here is that a lot of citizens demand and guard the right to safe, peaceful and
predictable life. They weight the efficiency of the state solely on its capability to ensure a
day to day safe life for the individual citizen. These citizens, however, tend to forget
their civic duty to co-operate with the law by often cooperating with illegal citizens, not
reporting crimes of all kind to the police or not fighting crime and initiating the society
for the prevention or control of crimes etc.
2. The other group of citizens is those standing at the opposite pole of the above. These
citizens feel that they are weak and helpless to protect their rights even when their rights
are arbitrarily violated against constitutional limits. These citizens are more sensitive to
discharging duties at the price of their rights because they regard the state as all powerful,
unquestioned, unaccountable and naturally rightful to do all its wishes upon citizens. For
these citizens, complete submission to the state without an equal or parallel concern and
assertiveness about their constitutional rights benefits, advantages and official
entitlements is the most reliable guarantee for their individual safety and security. They
have a strong tendency to distant themselves from visiting public institutions, like
kebeleadministrations, courts etc., and regard them as sources of unexpected danger to
ones safety. This extreme imbalance in the form of sacrificing legal rights (benefits) in
excess of civic duties adversely affects positive civic culture.
3. The other group of citizens, which is said to be dominant, by researchers, in many
societies particularly of the developing world, is the one lacking a good understanding
about the general list of civic rights and civic duties. The level of their consciousness
about what is going on in the society and the state is at best, inadequate and blurred, and
at worst, they are ignorant and devoid of any relevant information. Thus, with regard to
their relation with the state on the protection of their rights and discharging their civic
duties, these groups of citizens tend to do as per the instruction of others without self-
civic skill, in a passive and uncritical manner. On the other hand, when they are asked
10
 why they violated the rights of others and failed to discharge their civic duties, they
innocently and intuitively say that they know little or nothing that their action was illegal.
Under civic conditions where such group of citizens is a majority, leave alone the
development in the life of the society, the existence of the state is at foreseeable danger.
These citizens negatively contribute for the growth of a civic culture that cultivates
societal peace and security.
In sum, the consequences of the above civic culture problems can be;
Incivility, self centeredness and bad faith at societal level;
Passive, non-patriotic and unresponsive citizenship which in turn negatively
affects social transformation;
Ignorance, unprincipled citizenship and civic immobilization;
Weak, Irregular and uncritical participation in the political process etc

1.3.4.2 Virtue/Ethicate of socio-economic life related problems

Civic mindedness is a highly desirable quality/virtue of a citizen due to its positive contribution
for the development and transformation of society. i.e. when the mentality of civic mindedness
becomes a dominant national spirit, citizens develop a strong tendency to be committed to and
concerned daily with the well being of the general public. As a result, they do things often
voluntarily as far as their service provides some benefit for the good life of their people.

Moreover, civic minded citizens have a clear understanding and awareness about the strategic
importance of public infrastructures, common natural resources and properties and thus they
never hesitate to guard and preserve such public utilities and infrastructures as roads, bridges,
school buildings, hospitals, water pipelines, electric poles and cables, etc. against any damage
and misuse. Despite all these, however, there still are several evident problems regarding the
virtue of socio-economic lives of both governments and societies manifested mostly in the form
of repeated and uninterrupted records of abuses and careless treatment by citizens and
government of common goods. This can be seen from three recognizable angles. One is a virtue
of Vandalismin which citizens tend to intentionally and illegally destroy public infrastructures,
utilities and properties like wild animals, forests, water, electric and communication facilities.
Secondly, citizens usually demonstrate a virtue ofpublic good abuse/misuse(a behavior of using

11
public goods and wealth illegally and unethically for ones computed benefits ) either via
Patron client relations (clientalism) mechanism - a situation where a few government officials
abuse their political decision making power to divert public resources for sectional benefit of
themselves and their supporters or through Prebendalism- a concept denoting the use of state
office as an instruments for the gains of individuals and their ethnic brethren. The point here is
that such behavior systematically undermines civic duty when citizens begin to regard it as
normal, unavoidable and at times, an established and rightful quality of being a political leader.
Prebendalism is also called rent seeking behavior gathering wealth, not as a reward to ones
labor and innovation, but exploiting public resources. The third way citizens display their non-
civic minded virtue is via engaging in Kleptocracy a behavior in which the entire government
system, relations between citizens and the state, citizens with each other, etc. become dominated
by official and proactive attitudes of corruption.
In conclusion, the study of civics and ethics which examines and analyzes undesirable civic
cultures and virtues of social life manifested in the above discussed different features thus
becomes justifiable against its cruciality to save us from their derived negative consequences.
This is so because the study of civics and ethics enables citizens to fully understand and
internalize among others the following fundamental elements of civic and ethical virtues:
Elements of Civic and ethical dispositions: Such as Civility, Duty-boundedness (both individual
and collective), Self discipline, Civic mindedness, Open-mindedness, Compromization,
Tolerance, Compassion/generosity and Loyalty to the Nation and its Constitution; and
Elements of civic and ethical commitments:such active and all inclusive
engagements/participation on political/ electoral processes, an overall influencing and
monitoring of public policies and also societies values and standards of life.
1.3.5 Building civic competence of citizens
Civic competence is the capacity or ability to participate effectively in the political as well as
social systems. In newly democratic or democratizing countries where people are just beginning
to learn the arts of self-government and even in countries where there are developed democratic
institutions, there are limits of civic competence.If citizens were required to be effective in
participation, it would presuppose a certain level of civic competence on the part of citizens. In
this regard, there are common forms of participation that characterize competent citizens.
COMPETENCE OF GOOD CITIZENS
12
A competence refers to a complex combination of knowledge, skills, understanding, values,
attitudes and desire which lead to effective, embodied human action in the world, in a particular
domain. Ones achievement at work, in personal relationships or in civil society are not based
simply on the accumulation of second hand knowledge stored as data, but as a combination of
this knowledge with skills, values, attitudes, desires and motivation and its application in a
particular human setting at a particular point in a trajectory in time. Competencies are broader
than knowledge or skills, and are acquired in an ongoing, lifelong learning process across the
whole range of personal, social and political contexts.The term competence is strongly value
dependent (Westera, 2001) because a competence is expressed in action in the real world, for
example a person could be a competent thief, a competent mechanic or a competent career.Civic
competence is the complex mix of the sum of the different learning outcomes which are
necessary for an individual to become an active citizen. It is a combination of the knowledge,
skills, attitudes and values which enable people to act successfully in civil society, representative
democracy and everyday life based on democratic values.

1.4 Characteristics/Competence of good citizenship

A. Legality: - virtuous citizens freely adhere to the fundamental rules
required for the maintenance of a system of constitutional government without
requiring the imposition of external authority. In all situations, there are some
rules and regulations to be observed. This means individuals should be prepared
to follow rules and regulations without violating their personal freedoms.

B. Patriotism: - is love, devotion and commitment to ones country. It was

said that a true patriot should respect and adore his countrys symbols.
C. Responsibility: - Citizens have various obligations in their society.
These can be of moral, ethical, and legal origins. Good citizens maintain the
moral and ethical values of their society. They have also the duty to uphold the
constitutional principles and values and observe other laws. Every member of
the society has the duty to respect individual rights and freedoms.
Citizens are expected to actively participate in civic associations established for
various purposes. Another way by which responsibilities shall be discharged is
through paying fair tax and protecting public property from embezzlement and

13
misappropriation. Moreover, citizens have the responsibility to protect and
preserve natural resources, environment, and historical heritage. The other issue
in which citizens are strongly expected to feel responsible is the threat posed by
HIV/AIDS. Fighting this killing disease, which threatens the existence of human
race, is the major responsibility of each and every citizen.
D. Industriousness: - work, being necessary for the survival of the human
race and civilization, is the main concern of human beings. Ethical work conduct
thus enables workers to possess proper behavior and so as to develop proper
relationship with other workers and help them create good industrial
environment.
E. Self-reliance: - is a remarkable level of dependency on ones power,
resources and judgment. It is an attribute shared by both individuals and
communities. Individuals or communities that lack a self reliant character are
dependent on others to satisfy their needs.
F. Active community participation: - Community participation means
active involvement of citizens in the socio-economic and political spheres. The
participation may take place at different levels having different forms. It might
take place at school, at community, regional, national or international levels. It
might also have different forms based on the purpose of the participation.
Community participation may include: political participation & civic
participation.

14
 Chapter Two
Understanding Society, State and Government
State, government and society are common terminologies and concepts to the study of civics and
ethics. Thus, they are given wide coverage in this material for they have the most identifiable
influence on each other and this mutual influence in turn affects the individual citizen in many
ways such as providing him/her opportunities and challenges of development and stability/
peace. Moreover, the triangular relations among these three institutions determine the level of
states general socio-economic development and their influence in international relations. Given
this, the meanings, origins /historical evolutions and the nature of systematic interaction of
particularly two of these institutions- State and Government- would be discussed in some detail
in the subsequent sections.
2.1. Society
Definition: The term society may refer to different things and concepts among different scholars
specializing in different fields of studies. For instance, the term and concept of society mean
different between sociologists and anthropologists, and at the same time it may also mean
differently between political scientists and lawyers, etc.

In its broad sense, society, compared to other composition of individuals, is the largest
community of people living together. The term society refers to the collective existence of human
beings in varying forms of organization and relationships over a period of time in a defined
place. In this sense, society is broad grouping of people who live in a common environment and
have common traditions, institutions activities, and interests. In other words, society denotes the
totality of modes of human life, interactions, norms of behavior and underlying structures.

Furthermore, society can be explained by emphasizing two important perspectives, namely the
respective of relationship and heat of person. Viewed from the perspective of relationships,
society in the widest sense includes every kind of relationships entered in to by people, both men
and women. To be human is to interact with other human beings in everyday lives. When people

15
interact with each other, they affect others and are affected by others in one way or another. The
forms of relationships can vary from simple relations between individuals, such as friendship,
membership to a club, etc., to those complex interactions that occur at the level of large
communities leading to statehood, and by extension, to membership of world organizations, for
example the united Nations, the African Union, etc. social relationship can be conscious or
unconscious, organized or unorganized, direct or indirect, and cooperation or conflicting. Thus,
social life includes the whole issues of human relations without any boundary. It comprises then
tire web of societal relationships that are numerous, diverse, over lapping and dynamic.
In other ways, society can also be explained from the perspective of persons. In this sense,
society refers to a system of collective or group life within which men and women of all ages
live a shared life. As such all persons in a given society pursue their lives in terms of their
relationships with other people such as their parents, teachers, friends, neighbors, supporters,
opponents and so on. In short, society is made up of individuals in societal relationships as
interconnected and overlapping groups.
A society can also be defined as a self-perpetuating grouping of in dividable occupying a
particular territory, which mobhas its own distinctive culture and institutions. The term is most
commonly used or describe human societies, although it mob be used to describe animal
societies. The term mob also refer to a particular people such as the near or to a nation state such
as Ethiopia. In political science, the term is often used to mean the totality of human
relationships general in contrast to the state.
The social scientists generally use the term society to mean a group of people that form a semi
closed social system in which most interactions are with other individuals belonging to the
group. More are with abstractly; a society is defined as a network of relationships between social
entities. A society is also sometimes defined as an interdependent community. An important
feature of society is social structure, aspects of which include roles and social ranking.
From its etymological source, the English word society emerged since the 14 th century and is
derived from the French society. The French word, into in had its origin in the Latin societies
that mean a friend association with others, from socials earning companion, associate comrade,
or business partner. Thus the meaning of society is closely related to what is considered to be
social. Implicit in the meaning of society is that its members share some manual concern or
interest, a common objective or common characteristic. As such, society is after used to mean
16
the collective citizenry of a country as directed through national institutions canceled with civic
welfare.

Generally in spite of the commonly accepted variations in its meaning and concept, it commonly
refers to the following.
Society as
Persons as an organized body; community, people, public.
The totality of social relationships among humans.
A group of humans broadly distinguished from other groups by mutual
interests, participation in characteristic relationships, shared institutions, and a
common culture.
A group of people united in a relationship and having some interest, activity or
purpose in common such as association, club, organization, fraternity, order,
union, etc.
The institutions and culture of a distinct self- perpetuating group.

The concept of society in general refers to a relatively large grouping or collectivity of people
who share more or less common and distinct culture, occupying a certain geographical locality,
with the feeling of identity or belongingness, having all the necessary social arrangements or
insinuations to sustain itself. Calhoun et al (1994): "A society is an autonomous grouping of
people who inhabit a common territory, have a common culture (shared set of values, beliefs,
customs and so forth) and are linked to one another through routinized social interactions and
interdependent statuses and roles." Society also may mean a certain population group, a
community

Attributes of a Society

First, a society is usually a relatively large grouping of people in terms of size. In a very
important sense, thus, society may be regarded as the largest and the most complex social group.
Second, as the above definition shows, the most important thing about a society is that its
members share common and distinct culture which sets it apart from the other population groups.
Culture refers to the art, knowledge, beliefs, morals, law, value, custom, tradition, literature,
17
science, philosophy etc. acquired by man as amember of society. Society preserves their culture
and also transmits it to their future generations. Thus society is the store and centre of human
culture.Similarities are found among the people of society in customs, traditions, folkways,
mores, norms, values, beliefs, attitudes, needs, objectives etc.

Third, a society also has a definite, limited space or territory. The populations that make up a
given society are thus locatable in a definite geographical area. The people consider that area as
their own. Fourth, the people who make up a society have the feeling of identity and
belongingness. There is also the feeling of oneness. Such identity felling emanates from the
routinized pattern of social interaction that exists among the people and the various groups that
make up the society. Fifth, members of a society are considered to have a common origin and
common historical experience. They feel that they have also common destiny. Sixth, members of
a society may also speak a common mother tongue or a major language that may serve as a
national heritage. Seventh, a society is autonomous and independent in the sense that it has all
the necessary social institutions and organizational arrangements to sustain the system. However,
a society is not an island, in the sense that societies are interdependent. There has always been
intersocietal relations. People interact socially, economically and politically. In a society all
members depend upon each other. For example, family, the first society in which we all are
closely and deeply associated is based on the biological inter-dependence. Similarly, in a family
some members earn and all depend upon them. The children depend upon their parents in
childhood age and parents depend upon their grown-up children in their old age. Both male and
female members in the family cannot survive without the inter-dependence upon each other in
every sphere. Thus inter-dependency is most significant element of society. At the higher level,
one nation depends upon the other in the economic, social, political, cultural fields.

Society is cooperation crossed by conflict. Both cooperation and conflict are the essential
elements of society. Co-operation plays a vital role in every aspect of our social life. Society
cannot exist without co-operation. People cannot lead a happy and comfortable life unless they
cooperate with each other. Family rests on cooperation. The members of the family cooperate
with each other to live happily and peacefully. Not only cooperation but also conflict is essential
for society. Society needs struggles to solve social as well as personal problems. Society also
requires conflicts for its formation and growth, harmony and disharmony, association and
18
dissociation as well. Conflict is a universal process through which all things have come to
existence.

It is however, important to note that the above features of a society are by no means exhaustive
and they may not apply to all societies. The level of a societys economic and technological
development, the type of economic or livelihood system a society is engaged in, etc. may create
some variations among societies in terms of these basic features.Society exists only where social
beings create relationship with one another. Thus society is a web of social relationships.

Contending Theories of Society

Sociologists view society in different ways. Some see the world basically as a stable and ongoing
entity. They are impressed with the endurance of the family, organized religion, and other social
institutions. Some sociologists see society as composed of many groups in confect, competing
for scarce resources. To other sociologists, the most fascinating aspects of the social world are
the everyday routine interactions among individuals that we sometimes take for granted. These
three views, the once most widely used by sociologists, are the functionalist, conflict, and inter-
actionist perspectives.
A. Structural Functionalism
According to functionalism, society is a system of interconnected parts that work together in
harmony to maintain a state of balance and social equilibrium for the whole. The functionalist
perspective emphasizes the interconnectedness of society by focusing on how each part
influences and is influenced by other parts.Structural-Functionalism is a sociological theory
that attempt to explain social institutions as collective means to meet social needs.The
central concern of structural-functionalism is a continuation of the Durkheimian task
ofexplaining the apparent stability and internal cohesion of societies that are necessary to ensure
their continued existence over time. Many functionalists argue that social institutions are
functionally integrated to form a stable system and that a change in one institution will
precipitate a change in other institutions.

Societies are seen as coherent, bounded and fundamentally relational constructs that function like
organisms, with their various parts (social institutions) working together to maintain and
reproduce them.All social and cultural phenomena are therefore seen as being functional in the

19
sense of working together to achieve this state and are effectively deemed to have a life of their
own. These components are then primarily analyzed in terms of the function they play. In other
words, to understand a component of society, one should look at the functions of this
institutions. For example, each of the social institutions contributes important functions for
society: Family provides a context for reproducing, nurturing, and socializing children; education
offers a way to transmit a societys skills, knowledge, and culture to its youth; politics provides a
means of governing members of society; economics provides for the production, distribution,
and consumption of goods and services; and religion provides moral guidance and an outlet for
worship of a higher power.A function, in this sense, is the contribution made by a phenomenon to
a larger system of which the phenomenon is a part.

Explanations of social phenomena therefore had to be constructed within this social level,
with individuals merely being transient occupants of comparatively stable social roles.
Thus, in structural-functionalist thought, individuals are not significant in and of themselves but
only in terms of their social status: their position in patterns of social relations. Structural-
functionalism strongly emphasizes the pre-eminence of the social world over its individual parts
(i.e. its constituent actors, human subjects).
Structural functionalists focus on the cohesion, order and stability of social system. Change
disrupts the orderly functioning of the system. This theory focuses on the effect of social change
on the structure of society, the function and dysfunction of change, stability and equilibrium of
the social system. When change takes place, it affects the order and equilibrium of the social
system and thus the system has to bring itself back to the equilibrium, to smooth functioning of
the system.
Functionalists use the terms functional and dysfunctional to describe the effects of social
elements on society. Elements of society are functional if they contribute to social stability and
dysfunctional if they disrupt social stability. Some aspects of society can be both functional and
dysfunctional.Sociologists have identified two types of functions: manifest and latent. Manifest
functions are consequences that are intended and commonly recognized phenomena. Latent
functions are unintended and often hidden consequences of a phenomenon.

20
 B. Conflict Theory
The conflict approach argues that society is constantly in conflict overresources.The conflict
perspective views society as composed of different groups and interest competing for power and
resources. It explains various aspects of our social world by looking at which groups have power
and benefit from a particular social arrangement.According to this theory, thus, social change is
the result of social conflicts and is essential and beneficial.

Conflict theory argues that society is not about solidarity or social consensus but rather about
competition. It is based on the assumption that society iscomposed of various groups
struggling for advantage that inequality is a basic feature of social life, and conflict is the
major cause of social change. Moreover, itis based on the assumption that there are real and
meaningful differences in society, created by various factors, and these differences are
influential in shaping the behavioral patterns of people.Sinceall social systems contain such
inequality, conflict inevitably results, and conflict, in turn, is responsible for social change.

Itrejects the view expressed by structural functionalism that society is held together by shared
norms and values claiming that true consensus does not exist; rather, societys norms and
values are those of the dominant elite and imposed by them on the less privileged to
maintain their advantaged position.

The Marxian-oriented features of conflict theory have emphasized class struggle, other theorists
have moved toward emphasizing conflicts that occur between interest groups and the
unequal distribution of political power. According to B. Turner, modern societies are the best
understood as having a conflict between the principles of democratic politics (emphasizing
equality and universal rights) and the organization of their economic systems (involving the
production, exchange, and consumption of goods and services, about which there is considerable
inequality). Therefore, while people have political equality, they lack social equality. This
unresolved contradiction is relatively permanent and remains a major source of conflict.

In general, the following are three primary assumptions of modern conflict theory:
Competition over scarce resources is at the heart of all social relationships. Competition rather
than consensus is characteristic of human relationships.
21
 Inequalities in power and reward are built into all social structures. Individuals and groups that
benefit from any particular structure strive to see it maintained.
Change occurs as a result of conflict between competing interests rather than through
adaptation. Change is often abrupt and revolutionary rather than evolutionary.

Therefore, conflict theory was developed in part to illustrate the limitations of structural-
functionalism. The structural-functional approach argued that society tends toward equilibrium
and focuses on stability at the expense of social change.
One of the primary contributions conflict theory presents over the structural-functional
approach is that it is ideally suited for explaining social change, a significant problem in
the structural-functional approach. The functionalist perspective views society as composed of
different parts working together.However, somewhat ironically, the primary limitation of the
social-conflict perspective is that it overlooks the stability of societies. While societies are in a
constant state of change, much of the change is minor. Many of the broader elements of societies
remain remarkably stable over time, indicating the structural-functional perspective has a great
deal of merit.
C. Inter-actionist Theory
Whereas functionalist and conflict theorists both analyze large scale society wide pattern of
behavior, the inter-actionist perspective generalizes about every day forms of social intonation in
order to understand society as a whole. Interactionism is a sociological framework for viewing
human beings as living in a world of meaningful objects. These objects may include material
things, actions, other people, relationships and even symbols.
The inter-actionists perspective is sometimes referred to as the symbolic interactions perspective,
because inter-actionists see symbols as an especially important part of human communication.
Members of a society share the social meanings of symbols. The basic notion of symbolic
interactionism is that human action and interaction are understandable only through the
exchange of meaningful communication or symbols. In this approach, humans are
portrayed as acting as opposed to being acted upon.
The main principles of symbolic interactionism as outlined by Blumer (1986) are:
1. Human beings act toward things on the basis of the meanings that things have for them
2. These meanings arise of out of social interaction

22
3. Social action results from a fitting together of individual lines of action
Symbolic interactionism emphasizes that human behavior is influenced by definitions and
meanings that are created and maintained through symbolic interaction with others. It is
suggested that humans respond to their definition of a situation rather than to the objective
situation itself. Hence, situations that we define as real become real in their consequences.

Symbolic interactionism also suggests that our identity or sense of self is shaped by social
interaction. We develop our self-concept by observing how others interact with us a label us.
The sense of symbolic interaction is based on the look at the interaction among people
as continuous dialog, where the participants are observing each other and thinking about
each others intentions and react on them differently. Social meanings arebeing created and
changed during this dialog. Human behavior is social and based on the communication.
Individuals are responding both to the behavior ofothers and to the others intentions. Symbolic
interaction theory, focuses on how the actions and interactions between people are the
result of the meanings that people attribute to objects and to other peoples actions. In short,
symbolic inter-actionists take the view that, every-thing from the self to the patterns of
interaction between individuals is the result of social processes.

2.2 State
Definition of state: The conceptions about the state show differences in the expression of
political scientists, political philosophers and Lawyers. In addition, definitions of the state are
almost as numerous as the authority who wrote about it. One scholar, Jacobsen Kidman,
remarked the difference where historians may regard the state as a concrete reality, philosophers
may regard it as an abstraction and lawyers regard it as a juristic person of formulating single
definition that would fit variety of state existence.
The concept of state is central to traditional approaches in political science. Different scholars
have various conceptions about the state. There were numerous philosophical explanations about
the state.
The state is organized machinery of the making and carrying out of political decisions
and for the enforcing of the laws and rules of government.
A state is a society politically organized and is more than a mere collection of families or
an agglomeration of occupational organizations.
23
 A state is the fundamental association for the maintenance and development of social
order, and to this and its central institution is endowed with the united power of the
community.
The state is the institution or sets of institutions, which serve certain elementary common
purposes and conditions of life, unites under a single authority the inhabitants of a clearly
marked torrential area. The united power of the community and single authority
expresses the power authority to make law.
As part of its technical expression, political theories, define the state as a human association
having five essential elements population, territory, government, sovereignty and recognition.
While the first two elements are taken as its physical elements, the rest are considered as the
spiritual or metaphysical elements.
For the purpose of civic and ethical study here, thestate is technically defined as a political
association that establishes sovereign jurisdiction within a defined territorial borders and
exercises authority through a set of institutions overall the members of society. This definition
broadly distinguishes the state from both Society and Government in that firstly the former is
abstract while the latter two have physical existence and secondly the State tends to be broader
in scope than government whereas at the same time it is narrower than society.
Major attributes (elements) of State
As can also be inferred from its definition at the start of this chaptertheState basically consists of
at least four fundamental elements (attributes) namely population, territory, government and
recognized sovereignty to be really called a state. A nation or a state ceases to exist if any one of
these elements stops to exist. Given this, there are now nearly two hundred states or nations in
the world which are qualified as independent and sovereign states. Now let us see in brief what
each of these attributes means and what it consists of.
Population
Nowadays, as many as approximately 6.2 billion people live curved up in about two hundred
states with a lot of political, sociological, economic, cultural and socio-historical variations
characterizing them. The following are some of these characteristic features:
Homogeneity: is one feature distinguishing nations and it denotes peoples similarity or sameness
in cultural-psychological identity. i.e they speak the same language, follow similar way of life,
share one and adjacent territory and similar psychological make-up Germany, Iceland in Europe,
24
Somalia and Swaziland in Africa, Korea and Japan in Asia are few examples of a relatively
homogeneous states in the world today.
Heterogeneity: refers to variation in cultural identity among the populations of states in language,
culture and traditions. Examples of heterogeneous states include, among others, Ethiopia (with
about 85 ethnic groups), Nigeria (with some 250 ethnic groups) and India (with about 800
languages).
Socio-economic diversity: is another feature of populations in a given state with developed
nations having a majority of urban, industrial and literate populations while fast developing
states are transforming from majority peasant and rural, uneducated and labor based population
to that of urban and literate one.
Government
Government in this context broadly refers to groups of people who exercise political power in all
the 200 nations of the world. All states by definition have governments of some kind that
exercises sovereign power on their behalf. But there have been a lot of differences among the
governments of the world due to different reasons. For instance, issue of Legitimacy(a condition
for a government to be legal and acceptable in the eyes of its people and externally) in that while
some states have tried to achieve legitimacy through democratic elections do this through socio-
economic transformation. Governments also differ on issue of Authority (a real capacity of a
government to exercise its legitimate or illegitimate political power to rule the people
effectively). i.e while some states have such required authority while others lack it due to
illegitimacy or political inefficiency born out of lack of either allegiance or obedience. Another
area of distinction of states is the form/system of their governments (how the government is
organized and how it makes divisions of power among its different branches and institutions). i.e
while some states organize through constitutional mechanisms while other states do it through
force or some traditions . Similarly while some states adopt Presidential system of government in
which ultimate authority lies under a strong president directly elected by the for a specified term
to serve both as the head of state and head of government other states still adopt Parliamentary
system in which the parliament is the most powerful organ with the ultimate decision making
power. The parliament exercises its executive authority through a strong prime minister who is
head of government usually supported by a president with little or only ceremonial power and
acts as head of the state.
25
 Territory
Territory generally refers to three physical possessions over which the state and government
exercise their sovereign authority- landmass, space and water body. These territorial divisions
among the present states of the world are extremely irregular due to irregular political evolutions
in creating the state. In general, there can be no state without a territory of its own though its
boundaries might be clearly or ill-defined.
Recognized sovereignty
Sovereignty is usually a very serious matter bothering all states due to the legal, political and
diplomatic consequences it brings to third party states during the process of recognition. This is
so because once a certain community attains sovereignty, its rights and obligations in
international relations dramatically change. For instance, such sets of rights as to make decisions
on ones matters without being subjected to any outside supervision or control would come to the
surface. It also equally brings duties to the state to be subjected to established norms and laws
that governed interstate relations. Thus, sovereignty particularly understood in the
internal/domestic sense, is a very sensitive right/ privilege rationed very carefully by the states of
the world
Theories on the origin and development of State
The origin and development of state is still subject to debate because various theories on the
subject supposed different factors which are often irreconcilable to justify state formation.
However, for the sake of convenience in this course, only one grand /holistic theory known as
evolutionary theory will be considered. Generally speaking, according to this theory;
The State is not a make but a growth; and
Not one but many factors have played their part in state building.
The implication of the above two points is that evolutionary theory underlines that the state is
the a result of a very long process of evolution that involved many factors each with a pivotal
role in the origin and gradual development of the state
What then are some of these multiple factors? And how did each contribute?
Kinship:- i.e. blood relationship which naturally leads to the creation of family
then to a tribe then to society eventually creates the state. In simple terms, the
state is the eventual extension of the family. This thinking is specifically derived
from what is known as Genetic theory of state formation.
26
 Social contract/ Agreement: This is taken from a social contract theory which
argues that the authority of the ruler is based on some kind of agreement between
himself/herself and his subjects which then implies that men/women had
originally created the state by means of a social contract (agreement) to which
each individual had consented.
Force (physical force): - This factor is taken from theory of force which believes
that the state is the consequence of the forcible subjugation of successive
primitive groups by other groups in a long continued war-fare. I.e. the victorious
become the masters and the conquered had to accept the religion and servitude of
their lords. The coercive force exercised by the leader eventually developed in to
political organization called the state.
Economics: - According to this factor which is derived from Marxist theory
difference in relative economic power (occupation and wealth) created economic
exploitation and the domination of one class by another. Therefore, the state arose
as a matter of necessity when society was divided in to hostile classes, each
having its own interest as an instrument of defense for the economic power holder
class. The implication here is that in primitive society where there was no private
property and then no class there was no state either. So, as the state had not
always existed it may not always exist also. It had come into being with the rise of
class contradictions, so it will wither away with the end of class antagonisms.
State structure: unitary vs federalism
The classification of forms of state structure is fundamentally based on criteria of state power
distribution. Accordingly, there are so far three recognized forms of state structure namely;
Unitarism, Federalism and Confederalism. However, only the first two will be discussed here as
they are the historically commonly practiced forms.
Unitarism
Unitarism is a form of state structure characterized by power centralization and indivisibility of
sovereignty,i.e. the national government is legally supreme over sub-national territorial bodies or
units. At a more extreme case, a unitary state is even one in which no other governmental body
but the central government has any areas of public control. In a unitary state, sub national bodies
may be over ruled by the central government in any political decision they make. In most case
27
local units are merely agencies of the central government established for its convenience in local
administration. They owe their legal existence to it. E.g. Britain, the Netherlands, Romania,
Poland etc.

Key features of Unitarism

By way of a summary presentation, the followings can be listed as some essential features
characterizing unitary State structure:
Supremacy of the Central Legislature (Parliament). There is only one
(unicameral) legislature which is always absolutely supreme and hence it alone
enacts and monitors the law. Other bodies (sub-national bodies) are
predominantly to implement the laws made by it.
Absence of subsidiary sovereign bodies: i.e.Sovereignty is vested in the
national /central government and hence sub national bodies are not sovereign
because sovereignty in unitary form of state structure is indivisible. The
implication is that subsidiary legislatures normally exist when represented by the
central government but then they can also be abolished by the central government
at any time.
Unchecked/unilateral (re) centralization of Power at the center: i.e. power that
may have been decentralized to sub-national bodies can be re-centralized at the
will of the central government unilaterally. Moreover,sub-national bodies
(regional, provincial and local bodies) can be reshaped, reorganized and even
abolished at will of the central government. However, some unitary states have
quasi-federal features such as a degree of home rule for special areas.

Major factors /rationales for opting Unitarism: Looking to potential merits and demerits
Despite all the above features, there are still some important factors why unitarism might be
opted. The following potential merits/advantages summarize the justification for opting
unitarism. These are;
Power organization in unitarism is relatively simple
Conflict of jurisdiction is easily avoidable or manageable
Services/functions duplication is comparatively rare because powers and

28
 functions are centralized at the center /National government.
There is big room for uniformity of laws, policy and administration throughout
the whole state, etc.
Best suited to small states, or homogeneous states with similar regions
Because of all the above unitarism is advantageous especially in countries with relatively small
area and homogenous population. However, there are some potential demerits/disadvantages that
make unitarism relatively non-opt able. These are summarized as follows;
It overburdens the national legislature with numerous local matters. Particularly, in this
fast changing world, the central authority cannot cope all with the issues prevailing.
It leaves distant authorities and may lack adequate knowledge of local conditions to the
determination of policies and the regulation of matters, which may concern only the
localities affected. Hence, it is relatively less responsible to local needs and interests. By
doing so,it may restrain the self-governance and self determination of sub national
bodies /units.
Federalism
Federalism is a form of state structure in which power is formally (constitutionally) divided or
shared between the federal /national/ central government and sub-national (regional/ provincial)
governments, each of which is supreme in its own sphere. In federal state, the legislative,
executive and judicial powers are divided between central and sub national governments. In this
sense, it is a direct opposite of unitary structure. Today, federalism is becoming the basis of the
political organization of several states though its nature varies from one to another. For example;
Ethiopia, Nigeria, India, Brazil, USA, Canada, Australia, Germany, etc.
Key features of Federalism
By way of a summary presentation, the followings can be listed as some essential features
characterizing federal state structure:
The existence of dual polities: i.e. two relatively autonomous levels of governments- the
central and the regional states- exist each possessing a constitutionally entrenched
(unilaterally non-encroach able) ranges of powers and functions.
Written constitution: A federal state has most of the time but not necessarily always a written
(codified) constitution that stipulates formal (constitutional) division of authority between

29
 the central government and sub national governments. Therefore, the relationship between
the government levels is conducted within a formal legal framework.
Supremacy of federal Government and Constitution: this implies that in federalism the
federal government and constitution is usually superior and supreme over the sub national
governments and constitutions in conducting key issues and activities of the country.
Absence of unilateral re-centralization of powers and authority by thecentral/federal
government at its will.
Absence of unilateral amendment of the federal constitution or some of its provisions by
either government level. That is to say that the consent or agreement of the sub
national/regional governments is needed in the amendment process.
Constitutional Arbiter. The formal provisions of the constitution are interpreted by a supreme
court (the judiciary) at the federal level, which thereby arbitrates in case of conflict (disputes)
between federal and regional government. The respective fields of jurisdiction of each level,
the judiciary in a federal level (system) is constitutionally empowered to determine.
However, in Ethiopia, the House of Federation (HF) is in charge of this power.
Linking institutions: In order to foster or develop cooperation, partnership and
understandings between the federal and regional (sub national) governments, federalism
normally offers the regional (sub national) governments representation through a bi-
cameral legislature.

Major factors /rationales for opting federalism: Looking to potential merits and demerits
There are some important factors why federalism might be opted over unitarism. The following
potential merits/advantages summarize the justification for opting federalism. These are;
Federal orders may increase the opportunities for citizen participation in public
decisionmaking; through deliberation and offices in both sub-unit and central
bodies;
Local and regional governments are usually closer to the people and sensitive to
their needs. This ensures that government responds not merely to the overall
interest of society, but also to the specific needs of particular communities. In
this regard, federalism facilitates efficient preference maximization more
generally and specifically in the area of economic/ fiscal management.
30
 Local decisions prevent decision-making from becoming overloaded in the
central government and, thus, federalism may also minimize inefficiency and
bureaucratic chaos.
Federalism tends to combine national unity and local autonomy and the rights of
self-government and thus maintains balance between centrifugal
(disintegrating)and centripetal (integrating) forces in a state.
Despite all the above merits that make it relatively advantageous particularly for large and multi-
cultural states, federalism, however, have the following potential disadvantages/demerits;
The division of power between the central and federal government may lead to
conflicts of jurisdiction between national and local officials and thus a sort of
'No Man's Land" in which neither authority takes decisive action might be
created.
Can result in duplication, overlap and confusion of responsibilities and
accountability

Federalism and the issue of State power distribution
Federalism distributes state power in three broad categories of practices. These are;
Exclusive powers: these refer to powers exercised either only by federal/central or the
regional government authorities. In the context of Ethiopia, powers that are only exercised
by the federal government include among others;
Foreign Affairs
Defense
Printing and circulating of money
Concurrent powers: these refer to the powers exercised commonly by the central and regional
governments. In Ethiopia, areas of concurrent powers include among others;
Social sectors such as education, health and labor and affairs;
Transport and communication sectors
Internal security
Agriculture, industry, trade and tourism

31
 Local finance raising and spending etc.
Residual powers:These refer to the powers on which the constitution does not
expressly/explicitly mention as to which government level exercise them- the central or
the regional. i.e. in some federal states they are given to the central government while in others
to the regional ones. In Ethiopia, such powers are given to regional governments.

Processes of Federalism in brief

Most literatures in the academics of civics and ethics usually identify two processes
through which federal arrangements emerge and evolve. These are;

Federalism by disaggregating or Holding together federations

This is a process by which the federal arrangement is developed from a previously unitary state
mainly as governments response to alleviate threats of secession by territorially clustered
minorities. Such federations often grant some sub-units particular domains of sovereignty
e.g. Language/ cultural autonomy while maintaining broad scope of action for central
government. Examples include Ethiopia, India, Belgium, Canada and Spain.

Federalism by aggregation or Coming together Federations

This is a process by which the federal arrangement is developed from previously independently
existing states by way of pooling their sovereign powers to a certain domain for the
sake of goods otherwise unattainable. However, such federations are also typically arranged to
constrain the center and prevent majorities form overriding a sub unit. Examples include the
USA, Switzerland, and Australia.

2.3 Government
Definition and functions of government
Working definition:Although Government can also be expressively defined as the administrative
wing of the state, technically it refers to group of people and set of institutions that make laws
(the legislative body), implement (executive body) and interpret them (the judiciary body).

32
In its broadest sense, to govern refers to rule or control others. Government can therefore be
taken to include any mechanism through which ordained rule is maintained, its central features
being the ability to make collective decisions and the capacity to enforce them.

A form of government can thus be identified in almost all social institutions like families, school,
businesses, all social institutions like families, schools, businesses, trade unions and so on.
However, government in this context is more commonly understood to refer to the formal and
institutional processes that operate at the national level to maintain public order and facilitate
collective action. It is a body or organ that administers a country and main organization dealing
with affairs of the whole country. Thus, government is one of the most essential components and
also an administrative wing of the state.

In other words, government can also refers to political organization comprising individuals and
institutions authorized to formulate public policies and conduct affairs of state. Governments are
empowered to establish and regulate the interrelationships of the people within their territorial
confines, the relations of the people with community as a whole, and the dealings of the
community with other political entities. Thus, government applies both to the governments of
national states such as the federal government of Ethiopia and the governments of sub-divisions
of national states such as the regional states, provinces, and municipal governments, etc. of
Ethiopia.
Simply, government can refer to either of the following.

The act or process of governing, especially the control and administration of public

policy in a political unit.

The office, function, or authority of a governing individual or body.

Exercise of authority in a political unit, rule

The agency or apparatus through which a governing individual or body functions and

exercises authority.

A governing body or organization as

33
 a) The ruling political party or coalition of political parties in a parliamentary
system.
b) The cabinet in a parliamentary system
c) The persons who make up a governing body.

A system or a policy by which a political unit is governed.

The organization that is the governing authority of a political unit.

A body that has the authority to make and the power to enforce laws within a civil,

corporate, religious, academic, or other organization or group.

Broadly speaking, government is different from all other organizations because it possesses the
following features which others do not. These are;
Comprehensive Authority: i.e. rules made by any social organization other than government
are intended to apply to members of respective organizations. On the other hand, the rules of
the government are intended to apply to all members of society. Governmental authority is
acknowledged (recognized) power to make all binding decisions and issue obligatory
commands.
Involuntary Membership: Membership in most social organizations is voluntary and based on
conscious choices. However, membership in a nation is largely involuntary, i.e. most people
initially become citizens of a nation and subject to its rules without their deliberate/
conscious act/choice.
Legitimate monopoly and use of force: all members of any society do not always obey all
government rules. All organizations impose sanctions on rule breakers but government
differs from other organizations in the kind of sanctions it is authorized to impose. i.e.
Government can also impose two additional sanctions forbidden to other organizations
namely; imprisonment and death penalty.

Purposes/ functions of Government

In a modern state, government functions have greatly expanded given the fact that the institution
has evolved to be an active force in political, social and economic developments. Thus given,
some of the major purposes and functions of government include:
34
 Self-preservation: i.e.any government must by maintaining law and order ensure
predictability. To this end, government must in turn defend (using its police, defense
and court institutions) its citizens and territory from internal and external security
threats. This function of the government also involves conflict management and
resolution. i.e. it builds institutions for resolving and managing conflict which is
inevitable because of resource scarcity and humanitys selfish behavior.Moreover,
protection of citizens constitutionally enshrined fundamental human and democratic
rights is part of this function of a government.
Distribution of Resources:all governments invariably play the role of distributing
resources in their societies. In addition, governments are the only institutions that
determine whether resources are to be controlled by the public or private sector. Some
governments may decide that the resources should be controlled by the public, which
commonly known as socialist states and others mates. In addition, other states may lie
in between, that is the resources could be controlled by both the public and private
sector.
Moreover, governments also play the role of regulation of the Economy. By enacting and
implementing policies related with the agricultural, industrial transportation, taxes, tariffs,
etc. governments (some of the institutions) indulge in regulating the overall economic
activities of the country.
Management of Conflicts:governments usually develop and consolidate institutions and
procedures for the management of conflicts. These may include the legislative,
executive, and judicial institutions with established procedures for the supervision and
resolution of conflicts that may arise in the society.
Fulfillment of Social or Group Aspirations:in addition to the aforementioned purposes
and functions, governments also strive to fulfill the goals and interests of the society as
a whole and of various groups within the society. These aspirations may include the
promotion of human rights, common good, and international peace.
Protection of Rights of Citizens:some governments, especially those of constitutional
and democratic governments, are established for the protections of every citizens
human, democratic, political, social, economic and cultural rights. Constitutionals and

35
 democratic governments are created to serve and protect every citizens rights, not to
dominate them.
Protection of Property:states /governments provide means such as police and the court
systems that protect private and public property.
Regulation of the Economy:This function of the government consists of the role of
controlling the distribution of resources among societies. This might be done via
governments tax and expenditure policies. Moreover, regulation of the economy
signifies determining which resources are to be publicly controlled and which are to be
in private hands as well as provision of necessary Goods and/or services that cannot be
privately provided to the public. Such goods and services include: education, health
care, water supply, electricity, telecommunication etc.

Government structure: vertical arrangement Vs horizontal arrangement

vertical Arrangement /organization
The vertical arrangement or organization of government specifically shows the relationship
between the centurial /national government and sub national bodies or institutions (such as the
regional, provincial or local bodies).
A. The Central /National Government:The central/national governmentrefersto the levels of
government that control the overall affairs of the state. This means, in most cases, that
central government assumes overall control of the states economic life, and supervises
matters such as internal trade, transport and communications. Accordingly, the central
/national government is the level of government that situated at the top of the
governmental structure of any state.
Thus, the central /national government is the level of government that is responsible to enable the
state to function as an actor on the international or world state. It would possesses the machinery
for entering into strategic alliance, negotiating trade agreements, gaining representation at
international summit meatiness, or becoming a member of supranational bodies. This is why
central government is invariably responsible for a states external relations, as demonstrated by
this control of the foreign, diplomatic and defense policy. Moreover, some form of central
government is necessary to mediate between sub national bodies to ensure cooperation in areas
of mutual interest.
36
 B. The Sub National /local governments/: local or regional government, in its simplest
sense, is government that is specific to a particular region or locality, for example a
region, village, district, town, city or country. More particularly, it is a form of
government that has no share in sovereignty, and is thus entirely subordinate to central
authority, or in a federal system, to state or regional authority. This level of government is
in fact universal, being found in federal and nonfederal systems as well as in unitary
ones.
Horizontal arrangement
In todays world, government is horizontally arranged in to the legislative, executive and
Judiciary bodies/organs. What does each branch primarily do?

(I) The Legislative Body

Generally speaking, the legislative body is responsible for the formulation of laws, policies and
strategies. It also provides a link between government and the people hence serves as a channel
of communication. But specifically, the organ undertakes the following functions:
Statute making: Statute literally means parliament made law. From this it becomes obvious that
legislative bodys one major function is statute making.
Representation: This isAssemblies /Parliamentsrole of linking the government with the people
hence smoothing the communication/relationship between the two.
Controllingthe administration: This involvesthe legislative bodys role of
supervising/scrutinizing the executive that administers by implementing the laws and decisions
passed by the legislature itself. In this sense, the legislative body has the power to check and
balance the executive body and thereby to deliver responsible/ accountable government.
Constitutional making/ Amending: The legislative body also performs the function of
constitutional making/amending. This may, however, vary from country to country depending on
the nature of state structure they have. For example, in a federal form of state structure, the
constitutional amending or modification is usually carried by a joint agreement between the
federal and regional /state government following certain set of procedures where as in unitary
state structure the same function is normally done unilaterally by the central government.
Electoral and disposing functions: This function includes electing of the council of ministers
(also the Prime minister), voting on motion of no confidence to reelect or remove the
37
incumbent executive (prime minister) in parliamentary and in presidential the role of removing
the president by the principle of impeachment.
Financial functions (power of the purse): this is the legislative bodys function of determining
the nature and amount of taxes and appropriations or simply approval of budget presented to it
by, for example, each ministry.
Investigative functions: often times, legislatives through the establishment of standing
committees such as commission of inquiryalso engage in digging up information regarding the
causes, the profile and the consequences of certain conflicts in any part of the country and
suggest solutions accordingly.

(II). The Executive Body

In its broadest sense, this branch of the government is responsible for the implementation of the
laws, rules, policies, and decisions made by the legislature. It consists of the head of government,
the head of state and other various enforcement agencies. However, it is usually divided in to two
broad categories namely; the political executive and the bureaucratic executive. Whereas the
political executive refers to almost all elected or appointed politicians from within or without the
parliament the bureaucratic executive on the other hand consists of professional civil servants
whose job is to offer advice and administer policy subject to the requirements of political
neutrality and loyalty to their ministers. This being the case some of the principal functions of the
executive body include:
Enforcement functions: This is the function of enacting (implementing) all laws, rules, decisions
made by the legislative body and the judiciary body (courts decision) a country.
Formulation of administrative policy: This is the executive bodys function of making
regulations (on sub-legislative powers and issues) and policies to allocate funds to various public
activities. In this sense, the executive plays a policymaking leadership in that it also develops
coherent economic and social programs that meet the needs of society.
Control of military forces: Theexecutive branch has the power to determine how and where
troops, the military warplanes and ships may be used in period of conflict and peace.
Control of foreign relations: This is the general function of conducting foreign relations with
other states which also specifically includes granting or withholding recognition to the

38
governments of foreign state. To this end, it appoints ambassadors and other Foreign Service
officers.
Bureaucratic leadership: this is particularly the task of the top management executive
(ministerial ones) and revolves around overseeing the implementation of policies by the whole
machinery of the government.
Crisis leadership: this is the power of political executive over the assembly/ parliament and
includes its ability to take swift and decisive action when crises break out in either domestic or
international.

III) The Judiciary Body

The Judiciary body is a branch of government whose primary function is undertaking
adjudication / deciding on legal disputes. Besides, however, the body has also the following
specific functions. These are:
Formulating case laws: Case law is judge-made law which then becomes binding on all other
courts.
Protection of individual rights: The judiciary body has great role in protecting the
constitutionally guaranteed rights of individuals mainly through due process of law. This
function includes, for example, protection of the individual from unreasonable or arbitrary laws
and procedures made by the government and its institutions at any level.

Modern systems /forms of Government

One defining characteristic feature of modern governments is that they are all constitutional in
nature. i.e. they possess a constitution that effectively controls their exercise of political power.
Accordingly, in the modern world we have two major systems/forms of constitutional
governments namely; thepresidential system (as in the case of the USA, Argentina, Brazil, Costa
Rica, Mexicoetc.) and the parliamentary system( as in the case of western European nations,
Scandinavian countries, Japan, India, Ethiopia etc.). Let us now look at the nature of each of
these systems in some detail.
1. Presidential system of Government

39
Presidential system of government is a form of government which is chiefly characterized by
strict separations of powers between the legislative and executive branches of government.
Given this, the followings are some of the key distinguishing features of a presidential system of
government:
Real authority of the president: i.e. the leadership of the executive is in the hands of the president
who is elected by the people for a constitutionally fixed period (four years in the case of the
United States). He may nominate his body of ministers to form the cabinet. The president may
also change the portfolios of his ministers as per his will, or may dismiss any one of them in case
he loses the confidence of the boss. He formulates national policy; orders mobilization of
troops declares state of emergency and takes all necessary steps for the enforcement of law and
maintenance of order in the country. In short, he is the real power holder of his country. In short,
the roles of head of state and head of government (the chief executive) are combined in the
offices of the president. As such, the executive authority is vested in or concentrated in the hands
of the president; the cabinet and ministers being merely advisors to and responsible for the
president.
Separation of the legislative from the executive: This implies that the president and his ministers
cannot be members of the legislature. In case the president appoints a member of legislature as
his minister, he has to leave his/her legislature membership. It is for this reason that the president
and his ministers do not take part in the deliberations of the legislature. The president may go to
the legislature only for delivering an important address. Even his ministers may attend a session
of the legislature and may also take part in the discussion, but they have no right to vote.
Moreover, the executive and the legislative organs of government are separately elected and
work independently and separately. Moreover, each of the executive and legislative are vested
with a range of independent constitutional powers.
Electoral terms of the president are constitutionally fixed: That is, the president is supposed to
govern the state for four years or one term, for example, in USA. And, he/she can be reelected
for the second term (having four years). But, he/she cannot be elected for more than two terms.
The president can neither dissolve the legislature nor be dismissed by the Congress /Assembly
except possibly through impeachment. The process of impeachment is provided to remove the
president in case he violates the Oath of office. For instance, the president is under an oath that
he will defend and protect the constitution of the state. In case he does otherwise, the process of
40
impeachment may be used to remove him from office. Usually the power of impeachment is
given to the legislature.
2. Parliamentary system of Government
A Parliamentary system/form of government refers to the form of government in which the
government governs in and through the parliament/assembly there by fusing the legislative and
executive branch of government. In other words, it is a system that vests the political leadership
in a legislative body (the parliament) which, in turn, selects the executive body (the cabinet +
prime minister) entirely or largely from its membership. This being the case, the principal
features of a parliamentary system/form of government include among others the following:
Government is formed as a result of parliament/ assembly elections based on the strength
of party or coalition partys representation. Therefore, there is no separately elected
political executive.
A parliament of representatives is elected by the citizens of the state. For instance, in
federal state structure like Ethiopia, the citizens directly elect representatives both to the
Federal parliament and regional parliament.
The executive power of the government (both political executives like the Prime Minster
and ministers at a federal and at Regional level) is vested in the hand of group of people
who are elected by the parliament.
Most or all members of the cabinet (council of ministers) are usually members of the
parliament/ assembly. And usually, the party or coalitions of parties that have majority
seats take up executive responsibilities in addition to their legislative roles.
The cabinet (council of ministers) retains executive power only as long as it has the
confidence of the parliament; that is, only as long as majority vote in the parliament
unseats a cabinet - a situation called Government falling.
The government can, in most cases, dissolve the parliament. Just if the parliament holds
the cabinet (council of ministers) in jeopardy, the leader of the cabinet (usually the PM)
has the right to have the parliament disbanded with the consent of the majority members
of the parliament.
As the head of the government is the Prime Minister there is a separate head of the state -
i.e., the constitutional monarch or non- executive president.In the Ethiopian case, for

41
 example, the head of the state is thepresident, who is non-political executive and hence
cannot be a member of any political party. He/she is simply the figurehead of the state.
The PM (Prime Minister), who is the head of the government, retains office as long as
he/she can command majority support in parliament. In other words, electoral terms of
the PM is not constitutionally fixed.

The Relationship and differences between society and State

In Society, there may have different units or structures, varying interests, and specific or general
norms and values. Examples of the basic units of society include the family, the neighborhood or
village, clan or ethnic group, interest groups, clubs and associations, and the state with its
government. Among the organizations in society, the state is the most fundamental and
influential one. In fact, both society and the state are not necessarily one and same. The state and
society differ, among other things, in terms of their scope and objectives. Society embodies the
highest level of social existence with all associational forms, structures and modes of human life,
and thus, it is quite complex in terms of structures and organizational patterns.
Compared to society, regardless of its level of development, the state as a major political
organization is the ultimate manifestation of the political life of the society to which it belongs.
To this end, structures and organizations are created to facilitate this political life of the society.
The structures and organizations of the state are, however, not as diverse and complex as those of
the society.Rather, they are relatively clear cut, structured and identifiable in terms of
government institutions such as the parliament, the judiciary, and the executive authorities.

In general, besides the similarities shared between the society and the state, their differences can
be distinguished on the following grounds.
1. In terms of time, society is prior to the state. It means that society came in to being much
earlier than the state. Family and community are the oldest social institutions. Even the
hunters, the root digger and the fruit gatherers had their society, but authority came much
later.
2. State is just a part of the society. As stated before, society implies the general relations
and associations of human beings. Since human beings are social creatures by their
nature and necessity such relations are as old as humanity. Moreover, these social
relations have diverse forms in the religious, cultural and economic directions, of these
42
 devise forms, state is one part (political part) that has its purpose limited to the
maintenance of peace, order and security to the people.
3. The two may also be distinguished in respect of their functions. The society performs a
multiplicity of functions in order to meet multifold requirements of human beings. The
family, the community, religion, trade unions, clubs, etc., meet different kind of
requirements of people as intellectual, recreational, moral, cultural, and economic. But
the function of the state is to make and enforce a legal order so that people may lead a
life of peace, security and honor.
4. But the most important point of distinction is that state possesses the attribute of
sovereignty whereby it may coerce and compel others by the use of force. The society
has no such force and whatever force it has, it appears in the form of moral persuasion.
The customs and traditions of the society are followed by the people because of the force
public conscience but the laws of the state are obeyed, because their violation is visited
with suitable punishment.
The Difference between State and Government
Though state and government are similar when strictly studied in concrete and practical terms,
the two may be distinguished on a theoretical ground. These differences may include
1. The state is a bigger entity that includes all citizens, the territory sovereignty, recognition,
etc.; the government is a smaller unit that over only those who are employed to perform it
functions and the agencies. That is, while the state is the politically organized entity for
the promotion of common ends and the satisfaction of common interests, the government
is a common name for the agencies, authorities, ministers, organizations through which
the will of the state is formulated. The government is an essential organ or agency of the
state but it is no more than the state itself.
2. The state is an abstract idea, but the government has its existence in a physical form. In a
broad sense, a government includes all persons in the legislative, the executive or the
judiciary branches from the president / prime minister at the top to a more ordinary
citizen at the bottom. Thus, in its wider or narrower form, the government has a
concrete /physical form.
3. The power of the state is original and primary, but the authority of the government is
delegated and derivative. In other words, it is said that while the power of the state is
43
 absolute as being a sovereign entity, the authority of the government is limited by the
provisions of the constitution.
4. The state is a prominent institution. It survives until its sovereign power is destroyed by
the invasion of some other state. But governments come and go. The office holders
/political elites are changed, i.e., it is quite possible that the rule of one party is changed
by another party.
5. The government is an agency for the fulfillment of the purposes of the state. Hence, the
people may have grievances against the government, but not against the state. They may
agitate for changing their rulers, but they would not like to destroy the state.

2.5. ETHIOPIAN SOCIETY, STATE AND GOVERNMENT

Ethiopian Society, State, and Government

The state of Ethiopia has undergone diversified forms throughout its evolution to assume the
present shape and characteristic. We have seen that the Ethiopian state had Axum as its first and
core state that expanded south ward to incorporate finally a lot of diverse nations, nationalities
and peoples, which was a major land mark for the political evolution in the past hundred years
since around 1900. This time period marked a drastic transformation in the evolutionary process
for several reasons that shaped the state of Ethiopia and at the same time marked a break with the
past.
Since 1900, Ethiopia became a truly diversified state in terms of culture, value systems,
traditions, geo-topography, economic activity, language, religion, political views and so on and
so forth. Ethiopias boundaries more or less gained international recognition and a strong central
government was established at Addis Ababa. The sovereignty of Ethiopia gained full
international recognition and all cultural groups were effectively made subject to national
authority. The present Ethiopian generation this could be seen from two angles: state formation
and nation building.
State Formation in Ethiopia
The rise and foundation of states took place in different parts of Ethiopia at different historical
periods. Some of the developments took place in the north, while others were in the south,

44
southwest, east, and south eastern parts of Ethiopia. The span of development ranges from pre
Axumite civilization to recent past. Out of the continuous interrelations among them, the various
states of the different parts gave rise to the present form of modern Ethiopia state.
I. Development in the North
The rise of ancient states in the northern part of Ethiopia goes back to the pre-Axumite period.
There are enough facts about the Axumite state and its established political institutions as early
as 100 B.C. The Axumite state was one of the most civilized few states of the ancient world. The
monuments that are found today as Axum are the heritage of that ancient civilization. An axumite
state was also well known for its commerce and trade within Ethiopia as well as out of Ethiopia
with Greece, Rome, India and others. The Axumite state started to decline beginning from the 7 th
century and was no more in existence after the 10th century.
Following its decline, the political center shifted from, Axum to the northwestern part Wello.
Then political institutions developed in Lasta. This political development is called the Zagwe
Dynasty. Among others, king Lalibela was one of the famous kings of the Dynasty. The dynasty
is also well known for its wonderful construction works. One set of their works are the Rocke
Hewen Churches that are found in Lalibaela and its surroundings. The Zagwe period came to an
end in 1270. The Agaw people that are found today in the Amhara region were the founders of
the Zagwe dynasty.
After the fall of the Zagwe kingdom, the political center shifted further to the south of lalibela,
that was marked by the foundation of the Christian Highland kingdom called the Solomonic
dynasty. Yekuno Amlak was the first king of the dynasty. The dynasty claimed descent from king
Solomon of Jerusalem as it is explained in the Kibre Negest. The Solomonic dynasty moved its
center from Shewa to Gondar in the 17 th century. Later, the political power at Gonder declined
being followed by what is called as the zamene mesafint. Zemene mesfint was a period of
instability, civil war and struggle for power. As the result of such chaotic political phenomena,
the northern part of Ethiopia was decentralized. Thus, the nobility established their own
governance in their respective regions.
II. Developments in the South and Other Parts
While Christian states largely developed in the north, other states were also emerging in the
center, south, south west, and eastern parts of Ethiopia region. The earliest Islamic state was the
sultanate of Ifat, Dawra, Bali, Fatagar, Hadiya, the Emirates of Adal and Harar. There were also
45
states in the kingdoms of kaffa, Walayta, Janjere and Enarya. They were formed at different
periods. Moreover, the various Oromo states such as Jimma, Limu-Enarya, Guma, Goma and
Gera. In the east, there were the Emirates of Harar. The Kambata and Gurage political
institutions were also parts of the formation of various states prior to the emergence of the
modern centralized Ethiopian State.
The Formation of Modern Ethiopian State (Tewdros II- MenelikII)
Modern Ethiopian history has passed through two major dynamics; A) the making part of the
2nd half the 19thc(1850s) - x-ed by wars of incorporation for state formation on unequal terms.
This dynamics includes: I) Emperor Tewodross goal of building a centralized and modernized
state through abolishing the era of princes/ zemene mesafnit, avoiding (by force) separatist and
rebellious tendencies of the nobility and then making them under his Imperial Authority; II)
Emperor Yohannes IVs goal of building a centralized and modernized state but with a different
policy/approach- not by force but by diplomacy ( by adopting the idea of controlled
regionalism = slightly similar to todays notion of federalism; And III) Emperor Meneliks
goal of Empire building ( Shoa at the center) through forceful subjugation and assimilationist
policies - Orthodox Christianity, Amharic language and other values as instruments. B. the re-
making part of the 2nd half of the 20th c(1960S) -x-ed by class and national struggles to end the
existing asymmetrical relations and nation building on equal terms. This dynamics includes; I)
the 1974 revolution against feudal absolutism (II) the 30years armed struggle in Eritrea for
independence (III) the 17th years struggles in Tigray and other parts of Ethiopia for regime
change.
As a matter of fact, the existence of Ethiopia as a state is as old as no less than there thousand
years. However, with its present form and extent of territory, the Ethiopian state can relatively be
viewed as a recent phenomenon.
The process of building a modern centralized state in Ethiopia was significantly accomplished
during the reign of Emperor Menilik II. But, the attempts to do so were started by Emperor
Tewodros right after the end of the Zemene Mesafint. The efforts of building a modern
centralized state in Ethiopia made by Emperor Tewodros were also extended by his successor or
Emperor Yohannes.
The campaigns carried out by Emperor Menilik during the second half of the 19 th century
incorporated the states in the southern, southeastern, and the eastern parts in to present-day
46
Ethiopia. With that process of expansion from the center, the various nations, nationalities and
peoples in different parts in the south, southwest and east were also brought under the Ethiopian
Empire.
The conquest of these regions gave Menelik access to real wealth - coffee and gold among other
things which significantly enhanced his political position and military might in the then
emerging modern empire state of Ethiopia. i.e In the south, it was the issue of bringing in new
lands and new peoples into the emerging empire-state. So, the resultant outcome was a feeling of
dual oppression: national as well as class in the name of one polity. In the north too, his
nation-building project is considered to have laid down the seeds of future conflict.
In the mean time, the present day boundaries of Ethiopia were established based on international
agreements between the Ethiopian government and the surrounding colonial powers of the time.
This took place at the end of the 19th century. Therefore, it is clear to understand the fact that
todays Ethiopia is shaped in to Modern centralized state hood through the political integration of
the various states, nations, nationalities and peoples. They formed modern Ethiopia with their
respective languages, traditions, beliefs, and religions. The completion of the formation of the
modern state of Ethiopia on its part had followed the following trajectory as most scholars in the
field more or less agree:
Unification: refers to the mechanisms consistently and as dominant political strategies exercised
by emperor Menilik to unify the Ethiopian state by forcefully incorporating many of the present
ethnic groups in the south and Oromia. Unification from above as a strategy of modern state
formation in Ethiopia was exceptionally characterized, as Lapiso De Gilebo (1992), notes by use
of persistent royal force in a ruthless treatment of the subdued nations and nationalities regarding
them as captive subjects throughout the completion of the formation of the modern state. The
state formation basically involved to introduce and impose diametrically divergent popular
values of northern Ethiopia on other nations and nationalities in southern and eastern Ethiopia.
While the North developed entrenched values of absolute monarchy and unreserved respect with
complete obedience to central authority as a dominant political values.
South developed and maintained such values which merged political and moral rules in to one
political office and type of political rule excessively closer to the people, ruled. Thus, the
formation of the modern state of Ethiopia under Menilik was simply the forceful imposition of
the imperial values of the North on completely different values of the south. Moreover, there
47
were structural and institutional differences among the two blocks of peoplesimperial north
and south.
Nation Building in Modern Ethiopia
Once he successfully achieved the formation of the modern state of Ethiopia the, emperor
Menilik had no the rational and equally modern understanding of changing the centralized new
modern state created by soldiers of cultural, political and economic privileges over the newly
incorporated nations and nationalities in to a state where all Ethiopians were readily equally feel
similar attachment and membership to the modern state. Moreover, the creator of the state,
emperor Menilik had no time to realize these demands to determine the future of his state and
was overtaken by death.
The responsibility of nation building historically passed to Emperor Hilasellasee but he wasted
the golden chance through assimilations tactics to aggravate the contradiction with the ethnic
groups. He thought that if all ethnic groups assimilate one language and one culture, and then the
Ethiopian nation would be one and the same for all times.
In 1930, Haile Selassie I was crowned as, "Conquering Lion of the Tribe of Judah, Elect of God,
and King of Kings of Ethiopia. By1931, he declared a new constitution which set up the
judicial framework of his emergent absolutism. Here, he focused on reforms that aimed at
modernizing the country (civilization) and breaking the nobility's authority (centralization) and
by so doing he had succeeded in curtailing the power of Ethiopias regional elites, and the
autonomy of regions. This constitution asserted the emperors own status and reserved imperial
succession to his line by stating that "the person of the Emperor is sacred, his dignity inviolable,
and his power indisputable. By this very constitution, all legislative, executive, judiciary and
military powers were concentrated in the hands of the emperor.
Constitution bringing Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Italian Somaliland together into a single
administrative unit divided into six provinces under the notion of Italian East African Empire and
the responsibility to defend the nations sovereignty was left local warriors called Yewust
Arbognoch. The resistance was costly but at the end effective. E.g initial zemechas like Yekefaw
Michael and failed assassination(Abreham D. &Mogos A.) attempt against Graziani on February
19, 1937( Yekatit,12) can be mentioned as good cases here. What were then the negative
outcomes of the invasion?? Internally; Interruption of the national centralization policy of
H/Selassie because of Italy's policy of Racial separation including residential segregation(Woy-
48
Arada-hoy) and which in turn eroded his legitimacy as opposed to the traditional-warrior nature
of the previous Ethiopian Emperors( Emama Ethiopia yemotelish kerto---yekedash belash) =
cumulatively ,these made him face upcoming sever resistance in Gojjam(Belay Zeleke), the 1 st
Weyane rebellion, etc. Externally, Haile Selassie due to his speech before the League of Nations
in Geneva (1937) in support of collective security over international lawlessness was regarded as
a major international figure often considered as internationalist, Pan-Africanist and Advocator of
Peaceful Coexistence. However, after the invasion all these could not go with him.
Haile Sellase preferred in addition to assimilations tactics, continuation of use of royal force to
suppress conflicts against him in different parts of the Ethiopian state. The 1943 Kedamay
Woyane Movement caused by administrative corruption and greed ignited instability and
insecurity for self rule, the Bale peasant uprising between 1963 and 1970 for better life, the
nature of measurement of land which had reduced peasants to a serf-like status and the tax
system which triggered widespread alienation , The Gojjam uprising i and The Yejju 1948 and
Gedeo 1970 rebellions against land alienation and high taxation, the Somali resistance for self
rule, the assertion of the Oromo elite leaders for Oromo identity and appropriate share in the
political system in the 1950s and 60s were ruthlessly crushed by naked force, which only again
aggravated and complicated the social conflict. Finally the imperial regime collapsed, for it could
not resolve the deep social conflict alone cultural and political self rule and administration.
Then, all the above rural peasant uprisings and rebellions signified the importance of land in
Ethiopian economics and politics and then indicated the need for recognition to the rural society
as the critical social base. They also indicated the decadence of Haileselassies feudal absolutism
and its policy of centralization from its critical political and economic base (the peasants and
rural areas), and the need for radical reform in the old empire.
The imperial regime was the longest regime ever to rule Ethiopia from the ancient times (the last
2000 years) to 1974, the year of its official abolition. In terms of political power and rule, the
major values created, entrenched and maintained throughout the imperial rule continued up to the
last government of the regime, Emperor Haile Selasse and he tried to institutionalize them
through the 1931 Constitution and the revised Constitution of the 1955. These two constitutions
were the symbolization of the rule and moral values that determined most relations between the
people of Ethiopia and the ruling body as well as the relations between a citizen and another
citizen. One of these values was the value about political authority which the people were
49
expected to hold strongly as provided for example by the last Constitution of the imperial regime
at Article 4, which reads as follows:
His dignity is inviolable and his power indisputable. He consequently entitled to all the honors
due to Him in accordance with tradition and the present Constitution. Any one so bold as to seek
to injure the emperor will be punished.His dignity was also inviolable that any criticism or open
opposition to the emperor was a legal as well as a moral crime bound to serious punishment.
In terms of political membership/Citizen, according to James C. N. Paul and Christopher
Clapham (1972) the constitution had been a prefect continuation of age old imperial values of
citizenship and morality which got a clear pronouncement in the various Articles. First of all,
the first 36 Articles of the constitution were devoted to providing the rights and privileges of the
emperor as well his royal family as specific social groups remarkably distinct from the ordinary
people of Ethiopia.
They were the unreserved owners of the empire and all property but above all to the people, who
are collectively called in the constitution as subjects of the emperor to underscore that they
were placed under the will of the emperor by the Order of God to fulfill the wishes of the
emperor, Gods representative on earth. The value went to mean that the Ethiopian people were
the subjects of the emperor personally because his blood was different from his which
sprang from that of King Solomon.
The constitution further more made it clear at a number of the articles that individual Ethiopians
living in the country were residents with their rights were to be liable to the will of the
emperor. The value underlying this Article was that residence and nothing else was the official
attachment that an Ethiopian could have with the state.
Ethical standards and morality of the Ethiopian state and sources of moral values and rules were
tainted with the basic political doctrines of the empire state, which declared itself as the
guardian Ethiopian morality. What was bad for the emperor and his state was officially
announced to be bad for all Ethiopians and what he felt to be good was also hailed
constitutionally as good for all. The major source of morality and moral principles in imperial
Ethiopia, the Orthodox Church, Amharic language and Divinity were given constitutional
guarantee to be the official state and of all Ethiopians in the following Articles:
Article 125: The official language of the empire is Amharic.Article 126: the Ethiopian
Orthodox Church, founded in the fourth century, on the doctrines of Saint Mark, is the
50
established Church of the empire and is, as such, supported by the state. The Emperor shall
always profess the Ethiopian Orthodox faith. The name of the emperor shall be mentioned in all
religious services.
In any case, one could see that imperial Ethiopia was created throughout this historical period
with its own distinct political and moral identity.
One major contribution of the 1931 constitution was the creation of the parliament. The
parliament was bi-cameral. Namely the Chamber of the Senate (yehig Mewesegna Meker Bet)
and chamber of Deputies (Yehigmemria Miker Bet). This was the legislative body. The Emperor
had the power to appoint members of the chambers of senate and the Chamber of Deputies
(Yehig memria Meker Bet). Those elected to these two Houses were only noblemen and princes,
and their term of office was not limited. However the parliament was not given powers and
functions by the constitution. It was not an institution that decides on laws. The law making
power was vested on the emperor and the parliament was merely meant to rubber stamp the
legislation of the Emperor.
The Attempted Coup Dtat of 1960 and Urban (Palace-Military Generals) Challenges: The
Beginning of the Remaking of Ethiopian Empire.
Member s of the coup makers (the Decemberists) came from three groups: the commander of
the Imperial Bodyguard Mengistu Neway and his followers; few security officials, including the
police chief; and handful of radical intellectuals related to the officials, including Girmame
Neway, Mengistu's brother. The coup was initially successful in the capital (6 kilo palace- Addis
Ababa university), as the rebels seized the crown prince and more than twenty cabinet ministers
and other government leaders. But finally the coup d'tat failed due to: Lack of
coordination; failed to fully control the ground forces, air forces, the police and the media- the
necessary pre-conditions for coup making . Lack of mobilization to the people; even in Addis
Ababa city- the coup was limited to the palace (6 kilo palace- Addis Ababa University) as a
result only the students in campus expressed their support. The high role of American Embassy;
being the emperor was considered loyal to America and The high role of bishop in condemning
the coup makers and mobilizing the public as coup detat was new to Ethiopian culture (Nigus
aykesesm,semay aytaresm ) .Though failed, the coup d'tat had left the following legacies: The
coup indicated the climax of regime decadence(feudal absolutism) one that is even challenged
by its top defenders the military loyal generals and consequently a culture break of
51
emperors sacredness ( Nigus aykesesm,semay aytaresm) and Expansion /broadening of
protest(challenges ) against the regime to urban areas and hence served as catalyst mass
mobilization by student moments and later by organized nationalist armed struggles(ELFs,
TLFs, OLFs, SLFs) etc.

Urban Political Challenge and the Imperial decadence: A shift from Rural Revolt to Urban
Mobilization
Two factors seem to have operated as triggering factors for a shift in the nature of opposition to
the imperial regime: the coup of 1960, and the annexation of federated Eritrea. They both
instigated challenges to the regime by a body of students at Haile Selassie I, later Addis Ababa,
and University. The student movement which was largely influenced by the Marxist-Leninist
leftist thinking began to echo two main issues: the land (class) and the nationality questions-
which later became the back bone causes of the 1974 revolution. In fact, In the politics of the
post-liberation period students preoccupations began to be to vigorously contest the imperial
nation-building project through popularizing and politicization of Marxist-Leninist conception of
the National Question.
Class Question: Land question
Land, as the means of production of an agrarian society, has remained the major defining
political issue in Ethiopia since its modern formation. Why? because The expansion of Christian
kingdom to south, southeast, and west, and even in the northern part of Ethiopia has resulted in
the alienation and privatization of land from its natural owner(peasant) by the feudal lords.
Then, the immediate three most important consequences of such a move were: (A) the eviction
of a large number of peasants, (B) the spread of tenancy, and (C) emergence of absentee
landlordism. The rate of tenancy was very high in the southern parts of the country where
intensive land privatization was carried out. Similarly the rate of absentee landlordism, a
phenomenon characteristic to the members of the nobility, high government (civilian and
military officials), and civil servants was also high. This then made the social and economic
conditions of the peasantry extremely miserable and led to the people in those areas to rising up
in revolt against the government and, in most cases, the social system that reduced them to the
status of tenancy. As a result a number of movements challenged the alienation of land, because
the nature of land alienation had created both a land question and a national question.
52
In all movements the alienation of land and the high taxation imposed by feudal overlords were
central issues of concern these often overlapped with issues of national and or religious identity
and sovereignty. Resistance to the land policies of the Central government was not only waged in
the countryside by peasant dominated movements but also in the cities by the university student
movement. The Ethiopian university students were organically connected to the land question in
a number of ways;
Firstly, many of the students were not from urban areas but from rural areas hence Land
was not abstract issue of justice but an issue that directly affected them and their immediate
families. Secondly , national universities are one of the few places where individuals from
different regions and nationalities were brought together---as a result land which was
previously a local or regional question became a common national issue, and Lastly, the
students played important roles in the overthrow of the feudal order and the agitation for land
reform. Therefore, the university became the melting pot of students, came from different
social, national and religious backgrounds, new ideas and beliefs and social interactions of
a diverse nature. Why land to tiller was popular by the students?
First, it was a direct challenge aimed at eroding the foundation of the feudal social order,
and second, it set in motion a process that brought together students and other progressive
forces in society to challenge the imperial regime. Then by 1974, after a series of military
revolts, strikes by teachers, taxi drivers and eventually the Confederation of Ethiopian
Trade Unions, followed by demonstration by both Muslim and Christian religious led to the
downfall of Solomonic feudalism and the coming of the military junta to political power.
Dergue regime came next to replace the imperial government with radically new and extremely
revolutionary value which seemingly had nothing with those of imperial Ethiopia.
The Dergue Regime and the Land &Nationality Questions
Following the revolution, the Provisional Military Administrative Council (PMAC) or Derg
faced three intimately linked structural problems. (A) Question of nationalities, (B) the land
question and (C) the social and economic backwardness of Ethiopian society. Dergue began by
addressing the land question through what it calls radical land reform. Why a radical land
reform? Firstly, the two opposition democratic left groups (EPRP & MEISON) saw the necessity
for a radical land reform for the future development of the country. Secondly, the reform was
believed to be essential for resolving the nationality question. These groups and students exerted
53
great pressure on the junta to come up with a radical land reform. Thirdly, the junta realized the
need for a radical policy measure regarding land in order to uproot the landed aristocracy from
the rural areas, to appease the left opposition, and to win over the support of peasants, thereby
consolidating its power. Fourthly, within the Derg, there were some forward-looking elements
who then had significant influence.
Fifthly, in the early days of the popular uprising, peasants in the central and southern parts of
the country directly seized land belonging to the landlords, using violent measures such as the
killing or expelling landlords. This gave great urgency to the land question and was a constant
reminder to the military that it was on the agenda of the day. Then, on the land question, the
Dergues policy was quite radical: with a single stroke in 1975, all land was nationalized,
eliminating the politico-economic basis of the ancient rgime. In addition, the land reform bill
abolished all private ownership of land by individuals or organizations and declared that all
rural lands shall be the collective property of the Ethiopian people. More specifically, it stated
that without differentiation of the sexes, any person who is willing to personally cultivate land
shall be allotted rural land sufficient for his/her maintenance and that of their family and Large-
scale mechanized farms were expropriated without compensation. The farms were later to be
converted into state farms or co-operatives, or broken into smaller plots and distributed to
peasants. How about the nationality question? Primarily for reasons of ideology, Dergue had
neglected this question almost totally. Only towards the end of its rule it began to make sense of
the issue and give certain legal recognitions to nationalities.
Otherwise for much of its history Dergue was living under its slogan of Ethiopia
Tikdem/Ethiopia-first- a sense of territorial nationalism at the expense of people-centered
nationalism. So, what happened? The notion of the creation of 'one Ethiopian nation' continued
under the guise of Makinat (unification, reunification, pacification and/or colonization) which
involved evangelization of the local population, institutionalization of a new system of political
control, and imposition of a new political class, culture and language on the indigenous
population. Consequently, the quest for national equality which aimed at restructuring or
changing the imperial state of Ethiopia and its national centralization (homogenization) tenet
continued stiffly. Then, on the how of the matter three alternative political thoughts stood out by
namely the unitarist, federalist(national oppression) and separatist(colonial thesis) political
thinking.
54
 (I) Centralist (unitary) political thinking
This thoughts objective is to see a nation-state forged in Ethiopia even by force i.e a
country formed and run by one nation under the slogan of one-ness/same-ness/uniform
identity-one country-one people-one heart-one leader. Etc. So, accordingly, this thought sees
no problem in the assimilation of periphery cultures into generally northern core culture as the
process had made the creation of the Ethiopian nation possible.
(II) The separatist/Colonialist thought
This thought defined the then imperial Ethiopia as prison house of various nations. It also claims
that Abyssinia had colonized roughly half the territories and peoples to form a colonial empire-
state in the last quarter of the 19th century. Hence, logically the colonial empire (the colonial
state- Ethiopia) needs to undergo decolonization where "ethno-national" colonies become
independent states. Eritrean nationalist groups (ELF&EPLF/PFDJ), OLF, WSLF (ONLF) belong
to this thought.
(III) National oppression/Federalist thought
This thoughts historical root dates back to the Ethiopian student movements which were
influenced by leftist thinking and then it views Ethiopia as a historically evolved non-colonial
empire-state. But then the empire had created a problem of national oppression to various nations
in the land a problem that could be rectified through federalization and democratization of the
state. To this end, this thoughts immediate solution is eliminating shoan domination and then
radical restructuring of the Ethiopia imperial state in order to maintain the integrity of the
state and its nationalities. TPLF-EPRDF is the main advocate of this thought. This thought then
got prominence and then captured state power and established the FDRE under the motto of
Unity in diversity.
Dergs Regime
Derg was, as Assefa Endeshaw (2002) notes, a mystified term to refer to a group of junior
military officers who organized themselves to present the demands of the Ethiopian Defense
Forces to the imperial government of Haile Sellase in 1974. After 5 months of functioning as
mere representatives, Derg members seized the opportunity of power vacuum created at the fall
of the emperor. Derg declaring the call and burden history as its source of political legitimacy
entered political office. They exploited the opposition of the people to the imperial rule to sustain
55
themselves at political power. First, they boldly gave answers for several popular demands but
gradually turned to be perfect authoritarian leaders.
Within a few years of Dergs rule, almost all civic and moral rights promised for the nationalities
of Ethiopia were withdrawn with most imperial values of citizenship allowed to revive. Power
became the major means of rule over the people. Citizenship was redefined as complete loyalty
to the rule of Derg and the state. Marxism-Leninism was proclaimed to be the basis of the new
morality and political philosophy of the Ethiopia. Ethiopia was proclaimed a unitary state with
all political power heavily centralized under one Partythe Workers Party of Ethiopia. It was a
privileged Party with monopolistic control over everything in the state and militarization became
the top political value of the Dergue regime. In general, citizenship and morality under Dergs
regime were practically organized in the following value and institutional frame works:
A. Despotism: developed where a group of military officers imposed heavy handed and
unquestioned rule policies without any legitimacy without popular representation and
constitutional rule that theoretically lasted for ten years; members of Derg introduced in
to the Ethiopian culture an irrelevance of free judiciary and committees at all levels
were granted unlimited power to violently eliminate opposition forces causing the death
of several thousands of Ethiopian youth within a few years only;
B. Authoritarianism: reigned where one individual person with no knowledge, skill and
experience in politics suddenly grew to make himself a sole source of power. popular
representation and the idea of an elected government were rejected as demands of anti
revolutionary forces with the aim of subverting the revolution;
C. Personality cult: was attempted to cultivate in the minds of the Ethiopian people that
both the Revolution and the state of Ethiopia would disappear without the leadership of
one leaderMengistu Haile Mariam. His importance and role was equated with the very
state of Ethiopia, and the hopes of the Ethiopian people for better life were amounted to
the results of his personality and personal leadership;
D. Populism: became a major political strategy where commoner Ethiopians were organized
and encouraged to do mob justice by rendering regular courts irrelevant and arming the
people against opposition political parties, individuals and ethnic groups in secrecy; high
profile educated elites, former officials, former owners of land and property, etc, were all
targeted where the people were emotionally aroused to take violent actions against them
56
 without any due process of law; popular demonstrations were called frequently to show
alliance with the government of Derg forcibly;
E. Praetorianism: was promoted as the highest civic and moral virtue where success in a
battle field and state militancy dominated the national philosophy; national military
service was proclaimed as the new civic obligation and high morality; a big militia had
been maintained first to reverse Somalia invasion in 1974 but latter on for civil war
purposes and for the fight in Eritrea; civilian members of the Workers Party of Ethiopia
were also armed; the president himself used to reward successful agricultural Co-
operatives with machine guns individually; a number of military training centers usually
more than the number of universities and colleges in the country were established and
trained hundreds of thousands of conscripted recruits like Tatek, Tolat, Dedesa, Blate, Bir
Sheleko and others;
F. Jingoism: was adopted as a major political tactic to mobilize the Ethiopian people under
the wave of rising intense Ethiopian nationalism against neighboring states and
domestic armed oppositions as well as American imperialism on day to day basis under
such jingoistic slogans as Revolutionary Ethiopia or death, we shall fight to the last
one person and one rifle, every thing to the war front and others that were designed to
provoke mass emotions;
G. Totalitarianism: one of the perfect forms of authoritarian governments took definite
shape. Ethiopians were placed under the day to day supervision of Derg,s secret police
and armed forces including their private life at family level. The government became the
state saying that attacking the Derg government meant attacking the Ethiopian state;
officials and Cadres of the regime inspected manners and life styles of the private
individual person, the religious denomination he/she worshipped and all individual and
group relations; secret police and security institutions with complete power over the
individual citizen reigned day to day activities fanning fear, terror and subservient
feelings in the minds of the people; alternative political views and outlooks, if not
opposite values, were absolutely undermined and under controlled;
H. Exogenous moral sources: of citizenship and the new Ethiopian morality pronounced
religious neutrality(belief in Marxism), revolutionary zeal, propertylessness, ordinary
family background, acceptance of the leadership of Derg, anti America and Western
57
 Europe, allegiance to ex-Soviet world leadership, socialism and others. Ethnic
assertiveness like Tigrian, Oromo, Somali, etc identity was denounced as being disloyal
to the Ethiopian state as nationalism(Oyvind M. Eide, 2000).
I. Nationalization: private property worth above 500,000 and extra urban houses left many
citizens in urban areas poor and hopeless. Their nationalized properties were distributed
among top cadres and loyal followers of the regime causing a lot of complications for
Urban Development Programs at present; a lot of factory workers in the name of
proletarian revolution were forced to join the national army and most of them remained to
be soldiers to the last day of the regime;
All these steps by the Dergue undermined the hopes and optimism of Ethiopian nationalities and
citizens who finally armed themselves in resistance to the entire system and its aborted morality
values.
The Ethiopian federalism and federation: Brief overview
Since 1991, Ethiopia has been implementing an ethno-linguistic federal politico-legal
arrangement. As per Articles 1 and 47 of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic republic of
Ethiopia, the country is a federation of nine ethno-linguistically divided regional states. These
can be classified into three groups, based on (i) their population numbers, as minority or
majority in the federation; (ii) ethno-linguistic diversity, as multi-ethnic or homogeneous; and
(iii) way of life, as settled or pastoralist. The Tigray, Afar, Amhara, Oromia and Somali regional
states (taking the name of their majority inhabitants) are more or less ethnically homogeneous,
with a dominant ethno-linguistic community at regional level. And, the remaining four regional
states (Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples region or SNNP; Gambella;
Benshangul/Gumuz and Harari) are multi-ethnic, without a de jure dominant ethno-linguistic
community. So, therefore, the current Ethiopian state is entertaining of the following manifest
realities which are all radical shifts of the past;1)Federalism a system of state power
structuring 2) Constitutional democratic republicanism as a form of government system and
3) Diversity and Multiculturalism- as a socio-cultural foundation /fabric.

58
 Chapter Three
Understanding Citizenship: Ethiopia Focus
Introduction: Definition and Aspects/dimensions of Citizenship
States cannot be understood in the absence of citizens and citizenship. In the same way,
citizenship cannot be explained without the state. Thus, the notion of citizenship is important
both to the state and to individuals, since it denotes a basic relationship between the state and its
individual members. In this context, citizenship thus refers to the broad study of rights and duties
of citizens. It is the official recognition of an individuals integration in to the political system by
denoting the status of a person as a member of a particular country. Put differently, without the
status of citizenship, a person would be stateless and hence would loss official
recognition to exercise citizenship rights and fulfill responsibilities. However, citizenship in
all states is not the same. For instance, while non-democratic states usually reduce their people
to mere subjects that have very limited or no rights but only duties, in democratic states, on the
other hand, people govern themselves and thus enjoy equal rights in all aspects of life.
What this broadly implies is that the historical development of democracy and democratization
(from Greek- Rome- Western Europe-USA- elsewhere in the world today) has very much
affected the historical development of the meaning, scope and content of the concept of
citizenship.
Despite all these walks of historical evolution, the concept citizenship has now come to
be universally understood in terms of the following three basic aspects. These are:
The social aspects of Citizenship: this refers to the rights and duties of citizens that are directly
related to social and cultural norms and values. In other words, it refers to a situation in which
citizenship can be attained for example through parents nationality, adoption, marriage
etc., which are all products of social processes. i.e. in the case of adoption, for instance,
the full rights and responsibilities of parenthood are transformed from natural to social
parenthood and the childs social and kinship position is also transformed from the
biological childhood to social hood. In this case, a social person is created by appropriation and
people became parents in every sense other than the genetic factor. Therefore, the social aspect of
citizenship discloses that the rights and duties associated with citizenship status are
socially determined and also distributed.

59
The legal aspects of Citizenship: this aspect can be best understood from the statement which
reads citizenship entails a relationship between an individual and a state originating
under terms prescribed by the law of that state and giving rise to certain duties and rights, which
such law attaches to citizenship. What this explanation reveals is, therefore, the fact that
different countries can pursue different laws in granting and denying citizenship status or even
the same country can have different laws depending up on the prevailing political conditions of
that state.
The political aspects of Citizenship: this implies that the political system in a country
affects the citizenship status. For example, while in a dictatorial or authoritarian political system,
the rights and privileges of citizenship are enjoyed by a small group of the society but
the majorities are merely required to fulfill their responsibilities or duties as members of
that country, in a democratic systems, however, citizens are expected to express their allegiance
to their nation and obey the laws and reciprocally they are treated equally without any
discrimination.
3.2. Philosophical discourses on Citizenship
Liberal Approach or Citizenship
Citizenship here denotes the status of full membership in a society. Liberal theory, whether of
citizenship or of anything else, begins with the individual. Liberalisms view of the individual
shapes its views of all other social aggregations, including the state. Hence, Liberal citizenship
primarily value to maximize individual liberty.
There are different accounts of liberalism that ranges from negative liberty ideals that
emphasize individuals right to be left alone and to pursue their own projects free of state
compulsion, all the way to positive liberty notions. Common to positive liberty accounts is the
claim that the state should act affirmatively to create or secure those substantive entitlements
(e.g. income, health care, and education) that individuals need in order to lead the dignified,
independent lives essential to their freedom (Berlin, 1969).
The most influential early expositors of systematic liberal theory were John Locke and John
Stuart Mill.
Locke viewed individuals as endowed with and animated by reason, characterized as the Voice
of God, through which they can distinguish and act upon the commands of divinely given
natural law. From birth, all are equally endowed with this reason, which is the basis for decisions
to leave the state of nature, to enter into civil and political society, and to act in the community;
60
which enables individuals to consider not only their own interests but those of others and thus to
value social cooperation and self-restraint; and making a just law and government possible.
Freedom under government, to Locke, is not simply the absence of external restraint but also
living in conformity with a predictable, non-arbitrary law to which one has directly or indirectly
consented. It is to have a standing Rule to live by, common to every one of the Society, and
made by the Legislative Power erected in it.
To Locke and to the liberal theorists who followed him, private property is an essential condition
for individual freedom, as well as a principal goal of its exercise. Lockes theory of property,
considers three elements that are central to liberal citizenship. First is the notion that individuals
create property which Locke defines broadly as Lives, Liberties, and Estates and gain
domain/power over it by investing it with their labor; second, the protection of property against
public and private invasion is the most important function of law and government. Third the
lawful exercise of property rights naturally produces inequalities without injustice. On the other
hand, Locke believed, in a natural human sociability and concern for the interests of others that
might mitigate these inequalities.
John Stuart Mill, writing in the mid-nineteenth century, advanced Lockes liberal philosophical
project with a more systematic theory of liberty its nature, the manner of its exercise, its
relation to human welfare and to the discovery of truth, and the role of the state in limiting the
freedom of individuals.
Mills theory, even more than Lockes, regarded individuality and self-interest, properly
understood, as the source of social, not just personal, progress and well-being. Mill insisted that
unrestricted freedom of individual thought, inquiry, worship, and expression is the surest path to
truth and social improvement. And while Mill readily accepted that individuals freedom of
action could be limited more than their freedom of thought, he proposed a rule that would create
and defend a very broad domain of individual autonomy and self-promotion, while minimizing
the scope of government intervention.
Mills theory of the relationship between individual liberty and the state can be generally
summarized in a few propositions, albeit with considerable oversimplification. First, individual
liberty and state action tend to be opposed; increasing the latter reduces the former. Mill does
identify categories of situations in which state action can in fact enhance individual liberty law
enforcement and public goods, for example but the conflict is in his view endemic. This
61
tendency reflects several factors: the myopia (bias), corruptibility, and other defects of state
officials exercising coercive powers, the better outcomes when individuals pursue their own
ends, and the natural sociability of private actors in a liberal culture. Spontaneity and free choice
are the instruments of individual liberty; as spurs to action, they are more socially desirable than
legal compulsion or other forms of coercion.
Mills second, and closely related, proposition is based on a fundamental distinction between
activities that affect chiefly individuals own interests and those that also affect the interests of
others beyond those (e.g. ones own children) who are not yet regarded as independent,
autonomous beings. In a liberal society, he insists, the pursuit of ones own interests that do not
affect others is entirely the province of the individual, within which one must be free to do as one
pleases without the laws interference. Where others interests are affected, however, the state
may be justified in regulating the activity although even there it should recognize the likely
superiority of private ordering and often stay its hand, out of prudence and a concern for
individual liberty.
In general, these are the foundational principles of classical liberal theory: the primacy of
individual liberty understood primarily as freedom from state interference with ones personal
development and projects; a very broad protection of freedom of inquiry, speech, and worship; a
deep suspicion of state power over individuals; the restriction of state coercion to those areas of
activity in which individuals conduct affects others; and a strong though rebuttable presumption
in favor of privacy, markets, and other forms of private ordering.

Republican Approach/Citizenship
Republic derives from the Latin res publica, the public thing, matter, business, or property, with
the implication that a republic differs from a state or society in which the rulers regard
everything, including the people who inhabit it, as their property. In a republic, that is, the
government of the state or society is a public matter, and the people rule themselves. Publicity
the condition of being open and public rather than private or personal and self-government thus
seem to be the essential elements of republicanism.
To understand what is distinctive about republicanism, then, one must look more closely at the
implications republicans draw from publicity and self-government. In the case of publicity, the
implications are twofold. The first is that politics, as the publics business, must be conducted
62
openly, in public. The public business must be conducted in public not only for reasons of
convenience literally, of coming together but also in order to guard against corruption. The
second is that the public is not only a group of people but an aspect or sphere of life with its
own claims and considerations, even if it is not easily distinguished from the private.
All republicans believe that there is something educational about public life, regardless of how
tiresome it sometimes may be. Public life draws people out, and it draws them together. It draws
out their talents and capacities, and it draws them together into community into connection and
solidarity, and occasionally conflict, with other members of the public.
The republican emphasis on the rule of law and, perhaps most distinctively, on civic virtue. As
members of the public, people must be prepared to overcome their personal inclinations and set
aside their private interests when necessary to do what is best for the public as a whole. The
public-spirited citizens who act in this way display public or civic virtue. If they are to manifest
this virtue, furthermore, the public must be bound by the rule of law. Because it is the publics
business, politics requires public debate and decisions, which in turn require regular, established
procedures that is, rules about who may speak, when they may speak, and how decisions are to
be reached. Decisions must then take the form of promulgated rules or decrees that guide the
conduct of the members of the public. From the insistence on publicity, the rule of law quickly
follows.
The connection of self-government to the rule of law is at least as strong and immediate. If
citizens are to be self-governing, they cannot be subject to absolute or arbitrary rule. If the citizen
is to be self-governing, then he or she must be free from the absolute or arbitrary rule of others.
To avoid this arbitrariness, citizens must be subject to the rule of law the government of laws,
not of men, in what was the standard formula. But it is also important to note that self-
government requires self-governing. The republican citizen is not someone who acts arbitrarily,
impulsively, or recklessly, but according to laws he or she has a voice in making. Again, the need
for the rule of law is evident.
Self-government is, of course, a form of freedom. For republicans, it is the most important form,
for other forms of individual freedom are secure only in a free state, under law. Freedom thus
requires dependence upon the law so that citizens may be independent of the arbitrary will of
others. In Pettits terms, republicans are less concerned with freedom from interference than with
freedom from domination (1997). It is not interference as such that is objectionable but its
63
arbitrariness. A slave and a citizen may both suffer interference when the former must bow to the
will of the master and the latter must bow to the law, but their conditions are hardly equivalent.
The master need not consider the slaves desires or interests, but the law, at least in the ideal,
must attend to the interests of the citizen even when it interferes with his or her actions. Because
it protects the citizen against arbitrary, unaccountable power, the law is the non-mastering
interferer that ensures the citizens freedom.
The law only ensures the citizens freedom, however, when it is responsive to the citizenry and
when the republic itself is secure and stable enough for its laws to be effective. Sustaining
freedom under the rule of law thus requires not only active and public-spirited participation in
public affairs the civic virtue of the republican citizen but also the proper form of
government. This will be some version of mixed or balanced government, so called because it
mixes and balances elements of rule by one, rule by the few, and rule by the many this would
have the ability to stave off corruption and tyranny. Monarchy, aristocracy, and rule by the people
are prone, according to these writers, to degenerate into tyranny, oligarchy, and mob rule,
respectively; but a government that disperses power among the three elements could prevent
either the one, the few, or the many from pursuing its own interest at the expense of the common
good. With each element holding enough power to check the others, the result should be a free,
stable, and long-lasting government.
If the mixed constitution is the characteristic form of the republic, civic virtue is its desired
substance. Without citizens who are willing to defend the republic against foreign threats and to
take an active part in its government, even the mixed constitution will fail. Republics must thus
engage in what Sandel (1996: 6) calls a formative politics that cultivates in citizens the
qualities of character that self-government requires. Constitutional safeguards may be necessary
to resist corruption in the forms of avarice, ambition, luxury, and idleness, but they will not
suffice to sustain freedom under the rule of law in the absence of a significant degree of virtue
among the citizens. Seeing to the continuing supply of civic virtue through education and other
means will be, accordingly, one of the principal concerns of a prudent republic.
A prudent republic will also be a small one. Because in a small one, the public good is better felt,
better known, lies nearer to each citizen; abuses are less extensive and consequently less
protected. The concern for size and civic virtue that these alternatives reflect testifies to the
republican belief that citizens must have a strong attachment to their polity that grows out of a
64
connection to their fellow citizens. This connection must work almost immediately, as in the
city-republic, or in building-block fashion, with the higher and more remote layers of
government resting on the local ones, as in the federal republic. Without some connection of this
sort, civic virtue will not flourish and self-government will not survive.
From the republican point of view, citizenship has an ethical as well as a legal dimension.
Citizenship may be a matter of legal status that confers various privileges and immunities on the
citizen, in other words, but it must be more than that. Real or true citizenship requires
commitment to the common good and active participation in public affairs. It requires civic
virtue.
That is not to say that republicans degrade the legal aspect of citizenship. On the contrary, the
citizen of a community governed by the rule of law must be someone who holds the legal rights
and duties of membership. To be a citizen of a republic entails that a citizen of a republic not
only enjoys the protection of its laws but is also subject to them. It is also to say that, as a citizen,
they are supposed to be on an equal footing with other citizens. If they are not treated equally
under the law, then she or he may rightly complain of being a second-class citizen. In these
respects, legal status is as necessary to the republican conception of citizenship as to any other.
Necessary but not sufficient, for it requires the supplement of the ethical dimension. We
sometimes characterize people as good or bad citizens. If citizenship were only a matter of legal
status, we would not be able to distinguish good citizens from bad or true citizens from those
who are citizens in name only. That is, citizens hold a position of public responsibility, just as
mayors, senators, city councilors, and members of parliament do. The citizen who does not act
responsibly may thus be said to betray a public trust, while the citizen who faithfully does his or
her duty displays civic virtue. Citizenship has an ethical dimension, in short, because there are
standards built into the concept of citizenship, just as there are standards built into the concepts
of mayor, teacher, plumber, and physician. In the case of citizenship, moreover, these are
republican standards, for they stress the public nature of citizenship.
This public nature manifests itself in two ways. The first is that the good citizen is a public-
spirited person who places the interests of the community ahead of personal interests. Such a
person will recognize that citizenship is a matter of responsibilities as much as rights, and the
good citizen will discharge these responsibilities when called upon to do so from the day-to-
day demands of obeying traffic laws and respecting the rights of others to the more onerous
65
burdens of paying taxes and providing military (or some alternative) service. The second way in
which this commitment to the public good manifests itself is in civic involvement. Good citizens
will undertake public responsibilities when called upon, as with jury duty, but they will not
always wait for others to issue the call. Instead, they will take an active part in public affairs.
Two further dimensions of republican citizenship: the integrative and the educative.
Republicans believe that citizenship provides an integrative experience which brings together
the multiple role activities of the contemporary person and demands that the separate roles be
surveyed from a more general point of view (Wolin, 1960: 434). When we act as (republican)
citizens, we cannot simply speak or vote as parents or workers or consumers or members of this
group or that sect. A policy that will work to ones benefit as a consumer may work to ones
detriment as a worker or parent, for instance, so the search for a more synoptic understanding of
ones interests becomes necessary. Indeed, the activity of citizenship performs an integrative
function in two respects: it enables the individual to integrate the various roles he or she plays,
and it integrates individuals into the community.
Active citizenship educates people by drawing out abilities that might otherwise remain untapped
or unfulfilled. Because these abilities will prove valuable in other aspects of the citizens lives as
well, the educative dimension of citizenship clearly promises to work to their benefit. Two other
features of this educative dimension are noteworthy. Both pertain to the moral part of the
instruction afforded by participation in public affairs. First active citizenship widens individuals
horizons and deepens their sense of how their lives are involved with others, including the lives
of people who are unknown to them.
It is also important to notice how participation encourages public spirited citizenship. The legal
dimension of citizenship inclines us to think of citizenship in categorical terms: either one is a
citizen of a certain polity or one is not. From the ethical perspective, however, one can be more
or less of a citizen a real citizen, a citizen in name only, or something in between. Real
citizenship can be cultivated by encouraging those who are citizens in name only to join in public
life. From modest beginnings in occasional activities that require one to weigh interests not his
own and to look beyond his private partialities, political participation can transform the
nominal citizen into one who, made to feel himself one of the public, is moved to act by the
desire to promote the common good. Participation in public life thus seems to be a pathway to, as
well as a defining feature of, republican citizenship.
66
Communitarian approach/citizenship
In this conception, community is rooted in something prior to the political order of the state and,
it is based on something more substantive than the associational order of modern society
(Tnnies, 1959). Thus, political community is often seen to be rooted in a prior cultural
community, for it is held neither the state nor society can provide enduring normative ties.
Communitarians argue that citizenship is rooted in a culturally defined community.
Communitarians have given a view of citizenship as pre-political and rooted in a consensual and
spatially fixed understanding of the life-world. Communitarian thought tends to take for granted
the existence of a relatively coherent and stable cultural group. Community is an important basis
for citizenship. Citizenship as membership of political community must draw on something more
basic than politics.
There are three variants of communitarianismLiberal Communitarianism is one that was
explicitly cultural in its conception of community and emphasis on the rejection of individualism
and the contractualism. Communitarianism was a reaction, to a conception of citizenship based
on social, civic and political dimensions of political community.
Communitarians object to the asocial concept of the self in liberalism. The self is not only
socially constructed but is also embedded in a cultural context. For communitarians, citizenship
is not only about participation in the political community but it is also about the preservation of
identity, and therefore citizenship is always specific to a particular community. They consider
citizenship as the recognition of cultural difference and focus on the need for the preservation of
cultural community through an emphasis on equality, for instance the equal dignity of all citizens
with respect to their rights and moral worth, or an emphasis on difference, the need of the
majority culture to make concessions to particular groups, generally minorities but also, and
more importantly for communitarians, for the state to give official recognition to cultural
community, be it that of the majority or minority: Where the politics of universal dignity fought
for forms of non-discrimination that were quite blind to the ways in which citizens differ, the
politics of difference often redefines non-discrimination as requiring that we make these
distinctions the basis of differential treatment (Taylor, 1994: 39). In order for a cultural
community to retain its integrity and flourish there must be some public recognition by the state
of cultural community. This is particularly the case with minority cultures to which concerns
must be granted by the majority culture.
67
The concept of community in communitarian discourse is the community of the dominant culture
which is officially recognized by the state. Since political community, in which citizenship
exists, rests on a prior cultural community, minorities and incoming groups must adapt to this
community in order to participate in its political community. Thus, liberal communitarianism is
simply forcing liberalism to make explicit the existence of the cultural community that underlies
political community.

Civic Communitarianism or Republican version of Communitarianism

They focus on the re-empowering of civil society. Instead of the preservation of cultural identity,
what is at stake is social capital- the accumulation of trust among citizens who can view each
other sympathetically as co-venturers and cooperate in joint projects rather than give way to
cynicism, isolation, and free-riding incentives. Participation in public life is the essence of the
civic bond. This republican version of communitarianism can be seen as a radical form of liberal
individualism, differing from its classical liberal presuppositions in at least two respects. Firstly,
that individualism reaches its highest expression in commitment to public life, as opposed to the
liberal emphasis on the private pursuit of interest or personal autonomy. Rather than self-interest
what is at stake is public interest. And secondly, while liberalism was based on negative freedom,
the civic republican ideal of politics is one of positive freedom, the ideal of a self-governing
political community.
Much of civic communitarianism or republican discourse operates on the pre-political level,
valuing associational participation for its non-political benefits. Robert Putnam relates civic
engagement with what he calls social capital. The value of civil society is not its ability to
overcome conflicts but to promote values of trust, commitment and solidarity, values which
allow democracy to flourish. In this version of republicanism, social responsibility primarily falls
firmly on the shoulders of civil society rather than on the state, which can function only if civil
society already speaks with one voice. In his study of modern Italy he thus found that what
matters are not institutions but cultural traditions, in particular those that reinforce civil society
(Putnam, 1993). It is civil society that makes for a better state and public institutions, not the
reverse, he argues. A strong civil society will lead to a stronger state in which democracy will
flourish.

68
Governmental Communitarianismcan be seen as a combination of the concerns of liberal
communitarianism and civic communitarianism with identity and participation. It focuses on a
move towards government through community: in the institution of community, a sector is
brought into existence whose vectors and forces can be mobilized, enrolled, deployed in novel
programs and techniques which encourage and harness active practices of self-management and
identity construction, of personal ethics and collective allegiances (1999: 176). This refers to the
growing discourse of community in policy-making in recent years.
The new technologies of community, to follow Nikolas Roses characterization, are a diffuse set
of practices that cut across government and civil society, linking citizens to the state. The
governmentalization of community facilates this by the creation of a whole array of discourses
about community, for instance community regeneration, community experts, local community
initiatives such as community policing, community safety and community development (Rose,
1999: 189). It is important not to see this as merely the exercise of social control, for it can also
be the reverse. The language of community and of morality is increasingly entering political
discourse (ethical investment, ethical foreign policy). But as Rose points out, this can be a
superficial moralizing of politics or it can offer new possibilities for empowerment for an ethico-
politics.
In order to make citizenship meaningful to a society that had become highly depoliticized and to
which the state had become irrelevant a sense of responsibility, identity and participation needs
to be created.
3.3. Modes of Acquiring and Loosing Citizenship
The process of acquiring citizenship varies from country to country depending up on the
existing specific laws of each country. There is no clear cut uniformity in acquiring citizenship
status as there is no common standard that govern all state of the world. Thus different states
grant and deny citizenship to their citizens differently which in turn implies the fact that
the idea of citizenship is left to the domestic jurisdiction of a state. However, this does not mean
that the state should follow arbitrary and groundless decision in granting or denying citizenship.
Some broadly shared normative and customary principles are underscored to minimize
arbitrary deprivation of citizenship. In nut shell, the process of acquiring or losing citizenship
involves complex issues related with the interest of states as well as the interactions of

69
individuals. Accordingly, three major ways/modes of acquiring citizenship can be singled out
here for a discussion. These are:
A. Citizenship by Birth

The majority of peoples in almost all countries usually acquire citizenship at birth and hence
after they do not normally change their citizenship. Citizenship by birth has two principles
namely; jus soiland jus sanguinis. Whereas Jus soil(a Latin phrase for right of soil) means
child born in a particular state automatically becomes a citizen of the state irrespective
of his/her parents citizenship (what matters most is the birth place of the child), Jus-Sanguinis (a
Latin term for right of blood), on the other hand, does not consider the place of birth of
the child as important rather the child enjoys the citizenship of its parents automatically
(what matters most here is the citizenship of his parents). For instance, in the context of Ethiopia,
it is clearly stated in proclamation No378/2003 (Article 3) that any person shall be an
Ethiopian national by descent where both or either of his parents is Ethiopian.
B. Citizenship by Law

Naturalization (citizenship by law) is a mode of acquiring citizenship after birth. It is a

process by which a state confers citizenship on an individual who is originally (by birth) not a
citizen as a matter of its voluntary acts and intention of the individual. Hence, naturalization is
under the authority of the state and the individual is expected to fulfill some sets of criteria set up
by that particular country. More specifically, Citizenship by naturalization includes among others
marriage, legitimization, option and acquisition of domicile.
Grant on Application: refers to the possibility of obtaining an Ethiopian nationality by law
via the fulfillment of certain conditions.Nevertheless,different countries pursue different
requirements. For instance, according to the 1930 Ethiopian citizenship decree the requirement
for naturalized Ethiopian citizenship were; having a majority (legal age), staying in
Ethiopia for at least five years, being not dependent, being able to speak and write Amharic
language and not being accused of crime or other related illegal matters. On the other hand,
according to proclamation No. 378/2003 of the Ethiopian nationality law (Article 5), a
foreigner who applies to acquire Ethiopian nationality by law is expected to fulfill the following
conditions:
1) he/she has to attain the age of majority;
70
2) he/she has to establish a domicile in Ethiopia for a total of at least four years preceding the
submission of his application;
3) he/she has to be able to communicate in any one of the languages of the nations
and nationalities of the country;
4) he/she has to have a sufficient and lawful source of income to maintain him/herself
and his/her family;
5) he/she has to be a person of good character;
6) he/she has to have no record of criminal conviction
7) he/she has to be able to show that he has been released from his previous nationality or the
possibility of obtaining such a release up on the acquisition of Ethiopian nationality or that he is
a stateless person, and
8) he/she is required to take the oath of allegiance stated under article 12 of the proclamation
which says that I-----, solemnly affirm that I will be a loyal national of the federal democratic
republic of Ethiopia and be faithful to its constitution.
In the case of marriage for instance, if a woman marries a man of another country, she can
have the possibility of acquiring her husbands country citizenship. i.e., thewoman has the
option of choosing citizenship of her husband and deleting her own country. In the context of
Ethiopia, proclamation number 378/2003 article 6 clearly states that a foreigner who is married
to an Ethiopian national may acquire Ethiopian nationality by law when he/she fulfills the
following requirements:
1) The marriage is concluded in accordance with the laws of Ethiopia or the other
country where the marriage is contracted;
2) There is a lapse of at least two years since the conclusion of the marriage;
3) He/she has lived in Ethiopian for at least one year preceding the submission of the
application; and
4) He/she has fulfilled the conditions stated under article 5 (1, 7, 8) of the above proclamation.
Legitimation (Cases of adoption): is also other mechanisms of citizenship acquiring by
recognition- i.e. an illegitimate child has the right to get his/her biological or caretaker
father in accordance with Ethiopias proclamation no.378/2003).In Ethiopia, any child
adopted by Ethiopian national, based on proclamation No 378/2003, may obtain Ethiopian
nationality by law when the following conditions are fulfilled;
71
1) He/she has not attained the age of majority,
2) He/she lives in Ethiopia together with his adopting parent;
3) Where one of his adopting parents is a foreigner and such parent has expressed his/her consent
in written statement; and
4) The condition stated under article 5(7) of the proclamation has been fulfilled.

Citizenship by special case: Citizenship can be given to an individual or collectives without

undergoing all the legal procedures related to acquisition of citizenship. As to the Ethiopian
Nationality proclamation article 8, a foreigner who has made an outstanding contribution in the
interest of Ethiopia may be conferred with Ethiopian Nationality by law irrespective of the
conditions stated under sub-articles (2) and (3) of Article 5 of the proclamation. That is, he/she is
not required to live in Ethiopia for a total of four years and may lack the ability to communicate
in any of the languages of the country.
Reintegration (Restoration): A person who has lost his/her citizenship due to some reasons may
get it back if he/she fulfills some conditions as laid down by the laws of the state. According to
the Ethiopian Nationality proclamation article 22, a person who was an Ethiopian national and
who has acquired foreign nationality by law shall be readmitted to Ethiopian nationality if
he/she:
A. Returns to domicile in Ethiopia;
B. Renounces his foreign nationality; and
C. Applies to the security, Immigration and Refugee Affairs Authority.

Option: This is a modern development due to the direct participation of the inhabitants in their
status of citizenship. In voluntary partition, cession or exchange of territories option is given to
the inhabitants to choose only the citizenship of one state. Example, when the territory of India
was divided into Pakistan and India.
Citizenship by Political Case (Process): The political case refers to acquisition of citizenship by
conquest or cession of territory. Cession is voluntary process whereas conquest is coercive act.
Citizenship by political case is possible in two ways. These are:
i. When the people of subjugated state are incorporated within the territory of the victorious
state, they acquire citizenship of the new state. When large number of people acquires
citizenship at the same time, such practice is termed as collective citizenship.
ii. Due to the merger of one state or region of a state with another state, citizens of the
merged territory become citizens of the new state in which they are merged. Example,

72
 when the United States bought the Louisiana territory from France in 1803, the treaty
provided that all the people in the area should become American citizens.

C. Citizenship by mixed (dual) system

There are times when a person finds himself/herself with multiple citizenship status. Dual
nationality (citizenship) is when a person has citizenship status of two countries. This might be
due to an overlap of countries citizenship laws. i.e. a person may have one because of his /her
place of birth (jus soil) and another because of his/her parents citizenship by blood (jus
sanguinis). Similarly, when a person has citizenship status of more than two countries it
is termed as multiple citizenship. Some individuals have more than two citizenship status as
a result of jus soil, jus sanguinis or naturalization laws.
Modes of losing Citizenship
As they pursue different principles in granting citizenship status, states also adopt
different principles to make citizens loss citizenship.
1. Renunciation:in case states harass the person and in turn he/she dislikes the policies or
politics/ ideologies pursued by the state. In Ethiopia, as clearly explained in article 19
of proclamation no 378/2003 of the Ethiopian nationality law one can loss his/ her
Ethiopian nationality via renunciationif; he/she has acquired or has been guaranteed
the acquisition of the nationality of another state. However, one who intends to do so
shall in advance inform the concerned authority. Moreover, he/she who has declared
his/her intention to renounce his nationality may not be released until he/she has
discharged his/her outstanding national obligations or where he/she has been accused of
convicting a crime. However, the renunciation of the nationality of a minor child shall be
effected by the joint decision of his parents or, where one of his parents is a foreigner, by
the decision of the Ethiopian parent.Thus, given, dual nationality is impossible in the
Ethiopian context. Article 20 of the above stated proclamation supports this stating:

1) Without prejudice to the provision of article 19 (4) of this proclamation, any Ethiopian who
voluntary acquires another nationality shall be deemed to have voluntarily renounced his
Ethiopian nationality.
2) An Ethiopian who acquires another nationality by virtue of being born to a parent having a
foreign nationality or by being born abroad shall be deemed to have voluntarily renounced his

73
other nationality unless he has declared to the authority his option to retain it by renouncing his
other nationality within one year after attaining the age of majority or unless there has been an
earlier expressed renunciation of his Ethiopian nationality pursuant to Article 19(3) of
this proclamation.
3) An Ethiopian who acquires, in the absence of his own initiative, another nationality by the
operation of the law in connection with any ground other than those specified under sub-article
(2) of this article shall be deemed to have voluntarily renounced his Ethiopian nationality if he
starts exercising the rights conferred to such acquired nationality or fails to declare his option to
the authority to retain his Ethiopian nationality by renouncing his other nationality with in a
period of one year. And
4) A person who retains another nationality in addition to Ethiopian nationality shall be
considered an Ethiopian national until the loss of his Ethiopian nationality pursuant to
sub-article (2) or (3) of this Article.
Deprivation:a citizen may also be deprived of his/her citizenship, if he/she is guilty of
committing certain serious crimes against the state such as making access national secrets to
alien country, siding with enemy forces in time of war and so on.
Lapse case:in case the person stays outside of his/her country for a long and continuous period.
Substitution:Citizenship may be lost when the original citizenship is substituted by another state,
where it is acquired through naturalization. According to the Ethiopian Nationality proclamation
article 20, Ethiopian nationality can be lost upon acquisition of other nationality. On the other
side, this may also take place when a particular territory is annexed by another state; the
inhabitants citizenship with in the annexed territory will be replaced by the citizenship of the
subjugator.
Who is entitled to citizenship status?
Although it might sound surprising citizenship status is not a natural inheritance of only human
beings rather it also extends to non-human entities as well. Given this, the following elements are
normally entitled to citizenship status.
1. Human beings. All persons irrespective of religion, race, color etc. directly have the
right to be citizens. Here, citizenship is a right not a privilege. i.e it is not a status that is
conferred by the will of government .

74
2. Dehumanized elements: These are institutions, plants, animals and materials that have legal
status. Example, commercial organizations, registered ships and planes, endemic animals and
plants etc. However, dehumanized elements cannot be categorized under direct citizenship
status which refers to exercising the title of citizenship directly without the approval or
will of any political body. Rather the government has the responsibility to determine
citizenship status of non-human elements. Thus, direct citizenship applies only to
humanized elements although via legal status it is also possible to term dehumanized
elements as nationals of a country.
Major Rights and Responsibilities of Citizens
Rights
Getting protection that is to get his/her life and property protected by the state
Getting the necessary social services that is having access to health. Education, water,
electricity, housing and other facilities
Right to work in his or her own country (facilitate the working situations)
Right to elect and be elected

Responsibilities
Take part in the political, economic and social activities
Respect the right of other people
Protect the country from any kind of threat or attack
Bear duties in times of advertise
Respect the laws and rules that govern the country
Preserve historic and cultural heritages of the country
Pay taxes
Accept and appreciate the views, beliefs, and arguments of other people (open
mindedness)
Be good citizen free from destruction of any kind
Follow up what the government is doing or intends to do

Chapter Four: Constitution,Democracy and Human rights: Ethiopian focus

4.1. Constitution
Definition of constitution and constitutionalism

75
Working definition: Constitution refers to body of rules and laws,(written or unwritten)
that determine the organization of government and the distribution of powers and
functions to various organs of government, regulate the relationship among themselves and also
between the state and its individuals through general principles on which these powers are
to be exercised. Given this, a constitution is also figuratively defined as the fundamental or
basic law of a state which sets out the structure of the state and also lists the rights of citizens
alongside the limits on the power exercise of a government. On the other hand,
Constitutionalism refers to a doctrine that governments should be faithful to their constitutions
because the rules and laws so provided are all that can protect citizens rights from arbitrary
actions and decisions of the government. Put differently, it is the belief that constitution of a
state is the best arrangement of things and activities in a society.
Purpose and classifications of constitution
Purposes of Constitution
Having a constitution is not an end on its own rather it is meant to serve some notable
purposes. Following is, therefore, a description about some of these important purposes
and functions of a constitution.
It serves as a framework for Government: This means that the constitution of state is a plan
for organizing the operation of government which in turn effectively guides the functions
and powers of the executive, legislative and judicial bodies of government. In other words, it
is a brief and a general outline of duties and rights of governments and also that of
citizens.
It limits the powers of government: A country has a constitution may not necessarily
mean it has a constitutionally limited government. There is a difference between having a
constitution and having a constitutionally limited government. Given this, in a constitutionally
limited government, officials are always abided by the constitution. i.e. there is no decision or
action that will be undertaken arbitrarily and spontaneously rather every decision, act, or
behavior is entertained according to rules and laws that originate from the constitution.
This subjection to the laws and rules from the part of the government and the governed
(the people) is coined as the rule of law. However, constitutional government protects the
rights and a freedom of citizens doesnt mean that the government has no authority to
effectively exercise its functions. A constitutional Government is neither too powerful nor
76
too weak because if a government is excessively powerful, i.e. if it has unlimited powers, it
tends to abuse the rights and freedoms of citizens. If, on the other hand, a government is too
weak it cannot protect citizens. Therefore, constitutions shall grant Governments enough
powers to effectively and consistently undertake their functions and responsibilities but at
the same time must put limits on their powers to make sure that they are not in a position to
endanger the rights and freedoms of citizens.
It protects individual and collective rights of citizens: To protect the individual and
collective rights and freedoms of people, the constitution of a state lay down the
relationship between the state and the individual by making out the respective spheres of
government on the one hand, and the individual and collective rights and freedoms on the other.
It serves as the supreme (highest) law of a country: this implies that constitution is the
source of and supreme over all laws in a country. I.e. No specific law will be valid if it
contradicts the constitution. All laws in a country are made to fulfill the objectives and goals
clearlyspecified in a constitution of a given country. Because of this, the constitution of state
is referred to as the law behind other laws or the Mother of all laws of a country.
It provides government legitimacy/stability : as they formalize and regulate relationships
between political bodies and citizens and also provide mechanisms through which any
potential conflicts can be adjudicated and resolved, constitution usually provide the vital
function of introducing a measure of stability, order, and predictability of government. This
in turn gives governments a legitimate/legal right to rule or govern and by doing so it serves as
the weapon for legitimizing regimes.

Types of Constitutions
For the convenience of studying constitution of state scholars of the subject find it valuable to
categorize constitutions in different categories based on criteria such as the principle they
possess pertaining to distribution of political power, separation of power among branches
of government, and the procedures employed for amending the constitution. Accordingly,
constitutions in different political systems differ from one another. They also differ in their
form, content and patterns of political arrangements as a result of variations in historical
backgrounds, social traditions and political practices. i.e. In some cases constitutions are
products of compromises and consensus of differing social and political forces of
77
society while in others they are drawn by power holders in government with the aim of securing
their desired political and socio-economic interests. These being the case, by form constitutions
are generally classified as written /codified or unwritten/ uncodified ones.
written constitution: is one in which key constitutional provisions are found collected and
compiled together in a single legal document.
Some Benefits of Written (codified) Constitution of State
It is full of clarity and definitions because key provisions are written.
It has the quality of stability. That is, since people know the nature of
constitutional provisions, people feel a sense of satisfaction.
The Rights and liberties of the people are secured since all-important points
are reduced to writing. Hence, authoritarianism is kept at bay.
It has educational Value in that it highlights the central values and over all
goals (objectives) and principles of the political system.
Major principles and key constitutional provisions are entrenched,
safeguarding them from interference by the government of the day.
The power of the legislative is constrained, cutting its sovereignty down to
size.
Non-political judges are able to police the constitution of state to ensure that
its provisions up held by the public.

Unwritten constitution: on the other hand refers to a set of rules, regulations, declarations and
laws passed by either a parliament (the legislative body) or other competent body (ies) at
different times that are not compiled in a single document containing key constitutional
provision.
Some benefits of unwritten (uncodified) Constitution of State
It has the quality of elasticity and adaptability to changing circumstances or situations.
It is resilient with the result that it can absorb and also recover from shocks that may
destroy a written constitution.
It is dynamic in that it prevents chances of popular uprisings (upheavals).
Similarly, on the basis of the complexity with which provisions of the constitution can be
changed or amended, constitutions are categorized as rigid or flexible ones.
78
Rigid constitution: is one that does not adapt itself to changing circumstances immediately and
quickly or simply one whose amendment procedures are relatively complex or difficult (For
example, as in the case of the USA where it needs 2/3 majorities in both Houses (the
House of Representatives plus House of the Senate) and in Ethiopia where constitutional
amendment requires a support by majority vote of all state councils, by a two-thirds
majority vote of the House of Peoples Representatives and by a two-thirds majority vote of the
House of the Federation).
Flexible constitution: on the other hand is one that adapts easily and immediately to
changing circumstances or simply one whose amendment procedures are relatively simple as
in the case of UK, and Israel in which the central legislature can easily amend the
constitutions.
Constitutions are also grouped in to effective or nominal ones on the basis of the degree
to which constitution of a state is observed in practice.
Effective Constitution: denotes a situation in which government/citizens practices correspond to
the provisions of the constitution.
Nominal Constitution: signifies a condition in which the constitution accurately describes
government/citizens limits yet in practice either or both fail to behave accordingly. In
short when the constitution only remains to have paper value or when there is absence of
Constitutionalism.
Last but not least, constitutions can also be substantially classified as either Federal or
Unitary ones depending on the extent to which they concentrate government legislative,
executive and judicial powers at the center (the former) or distribute it among the different
branches and levels of government (the latter).
4.2. Democracy
Definition and Ways of Exercising Democracy
Though democracy might be defined differently in different contexts, we can for our
purpose here approach the concept from two perspectives. One is to define it etymologically as
government/rule of and by the people (i.e. demos in Greek means people and kratiarule
hence democracy means peoples rule) and the other is to give the concept a socio-
cultural and politico-economic context and accordingly define it as a moral value/ethical
idea that preaches about liberty and equality of individuals and groups and hence the
79
need for governments/other actors power limitation if they go against these values.
Moreover, democracy signifies in the same contexts a political system of rule in which values of
tolerance, cooperation, compromise, consensus, compassion, civility, pragmatism, etc. are
uphold as instruments of peaceful resolution/management of conflicts and hence
differences accommodation. Generally, democracy refers to a political and social process
through which people to people as well as people government relationships are guided by
principles of popular sovereignty (a belief that governments legitimate authority emanates from
the people) and rule of law (a belief that government power should not be arbitrary rather its
exercise must be circumscribed/limited by a set of rules).
Ways of Exercising Democracy
If one maintains the definition of democracy to be a government system in which supreme
power is vested in and exercised by people, two broad ways of exercising it can be
singled out namely Direct and Indirect. i.e. while direct democracy implies a form of
government in which the right to make political decisions is exercised directly by the
whole body of citizens acting under procedures of majority rule (as in the case of referenda,
local meetings/discussions) indirect democracy on the other hand refers to a form of government
in which citizens exercise their rights and freedoms and discharge their obligations not in person
but through representatives chosen by themselves.
Major Theoretical Approaches to Democracy
On the basis of how we confront with and view democracy, we can identify two theoretical
approaches to democracy. These are: procedural view and substantive view.
A. Procedural view of Democracy

Procedural view of democracy focuses on the procedures that enable the people to
govern themselves; such as meetings to discuss issues, voting in elections, running for
public offices. The questions that the procedural approach to democracy seeks to
address are.
Who should participate in decision making?
How much should each participants vote count?
How many votes are needed to reach a decision?

The theoretical answers to these questions are that

80
 Everyone should participate in government decision making process, as possible
as directly, and trough representation. This is referred to as principle of
universal participation.
All votes should be counted equal. This is the principle of political equality.
An equality majority of the participants i.e. 50% or simple majority or qualified
majority (70%) this principle of majority rule.
B. The Substantive View of Democracy

The substantive view of democracy, on the other hand, emphasizes on the substance of
government policies, laws, rules and regulations, etc., not on the procedure followed in
making these policies, laws and rules. According to this way of approaching
democracy, the public of a democratic government should at least guarantee such
human and democratic rights as, for example, the right to life, liberty, security, property,
freedom of religion, conscience, thought, expression, assembly, movement, peaceful
demonstration, the right to petition, as well as cultural rights, economic and
development rights. Therefore, the principles of universal participation, political, social,
economic natural and legal equality, majority rule and the provisions of fundamental
human and democratic rights, among other, essentially characterize democracy.
Fundamental Values and Principles of Democracy
There are three core values that are central in the discussion of the concept of democracy. These
are values of liberty/freedom, justice and equality. Let us now briefly look at what each of them
means.
Liberty: This value includes personal freedom (to mean that Individuals should be free from
arbitrary arrest and detention and also their homes/property should be secured from unreasonable
searches and seizures), political freedom (to imply that people of a nation have the right to
participate freely in the political process such as elections without being subject to arbitrary
arrest, harassment and electoral corruption such as buying votes, intimidation and obstruction
of voter) and economic freedom (to mean that citizens should have the right to acquire,
use, transfer and dispose of private property without unreasonable governmental interference
and moreover to enjoy right to seek employment wherever one pleases, to change employment
at will and to engage in any lawful labor unions or business corporations).

81
Justice: this value of democracy can be understood in three general senses of fairness.
These are distributive Justice (the sense of distributing benefits and burdens in society via
agreed up on standards of fairness), corrective Justice (the sense that a proportional response
should be in place to correct wrongs and injuries) and procedural justice (the idea that
procedures used for gathering information and making decisions should be guided by such
principles as impartiality and openness of proceedings).
Equality: three notions of equality are of particular significance here for our discussion. i.e.
political equality (implying that all people who attain the status of adult hood have equal
political rights or in short one man-one vote- one value), social equality (implying that
there should be no social hierarchy at individual and collective level or no discrimination
what so ever)and economic equality(implying that all peoples of a country deserve equal
and fair assessment to the national resources services).
Although we can be exhaustive in our list, the followings constitute some of the fundamental
principles (both in the procedural and substantial senses) of democracy. These are;
1. The principle of popular sovereignty: this is the idea that the only legitimate source
of government authority is the consent of the governed which consist of the citizens of a state as
a whole. Consent is given by the people through their regularly elected representatives
and approval of all constitutional changes. Popular sovereignty also means that the people have
the right to withdraw their consent when the government fails to fulfill its obligations under
the constitution. Technically, popular sovereignty in democracy assumes the principle of
majority rule which means that within some constitutional limits the majorities should have
the right to make political decisions. In the Ethiopian case, Article 8 of the FDRE
constitution states that the highest power and authority is vested in the nations, nationalities
and peoples of Ethiopia to indicate that they are the sovereign in the land.
2. The principle of constitutional supremacy: This is a principle that puts the constitution at the
highest level in thehierarchy of laws. According to this principle, the constitution isabove all
lawsand organs of a state. This principle dictates all laws and governmental or non-governmental
acts to be under the constitution. It also implies that if an act is found to be against the
constitution, it would be out of effect or void.

82
3. The principle of Rule of Law: it means that both government and the governed are and must
be subject to the laws of a country when they make decisions and take actions instead
of doing so arbitrarily.
4. The principle of secularism: this is a principle that demands strict separation of religious and
political affairs and hence state and church operations basing on the philosophy that
individuals and groups in a free society should have freedom of conscience (the right to decide
for themselves what to believe in which case it can be threatened if government becomes
religious and supports some religions but not others). This principle is clearly upheld in Article
11 of the FDRE Constitution which states that 1) State and religion are separate 2) There shall be
no state religion and 3) The state shall not interfere in religious matters and religion shall not
interfere in the state affairs.
5. The principle of accountability and transparency: this is a principle that as the ultimate power
holder is the people public officials at different levels should involve public participation in
decision makings and also be answerable for any misdoings. In fact, this principle is a natural
consequence of the strict application of principles of separation of powers (the idea that
the law making, implementation and interpretation powers of government should be separated
horizontally among the legislative, executive, and judicial institutions and vertically between
the central and state governments) and checks and balance (to mean that the powers given
to the different branches of government are balanced so that no branch can completely
dominate the others).
6. The principle of civilian government and peaceful transition of political power: This is
a general principle that there must be a civilian control of the military often to be reflected in the
form of making the head of government or state also the commander in chief of the
armed forces and most importantly giving the parliament constitutional power to declare war.
Parallel to this the principle is also about the prevalence of peaceful transition of political power
first from the public via. Elections to political contestants (parties or individuals) and latter
from all competitors to a winner(s). To this end, elections are expected to be fair, free
periodic, competitive and all inclusive.
7. The principle of protection and promotion of human rights: Human rights are those naturally
given values that reflect respect for human life and dignity hence their protection and promotion
test the legitimacy and constitutionality ofa democratic government. There are different types
83
of human rights that seriously need government protection and promotion such as first
generation rights( Civil and political rights), second generation rights (Social and Economic
and cultural rights) and third generation rights (Environmental and developmental rights).

Democracy and Actors in Democratization Process

1. Roles of the Government in Democratization Process

It is not beyond imagination that governments, especially that of developing countries like
Ethiopia, play the central roles in democratization processes. Accordingly, in this part, we shall
look at the central roles and functions of government in general and Ethiopia government in
particular. In line with this, the following ones are the major central roles and functions of
government, especially in developing countries like Ethiopia.
A. Effective Order, Predictability, Internal Security and External
Defence
Nearly all governments at least claim to have as their primary role and purpose the establishment
of an order that permits predictability which in turn, promotes a sense of security among the
governed (the public). Moreover, government on behalf of state and the governed takes the
primary/central role in internal security and defends its territory from external attack.
B. Fair and Just Distribution of Resources and Social
Responsibilities
All governments play a role of controlling the distribution of resources in their societies fairly
and persistently. These include capital, labor, and natural resources. In doing so, governments
have the mandate to determine which resources will be publicly controlled, and which sectors &
resources will be in private hands.
Moreover, governments have usually the responsibilities to discharge social responsibilities such
as education, health (protection against the hazards of sickness), physical infrastructure,
protection against unemployment and old age, etc.
C. Policy planning /formulation and implementation
Governments are usually given the mandate to formulate, implement, supervise and evaluate
various public policies in many issues and sectors at different levels. In this regards government;
formulates, implement and supervise various laws such as constitutional law, criminal law, civil
laws, etc. Likewise, governments are vested with the power and authority to formulate economic,
social, cultural, and other policies accordingly.

84
 D. Conflict Resolution and Management
All governments develop various institutions and procedures for the effective management of
conflict and political flare-ups at individual and collective level. In line with these institutions
like legislative, executive, and judiciary are established accordingly. Likewise, governments may
also provide other institutional and informal means of conflict management such as voting rights,
majority rule, protection of minorities, and freedom of expression and discuss in conflicting
ideas, beliefs, etc.
E. Good Governance /Democratic Governance
Prevalence of democratic governance requires establishing the required institutions. Needless to
say that it is through those government institutions that the values of democracy and good
governance are put in to practice. The two core indicators of good governance are:
1. Accountability; and
2. Transparency
1) Accountability: Refers to the system in which elected public officials are made to be
responsible (answerable) to the people that elected them.
2) Transparency: Transparency refers to the ideas that the workings/procedures, decisions, and
actions of the government and its officials should be clearly disclosed and known to the
people. In other words, the people should be made aware of important policy decisions of the
government, including how, when, where, by whom and why they are made. The rationale is
that access to such information enables citizens to check the prevalence of accountability in
their government, prevents a government from being corrupt and from transgressing the
wishes and interests of the people.
2. The Roles of Civil Societies in Democratization Process

Civil society are associations which are separate from state and enjoy some autonomy in
relations with the state, and formed voluntarily by members of society to protect or promote their
interests, values, or identities.
Civil society is a broader concept encompassing all the organizations and associations that exist
outside of the state (including political parties) and the market. It includes the extent of
organizations, which considered as interest group [not only NGOS but also Chamber of
commerce, ethnic associations, welfare group, -- etc.). It also includes religious organizations,
sports club and informal community group.
From the above explanations, we can easily understand that civil societies are formed by the free
will of their members, voluntarily not by force, but by their own. Thus, for an individual to

85
voluntarily participate in civil societies or civic group, he/she should believe that there is a cause
to promote through participation.
It goes without saying that civil societies deliver a lot of benefits and advantages in building and
consolidation of democracy and democratization.
Democracy is about creating and consolidating an enabling environment and fertile ground for
peoples participation in the public affairs. Therefore, if democracy is to be successful and
effective, devoted and persistent participation of citizens in the affairs of the public is
conspicuous. This is because of the fact that democracy is not like a machine that goes by itself
once it is inserted; rather, it needs the devoted and persistent participation on the realization and
achievement of democracy and democratization process.Therefore, it is evolutionary process that
requires time and a myriad of requirements. Due to this fact the realization of the ideals of
democracy demands the reasonable intervention of civil societies. They promote citizens
participation in decision-making on various issues directly or indirectly. Civil societies can go as
they usually do, to the extent that of influencing and monitoring the government in drafting,
ratification and implementation of public policies and lawmaking.
As a result of the above mentioned justifications civil societies are usually viewed as an
important vehicles or organs in framing public agendas, developing public opinions, and
mobilizing local populations for awareness development, and looking for solutions and come up
with suggestions.
Trade Unions
Trade unions have protecting workers' economic rights as their main responsibility. They have,
inter alia, to make sure that workers are paid reasonably in a workers-friendly working
environment. It is however not canonical that trade union should only stick to this role especially
under a circumstance where public policies are silent about workers interests. In this context, a
political role is in escapable as these unions have to go beyond economism and struggle to
democratize the state.
Professional Bodies
Organizations representing professionals bring to the table of governance the views and
experiences of those groups of people who oil the machinery of governance on a day to day basis
and without whose active input there would be little governance to speak of. Lawyers guilds,
medical practitioners associations, accountants bodies and others, play a crucial role in ensuring
86
that their adherents perform their duties diligently and with probity and in checking professional
misconduct and sanctioning fraud. They are of special importance in promoting self-regulation in
areas in which governmental bodies lack specialized competence.
Academic Organizations
At this time of profound change, academia, including universities, research institutes and public
policy centers, has taken on increased importance in world affairs by helping to uncover the
dimensions of change and to construct an intellectual platform upon which future efforts may be
built. By expanding the flow of ideas, academia has become increasingly powerful in
encouraging public participation in national and international dialogue on the future and, more
importantly, in shaping that dialogue. Thus, by its very nature, academia also contributes to
democratization. At the same time, academia is providing important new evidence on the
complementarity among peace, development and democracy, and on the contribution of
international organizations to all three.
The Media
The media are a powerful force for democratization. Responsible and independent
communications media can engage the governments and people in different affairs and enable
them to be informed, to discuss and debate, and to express positions on the issues of the day. In
this way, the media and democratization are mutually re-enforcing: a free press is a vehicle for
democratization; democratization promotes the open society in which a free press can flourish.
The media can help keep national politics open, responsive and accountable. The media,
especially through the immensely powerful imagery of television and film, have the ability to set
the terms of debate and to shape public opinion.
The media can be used to mobilize political support or to undermine opponents. This can be done
by communicating negative propaganda or news about opponents or simply not making their
views public. Governments also use the media to communicate their ideas in a particular way
that suits their interests. This largely accounts for the determination by governments, the world
over, but especially those that suffer from a crisis of legitimacy, to control the media. The mass
media are crucial in political life because they are the means by which citizens, groups and
leaders acquire political information and try to influence each other.
Access to information is essential to the health of democracy for at least two reasons. First, it
ensures that citizens make responsible, informed choices rather than acting out of ignorance or
87
misinformation. Second, information serves a checking function by ensuring that elected
representatives uphold their oaths of office and carry out the wishes of those who elected them.
Free and fair elections conducted through transparent processes require a media sector which
gives candidates equal access, and reports the relevant issues in a timely, objective manner.
The media can also help build peace and social consensus, without which democracy is
threatened. The media can provide warring groups mechanisms for mediation, representation and
voice so they can settle their differences peacefully. The media also serve as a conduit between
governors and the governed and as an arena for public debate that leads to more intelligent
policy- and decision-making.
3. The Roles of Political Parties in Democratization Process

Political parties usually play their role in an all-out endeavor of democratization process and
building and consolidation of democracy. Before we shall see how they play their role in
democratization process, lets look at the comprehensive definition of political party and basic
characteristics that distinguishes them from other groups.
Political party refers to a formally organized group of people that performs the function of
educating the public, recruits and promotes individuals for public offices and that provides a
comprehensive linkage of functions between the public and government decision making having
its known particular policy. This indicates that the definition of political party has the following
three essential ingredients:
A. It is an organization of persons who are more or less agreed on some important matters of
public policy
B. It is an organization whose main aim is to take part in the struggle for power; and
C. It is a body whose members make concerted efforts to implement their policies and programs
by constitutional (democratic) means.

Distinct characteristics of political parties that differentiate them from any other groups

With regard to some major features of a political party that distinguishes political parties from
any other groups; we can identify the following characteristics:
i. Parties aim to exercise government power by winning political office

88
 ii. Parties are organized bodies with a formal card caring membership. This
distinguishes them from broader and more diffuse social movement.
iii. Parties typically adopt a broad issues focus, addressing each of the major areas of
government policy; and
iv. To varying degree, parties are united by shared political preferences and a general
ideological identity.
Constitutional parties operating in a context of electoral competition tend to be portrayed as
defenders of democracy; indeed, the existence of such parties is often the litmus test of a
healthy democratic system. As such, political parties can play their pivotal role in the process
of democratization.
Political parties can, as they often do, play several pivotal roles for building and effective
consolidation of democracy and democratization process. The major indispensable roles and
imperatives of political parties in democratization and democracy, among others, are the
following:
1. It is important to organize and coordinate individual interest.Needless to say, individuals or
citizens have different political views and interests though in the meantime the interest of
some individuals are the same. In some cases, political party is important to sum up or to
organize those people who have the same or similar political views. Organizing individuals
interests is important to handle contradicting views of development.
2. It is important to create political awareness among the citizens. Political parties perform the
job of political mobilization, and recruitment. In a democratic system, the people have the
right to know about what is going on in their government offices. So, the presences of such
parties are important to expose the doings of government. Besides, it also educates the people
about the democratic measures that should be taken.
3. Political parties are important to widen the base of popular participation.Political parties are
one of the most important attributes of democratic system. Inorder to implement the very
concept of democracy, effective and persistent participation of people in their affairs is must.
4. Political parties are important to serve the interest of the people.The very concept of
democracy is the rule of law. In democratic processes, the people are in charge and the
government is expected to implement the interest of the people. After completion, for

89
 example one of the parties will hold power in such a way that the party serves the interest of
the majority in order to be successful in their completion.
Business Associations
This category encompasses a wide range of actors, mainly involved in for-profit pursuits in
commercial, trading, contracting, farming, mining, and other areas; and they are outside the
realms of civil society organizations. Its importance has grown dramatically since the economic
liberalization processes that have taken place across the world, especially with the marked
withdrawal of the state from many of its former economic interventions. It ranges from large
corporate entities to small and medium entrepreneurial actors providing a variety of services to
the community. It is also a sector that, on a very basic level, provides gainful employment for a
huge number of citizens, thereby helping to reduce the size of armies of unemployed youth, and
includes peasants, artisans, petty traders, vendors and hawkers.
Therefore, they can play an important role in economic governance, including advising their
governments on how to help them grow their industries in equilibrium with the interests of other
sectors of society, as well as in the promotion of self-regulation. The importance of these
associations arises out of their centrality in the productive sectors.
4.3. Human rights
Definition, nature and Classification of Human Rights
Working definition: Different scholars have different definitions of human rights. However,
for our purpose here, Human rights are generally defined as rights enjoyed only by
human beings simply because they are humans and with no further requirements what so
ever attached. Because of even alternatively called as natural rights which are equally
possessed by all human beings everywhere. Human rights are understood to represent
individual and group demands for shaping and sharing of power, wealth, enlightenment and other
values (like-respect and its constituent elements of reciprocal tolerance, mutual clemency).
Unlike Moral rights that emanate from the consensus of two or more groups and Legal rights
which are exercised as per the legal permission of certain bodies and thus are accordingly
amendable /violable, human rights are natural rights that do not emanate from government will
or from individuals conventions. Given this, human rights possessthe following salient features
that distinguish them from other variants of right like democratic rights.

90
Universalism: Human rights are universal both in conception and practice in the sense that they
are not bound by space and time differences. All people across all places and times enjoy them
without any form of discrimination.
Naturalism: Human rights are inborn/innate rights endowed to all humanity by nature.
Hence, they are not given to individuals by the will of government or any other body and
similarly they are not subjected to the permission of anybody to be enjoyed or denied.
Eternality: The only time individuals stop enjoying their human rights is at the time of
natural death otherwise these rights are in principle eternal.
Inalienability: Human rights are inalienable from their natural beholders (human beings). i.e. to
imply that delinking/detaching these rights from human beings is senseless because one
naturally exists in the existence of the other.
Inviolability: human rights by their very nature are expected not to be violated or even restricted
by any one. In some countries where democracy is well consolidated this inviolability
logic extends to even at times of crisis/emergency.
Classifications of Human Rights
Human rights embody rights and these rights are classified in the following ways. The
classification reflects the ways of attaining the rights.
Legal Rights: These are rights written down in codes of law. They are legally permitted rights;
exercised by all. When these rights are violated the body whose rights (s) are violated is able to
bring the case to court to safeguard his right (s).
Moral rights: These are rights that emanate from the consensus of two or more bodies. The basic
principles of moral rights are justice and impartiality. Such rights are related with religion and
percepts. What is moral right is still controversial. The question of universalization and
comprehensiveness of moral rights cannot be assented (approved) by all.
Human rights: These are natural rights. They do not emanate from government will or from
individual conventions. The following examples illustrate how human rights are natural rights.
The right to education emanates from mans desire to know himself and the environment. The
right to live emanates from the instinctive desire of man to live in life. To exist, man must get
something to eat, get shelter and clothing, to get these necessities we have to work, move from
place to place; then comes the right to work, the right to movement, etc. Human rights are
protections to which all human beings are entitled because of their humanity and not because of
91
their social status or individual merits. Some of these rights are claimed and enjoyed without
regard to political order. The types of human rights which are closely related with the actions of
government are civic liberties and civic rights.
Civic Liberties: are constitutional protections of persons, opinions, and property against
arbitrary interference by governments. Civic liberties include such protections as freedom
of speech, freedom of press, religious beliefs and freedom from arbitrary arrest and
punishment.
Civil Rights: are legally guaranteed benefits provided by positive actions of
governments. Civil rights include such guarantees as education, protection against illness
and starvation and financial support at times of unemployment and old ages.

Human Rights Instruments

United Nations Charter
In the treaty establishing the United Nations in 1945, all member states pledged themselves to
take joint and separate action for the achievement of universal respect for and observance of
human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, religion, etc.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The development of Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) followed the end of the
Second World War. The destruction and painful consequences of the war contributed for the
conception of UDHR. Apart from genocide and destruction of resources and wealth there were
serious human rights abuses during the Second World War. Many people were denied of their
fundamental rights including the right to life. As a response to what happened during the war, the
nations and peoples of the world wrote the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That was
done with the hope that the human right abuses that took place during the Second World War
would never happen again to human kind.
UDHR contained the basic hopes and wishes common to human beings. It was believed to be a
common standard to be achieved by all nations and peoples of the world. The UDHR contains a

92
preamble and 30 articles, which includes different types of rights that is civil, political, social and
cultural rights.
The General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the UDHR on 10 December 1948. By then
the UN had 56 members. Among these 48 nations including Ethiopia voted in favor while 8
countries among them namely Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Belarus and Ukraine
abstained.
Under the United Nations charter member states are expected to promote respect for human
rights. The UDHR has been important in that it has influenced the constitutions, laws, and court
decisions of many countries and international organizations since its development.
The General Assembly of the United Nations has adopted additional documents in 1966. This
was done to further strengthen the UDHR. These two international covenants were the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant of
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). The conventions address different types of
issues like genocide, racial discrimination against woman, torture and the rights of the child.
Many regional organizations and human rights institutions were also formed following the war.
Europe: The council of Europe adopted the European convention on Human Rights in 1950. The
European convention has created two organs.
1. The European commission on Human Rights
2. European court of Human Rights

America: The North, South and Central American countries also formed the second regional
organization for the protection of human rights. This organization was the Organization of
American States (OAS). The OAS was set up in 1948. The OAS adopted the American
Convention on Human Rights in 1969. This convention provides for two organs.
1. Inter-American Commission on Human Right
2. Inter-American court of Human Rights

Africa: The organization of African Unity (OAU) was set up in 1963. In 1981 the OAU adopted
the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights. The charter contains a long list of rights
covering a wide spectrum not only of civil and political rights, but also of economic, social,
cultural rights. It has established the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights, to
protect and promote human and peoples rights and ensure their protection in Africa. In 1998, the
protocol to the charter on the establishment of an African Court of Human Rights was adopted.
93
Arab Countries: The League of Arab States was founded in 1945 and has concern about human
right matters. It established an Arab Commission on Human Rights. Another related organization
called the organization of the Islamic Conference was also established in 1971. The organization
of the Islamic Conference adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam in 1990.
Human Rights in Ethiopia
Ethiopia has fully accepted the human rights provision of the UDHR of the 1948. The present
day constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia has incorporated the
fundamental and basic freedoms and rights that are found in the UDHR. Based on the
fundamental principle of the UDHR Ethiopias new constitution is made to suit the socio-
economic, political and cultural realities of the Ethiopian societies. However, much should be
done for the effective application of these rights that are enshrined in our constitution. In other
words, even though human and democratic rights are provided in the constitution, there are
possibilities for the violation of these rights. Therefore, there must be a mechanism of checking,
monitoring and protecting the rights of citizens against abuses and violations. That is, whenever
abuses of rights of citizens happen, there is a need for an institution or responsible body to detect
the violations and work help maintain rights of citizens. Citizens need to have institutions that
they should appeal. Human Rights Commission and the Ombudsman are such institutions that
operate for the protection of citizens against abuses and violations of their rights and for
redressing wrong doings. Article 55 sub Article 14 and 15 of the FDRE constitution dictates that
the House of Peoples Representatives responsibility to establish the Human Right Commission
and the institution of Ombudsman and determine their power and functions respectively.

The major objectives of these institutions are:

To serve as public guardian for the growth of democracy and proper application of rights,
and stand for the fulfillment of human and democratic rights in Ethiopia;
To protect Ethiopian citizens democratic and human rights as enshrined in the
constitution from any violations by societal forces including government authorities,
administrative personnel and community;
To assist avoid injustice, misuse of governmental powers, embezzlement and corrupt
behaviors of some governmental officials.

94
More specifically under Article 5 of Proclamation No. 210/2000 Human Right Commission was
established with the objective to educate the public to be aware of human rights and to see that
human rights are protected, respected and fully enforced as well as to have the necessary
measure taken where they are found to have been violated. Under the same Proclamation Article
6 stipulates the duties and power of Commission as to:
1. Ensure that the human rights and freedoms provided for under the Constitution of the
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia are respected by all citizens, organs of state,
political organizations and other associations as well as by their respective officials;
2. Ensure that laws, regulations and directives as well as government decisions and orders
do not contravene the human rights of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution;
3. Educate the public, using the mass media and other means, with a view to enhancing its
tradition of respect for, and demand for enforcement of, rights upon acquiring sufficient
awareness regarding human rights;
4. Undertake investigation, upon complaint or its own initiation, in respect of human rights
violations;
5. Make recommendations for the revision of existing laws, enactment of new laws and
formulation of policies.
6. Provide consultancy services on matters of human rights;
7. Forward its opinion on human rights reports to be submitted to international organs;
8. Translate into local vernaculars, international human rights instruments adopted by
Ethiopia and disperse same;
9. Participate in international human rights meeting, conferences or symposia;
10. Own property, enter into contracts, sue and be sued in its own name;
11. Perform such other activities as may be necessary to attain its objective.

Whereas the Institution of the Ombudsman was established under Proclamation No. 211/2000
Article 5 with the objective to see to bring about good governance that is of high quality,
efficient and transparent, and are based on the rule of law, by way of ensuring that citizens' rights
and benefits provided for by law are respected by organs of the executive. In light of this, Article
6 of the same proclamation provides the institution to carry out the following duties and
functions:
95
 1. Supervise that administrative directives issued, and decisions given, by executive organs
and the practices thereof do not contravene the constitutional rights of citizens and the
law as well;
2. Receive and investigate complaints in respect of maladministration;
3. Conduct supervision, with a view to ensure that the executive carries out its functions in
accordance with the law and to prevent maladministration;
4. Seek remedies in case where it believes that maladministration has occurred;
5. Undertake studies and research on ways and means of curbing maladministration;
6. Make recommendations for the revision of existing laws, practices or directives and for
the enactment of new laws and formulation of policies, with a view to bring about better
governance;
7. Perform such other functions as are related to its objective.
However, the institution has no power to investigate:
1. Decisions, given by Councils established by election, in their legislative capacity;
2. Cases pending in courts of Law of any level;
3. Matters under investigation by the Office of the Auditor-General; or
4. Decisions given by Security Forces and units of the Defense Forces, in respect of matters
of national security or defense.

Constitution, democracy and human right experiences in modern Ethiopia

A. The 1931 Constitution of Ethiopia
The 1931 constitution was the first written constitution in the Ethiopian history. The introduction
of the written constitution however, doesnt mean that a new philosophy was introduced to the
Ethiopian political system. Instead, it was an attempt to simply change the unwritten dynastic
claim in to a written form, in other words; it didnt provide genuine freedom to the Ethiopian
peoples. Its main aim was to give the country and the Imperial Rule an image of modernity. By
and large, the major aim of the 1931 constitution was guaranteeing continuity to the rule of the
Emperor. This can be clearly seen in the constitution that the king was presented as the
representative of God. In the same constitution, the king is presented as
NiguseNegestSeyumeEgziabher, which literally means king of kings elect of God. Those who
were participating in the political leadership were only the noblemen. Even then, the power was
absolutely in the hands of the Emperor.

96
The 1931 constitution was not initiated by the demand of the people and it was not also initiated
for the people. That is why there was no attention to guarantee popular sovereignty, political
freedoms and fundamental human rights to the Ethiopian people. And the people were
considered as subjects as they used to be, without granting any kind of political and civil rights.

In general the constitution was formulated or introduced mainly to attain two basic purposes that
would advance the Emperors authority and political control.

1. The constitution was intended to give Ethiopia the image of modernity in the international
community. i.e. because during that period, Ethiopia felt pressures from the European powers
that controlled colonial territories in Africa. Ethiopia was accused of being uncivilized to be
considered as a sovereign political entity in an international atmosphere by the colonial powers.
The colonial powers did that to justify their presence in Africa with a civilizing and
modernizing mission. Therefore, HaileSelassie issued the constitution to impress Europeans
with Ethiopias political modernity in search of external sovereignty for Ethiopia.

2. The constitution was introduced to strengthen, and centralize the absolute power of the
Emperor by extending his power over the regional rulers. In other words the constitution was
meant to create a legal framework that enabled the Emperor to subordinate the traditional
nobilities. As the result, the emperor became the only person that could give political titles and
appointments. This also helped him to end any tendency of provincial autonomy by the nobility.
In conclusion, the constitution served the interests of the Emperor and hence it can be considered
as the Charter of the absolute power of the monarchy where the political and human rights,
freedoms and liberties of peoples of Ethiopia were denied. However, the 1931 constitution laid
some foundations for modern practices of government in Ethiopia. These innovations can be
summarized as follows:

1. The Parliamentary/ Ministerial legislative and executive Systems

One major contribution of the 1931 constitution was the creation of the parliament. The
parliament was bi-cameral. Namely the Chamber of the Senate (yehigMewesegnaMeker Bet) and
chamber of Deputies (YehigmemriaMiker Bet). These were the legislative body. The Emperor
had the power to appoint members of the chambers of senate from the members of dignitaries
97
(mekuwanints) who have for a long time served his empire as princes or ministers, judges or
army leaderswhile the Chamber of Deputies (YehigmemriaMeker Bet) were to be elected
through an indirect voting system in which only the nobility participated until the people are
capable of electing them themselves. Their term of office was not limited. The primary function
of the deliberative chambers was advisory. It was not an institution that decides on laws because
the chambers could neither refuse to deliberate on proposal sent to them nor initiate legislation
themselves. The law making power was vested on the emperor and the parliament was merely
meant to rubber stamp the legislation of the Emperor.
The constitution also provided the institutional framework for the ministerial system. However,
the Emperor still remained with the most important executive power and the ministerial system
was completely subordinate to the Emperor. The ministers both individually and collectively
were responsible to the Emperor. There was no prime minister; the ministry of pen acted as the
first among equals. Thus, the executive branch of government was heavily dominated by the
Emperor.
2. The Judicial system
The traditional courts of law were formally institutionalized by the constitution.i.e. According to
the constitution, there were two separate systems of courts, known as, Regular Courts; and
Administrative tribunals. The former deals with civil and criminal cases. The Administrative
Tribunals handle civil cases that affect the government. At the top of the court system was
emperors Chilot (YenigusChilot) where the emperor in person reviewed cases, and if necessary,
change judicial decisions. The highest judicial power was then in the hands of the Emperor.

B. The Revised Constitution of 1955

After nearly 25-year experiment of written constitution, Ethiopia entered in to the second phase
of its constitutional development. The political principles and objectives of the 1955 constitution
were much clearer in pronouncing the powers and functions of the Imperial government than its
predecessor. It included some provisions bearing advanced democratic ideas compared to the
previous written constitution. Like the constitution of 1931, however, the revised constitution did
not involve popular process for ratification. Indeed it was gift from the Emperor to his subjects
on the occasion of celebrating his twenty five years in power, i.e. silver jubilee.

98
In terms of enhancing popular sovereignty, the principles and manners of implementing the
revised constitution made little or no progress. Instead, it was revised because there were major
historical and political processes that forced the revised constitution to come into being. One of
the essential prerequisites for constitutional revision was the act of federation of Eritrea with
Ethiopia in 1952. Eritrea that had been under Italian colonial rule for decades, and latter under
the British protectorate, was federated with Ethiopia following the decision made by United
Nations (UN) General Assembly. Then, 1952 federal arrangement was drafted providing a
separate system of government for Eritrea under the sovereignty of Ethiopian crown. But then it
later created abnormal political situation. Firstly, the federal act was not strictly federal in its
nature; Ethiopia remained a unitary state with absolute rule of an Emperor, while Eritrea
obtained an entirely different government. In other words, there emerged two separate
governments, based on entirely different principles i.e. elected government in Eritrea and an
absolute monarch in Ethiopia. Thus, both were exercising different powers over the same
territory. Secondly, in its nature, the Eritrean constitution implied a more liberal government that
incorporated some element of democratic society. Thus the Emperor saw it necessary to settle
this political anomaly by granting the revised constitution of 1955. Moreover, it was also
required to redress the inadequacies of the 1931 constitution to cope up with the social and
political dynamics of the period.
As far as the content and issues addressed are concerned, the revised constitution maintained
some of the basic principles of the 1931 constitution. However, it incorporated some new
concepts, and it was much more elaborated than its predecessor. It has 131 articles divided in to
eight chapters. The first two chapters, comprising nearly one third of the articles, were concerned
with defining the power and authority of the Emperor and privileges of the imperial family. Only
one chapter was reserved to deal with some rights and duties of the people. Its undemocratic
character can simply be inferred from the Emphasis given to the Authority of the Emperor. It
further developed the centralizing and modernizing themes of the 1931 constitution. It declares
the inviolability of the emperors dignity. He could appoint and dismiss the prime minister and
other ministers, judges, diplomats, and other government officials in all branches of government
as he wished. The emperor also had the power to dissolve the parliament. Any law could not
come in to effect unless he approved it. He was also provided with co-legislative functions.
Besides members of the parliament, only the emperor had the right to submit proposals; and
99
proposals approved by both house of parliament were not law unless and until signed by him.
Thus, the emperor has veto power on legislation and when parliament was not in session the
government issued imperial decrees. The emperor was not only commander in chief of the army
forces but was constitutionally empowered to meet threats to the defense or integrity of the
empire. The emperor exercised supreme direction in the foreign relations of the empire and alone
conferred and withdrew titles of prince and other honors and instituted new orders.Moreover, his
power also extended to the extent of determining the administrative affairs of the church itself. In
short, the 1955 revised constitution made the powers and authority of the Emperor absolute and
complete in the Ethiopian state and society. In contrast, little significance was attached to the
need to guarantee political and human rights of the Ethiopian people through protecting
individual rights in terms of property, life and private affairs. However, in practice the
mechanisms for implementing these limited rights were largely absent. There were no effective
means for representing and reflecting the needs and interests of the people in the government. In
the practical sense, Ethiopian people were still considered as merely subjects of the Emperor.
Although the revised constitution of 1955 was a step forward in the history of constitutional
development in Ethiopia, in effect it failed to lay down a democratic tradition in the Ethiopian
political process.
In the end, it is possible to identify some progressive elements, which were included in the
Revised Constitution of 1955. These were the following:

1. It gave at least textual recognition to rights and liberties of citizens, which included rights such
as freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of assembly, and peoples participation in
election of the members of chamber of Deputies. But, there was no observance (enforcement) of
these provisions of rights and freedoms of individuals in practice at all. It was only paper value
to ordinary Ethiopians.
2. The Chamber of Deputies was made to have the power, at least in textual sense, to question
the ministers with the view to hold the government accountable.

C. The Constitution of Peoples Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (PDRE) (1987-1991)

100
By the mid-1970s, the undemocratic system of the Imperial government came under socio-
political challenges and crises that led to its ultimate collapse. The continued social, economic
and political crises led to the outbreak of the Ethiopian revolution in 1974 which has resulted in
the deposition of Emperor Haile Selassie from power. And, the military Junta that formed a
military council known as the Derg controlled political power. Then, the military council
suspended the 1955-revised constitution; and began to rule the country by series of decrees and
proclamations. In order to deepen its power, the Derg established its single party, the Workers
Party of Ethiopia (WPE) in 1987. This has marked the transition from no party system to the one
party system in Ethiopia. Nevertheless, this didnot give rise to democratic orders. Through
eliminating or weakening internal opposition, the Derg moved on establishing the Peoples
Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (PDRE). The PDRE constitution differed from the previous
constitutions in some ways. It was drafted by a constitutional commission through a program of
public consultation. It was later on ratified by the name of a popular referendum to provide it
pretext of broad participation. However, the discussions were not effective as planned because
the public was in the state of insecurity and intimidation. Discussions were carried out on matters
of peripheral importance and no body dared to express his/her opinion on issues of central
importance such as political and ideological matters. The overall objective of the 1987
constitution was the establishment of a proletarian dictatorship under the WPE. Following that
the constitution put all three branches of the government under the strict control of the party.
Under the 1987 constitution there was no separation of powers but unity of power following one
of the basic principles of socialist constitutionalism. In the PDRE years power was totally in the
hands of MengistuHailemariam and/or the WPE but allowing separation of functions only.

The PDRE constitution has divided the unified state power among the National Shengo, the
Council of State, the President of the Republic and Shengos of the Administrative Autonomous
Regions. Theoretically, the National Shengo was the most important organ exercising the most
significant functions of the state of the PDRE. Accordingly, the working people exercise their
power through the National Shengo and Local Shengos they established through election. The
authority of other organs of the state shall derive from these organs of state power. Thus, the
National Shengo was the supreme organ of state power through which the sovereignty of the
working people would be manifested.
101
The council of state was meant to be an organ of state power functioning as a standing body of
the Shengo. The council was given the power, inter alia to ensure the interpretation and
implementation of the constitution including other laws; ratify and denounce international
treaties; grant amnesty, citizenship, and political asylum; and to issue special decrees between
sessions of the National Shengo. The President of the Republic was to be elected by the National
Shengo, and vested with broad powers. He was the head of state representing the Republic at
home and abroad as well as the commander in chief of the Armed forces.

Matters pertaining to citizenship and fundamental freedom, rights and duties of citizens were
given better coverage in the 1987 PDRE constitution compared to the way they were treated
under the previous constitutions. To mention but few of the concerns, irrespective of their
nationality, sex, religion, occupation, social or other status the constitution has provided that
Ethiopians are equal before the law. This equality was to be manifested through equal
participation in political, economic, social and cultural affairs. Moreover, the constitution came
up with womens rightswhich until then had never been reflected in Ethiopian constitution. It
also set the duty to provide women with special support particularly in education, training, and
employment so that they participate in political, economic, social, and cultural affairs on equal
basis with men.

Contrary to the previous constitution, the 1987 PDRE constitution explicitly states the separation
of state and religion. The PDRE constitution appeared to be a meaningful solution to problem
related to inequalities among nationalities in Ethiopia. The establishment of the Institute of
Nationalities was assumed by many as a prelude and by the Derg to ending the civil wars on in
Eritrea and Tigray. However, the most the Derg could offer was regional autonomy, as is unable
to implement genuine decentralization of governance. That means, the efforts of introducing
regional autonomy failed to guarantee the equality and rights of the Ethiopian Nations and
Nationalities as the PDRE constitution kept in effect the centralized and unitary state structure
under the partys control, there were little or no opportunities for exercising the rights of nations,
nationalities and peoples of the country to self determination.

D. The 1995 Constitution of FDRE

102
The 1995 constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia is significantly different
from that of the Imperial and the Derg constitution. It made an important departure from the
constitutional traditions of the country in terms of its basic philosophy, content and organization
of government. The constitution strongly affirms that the peoples of Ethiopia are the source of
sovereignty and that this sovereignty is expressed through the constitution. The constitution
explicitly states the rights and duties of the federal government as well as the prerogatives and
obligations of the regional states. It clearly declares the areas that purely fall under the
jurisdiction of the federal government and that of the regional states as a well as their concurrent
powers. The constitution also states that the political power shall be held through periodic, fair
and free elections, which entitles the Ethiopian citizens to exercise their human, democratic,
political, social and economic rights and freedoms.
It declares the right of nations, nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia to exercise their self-
administration including the right to secession. Moreover, the constitution recognizes and affirms
fundamental human rights and freedoms in conformity with the United Nations Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and other international human right instruments.

The 1995 constitution has established a federal system comprising of nine member states called
National Regional states. The member states exercise Executive, legislative and Judicial powers
in their own territories in conformity with the federal constitution.
The constitution dictates that any official or governmental body shall not exercise power
arbitrarily. Officials and governments at all levels are to be held accountable to their people and
responsible for their actions and decisions. If the people lose confidence on their elected
representatives they have a constitutional right to recall them at any time.
The 1995 constitution established a parliamentary system of government and divides the
legislative, executive and judicial powers among the parliament, council of Ministers and the
independent Judiciary.

Core Principles of the 1995 FDRE Constitution

1. The Principle of the full respect of the fundamental democratic and Human rights of
the Citizens at individual and collective levels; and

103
 2. The principle of living together. i.e. the principle of peaceful co-existence on the basis
of equality and without any ethnic, cultural, political, religions, gender, social status, or
any other form of discrimination.

Some Major /Principal/ Salient Features of the 1995 FDRE Constitution

1. System of Federalism or more specifically the idea of ethnic-federalism. i.e Ethnicity as a

major component is officially empowered. In other words, Utmost Significance is given to the
Ethno-linguistic components of the Ethiopia Society. Ethiopia is a Nation of Nations; a republic
of republics. The ethnicity of states is not just of historical importance; it is of actual significance
(realistic) in the everyday life of the people and of the federation as a whole.
2. Provisions of Basic /fundamental Democratic and Human Rights.
3. The Principle of maintaining national unity based on values of Equality, Justice and rules of
law, i.e. forging unity through Recognition of diversity. Because, Ethiopia is a home of various
Nations, Nationalities and peoples, Unity is to be essentially founded only on the notion of
diversity.
4. Parliamentary Democracy- The use of parliamentary democracy assumes the exercise of freely
and fairly contested, periodic elections and representative assembly or assemblies that are the
expression of popular will and hold power for a mandated period.
5. The Right to Self-determination both in the internal and external senses
6. State Ownership of Land- i.e. the right to ownership of rural and urban land is exclusively
vested up on the state and up on the peoples of Ethiopia. Added to the above is that land is a
common property of the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia and shall not be subject
to sale or other means of transfer.
7. Constitutional Interpretation. i.e. the highest authority, of interpreting the FDRE Constitution
is vested up on the House of Federation, not up on the Federal Supreme Court.

Chapter Five

5.1. Over view of Ethics and Ethical theories/school of thoughts

104
Within the broad categories of deontological and teleological ethics, philosophers have
developed five basic approaches to values to deal with moral issues. Teleological theories give
priority to the good over the right and evaluate actions by the goal or consequences that they
attain. The term teleological is derived from the Greek work telos which means end or
goal.Thus, right actions are those that produce the most or optimize the consequences of ones
choices, whereas wrong actions are those that do not contribute to the good.

Deontological theories argue for the priority of the right over the good or the independence of the
right from the good.Deontological is also derived from the Greek word, deon, which means
obligation.Actions are intrinsically right or wrong regardless of the consequences which they
produce. The right or ethically proper action might be deduced from a duty or a basic human
right, but it is never contingent on the outcome or the consequences of the action.Deontological
theories include both duty-based and rights-based approaches to ethical reasoning.These are
sometimes referred to as pluralism and contractarianism.

This section will describe some of the competing ethical theories and frameworks and how they
might be applied to solve certain practical moral problems:

1) The Utilitarian Approach

Utilitarianism - maximizing good for the greatest number of people - was conceived in
the 19th century by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill to help legislators determine
which laws were morally best. Both Bentham and Mill suggested that ethical actions are
those that provide the greatest balance of good over evil. The ethical choice is the one
that produces the greatest excess of benefits over harm. An action or policy is right if it
produce the greatest net benefits or the lowest net costs.Utility refers to the net
benefits (of good) created by an action.Moral Principle of Utilitarianism is persons ought
to act in a way that promotes the maximum net expectable utility, that is, the greatest net
benefits or the lowest net costs, for the broadest community affection by their actions.
Utilitarianism argues that the consequences of an action make that action either moral or
immoral. An action that leads to beneficial consequences is right or moral; one that leads to
harmful consequences is wrong or immoral. Utilitarianism is known as a consequentiality theory.

105
To analyze an issue using the utilitarian approach, we first identify the various courses of action
available to us. Second, we ask who will be affected by each action and what benefits or harms
will be derived from each. And third, we choose the action that will produce the greatest benefits
and the least harm. The ethical action is the one that provides the greatest good for the greatest
number.

2) The Rights Approach

The second important approach to ethics has its roots in the philosophy of the 18th-
century thinker Immanuel Kant and others like him, who focused on the individual's right
to choose for herself or himself. According to these philosophers, what makes human
beings different from mere things is that people have dignity based on their ability to
choose freely what they will do with their lives, and they have a fundamental moral right
to have these choices respected. People are not objects to be manipulated; it is a violation
of human dignity to use people in ways they do not freely choose. These rights may
include free choice, dignity, equality, truth, privacy and the right not to be injured. Ethical
behavior ground in a rights approach protects people from having their rights harmed by
the actions of others.

Of course, many different, but related, rights exist besides this basic one. These other
rights (an incomplete list below) can be thought of as different aspects of the basic right
to be treated as we choose.

The right to the truth: We have a right to be told the truth and to be informed about
matters that significantly affect our choices.
The right of privacy: We have the right to do, believe, and say whatever we choose in our
personal lives so long as we do not violate the rights of others.
The right not to be injured: We have the right not to be harmed or injured unless we
freely and knowingly do something to deserve punishment or we freely and knowingly
choose to risk such injuries.
The right to what is agreed: We have a right to what has been promised by those with
whom we have freely entered into a contract or agreement.

106
In deciding whether an action is moral or immoral using this second approach, then, we must
ask, Does the action respect the moral rights of everyone? Actions are wrong to the extent that
they violate the rights of individuals; the more serious the violation, the more wrongful the
action.

3) The Fairness or Justice Approach

The fairness or justice approach to ethics has its roots in the teachings of the ancient Greek
philosopher Aristotle, who said that "equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally."
The basic moral question in this approach is: How fair is an action? Does it treat everyone in the
same way, or does it shows favoritism and discrimination? Favoritism gives benefits to some
people without a justifiable reason for singling them out; discrimination imposes burdens on
people who are not different from those on whom burdens are not imposed. Both favoritism and
discrimination are unjust and wrong. The ethical choice is the one that treats everyone the same
and does not show favoritism or discrimination.

Aristotle, an ancient Greek philosopher, divided the concept of justice into three types: 1)
distributive justice, 2) retributive justice, and 3) compensatory justice. Distributive justice,
perhaps the most basic kind, concerns the division of benefits and burdens among individuals.
These must be distributed fairly. Retributive justice concerns what form of "retribution," or
punishment, should be imposed on someone who has done wrong. When we say, the punishment
must fit the crime; we are calling for retributive justice. Compensatory justicerefers to what kind
and amount of compensation someone should receive if they have been wronged. Again, we tend
to think that compensation should in some way be proportional to the degree of damage that has
been done to them. The greater the wrong or the greater the damage, the greater should be the
compensation.

The principle of fair equality of opportunity obviously means that all forms of racial, sexual,
nationality and other forms of discrimination are unjust. It also means that everyone must be
provided the same opportunities to qualify for the best jobs and positions. Everybody must be
given access to the training and education necessary for success in any competition for favored
employment.

107
The principle of fair equality of opportunity, states that everyone has to get an equal opportunity
to obtain the most privileged positions and offices in society or in a just institution of that group.

4) The Common-Good Approach

This approach to ethics assumes a society comprising individuals whose own good is
inextricably linked to the good of the community. Community members are bound by the
pursuit of common values and goals.

The common good is a notion that originated more than 2,000 years ago in the writings of Plato,
Aristotle, and Cicero. More recently, contemporary ethicist John Rawls defined the common
good as "certain general conditions that are...equally to everyone's advantage."

The Common Good Approach believes that all actions / decisions should benefit the life of the
community. In this approach, we focus on ensuring that the social policies, social systems,
institutions, and environments on which we depend are beneficial to all. Examples of goods
common to all include affordable health care, effective public safety, peace among nations, a just
legal system, and an unpolluted environment.

Appeals to the common good urge us to view ourselves as members of the same community,
reflecting on broad questions concerning the kind of society we want to become and how we are
to achieve that society. While respecting and valuing the freedom of individuals to pursue their
own goals, the common-good approach challenges us also to recognize and further those goals
we share in common. When acting from a common good point of view you need to be aware of
how your actions will effect or benefit the community at large.

5) The Virtue Approach

The virtue approach to ethics assumes that there are certain ideals toward which we
should strive, which provide for the full development of our humanity. These ideals are
discovered through thoughtful reflection on what kind of people we have the potential to
become.

108
Virtues are attitudes or character traits that enable us to be and to act in ways that develop our
highest potential. They enable us to pursue the ideals we have adopted. Honesty, courage,
compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of
virtues.

Virtues are like habit; that is, once acquired, they become characteristic of a person. Moreover, a
person who has developed virtues will be naturally disposed to act in ways consistent with moral
principles. The virtuous person is the ethical person. The ethical choice is the one that best
reflects moral virtues in ourselves and our community.

In dealing with an ethical problem using the virtue approach, we might ask, what kind of person
should I be? What will promote the development of character within myself and my community?

5.2. Selected issues in Applied Ethics

Development Ethics

The notion of Development is as equally a moral issue/concept as it is political, legal

and economic. Therefore, from the point of view of the study of ethics/morality, there are a
number of development related questions /issues that are worth of discussion and analysis.
For instance, one might legitimately ask questions like;

In what direction and by what means should a society 'develop'?

Who is morally responsible for beneficial change?

What are the moral obligations, if any, of rich societies to poor societies? Etc. In fact , if
some is a development ethicist, he /she might even go as far as asking the following
more deeper and wider questions;

What should be counted as good or bad development?

What controversial moral issues might emerge in development policymaking and practice
and how should they be resolved?
109
 How should the burdens and benefits of development be distributed?

What are the most serious local, national and international impediments to good
development? And the like.

At the heart of all the above questions is therefore a moral concern to find out sources for
moral assessment of theories and practices of development that exist today and thereby
prescribing a morally better way outs for future development. This being the case, studying
development ethics would be extremely crucial to identify major areas of moral consensus and
controversy on practicing and defining development and eventually develop shared general
parameters for ethically based development. As their points of convergence, almost
alldevelopment ethicists first underline that development practices and theories have ethical
andvalue dimensions hence they must be approached accordingly during analysis of support
andcriticism. Second, although development is multidisciplinary lacking precise definition they
tend to agree on its minimum understanding as reducing human deprivation and misery
particularly in the material sense. Third, a consensus exists also on the fact that development
planners should seek strategies in which both human well-being and a healthy environment
jointly exist (i.e. the issue of sustainable development). A fourth and recently evolving area of
agreement is that development strategies must be contextually sensitive. This is so because what
constitutes the best means of development depends on a society's history and stage of social
change as well as on regional and global forces. For instance, some might prefer state
provisioning while others market mechanisms. Neither could be absolutely bad or good.

Despite all the above points of agreement, however, there are several controversies and unsettled
issues on conceptualization and practice of development. This controversy starts with scope of
development ethics itself. Development ethics initial concern was assessing the development
ends and means of poor societies (third world societies). The question is should it now go
beyond this, there is no consensus. The same trend of controversy exists on how to deal with
kinds of currently existing North-South (and South-South) relations and their effectson economic
and political power gaps. Development ethicists also are divided the moral norms that they
seekto justify and apply. Three positions have emerged in this regard. Universalists, such as
utilitarians and Kantians, argue that development goals and principles are valid for all
110
societies. Particularists, especially communitarians and postmodern relativists, however argue
that universalism masks ethnocentrism and (Northern) cultural imperialism. Instead,
particularists support what can be called procedural principle which asserts that each nation or
society should grow only on its own traditions and decide its own development ethic and path.
The third approach in this respect tries to avoid the extremism between the first two positions
stating that development ethics should forge a cross-cultural consensus in which a society's own
freedom to make development choices is one among a plurality of fundamental norms and in
which these norms are of sufficient generality so as not only to permit but also to require
sensitivity to societal differences. The above debate in short was on issue of procedure of
development-how is it to be brought about? How about on its contents? There is also an ongoing
debate abouthow developments benefits, burdens and responsibilities should be distributed
within poor countries and between rich and poor countries. Utilitarians prescribe simple
aggregation and maximization of individual utilities. Rawlsians advocate that income and wealth
be maximized for the least well-off (individuals or nations). Libertarians contend that a society
should guarantee no form of equality apart from equal freedom from the interference of
government and other people. Capability ethicists defend governmental responsibility to enable
everyone to be able to advance to a level of sufficiency.

Development ethicists also differ with respect to whether (good) societal development should
have- as an ultimate goalthe promotion of values other than the present and future human
good. Some development ethicists ascribe intrinsic value, equal to or even superior to the good
of individual human beings, to human communities of various kinds, for instance, family,
nation or cultural group. Others argue that nonhuman individuals and species, as well as
ecological communities, have equal and even superior value to human individuals. Those
committed to 'eco-development' or 'sustainable development' do not yet agree on what should be
sustained as an end in itself and what should be maintained as an indispensable or merely helpful
means. Nor do they agree on how to surmount conflicts among intrinsic values.

In sum, it is the existence of all the above complicated development oriented ethical issues that
directly or indirectly and positively or negatively affect the life of every one of us that justifies
studying development ethics via interdisciplinary and cross-cultural dialogue so that we

111
all could deepen and widen the current consensus and then apply ethical wisdom to enhance
human well-being and international development.

Environmental Ethics

Environmental ethics is the discipline that broadly studies the moral relationship of human
beings to the environment. From the perspective of morality study it covers the challenge of
environmental ethics to the anthropocentrism (i.e., human-centeredness) and vice versa. More
specifically, there are many ethical decisions that human beings make with respect to the
environment. For example:

Should individuals continue clearing forests for various consumption purposes?

Should individuals continue making gasoline powered vehicles?

What environmental obligations do individuals need to bear for future generations?

Is it right for humans to knowingly cause the extinction of other species for their own
convenience? etc. With a view to develop answers to the above moral questions on
environment, three general ethical approaches have emerged over the last 20 years. The
following technical terms can be used to describe the approaches: Libertarian Extension,
Ecologic Extension and Conservation Ethics.According to libertarian extension approach, the
value of liberty must be echoed when we deal with environment to. (i.e. a commitment to
extend equal rights to all members of a community). The approach defined community as
consist of both non-humans and humans. In view of ecologic extension approach, however,
emphasis must not be placed on human rights on the recognition of the fundamental
interdependence of all biological and abiological entities. The point here is that as planet is
unified entity the human race alone is of no particular significance in the long run. Finally,
supporters of conservation ethics approach on the other hand tend to look at the worth of the
environment in terms of its utility or usefulness to humans .i.e.theapproach argues for the
preservation of the environment as long as it has extrinsic value to humans (it is instrumental to
the welfare of human beings).In other words, conservation must be understood as a means to an

112
end and purely concerned with mankind and intergenerational considerations. It is this ethic that
has been also widely pronounced at the Kyoto environment summit of 1997 and the three
agreements reached in Rio in 1992. How about in Copenhagen and the coming Cancun
conference? What are the main agendas? What are the main arguments and counterarguments?
Etc. (issues for discussion).

Professional ethics

Profession has now become a very popular term in almost all world countries/societies including
Ethiopia partly due to new developments in the relations between citizens and government
as well as citizens and citizens in the ethical sphere. What then are profession and professional
ethics? The concept profession, though it may mean different things under different contexts,
can be generally defined as a systematic way of acquiring and continuous development of a
balanced combination of 1) Training (here to mean a formal, rational, systematized and
scheduled activity to transfer knowledge from the trainer and the environment to the trainee), 2)
Specialty/expertise (here refers to a situation in which the trainee ends up with being an almost
irreplaceable one/a referent point in a specific field), and 3) Full time activity and source of
livelihood (to mean that the individual now becomes fully engaged in the application of the
knowledge so gained on full time arrangement and that has to be the major source of his/her
income). This definition in turn provides us with the following distinguishing features of a
profession;

Technicality/specialty/particularity: which refers to having a knowledge and skill about

parts of a whole regarding specific procedures in the operations of things, the specific
rules governing operations and relations that should be kept along the general process;

Service delivery/relationality: any profession has the ultimate purpose of rendering some
sets of services for individuals, groups or the state;

Decision making: This feature follows from the above because every service delivered to
the people is directly or indirectly a decision made by a professional. For instance, a
patient who goes to the hospital may be told by the nurse that he will undergo medical

113
 operation. This is a professional decision made by the doctor as a professional and
hence cannot be shared by any other people inside or outside. Similarly, to give some
professional advice to a political leader at any level of government is by itself a decision
because it involves influence over the options before the leader. In precise terms,
the professional is there to give decisions and decisions are the integral part of service
delivery. Any professional decision is an official response of the government to the
demand of a citizen who needs the service. It may be a decision to give the service on
demand or it may be a rejection due to some failure in the process or it may be
a post-phoning until some preconditions are met by the service seeker; And

Complementarities: specialty and particularity cannot be the end points of a profession in this
dynamic and interconnected world requiring vast knowledge and skill in order to resolve a long
list of social problems widening ever and ever. As such, there can never be an encyclopedic type
of profession which contains all needed professional services by the people. This is so because
an average citizen may demand a dozen of services at one time as a matter of right. For example,
a man who wants to build his house may need service from a planner, then an architect, then a
consultant, then a banker then a designer and so on. It is thus becomes clear that all these
services cannot be full field at one instant and location as they are fragmented and naturally
belong to different professionals. This necessitates for the Complementarity of all professions.

From all the above discussions about profession and its salient features one can safely argue that
if someone does not possess a combination of the above defined elements of profession in their
right balance and with the stated distinguishing features then he/she is better considered as
having been engaged not in profession but rather amateurism - a condition in which someone
might earn life by engaging in activities where he/she has no formal/regular training and clearly
defined area of expertise. Furthermore, it can be generally argued that a good profession is a
whole time self-education once the fundamental knowledge are gained from formal educational
institutions because these are beginnings for a more tiresome and difficult development of
personality by ones own continued efforts.

Building on the definition of profession, professional ethics can also be generally defined as
ethics that enables professionals of different fields to distinguish what is right from what is
114
wrong using morality as standard of evaluation and thus judge on their actions and behaviors. It
follows that Professionals are expected to behave and act in accordance with the codes of
conduct each profession demands. In other words, professional ethics is concerned with the
moral issues that arise because of the specialized knowledge that professionals attain, and how
the use of this knowledge should be governed when providing a service to the public. What this
in turn implies is that a meaningful discussion of professional ethics is almost impossible in the
absence of the concept of professional responsibility attached to it. i.e. a professional carries
additional moral responsibilities to those held by the population in general. This is because
professionals are capable of making and acting on an informed decision in situations that the
general public cannot as the latter have not received the relevant training. For example, a layman
member of the public could not be held responsible for failing to act to save a car crash victim
because he/she could not give an emergency medical treatment. This is because he/she does not
have the relevant knowledge. In contrast, a fully trained doctor with the correct equipment and
thus capable of making the correct diagnosis and carrying out the procedure did wrong if he/she
stood by and failed to help in this situation. On the other side, this additional knowledge comes
to the professional with authority and power. i.e. the clients places trust in the professional on
the assumption that the service provided will be of benefit to them though itis also quite possible
for the professional to use this authority to exploit the client. An example here can be the case
with a medical professional who undertakes unnecessary treatment on his patients in order to
gain more money. It is likely that the patient will not have sufficient knowledge to question what
is being done, and so will undergo and pay for the treatment. It is situations like this that
make the study of professional ethics-professional responsibilities nexus justifiable and
valuable.

As in all areas of human life, there are values of good and bad in the professional world too. A
professional is first and for most never an angel simply because he/she is of a specialty of the
most desired type. A professional is a human being as anyone with all human strengths and
weaknesses though with a strong tendency to modify them through rational thinking which the
training he/she supplied. Secondly, a professional is a citizen with a set of specified rights and
obligations shared with all other citizens regardless of educational standing and income level.
This brings additional duty to the professional to be integrated in to his mission and goal as a

115
professional. Thirdly, a professional is a member of one of the cultural groups of the society with
he/she shares commonality in language, religion, culture, and psychological make-up and thus it
is natural for him/her to develop tendency to have some kind of bondage. i.e. he/ or she feels
what other members of his/her cultural group members feel and strongly tempted to respond
somehow to pressures from the groupings. Fourthly, a professional is a citizen with an
exceptional knowledge and capacity which is not shared with all citizens and cultural groups.

Therefore, a professional is over stretched by a long list of socio-economic, cultural and political
factors nationally and internationally. For example, since all professional are either male or
female in their sex varied experiences are encountered every day simply because there is a
difference in sex. Similarly, a professional might be born in to low income families, urban
business or state servant family or from a farmer which has a great bearing on his/her
psychological set up and on later professional activities. Because of all the above settings, a
professional is then probably the most vulnerable citizen to morality and moral rules due to the
especial multiple roles he/she is expected to play among the society. Therefore, an in-depth
study and understanding of professional ethics and the universal as well as profession specific
principles with in the field becomes imperative. Otherwise, professions which are basically
creations of a need to give public service would be inefficient and ineffective in doing so once
they are deficient of knowledge and practice of some established standards of Professionalism.

Some Selected Fundamental Codes / Principles of Professional Ethics

Although different professions may have different codes of ethics (example, the Hippocrates oath
in the case of Medicine profession) by which respective professionals actions and behaviors are
judged as right or wrong, there are also common codes of ethics applicable across professions.
The followings are therefore some of the fundamental codes of ethics universally applicable for
all professions:

Punctuality: a state of being strictly observant of an appointed or regular time. It is a belief that
across all professions a worker must always be on time both to come to work place and during
the entire work process.

116
Honesty and Integrity: refers to the art of telling the truth. Employers/ institutions expect their
workers to be honest. Thus, when someone is employed somewhere for a certain job of a given
profession, he/she has already entered agreement to his time, knowledge and skill to an
institution and hence his/her time, skill and knowledge do not solely belong to him/her but also
the institution. So, there is a need to be honest on how to use these resources.

Confidentiality: a desired tendency of a professional to keep some information that should be

kept secret. For example, in the case of medical profession this would entail that a nurse/doctor
has to keep secret all the information regarding patients.

Impartiality (NonPartiality): an ethical condition in which a professional is expected to treat all

clients equally during service delivery without any forms of discrimination. Example a teacher
(an instructor) should treat his/her students equally on the basic of their academic performance or
achievement regardless of their respective sexual, ethnic, religious etc. grounds. And the list goes
on.

5.3. Overview of civic virtue: Civic disposition and Civic commitments

It is viewed that the citizen committed to civic virtue as one who watches both sets of values-
those of the public good and those of freedom, diversity, and individual rights and who acts on
the basis of the best informed judgment that profoundly study and active participation can be
provided. It is believed that civic virtue embraces rational thinking and acting in such a way that
individual rights are viewed in light of the public good and that the public good includes the
protection of individual rights. Whether one prefers to stress balance, equilibrium, or tension
between these traditions, or views them as a blend, mixture, or tapestry it is believed that the
effort to identify and understand their ingredients is the first major step toward the practice of
civic virtue which is described in terms of civic dispositions and civic commitments which are
two important characteristics required from citizens in democratic society.

1. Civic Disposition: refers to habits or characters of citizens that are conducive or helpful to
healthy functioning and common good of democratic system. It includes all the behaviors and
actions that are good, desirable and acceptable. Such behaviors and habits are expected from
responsible citizens. Some of civic dispositions are the following:

Civility: is a polite way of acting or behaving towards others. It is the need to respect
others. Civility includes respect and politeness to those with whom one may disagree.

117
 Civility requires you torespect the rights of those who are in dispute with you. It is a way
of peaceful living and co-existence with others.

Self-Discipline: acting and behaving according to some acceptable standards without

external controls and impositions.

Individual Responsibility: fulfilling duties or obligations of citizenship. As we would

like to demand and enjoy our rights and benefits, we should also be ready to discharge the
responsibility that is expected from us.

Civic Mindedness: It is readiness and desire to give concern to public interest. Civic
mindedness is a commitment to give priority to the common good than our private
interest. It is unselfish behavior that enables us to do good and make sacrifice ourselves
to the society and to our nations.

Open mindedness: It refers to our willingness to listen to the ideas, views, and
arguments of others. It is the tolerance we show to carefully examine what others say or
suggest. It is also our ability to express what we feel what is in our mind.

Compromise: It is one form of behavior that should be observed in settling conflict

peacefully. It involves the readiness and willingness to spare something on both sides of
the conflict in favor of the peaceful resolution of the problem and its outcomes. It
requires giving up some of our position or interests. However, compromise never allows
abandoning basic principles and interests.

Tolerance:it is the ability and willingness to accommodate differences in ideas, out looks,
views, etc. Tolerance is the heart of peaceful co-existence in diversity. The first important
step in tolerance is to positively accept diversity itself as it is. Tolerance involves
recognizing, appreciating, and being patient with, others views, ideas, languages, beliefs,
etc.

Honesty: It is the behavior and attitude of not telling and not accepting lies. It is a habit
of not cheating or stealing. Honesty is being free from corruption and dishonesty.
118
 Patriotism: patriotism is one of the most valuable responsibilities expected from
competent and responsible citizens. The attributes of patriotism includes:

- Constitutional patriotism

- Tolerance and culture of peace

- Respect for national symbols and a search for true history

- Safeguarding the countrys security

- Conscientious objectors- this refers to persons who refuse to participate in active

military activities for reasons of morality, religion and other forms of personal beliefs
and opinions.

- Keeping states secrets

- The case of whistle blowers- whistle blowers are people who expose wrong doings,
unethical activities or criminal acts happenings in their companies, government,
neighborhoods and other forms of organizations without identifying themselves as a
source.

2. Civic Commitment: is an active participation of citizens for their personal as well as the
common good in a democracy. It is the expressed devotion of citizens for the implementation of
the fundamental principles of democracy. In a democracy the political authority resides in the
people that are democracy is the self-governance of people. This it requires an active
participation of citizens in their own affairs.

119
120