CHAPTER FOUR: CONSTITUTION, DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS: ETHIOPIAN FOCUS Overview This chapter presents the discussion about the concepts of constitution, democracy and human rights. It is divided into three major sections. The first section presents about the concept of constitution and constitutionalism with great emphasis to the Ethiopian constitutional developments. The second section brings the concept of democracy for discussion. And the last section is about the practices of human rights at deferent levels of the world. Under each section, an emphasis is largely made to the Ethiopian case experience. Section One: Meaning of Constitution and Constitutionalism Introduction State, as a political organization, is administered by a set of institutions or a group of individuals known as the government. The government cannot run the state according to the sudden, passing, and often bizarre idea. There has to be certain rules and principles upon which the power/authority of the government is founded. This set of principle is called the Constitution. It is the base upon which a democratic government rests. The constitution of a country is supreme law of the land. Thus, all citizens, leaders, peasants and so on are subjects to its provisions. Moreover, all other laws that may be contrary to the constitution are considered null and void. However, constitutions are not exactly the same everywhere. They differ from one country to another depending on the leading political philosophy and outlook of the people, the degree of implementation of the constitutional principles in practice, and the constitutional provisions set for improving and amending the constitution. Thus, this lesson brings the basic concepts of both constitution and constitutionalism. In so doing, you will find out the definition of constitution and constitutionalism, as well as its major purpose and functions. Objectives At the end of this unit, you will be able to: Define constitution and constitutionalism Discuss the purposes of constitution Distinguish the types or forms of constitutions. Describe the constitutional experience of Ethiopia Describe salient features of FDRE constitution In this section, you will see the definitions of constitution and constitutionalism and their differences, distinctive features of a constitution, the purposes of constitution, classifications of constitutions and finally the constitutional development of Ethiopia. 4.1. Defining constitution and constitutionalism What is a constitution? Constitution is quit many things for a give country. Over and above everything else, constitution is a supreme law of a land. It is a reflection of the wishes and aspirations of a nation. It is a ground of the legal relationship between the government and its citizens. It is a means by which social, political and economic policies and principles of a given state are outlined. The constitution sets out the structures and functions of the principal organs of the government within the state and declares the principles by which these principal organs must operate. Likewise, it also sets out the rights and responsibilities of the citizens and the way they interact with the government. Because of all these facts, here it can be said that, it is difficult to give a single lined definition for the word constitution. Several scholars and legal experts as well as politicians have defined it differently. As mentioned here above, this is largely because of the different and multifaceted issues usually comprised in the constitutional document. Another reason for the definitional disparity of the term also stems from the very nature of the constitutional document itself. For instance, a given constitution differs from others in terms of its form, nature, purpose, scope and other possible factors as well. All these differences therefore are reflected in the difference seen in many definitions of the concept. With this background, when defined in terms of both its form and nature, constitution can be defined as a fundamental document or a basic law containing laws, rules and principles according to which a political system of a given state is governed. On the other hand, constitution can also be defined as a basic laws of a land or a body of rules and laws, written or unwritten which constitute and determines the organizations of government, distribution of powers and functions among principal organs of government, the relation between government and peoples, sets the structure of the government, lists the rights and responsibility of citizens, and the basic political, economic, social and cultural principles that should be followed while running the government. What is Constitutionalism? Can you guess based on your understanding of what constitution is in the above discussion? Constitutionalism is the order of a state or a political system in which state strictly governed by the constitution or customary law. Constitutionalism is about respect for human worth, dignity and predictability of governmental actions. It is closely related with rule of law but constitutionalism refers to the situation in which the government in whole accepts and governed by the law of the land. Whereas rule of law refers, it is not the wishes of individuals or groups of people that govern the nation but the law and the law alone. In other words constitutionalism is political governance based on the given constitution where state power is exercised according to the established rules contained in the constitution. It reflects that the state officials shall hold accountable to the people and are responsible for their actions. Constitutionalism is more of political culture of a society than just having a written constitution. Constitutions must be observed by both the rulers and ruled and must be enforced. Constitutionalism in its richer sense is the idea that government can/should be limited in its powers and that its authority depends on its observing these limitations. A further important feature of constitutionalism is that the rules imposing limits upon government power must be in some way be entrenched by law. In other words, those whose powers are constitutionally limited — i.e., the organs of government — must not be legally entitled to change or expunge those limits at their pleasure. In short the concept of constitutionalism refers to a doctrine that governments should be faithful to their constitutions because the rules and laws so provided in the constitution are all that can protect citizens’ rights from arbitrary actions and decisions of the government. It is about the full realization and implementation of constitutional provision on the ground. 4.1.1. Major Distinctive Features of a Constitution Could you mention some of the characteristics feature of a constitution? __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________. A constitution has distinctive features that distinguish it from any other laws. The following are some of the features of a constitution. Generality: a constitution provides the general principle of a state and carry on foundation and sets out general framework of the law and the government. Other laws provide the details of the subject for which they are created. Constitutional principles are a guideline for others laws. Any law that contradicts the constitutional provision will be null and void. In this case, constitution only states the general principles. Thus, this makes constitution different from other laws that may found in a given country. Permanency: unlike laws constitution is made for undefined period of time. That means constitution serve for a long lap of ages. It is purposely made to be stable and permanent. One of the mechanisms to ensure this permanency is through constitutional amendment. Judicial interpretation is also another ways of making a given constitution adaptability. In short, amendment is necessary to offer stability in a country. Thus, constitutional stability is one of the factors for creating a durable peace in a society. Unstable constitutional environment mostly indicates a socio-political instability. What do you think is the importance of making constitution permanent? _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________. Supremacy: a constitution is a supreme law of the land. As a mother of law, it is original law by which the system of government is created, and to which the branches of government must look for all their powers and authority. It is original because it is directly made by the people as the direct expression of the will of the people. To ensure this supremacy, the constitution needs to have the following: First and for most, the constitution must have a supremacy clause. All written constitutions have this clause. This provision commands that individuals, government institutions, and private institutions must observe the constitution. The second way of adjustment of a constitution with a changing need of the people is via interpretation. But that must be in accordance with the procedures established by the constitution. Otherwise the constitution is at the state of risk. In majority of states, this task is given to the Supreme Court or a specialized constitutional court. Thus, judicial review should be there, to ensure the supremacy of the constitution. Finally, in order to make constitution a fundamental law of the country we need special amending procedures. If the constitution is amended by those in power, there might be a state of crisis. Thus, the constitutions must state the amendment procedure clearly; this promotes its supremacy. 4.1.2. Basic Purposes and functions of Constitution What are the purposes and functions 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 doesn’t mean that the government has no authority to effectively exercise its functions. A constitutional Government is neither too powerful nor 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 can’t 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. Protects and guarantees 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 clearly specified 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. It serves as covenant, symbol, and aspiration for the people: In so far as a constitution is a covenant by which a group of people agree to transform themselves in to a nation, it may function for the founding generation like a marriage concluded through the pledging partners’ positive and active consent to remain a nation for better or worse, through prosperity and poverty, in peace and war. A constitution may serve as a binding statement of a people’s aspirations for themselves as a nation. In short, a constitutional text may guide as well as express a people’s hopes for themselves as a society. The ideals the words enshrine, the processes they describe, and the actions they legitimize must either help to change the citizenry or at least reflect their current values. Otherwise, it will quickly fade. This is why we see differences among constitutions. 4.1.3. Modern Classification of Constitutions While studying at constitution of state, scholars of the subject find it valuable to categorize constitutions into several categories. Constitution in different political systems differ from one another in terms of their principles on the distribution of political power, on the structural separation of authority among branches of government, procedures employed for amending the constitutional provisions, and on the limitations they set on government authority. Constitutions of different countries also differ from each other in their form, content and patterns of political arrangements. These constitutional variations among nations may have been caused due to different historical background, social traditions and political practices. In some cases, constitutions tend to be products of compromises and consensus of the differing social and political forces of society. But it has been historically observed that in other cases, constitutions are also drawn by power holders in government with the aim of securing their desired political and socio-economic interests. Student do you know what types of constitution are there? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Constitutions can be classified into different forms Based on codification/ form constitution can be classified as Written (codified) and unwritten (uncodified), Based on mode of amendment constitution can be classified as flexible or rigid. Based on state structure constitution can be classified as unitary or federal. Based on the degree to which constitution of state observed in practice. Constitution can be classified as effective and nominal/facade/fictitious classification. Written/codified or unwritten/un-codified constitutions Before we go into the detail of the discussion about classifying constitution based on its codification, it is just better to have a little knowledge about the concept of codification first. Codification is the art of compiling the materials of constitution from several sources. It is about collecting materials of constitution like executive decrees, parliamentary legislations, and norms agreed upon at international treaties, declarations such as universal declarations of human rights and the like from different places and compiling them into a single document. A. Written (codified) Constitutions What does written constitution mean? _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________. A written constitution is one in which key constitutional provisions are found collected and compiled together in a single legal document, so that it renders advantages of stability and easy accessibility A written constitution has the detail of rules, laws and principles in a single file or document. It is well arranged and systematized. As a result, this document is understandable and is handy for movement. All political structures and institutions of a country are organized in accordance with the principles stated in the single written document. The majority of constitutions in the world are in written form. Countries like Ethiopia, Kenya, India, France, Germany and United States of America have written constitutions. The constitution of India, is the largest constitution in the world, it has 395 articles. B. Unwritten (uncodified) Constitutions What does unwritten constitution mean? Unwritten constitution is a set of rules, regulations, declarations and laws passed by either a parliament (the legislative body) or other competent body at different times. This kind of constitution is not systematically put in a document. It is based on the beliefs, traditions, norms, wisdoms, and conventions of the society. In the unwritten constitutional systems, basic laws may be derived also from previous acts and judicial rulings that serve as precedents for giving decisions on similar other cases. In this sense, the rules and principles of an unwritten constitution may be considered as complex collections of articles found in different documents. Countries like Great Britain, New Zealand, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Israel have unwritten constitutions. Both written and unwritten constitutions have certain advantages and disadvantages. In order to examine some of the advantages and disadvantages of both the written and unwritten forms of constitutions, try to critically study the following table. But, before that, (?) Can you guess advantages and disadvantages of written constitutions (at least mention 2 for each) 1. 2. Written Constitution Advantages Disadvantages As it is readily available to citizen to enable them monitor the behavior of their government, it may prevent the emergence of dictatorship. Citizens can easily learn their fundamental rights and duties & the basic laws governing the patterns of political process of their nation. In amending the constitution, citizens could have the chance to seriously consider fundamental provisions before making the amendments. Since the constitution clearly establishes basic political principles, uncertainties of political life and processes will be avoided or at least reduced to the minimum. The implementation of the constitution usually involves interpretation. In some instances such interpretations may lead to disputes between branches of government. It is not possible to absolutely delineate the extent of devolution of power among different levels of government in a country. It is not easily adaptable to changing circumstances. To be adaptable to new situations, written constitutions need to be continuously amended or modified. (?) Can you guess advantages and disadvantages of unwritten constitution? (Mention at least two for each) _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________. Unwritten Constitution Advantages Disadvantages It is relatively more flexible than a Written constitution because it can be easily adapted to changing circumstances. It may ensure smooth running of the government in accordance with the various conventions and customs. This may contribute to the political stability of the state. Since there is no single document that clearly states the fundamental rights and duties of citizens and governments, it would be difficult to quickly determine which aspect of the constitution is violated and when. Since there is no legal restraint and because it is not accessible to the public, it can easily be distorted or even changed without the consent of the stakeholders. It is not simple to determine what an established convention or custom is. As a result, there may arise differences in society regarding which convention or custom is acceptable and which is not, since there could exist different conventions and customs in a country. Because of its inaccessibility, it is nearly impossible to create awareness through education on the fundamental constitutional rights and freedoms, duties and obligations of citizens. C. Flexible and Rigid Constitutions Dear student, you have lernt that a constitution is the highest law of a country and, therefore, considered as a permanent legal instrument. Nevertheless, it needs to be changed or modified in order to cope up with changing internal and external circumstances of a country. It is by writing a new provision or provisions into the constitution, or by modifying the existing provision or provisions of the constitution that usually the modification takes place. This process is called amendment.It is simply the process of changing or modifying constitutional provisions of a given country so as to make it to cope up with the existing or changing situations. Amendment will sometimes be necessary to reflect the changes that have occurred within a society so that it prevents the constitution from becoming an historical anachronism. Since the constitution is the supreme law within the nation or state, it is unlikely that it will be capable of being amended in the same way as other laws as well. Usually, special procedure will have to be followed in order to effect a change to a constitutional document. A comparative study of different countries constitution shows that, there is no common procedure to be followed for amendment to take place. It depends upon country’s own political and historical experiences. Thus, all constitutions, especially written constitutions, provide formal mechanisms and procedures that must be followed in the process of amendment. Whether or not explicitly stated in a constitution, certain factors may necessitate amending it, so that the constitution can address contemporaneous practical problems and be adaptive. To this end, a constitution may be regarded as rigid or flexible depending on the complexity of the requirements stated in the provision for amendment procedures. Student, can you guess what flexible and rigid constitutions are? Think over it for some minutes before you read the note below. 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. A rigid constitution is the 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 People’s Representatives and by a two-thirds majority vote of the House of the Federation). Dear student some amendment procedures from the simplest to the difficult ones are outlined below. The simplest and commonest amendment procedure is that which requires an extraordinary or absolute majority (two-thirds support) in the parliament. A relatively difficult way of amending a constitution is that which requires the absolute majority in parliament as well as two-thirds support of regional legislatures. This type of arrangement is usually in federal states where regions have their own governments with their respective legislatures. A more difficult procedure of constitutional amendment is that which involves a national referendum. D. Federal constitution and unitary constitution Constitution can also be classified into another category based on the division of power between the levels of government or simply based on state structure. This is a classification mechanism which takes concentration of political power (undivided power) versus decentralization (divided power) political power into account. On the bases of this classification mechanism, constitution can be classified into federal or unitary constitution ones. A Federal constitution is a type of constitution that distribute political power and authority between federal and regional levels of government whereas a unitary constitution is another type of constitution that concentrates all political power and authority in the hands of one central government. In unitary constitution the power of the central government is absolute and it can establish or abolish the existence as well as the functioning of regional governments if any. In this type of constitution, regional governments have no any constitutional guarantee for their existence. E. Effective and Nominal Constitution Write something that comes to your mind about effective and nominal constitution? _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Modern constitution can also grouped in to effective or nominal ones on the basis of the degree to which constitution of a state is observed in practice. i.e while the former denotes to a situation in which government/citizens practices correspond to the provisions of the constitution, the latter 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. 4.1.4. Constitutional Development in Ethiopia Dear student, learning the political and constitutional experiences of different countries and historical development of constitution is important for understanding their political systems and the nature of their governance. As a result, we will now briefly review the constitutional experience of Ethiopia. For the sake of convenience and clarity as well, we can approach the Ethiopian constitutional development from two dimensions. These are traditional and modern constitutional experience. 4.1.4.1. The Traditional Constitutional Experience of Ethiopia In spite of its long history of people and state, Ethiopia has little experience with regard to written and modern constitution as well. The political system of monarchy was established in the very early periods in Axume on basis of divine rights of kings. Divine rights of kings imply that they had absolute power over their subjects and their rule was meant to be not secularand also spiritual. This made kings to attain unquestionable and unchallengeable power over their subjects. Before to 1931, Ethiopia had no written constitution. Despite the fact of the existence of constitutionally significant documents, no written constitution in the modern sense formed the basis for the constitutional process. Considering this dry fact, the practice of modern written constitution is relatively a recent development. Until the early 1930s, the rule of the Ethiopian Empire was based on traditional and customary political and legal premises. This traditional constitutional experience was characterized by the dominance of myths and legends that were used to provide legitimacy to the monarchies like that of Solomonic Dynasty. As you might have learnt in history subject in your previous regular classes, the KibreNegestand theFethaNegest were used as traditional constitutional documents in Ethiopia. Beside this, the practices of the Gada system of the Oromo people can also be taken as one form of traditional constitutional practices. The KibreNegest, for example, mystifies that the Ethiopian monarchies derived their power to rule from God and therefore they were not accountable to any secular power. The myths and legends provided virtually no opportunity for the Ethiopian people to participate in political affairs and to influence the decision-making process in their nation. The people were merely considered to be subjects of the kings. 4.1.4.2. Modern Constitutional Experience of Ethiopia As far as the practices of modern constitutional document is concerned there have been a varying historical and political circumstances and values as well as the predominant attitudes and characteristics of the Ethiopian governments have shaped each of the constitutions, which were adopted in the country at different times. Given the political and socio-economic differences, orientations and philosophies of the three successive regimes of Ethiopia, the constitutions differed in terms of their basic political objectives and principles. In the sub-sections below an attempt is made to briefly survey the nature and development of each of the above constitutions. 4.1.4.2.1 The 1931 Ethiopia Constitution The 1931 imperial constitution was the first written and modern constitution in the modern political history of Ethiopia. Prior to 1931, Ethiopia had no any compiled and modern written constitution. Rather, as mentioned above, the country’s political system was simply based on customary and religious documents and laws. However, On July 16 1931 the first written constitution was formulated in Ethiopia during the reign of Haile Selassie. This heralded the beginning of modern practices written constitution in the history of the country. The constitution was written by BejrondTekleHawariatTekle Mariam, a Russian educated intellectual of some considerable political sophistication and also assisted by BlatanguetaHiruy Weld Selassie, a person of equal intellectuality to BejirondTekleHawariyat, but the product of traditional church schools of Ethiopia. He followed the model of the 1898 Japan’s constitution. Why was Emperor Hailesilassie so motivated to formulate the constitution? There were some reasons that encouraged him to have a formally written constitution. Dear student, you might have tried to give reasons behind the formulation of the 1931 constitution, you can also include the following. One of the reasons was Haile Selassie’s exposure to the modern constitutions that he saw in Europe in his state visits. This motivated him to have a progressive and modern constitution. The second reason was to win international image about his country. He wanted to convince the European states that Ethiopia was a civilized country. The other factors that motivated the king was to build up his own reputation as a modern and reformist king of the country, different from the preceding kings. The final reason that pushed the king was to enable him to reunify the country and consolidate his central government. This opportunity gave him power to rule the country under his own supremacy. Can you guess the distribution of power, the form of state structure, and rights given to citizens in this constitution? The 1931 constitution formulates two chambers of a parliament. These were the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies. The senate was the supreme Chamber. The king himself chose the members of the senate. The members were drawn from noble men, the Orthodox Church, the dignitaries, and other important personalities of the time. The members had to be above 35 years of age and could serve for six years. The lower chambers, i.e. the chamber of Deputies were chosen, by provincial governors. These members were drawn from the nobility who were Ethiopian nationals. They had to be 25 and above years of age. However, this constitution did not give freedom to the people. It was rather a formal, modern way of monopolizing power by the king and the nobility. It simply helped the ruling class to expand their unlimited power to strengthen their authority and to subjugate regions that were not under their power. The parliament had no significant power other than advising the king. It cannot question or oppose the deeds of the executive without the consent of the king. Above all, it was the king who could have the authority to dissolve the parliament. With regards to the ministers, all of them were accountable to the king, be it individually or in-group. This is clearly stated in the constitution. The constitution did not allow the existence of a prime minister. This was done by the minister of pen in the council of ministers. All these indicate that the king had power monopoly. The judicial system is made to have regular country and administrative tribunals. Civil and criminal cases were attended by the regular courts where as those cases that were linked with the government and that had some effects on the system was seen by the administrative tribunal. The Emperor had the power to lead the Chilot, which was used as the Supreme Court in the country. He was decisive in passing verdicts upon a case. He was the chief judge. Not only this, but also, he was law maker and executive. Thus, we understand from this that the 1931s Constitution had three organs-legislative, executive and judiciary. But, they all were run under the direct control of the king. What the constitution did was to enable the emperor to formally strengthen his power. It did not allow the people to freely participate in political and economic activities. 4.1.4.2.2. The 1955 revised constitution Can you guess what factors motivated the king to revise the 1931 constitution in 1955? After 24 years use without amendment, in 1955 the king revised the constitution. There were basic reasons that compelled the king to revise the old constitution. One of these factors was the federation of Eritrea with Ethiopia in 1952. At this time Eritrea had better constitution. It had enlightened ideas of a democratic system that did not exist in Ethiopia’s constitution. Thus, after Eritrea was federated with Ethiopia by the resolution of the United Nations, the old constitution of Ethiopia had to be revised so that it could include enlightened concepts of democracy. The other reason that compelled the king was the economic and social changes that were witnessed in the 24 years. The Second World War had affected Ethiopia greatly. The five years Italian occupation had created closer ties with the outside world. The war had increased the movement of goods, ideas and people. In 1945 the League of Nations replaced by the United Nations, and Ethiopia became a founding member. There were also signs of modernity. The infrastructure was developed. All these had forced the emperor to revise the old constitution. The other factor compelled the king was the demand made by educated Ethiopians. Those Ethiopians who were educated in Europe and other countries forced the king to include democratic concepts in the constitution. As a result of all those factors mentioned above, the 1931 constitution was revised in 1955. The revised constitution included many of the progressive concepts introduced. It also retained some of the principles in the 1931 constitution. What were the new features witnessed in the revised constitution? Can you try? Try to write few of them in 5 minutes. The revised constitution introduced some enlightened concepts. One of the basic concepts was the inclusion of due process of law, that is, no one shall be arrested or put in prison by the king or other officials without the order of the court. This was a breakthrough in maintaining the rights of citizens. Besides the introduction of the rights of citizens, it was endorsed that officials shall be held responsible for what they do. It was also amended that the constitution was a supreme law that governed all other laws. The concept of maintaining check and balance was introduced. To this effect, the bill of rights that included equal protection of law, protection against double jeopardy, and civil rights that included the freedom of speech, press, religion and assembly were incorporated. It was also revised that deputies shall be elective although senators remained to be appointed by the king. Also, the legislative role of the parliament was improved. It says that the chambers or deputies could formulate laws. The emperor had the role of only promulgating or suggesting ways of revising it. Finally, in the revision, an independent judiciary was established. Dear student, what about the power of the monarchy in the revised constitution? Increased or decreased or remained as it was in 1931 constitution. The power of the king was reaffirmed in the 1955-revised constitution. He was believed to be a sacred king sent from God to rule Ethiopia. His power was also accepted as an undisputable gift. This was put in Article 4 of the constitution. He was also the head of all powers as stated in Article 26. He was the head of the governance. He was chief executive as he had been before. He was still in the same position of appointing and dismissing ministers, governors, senators, a military officer, bishops of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, etc. Thus, we can say that although the constitution was revised to include enlightened ideas about democracy, his power was still unlimited. What was the response of the people? What do you think? Owing to the absence of change and development, in the 1960’s some movement’s started. For example, in 1960 a coup d’ etat was attempted. This was the first symptom of the growing dissatisfaction of the people. In 1963 the OAU with its head quarter in the capital was established. This created pressure on the need of change. Students’ movement became so intense. “Land to the tiller” became an important slogan. The dissatisfied Eritreans with the federation of Eritrea with Ethiopia went to the bushes for liberating Eritrea. There was growing insecurity between the borders of Ethiopia and Somalia. Teachers and taxi-drivers went on strikes. What do you think the response of the king could have been? Can you guess dear student? Due to the above and other pressures, the king established constitutional commission in 1973. Many changes were introduced in the draft constitution. It limits the power of the king. Complaints in administrative mal-practices were to be attended. The new draft also included the respect of the rights and duties of citizens, which were not put in the former constitutions. An elected two chambers of parliament were to be created. Nevertheless, all these provisions were too late to withhold the growing restlessness and opposition of the people. Thus, using the ripe situation, in 1974, the military took power, overthrowing the king. 4.1.4.2.3. The 1987 Constitution The military regime did not have constitution until 1987. A period of 13 years lapsed without a constitution. In place of constitution the Derg ruled the country through a series of decrees and proclamations. However, later on September 12, 1987, the new constitution was written. When compared with the previous emperial constitutions, the constitution was the most shortly lived constitution. Relatively speaking, the provisions of the constitution had shown the dawn of democracy in Ethiopia. The constitution introduced the idea of party politics and republican form of government for the first time in the modern political history of Ethiopia. The constitution declares that the country democratic republic and the name of the country was Peoples Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (PDRE). This constitution consisted 119 articles. There was only one party called Workers’ Party of Ethiopia (WPE). What were the major features of the 1987 constitution? The preamble of the constitution states, besides other things, that in the constitution people’s sovereignty, the unity of Ethiopia, the equality of the nationalities with the right to self-determination, basic freedoms and human rights are guaranteed and that the foundation for establishing socialism was laid. The constitution has four parts. The first part states that Ethiopia is a unitary country and that nationalities live in equality. It also expresses that source of power is the workers. Besides, it explains that the state has a role in the national economy. This part also states social and cultural policies, and policies related to national defense and foreign relations. The second part of the constitution describes the rights and duties of citizens. Although these were put in paper, they were not practiced. In other worlds there was no constitutionalism. Dear Student can you please refer back what constitutionalism mean and criticize the Derg’s constitution? The third part of the constitution elaborates the state structure and the power and responsibilities vested in them. These were the Council of State, which was faction as a standing body of the National Shengo, Council of Ministers, court, and the unicameral parliament that is the National Shengo. Besides this, the central committee and the polit bureau have equivalent power to that of the other state organs. The Secretary General of the Communist party is the executive president of the republic, the president of the council of state, the chairman of the National Shengo and the commander in chief of the armed forces. We thus understand from this power monopoly that the system was dictatorial which did not allow the participation of the people in the various state organs. Finally, the constitution contains general provisions like the flag of the national, the National Anthem, the National Language, the capital city, the date of enforcement of the constitution and condition of amendment of the constitution. What characteristics do constitutions in the two, that is, the Haile selassie and the Derg regimes have in common? Dear student try to answer this question. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________. To give you a clue to your answer, the 1987 constitution of the military regime and the two constitutions of the imperial government of Haile Selassie served only to maximize the political powers of the central governments. The Ethiopian political system during the periods of Emperor Haile Selassie and the military government seriously lacked the process of constitutionalism. That is to say, although there were modern written constitutions during these two Ethiopian regimes, the constitutions invariably failed to ensure the prevalence of the rule of law. After the EPRDF seized power in May 1991, Transitional Government was formed from the various parties and organizations that had fought the Derg regime and from other opposition groups. The Transitional Government stayed in power from 22 July 1991 to 21 August 1995. The Federal government constitution of 1995 then replaced it. 4.1.4.2.4. The 1995 FDRE Constitution Dear student, do you have the present constitution around? I advise you to read this section having the constitution with you so that you can refer when it seem necessary? To begin with, the 1995 constitution is different from all other constitutions that were formulated in the history of the country. Because, it changed Ethiopia from unitary to a federal state. Also it gives importance to Ethno-linguistic composition of the state. It is the nation of nations. This constitution has 106 articles in eleven chapters Salient features of the constitution of 1995 One of the most important thing to note about the Ethiopian constitution of 1995 is that it is clearly a departure from monarchial a Marxist dictatorial types of previous Ethiopian constitutions. The state it envisages and the government it establishes are different both in form and content. Unlike the age – old monarchical constitutions that are familiar land marks in Ethiopian history, this constitution provides for a republican form of government. The 1995 constitution is the second republican constitution that has been promulgated; but while the 1987 (Derg’s) constitutional practice former provided for a single party system and a unitary form of government, the 1995 constitution provides for a Federal multi-party system of government in the long history of the country. That is why we focus on the silent features of the current or 1995 FDRE constitution. Some of the silent features of the 1995 FDRE constitution are: What are the basic features of 1995 constitution? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Federal state structure A federal state is a form of state structure where by a country is divided into different areas or territories in which some powers are exercised by the central government and others by the regional governments. It is a complex, legalistic and always a conscious creation. In this regard, federalism seeks to unite in a central government system several component units that desire some degree of unity without sacrificing their own identity or autonomy in local affairs. Federalism is a principle according to which two levels of government exist side by side in the state, in which each possessing certain assigned powers and functions. Each level of government operates directly upon people. Theoretically, one level of government is not dependent on the other for its legislation, taxation, or administration each regional state has its own means of law making, law enforcement, and taxation. Theoretically, each regional state is limited to its own sphere and it is autonomous and independent. In general, federal state structure has the following basic characteristic features. Absence of a single strong centre Strong sub – national groups Sovereignty is divided. A subsidiary law – making body. The federal constitution is supreme. Local units are not created or abolished by the interest of the central /federal government. Theoretically, a federal state structure best fits for a heterogonous society & vast territory like Ethiopia. Also, it had multitudes of advantages: Encourage different ethnic, linguistic, religious or cultural groups to administer themselves in this regard federalism is the best solution for the question of equality Encourages social diversity and the autonomy of the minority groups It encourages individual & local enterprises for development. Ethnicity as a Major Component. What this feature indicates? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ One feature of great import throughout the constitution, and one that places this constitution on a pedestal of its own, more or less, is the utmost significance given to the ethno-linguistic components of the society. The preamble of the constitution does not open with the familiar “We the peoples of Ethiopia……….” This is not a constitution of the Ethiopian citizens simply lumped together as a people. The Ethiopian citizens are first categorized in their different ethno-linguistic groupings and then these groupings come together as authors of and beneficiaries from, the constitution of 1995. The ethno-linguistic groupings and the nationality issue have historic-political and socioeconomic significance beyond the cultural and linguistic expressions. The constitution, therefore, necessarily becomes a constitution of a Nation of Nations. The importance given to the ethno-linguistic components of the society by the constitution is absolute and real, and cannot be overemphasized. Dealing with the fundamental principles of the constitution, chapter 2 starts with the clear provision that “all sovereign power resides in the Nations, Nationalities, and peoples of Ethiopia.” Indeed, the constitution is considered as nothing more than “an expression of their sovereignty. “ Parliamentary Democracy Dear student, you have seen what parliamentary form of government mean in chapter two. Ethiopia is one of the countries that follows parliamentary form of government and try to relate Ethiopian parliamentary democracy with other parliamentary countries? _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Another salient feature of the constitution of 1995 is expressed by the term “democratic” that is contained already in Article 1 of the constitution and also forms part of the nomenclature of the state. What this constitution establishes is a parliamentary democracy much along the manner in which parliamentary democracies have been working in most of Western Europe and North American. The use of the term “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 of a mandated period. The constitution in this respect provides for a two chamber parliament known as the Federal Houses. They are the House of peoples’ Representatives and the House of Federation. The constitution also provides for a one chamber state council at state level. The house of peoples’ Representatives is “the highest authority of the Federal Government and the state council is “the highest organ of state authority. The House of Federation which is “composed of representatives of Nations, Nationalities and people” is the other representative assembly with specific power, including the ultimate “power to interpret the constitution” and to decide on other matters of grave constitutional concern such as the right to secession. The Right to Secession What does secession mean? _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The right to secession is one of the peculiar features of the constitution that again emanates from the overriding significance given to the ethno-linguistic notion of nation, nationality and people. The right to secession is part of the broader right to self-determination. The right to self-determination includes the right to develop one’s language, promote one’s culture and preserve one’s history. Beyond that it includes the right to self-government and equitable representation in state and national government. The right to secession is the ultimate extension and expression of the right to self-determination and the constitution provides a detailed set of procedures by which this right may be exercised, if necessary. The right to secession is definitely the most controversial item in the constitution. This right, which we will examine in greater detail in chapter 9 under “The Nationality Right” it has been pointed out as a basis for unity in diversity and serves as a litmus test for democracy. It can be a guarantee for sustainable peace and a solid foundation for unity based on equality and mutual respect. Do the right to secession encourages unity or vice versa? __________ __________ Ownership of Land According to the constitution of FDRE land is owned by whom? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Another item of the constitution which is hotly debated, but on economic rather than political terms, is the question of ownership of land. The constitution explicitly states that, “the right to ownership of rural and urban land …is exclusively vested in the state and in the people of Ethiopia. “It goes on to add, “Land is a common property of the Nations, Nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia and shall not be subject to sale or to other means of transfer. The general principle that land be it urban or rural should not be considered simply as a market commodity is based on Ethiopian experience of long standing. The extra ordinary significance attached to land that propels it beyond market forces is usually put in philosophical language. Land is seen in an inter-generational manner as having belonged to one’s parents, grandparents, great-grandparents and will belong to one’s children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren. Beyond that, land is also seen as the common property of the extended family, the clan, the tribe, and etc. one cannot forget that land touches sensitive chords in a traditional society that is particularly subsistence-agriculture based. Other modalities of use of land in traditional society will also attribute special value beyond market forces to land and the natural resources contained, be they water, minerals, or pastures and forests. Language Policy What is the language policy of FDRE constitution? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Still another salient feature of the Constitution that emanates from Ethiopia being a country of Nations, Nationalities, and peoples is the constitutional provisions dealing with languages. Under the general provisions of the first chapter of the Constitution, article 5 provides both for the equality of languages and for their practical application in government. The general principle is first laid down, that all Ethiopia languages shall enjoy equal state recognition. “When this provision is put together with the provision of article 39(2), which provides each nation, nationality or people with “the right to speak, to write and to develop its own language.” Having said this, the question of state use of language has to be settled. Here two provisions are made, one at federal and the other at state level. At federal level, Amharic is made the working language of the state. This means that the Federal State in all its official dealings shall employ Amharic as its language. But member states of the Federation are allowed by the constitution to determine their respective working languages by law. In other words, each member state through a law promulgated by its legislative council will have to determine what the official language of that member state is. There is no question that this process of accommodation at the linguistic level is a reflection of the overall accommodation process that federalism provides. The balance will have to be made. Secularism Is the FDRE constitution has state religion? _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ One very important item the constitution specifically provides for is religion. Religion has played an important part in Ethiopian constitutional history over the centuries. From animism to archaic Judaism, from Christian Orthodoxy to Islam, and from Catholicism to Protestantism, they have all left their strong imprint at one time or other in Ethiopian constitutional history. The FDRE constitution came into effect some basic important to religion. First, the general principle is laid down that “state and religion are separate.” Secondly, the important departure is officially announced that “there shall be no state religion.” To spell out in black and white the implication of the first two provisions, a third one is added, saying that “Government shall not interfere in the affairs of religion. Religion shall not interfere in the affairs of government. With the constitutional right of individual freedom of conscience and religion provided for by the constitution, which includes that right to worship, exercise, and propagate one’s religion , individually or collectively, and in public or private, the picture is completed. Fundamental Rights and Freedoms Dear student these human rights and freedoms were dealt in the chapter seven of the module in brief, so you have to discuss the difference between human rights and democratic rights. A significant thrust of the constitution is achieved in the field of fundamental rights and freedoms. Nearly one-third of the provisions of the constitution deal with fundamental rights and freedoms. Chapter 3 of the constitution is divided into two parts and rights are categorized as human right and democratic rights. Constitutional interpretation The FDRE constitution gives the power of constitutional interpretation to whom? _______________________________________________________________________ Since the constitution, the highest overall authority in the land, is a law, it is argued, its ultimate interpretation should rest with the highest court of law. On such premises, for instance, the American Federal Supreme Court is vested with the power of ultimately interpreting the United States constitution. In other federal systems, such as in Germany, the ultimate interpretation of the constitution rests with the constitutional court, which –although a specialized institution- is still a court.” The Ethiopian Constitution, on the other hand, in a creative stroke provides for something quite different, emanating from and consistent with overriding sovereignty the constitution expresses. Without losing sight of the constitution as the supreme law of the land, its characteristics as the supreme political instrument for self-determination, peace, democracy, and socio-economic development are fully exploited. Thus the ultimate interpreter of the constitution is made, not the highest court of law, but the House of Federation. The House of Federation, as the champion of the nations, nationalities, and people of Ethiopia, whose equality it promotes and whose self-determination right it enforces and whose misunderstandings it seeks to solve, it is precisely this political institution that is vested with “the power to interpret the constitution. The constitution does not however consider its interpretation a purely political matter. The constitution establishes the council of constitutional inquiry, a body of mostly legal experts of high standing, headed by the Chief Justice of the Federal Supreme court, to examine constitutional issues and submit its findings to the House of Federation. The House of Federation thus has the official competent and authoritative legal advice of the council of constitutional inquiry before it makes its final decision on constitutional issues. Constitutional Amendment Dear student do you know the amendment procedures of FDRE constitution? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Another interesting feature of the constitution is its amendment procedures. True to federal systems, it involves both regional and federal legislative organs in the process. The formal initiation of constitutional amendment can come from either regional or federal legislative organs. Where the initiative comes from the regions, a third of state councils must have supported a draft by majority vote. Otherwise either of the Federal Houses can initiate a constitutional amendment by a two-thirds majority vote. Constitutional amendments are then categorized into two. Ordinary constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority vote in a joint meeting of the Federal Houses as well as a majority vote in two-thirds of state councils Where constitutional amendment deals with fundamental rights and freedoms enshrined in the constitution or the constitutional amendment initiation procedures of Article 104, a more stringent requirement is introduced. In such cases, the Federal Houses must pass the draft by majority vote. Constitutional amendments in additional require popular discussion and may be submitted for referendum. Multiparty system What is multiparty system? (You can give your answers in the spaces provided below) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Multi-party system is a system where there are more than two political parties operating within one political system. Democracy should allow different political parties to be formed and participated in democratic elections. A multiparty system is essential for republican government because it prevents the leadership of a single party from setting policy without challenge. Parties are seen as instruments of democracy because they guarantee diversity of political opinion; parties allow competition and prevent the misuse of power by the government. Multipartism forms a basis for institutional cheeks against the concentration of power in one body. That is why I have already stated that without multipartism, there may not be effective separation of power. Besides, advocates of multiapartism argue that citizens should have a right to form and belong to a party as a basic freedom of association. Thus, multiparty system encourages greater citizen participation and reduces corruption. It also allows for greater diversity of opinion. In fact all democratic systems are not multiparty systems for instance; the American electoral system operates, on a two-party system with two political parties, which are dominant. The same holds true for Great Britain. But in a system with heterogeneous society, multi-party system is essential for popular representation and separation of powers. Certain African leaders opposed multi-party system saying that multipartism would exacerbate the linguistic, ethnic and regional divisions in Africa. The general consensus, however; that is it should be based on the nature of the society, Multi-party system is good at promoting diversity of ideas. It is also good at effecting separation of powers. Section Two: Democracy Introduction Democracy is defined in different ways. There is no universally argued definitions of the term democracy. So rather than call for a simple and precise definition of democracy it is somewhat sensible to argue on the fundamental principles of democracy. In this lesson you will see different definitions of democracy, the fundamental values and principles of democracy and ways of exercising democracy. Objectives After studying this lesson, you will be able to: define the term democracy in your own words identify the fundamental values and principles of democracy assess each values and principles of democracy in your locality context compare direct and indirect ways of exercising democracy apply democratic participation in your locality and at a national level 4.2. Defining Democracy Democracy is not an exclusive property of developed countries or Western societies. Democratic norms and principles are universal, but the institutions which inform democracy and concrete forms of its political practices may vary in time and space (i.e. through historical era and from country to country). Thus, as a universal form of rule with specific manifestations in time and space, democracy is a political concept founded on three underlining ideas, namely, democracy as a value, a process and a practice. Strictly speaking, there are conceptual and methodological difficulties in understanding and defining democracy. In this case, one difficulty in defining democracy arises from the fact that political systems are in a continual state of evolution. As ideas change, so the content of the word democracy changes in people’s minds. A consequence of this change of attitude has been that the term is now used to describe so many different forms of government. It is this very popularity of the term that makes democracy a difficult concept to understand. When a term means anything to anyone, it is in danger of becoming entirely meaningless. Student can you define democracy in your own words? __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________. It is evident that the term democracy is used to cover wide ranges of political systems; some of which are old and experienced, while others relatively new and inexperienced. Their rate of advance towards their political, social and economic goals varies widely. Despite these facts, scholars, politicians and others attempted to define democracy in various ways. To this end, the following are some of the possible definitions of the term democracy. The word democracy is a term that comes from Greek and it is made up with two words demos, which means people and kratos, to mean to govern, or to rule. “Democracy” can then be literally translated by the following terms: Government of the People or Government of the Majority. Convincingly it can be also said that Democracy is a people centered system, where the people are the heart, the root and also the fruits. The fruits of democracy are prosperity, good quality of life and wellbeing, human security, human dignity and participation of the people in all decisions affecting their lives. The dictionary definition of the term entails that democracy is a state of government in which people hold the ruling power either directly or indirectly through their elected representatives. Accordingly, democracy embraces the principles of equality, individual freedom and opportunity for the common people, as those who actually wield political power. From the perspective of participation, democracy can be explained as, the mobilization of constituent groups around the issues and problems of common concern, the organization of forums for the expression of alternative views on the issues, and the implementation of decision-making procedures based on majority rule. According to this definition, since the practical establishment of democracy depends on individual citizens’ participation, in the absence it is difficult to influence government decisions or policies for just and fair public welfare. To be brief, you may have already heard about the most common definition of democracy: "…government of the people, by the people and for the people" (i.e. the former US president, Abraham Lincoln). To put it another way we can say that a government comes from the people; it is exercised by the people, and for the purpose of the people’s own interests. This description is only a very broad one, to start with, but the pages that follow will explain to you in a more concise way the different facets of democracy. 4.2.1. Approaches of Understanding Democracy There are two views of understanding democracy: substantive and procedural views. In this lesson you will assess each of them in relation with some of the theories of democracy, like liberal democracy, economic democracy, social democracy, and developmental democracy. 4.2.1.1. Substantive Views of Democracy The substantive view concentrates on what a government actually does, that is, the policies it makes should fulfill democratic ideals. A substantive theorist would not recognize a decision that violated those ideals as "democratic" even if it were made in response to majority wishes. Substantive theorists, however, do not agree on the contents and nature of these democratic ideals. Substantive democracy is a form of democracy in which the outcome of elections is representative of the people. In other words, substantive democracy is a form of democracy that functions in the interest of the governed. Though a country may allow all citizens of age to vote; this characteristic does not necessarily qualify it as a substantive democracy. In a substantive democracy, the general population plays a real role in carrying out its political affairs, i.e., the state is not merely set up as a democracy but it functions as one as well. This type of democracy can also be referred to as a functional democracy. Have you be aware of substantive democracy? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________.  4.2.1.2 Procedural Views of Democracy The procedural view stresses the form and process of government, or how the people govern. Procedural democracy emphasizes the principles of universal participation, political equality, and majority rule. Modern nations are too large to employ direct (or participatory) democracy, and they must rely on indirect democracy in the form of representative government. The procedural view of democracy also insists on the principle of responsiveness, that the government should follow the general thrust of public opinion. In other words, the procedural view of democracy sets forth principles that describe how government should make decisions and address three distinct questions: Who should participate in decision-making? How much should each participant's vote count? How many votes are needed to reach decisions? Of course, there is no simple answer to these questions and as such there are various perspectives on those issues. In brief, procedural democracy is a democracy in which the people or citizens of the state have less influence than in traditional liberal democracies. This type of democracy is characterized by voters choosing to elect representatives in free elections. Procedural democracy assumes that the electoral process is at the core of the authority placed in elected officials and ensures that all procedures of elections are duly complied with. It could be described as a democracy in which only the basic structures and institutions are in place. Commonly, the previously elected representatives use electoral procedures to maintain themselves in power against the common wish of the people, thus awkward the establishment of a full-fledged democracy. Procedural democracy is quite different from substantive democracy, which is manifested by equal participation of all groups in society in the political process. Now what is the difference between substantive and procedural views of democracy? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________. To understand better what we sow above let see the theories of democracy including: liberal democracy, economic democracy, social democracy, and developmental democracy. 4.2.2.Fundamental Principles and Values of Democracy Can you mention some of the fundamental principles and values of democracy? As we have seen above two individuals may speak about democracy, but there understanding might not be similar. However, if we are aware of the fundamental principles and values of democracy such differences may not be as such serious. Now let us see some of the most frequently mentioned universal principles and values of democracy. These basic principles that have identified by people from around the world must exist in order to have a democratic government. These principles often become a part of the constitution or bill of rights in a democratic society. Though no two democratic countries are exactly alike, people in democracies support many of the same basic principles and desire the same benefits from the government. Given this 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 more over 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). 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). Again as far as fundamental principle of democracy is concerned, the followings constitute some of the fundamental principles (both in the procedural and substantial senses) of democracy. These are; 1. 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. 2. Citizen Participation: - One of the most basic evidences of a democracy is citizen participation in government. Participation is the key role of citizens in democracy. It is not only their right, but it is their duty. Citizen participation may take many forms including standing for election, voting in elections, becoming informed, debating issues, attending community or civic meetings, being members of private voluntary organizations, paying taxes, and even protesting etc. This active participation of citizens in all affairs of his/her country considered as a cornerstone to build a better democracy. 3. Political Tolerance: - A democratic society is often composed of people from different cultures, religious, and ethnic groups who have viewpoints different from a majority of the population, but all are tolerant of each other. A democratic society is enriched by diversity. Democratic societies are politically tolerant. This means that while the majority of the people rule in a democracy, the rights of the minority must be protected. People who are not in power must be allowed to organize and speak out. Political minorities are sometimes referred to as “the opposition” because they may have ideas which are different from the majority. If the majority deny rights to and destroy their opposition, then they also destroy democracy. 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. This is a principle consisting of two distinct democratic elements. These are accountability and transparency. Accountability is a principle which requires governmental officials to be answerable for the decisions and acts they undertaken. In a democracy, elected and appointed officials have to be accountable to the people. They are responsible for their actions. Officials must make decisions and perform their duties according to the will and wishes of the people, not for themselves. On the other hand, transparency requires openness of the activities of government officials and institutions to the public. For government to be accountable the people must be aware of what is happening in the country. This is referred to as transparency in government. A transparent government holds public meetings and allows citizens to attend. In a democracy, the press and the people are able to get information about what decisions are being made, by whom and why. 6. Free, Fair and Regular Elections:-One way citizens of the country express their will is by electing officials to represent them in government. Democracy insists that these elected officials are chosen and peacefully removed from office in a free and fair manner. Intimidation, corruption and threats to citizens during or before an election are against the principles of democracy. In a democracy, elections are held regularly with fixed time interval. Participation in elections should not be based on a citizen's wealth. For free and fair elections to occur, most adult citizens should have the right to stand for government office. Additionally, obstacles should not exist which make it difficult for people to vote. 7. Control of the Abuse of Power:-Democratic societies try to prevent any elected official or group of people from misusing or abusing their power. One of the most common abuses of power is corruption. Corruption occurs when government officials use public funds for their own benefit or exercise power in an illegal manner. Various methods have been used in different countries to protect against these abuses. Frequently the government is structured to limit the powers of the branches of government: to have independent courts and agencies with power to act against any illegal action by an elected official or branch of government; to allow for citizen participation and elections; and to check for police abuse of power. 8. Respect for Human Rights:-All democracies strive to respect and protect the human rights of citizens. Human rights mean those values that reflect respect for human life and human dignity. Democracy emphasizes the value of every human being. Examples of human rights include the right to life, liberty, and security of a person among others. 9. Multi-Party System: - In order to have a multi-party system, more than one political party must participate in elections and play a role in government. A multi-party system allows opposition to the party which wins the election. A multi-party system provides voters with a choice of candidates, parties, and policies to vote for. A multi-party system, thus, provides voters with a choice of candidates, parties and policies to vote for. However, when a country only has one party, the result has been a dictatorship. 10. The Rule of Law:-In a democracy no one is above the law, not even a king or an elected President. This is called the rule of law. It means that everyone must obey the law and be held accountable if they violate it. Democracy also insists that the law be equally, fairly and consistently enforced. 4.2.3. Ways of Exercising Democracy There are two ways of exercising democracy i.e. direct and indirect (representative) democracy. In fact both have advantage and disadvantages. In this section you will look at each of them. 4.2.3.1. Direct democracy The expression 'direct democracy' is subject to misconceptions. The equal right of all citizens to participate in the processes of government did not mean that every decision was taken at a kind of mass meeting. Rather it meant that all citizens had equal right to membership of a number of governing bodies. But these governing bodies had a manageable size. Direct democracy (pure democracy) is an exercise of democracy, in which ‘all citizens’ without the intermediary of elected officials can participate in decision-making process. This belief is based on the right of every citizen over a certain age to attend political meetings, vote on the issue being discussed at that meeting and accepting the majority decision should such a vote lead to a law being passed which you as an individual did not support. Part of this belief, is the right of every one to hold political office if they choose to do so. Direct democracy also believes that all people who have the right to, should actively participate in the system so that any law passed does have the support of the majority. Direct democracy gives all people the right to participate regardless of religious beliefs, gender, sexual orientation, physical wellbeing etc. Only those who have specifically gone against society are excluded from direct democracy. The difficulties of direct democracy are well known. When the people of a nation cannot meet to take decisions, direct forms of democracy are incapable of replacing representation. However, there are areas in which they can complement democracy. Direct democracy can be put to local committees, schools and citizens' associations, where they can be discussed and submitted for collective decision. However, this is not possible with more complex and general matters. Most constitutions envisage a procedure for the direct consultation of all citizens, namely the referendum. The practice of holding referenda on precise points should be used frequently and defined with precision. Referenda could be held at the local, regional and national levels. Direct democracy is fine in theory but it does not always match the theory when put into practice. The origin of direct democracy can be traced back to ancient Athens. In the ancient Athenian city-state, all adult male citizens met in assembly and made decisions. Athenians were ruling themselves directly without intermediaries of representatives. Political participation in Athens, however, was not all-inclusive and opens to all. Women, slaves and aliens were not considered as citizens and hence were not allowed to participate in the assembly. In strict words, the Athenian democracy was not an ideal or pure model of democracy. Nevertheless, the Greek experiment of democracy is generally considered to have provided important lesson for today's world. This is partly because of the facts that: It was the first known example of democracy, and It was carried out in circumstances that can never be repeated, which makes it possible to study a much simpler form of democratic government. 4.2.3.2. Indirect (Representative) Democracy This is the modern type of democracy that we have today. A representative democracy is where citizens within a country elect representatives to make decisions for them. In this regard, the meaning of representative form of democracy is that the whole people cannot directly participate in their own affairs but through their representatives, which are periodically elected by the people themselves. For instance, every 5 years in Ethiopia, the people have the chance to vote into power those they wish to represent us in the Parliament. The Parliamentarians meet in the House of People representatives to discuss matters and pass acts which then become Ethiopian law. Within the House of People representatives, each elected Parliamentarians represents all citizens. The voters passed the responsibility of participating in law making to the Parliamentarians. In this case, leaders must maintain some contact with voters so as to stay in power. However, if they fail to perform (or if the party has done badly during its time in office) they can be removed by the people. In this way, the people exercise control over their representatives. Then what is the difference between direct and indirect democracy? To sum up, let me ask you a question, is representative government working well in our country? The answer to this question depends on what we think the purpose of representative government is. Most research in political science assumes that the purpose of representative government is to represent the will of the people by translating popular sentiment or public interest into governmental policy. It therefore assumes that a good measure of the performance of representative democracy, at least in its representative capacity, involves comparing policy results with public opinion as it is or as it should be. 4.2.4. Democratization and Actors in Democratization Process 4.2.4.1. Defining democratization Democratization is a complex, long-term, dynamic, and open-ended process. It consists of progress towards a more rule-based, more consensual and more participatory type of politics. When defined in a more elaborate manner it can be understood as a political process that moves the political system of a given country into democracy. As narrowly mentioned above, it is a complex historical process, consisting of several analytically distinct but empirically overlapping stages. Empirically, it involves the destruction of the non-democratic regime, the inauguration (institutional engineering) of the democratic institutions and then the cultural and social consolidation of the democratic regime. Thus it is a process by which democracy becomes so broadly and profoundly legitimate among citizens that is very unlikely to break down. Having all these things in our mind about what democratization is now let move onto the discussion about actors in democratization process. 4.2.4.2. Actors in Democratization Process Modern democracy has procreated the system of political parties, organized interest groups and an independent media as indispensable factor for its operation among others. The fact behind is that the representative system arrange the mobilization of political participation by enjoying upon the members of politically active people to take the mass, as much as possible in confidence either for the sake of demonstrating their faith or to justify the very legitimacy of their leadership and authority. Previously we have said that democracy is a process. Building up of democracy is not an overnight program it needs not only time but different actors must also involve to build democracy and democratic culture. Thus, in this lesson you will look at the roles of different actors in the democratization process. Objectives After studying this lesson, you will be able to: identify the roles of different actors in the democratization process define political parties discuss the base for the classification of party system identify the difference between one party, two part and multi-party system appreciate the role of mass media in the democratization process Political Parties What do you understand when we say political party? In a political regime characterized by representative democracy, political parties are vectors of democracy. They are essential to the functioning and durability of democracy since they are not only the instruments through which power is attained by means of free, fair and transparent elections but also the setting for working out practical ideas and proposals which may constitute alternative programs to the government. They also constitute the means through which individuals may influence public affairs, express their discontent or support governmental action. Open competition between political parties in the framework of elections is one of the indispensable characteristics of representative democracies. Open competitions between parties contend for the management of a country's affairs is a socially and politically divisive factor and the stakes are generally high for those involved in this competition. It is therefore important and this is one of the conditions for democracy's survival. Party Systems Party systems refer to the number of parties and pattern of relationships among the parties with in a nation. Taking in to account the number of dominant or existing political parties with in a state, party systems are classified in to three major categories. One party system Two party system Multi-party system Considering the prominent political parties that are active with in the political system of a given state makes this classification. The type of electoral system that is used in a particular country can have an important influence on the number of dominant political parties within the country. Proportional representation is said to foster a multiparty system because it assures that even parties that poll a relatively small vote will win some seats in the legislature. On the other hand, in the first-past-post system, which the winner takes all, may encourage the development of two party systems since it penalizes parties that may poll a substantial number of votes but do not get the plurality that is necessary to elect a legislator with in a specific constituency. One Party System One party system is, most of the time, ideological in its outlook and authoritarian in its structure. In this system, it is usually not allowed other parties to function either de jure or de facto. As such, the party and its ideology are the main determinants of governmental policy, style, and the very existence of the media and interest groups and the like. In is case, the party requires that important government officials are members of the party or of satellite groups and expects their behavior to conform to the policies and ideology. Two Party Systems Two party systems are characterized by a regular alternation in office between two major dominant parties. In two party systems, although minor parties exist, two major parties dominate government. It is argued that the system provides the people with a choice of policies and leaders while at the same time guaranteeing governmental stability. The devices of the electoral arrangement in such a system assure a majority for one party or the other, thus enabling that one will have the power to carry out its election promises. The origins of many one-party systems are obvious, but the question often arises as to why some modern countries function as a two-party system when these societies are so complex and that it should be impossible for two parties to aggregate all the prevailing interests present and still stand for anything. Two party systems are common in the political system of Britain, which is mostly dominated by the conservative and labor party. United States of America as a country dominated by the Democratic and Republican parties is also another good example of the two party systems. Multi Party Systems Multiparty systems are systems in which we have at least three or more major parties. In multiparty system, one party rarely wins enough seats in the legislature to form government. Consequently, several parties combine forces to obtain a majority and form a coalition government to direct the nation’s affaires. As you might expect, when groups with different ideologies attempt to share power with different ideologies, coalitions often break down when disputes or disagreements a rise requiring new elections. In such countries voters have a wide range of choices on election days. The parties in multiparty system often represent widely different ideologies or basic believes about government. Non-Governmental Organizations Like political parties, Non-governmental associations and organizations are valuable vectors of democracy. They differ from political parties only in their final goal, but they all contribute to consciousness raising, defense of the legitimate interests of groups of individuals and the protection of individual and collective rights and freedoms. The efficacy of the work of civil society depends on the extent to which such associations are autonomous or institutionalized. When they have relatively formal links to the State or political parties, they lose some of their autonomy and thus their ability to intervene in all freedom in the management and conduct of public affairs and in the working of institutions according to arrangements deriving from their governing principle of special interests. NGOs, while being associations, have more pronounced concerns in the area of the protection of human rights and humanitarian law. Such concerns urge them to intervene in the political field even if they claim to have nothing to do with politics. It is nevertheless true that the growth of professional associations and national NGOs is making a strong contribution to the consolidation of civil society in these countries. Interest Groups What is the difference between political parties and interest groups? Interest groups, as associations on the basis of the free will of individuals, play a prominent role in the process of democratization. Here, we will deal with the nature of interest groups, their difference with political parties, various types of interest groups and methods they employ to influence government. Consistent with the freedom of association granted to citizens in democracies, democratic states are characterized by the emergence and operation of several kinds of interest groups. Interest groups are organizations or groups of people, which are autonomous from government or political parties with the objective of influencing government. In democracies we find several interest groups who are attempting to promote and influence the policies of government. In fact interest groups are regarded as essential transmission belts between people and government. They play an important role in helping people interact with government, which is often remote and difficult for the individual to influence. Interest groups, bridge the gap between the citizen and government. Through interest groups, citizens communicate their wants on policy goals to government leaders. Public Opinion Public opinionis of a crucial importance for democracy. Are you wondering why? Public opinion is made up with citizens or specific groups that reflect on their community and express their criticisms, their proposals or their agreement to influence the construction of political will. It is not possible to talk about only one, but of several public opinions because in a plural society, there are always several stands. Public opinion is then a tool to control the politicians that lead the country. On the one hand, this is important for the opposition as the latter is only potentially active in front of the government through this public opinion. Indeed, what important changes would an opposition bring if it was only able to express criticisms in closed rooms? It is when the opposition represents its stands and opinions, finds itself obliged to react, otherwise it is running the risks of disaffection or destitution, from its citizens. Moreover, public opinion serves the whole population in its effort to display criticisms and its incitements to well defined actions. How can public opinion serve as a tool to control their leaders? Each citizen has the right to gather information and to contribute somehow to the expression of public opinion when he/she organizes, for instance, a meeting in order to exchange information. In this context, political and social human rights play an important role: the freedom of opinion, as well as freedom to hold meetings and to setup associations which allow citizens to participate in the expression of public opinion, withouthaving to put up with any pressure. Public opinion then constitutes a controlling tool, which is very important in a democracy. Mass Media What do we mean by mass media? Finally, we will discuss the roles of the mass media in the process of democratization.Freedom of the media is essential in a democracy. The mass media refers institution and to the methods of communication, which can reach large number of people at the same time. It includes newspapers, television, radio, books, posters, magazines, and cinema etc.Media plays a role in the political training of citizens and democratic culture by informing them of the scope of public policies, the management and conduct of affairs by those responsible at both the State and grass-roots level, by providing and offering the members of the community the means of communicating with each other. But if the media is to perform those functions, it must be free and independent; it must have sufficient material and human resources to deal with all the important problems of society. The importance of the mass media in a country is not dependent on the number of newspapers or private radio and television stations but on the quality of the information provided to the public. Section Three: Human Rights 4.3.Defining human rights What are human rights? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________. 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 this they are even alternatively called as natural rights which are equally possessed by all human beings everywhere. 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. 4.3.1. Features of human rights Human rights possess the following salient features that distinguish them from other variants of right like democratic rights. 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. 4.3.2. Instruments of human rights protections The development of Human rights laws was linked to reaction to massive state abuse of human beings. The modern concept of human rights has also drawn impetus from the experiences of World War II. As such it is rooted in the experiences of ‘legal lawlessness’ that characterized the activities of some oppressive regimes. The occurrence of holocaust in pre-war Germany and the apartheid regime in South Africa has taken as an example of legal lawlessness. In response to such lawlessness, the international human rights regime developed since WWII. The milestone in the history of the development of the international human rights system is the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948. The UDHR, meant to serve as “a common standard of achievement for all nations”, is the single most important instrument that shaped the post-war human rights movement. Today, it forms the core of the International Bill of Rights (IBR). Although it is a declaration of mere 30 articles, it embodies the list of all rights that can be viewed as first, second, and third generation of rights. The UDHR is viewed by scholars as one of the most magnificent achievement of the modern human civilization. The UDHR “gave expression to diffuse, deep-seated longings and lent wings to movements that would soon bring down colonial empires. Its thirty concise articles inspired or influenced scores of post war and postcolonial constitutions of many countries and various treaties throughout the world. It became the polestar of an army of international human rights activists, who pressure governments to live up to their pledges and train the searchlight of publicity on abuses that would have remained hidden in former times. It is the parent document, the primary inspiration, for most rights instruments in the world today. The adoption of the subsequent covenants on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) in 1966 (to come into force in 1976) was a gradual but immense stride toward completing what later came to be the regime of the International Bill of Rights (IBR). Through these and other important instruments, the UN has discharged its responsibilities to set normative standards on human rights while also working with specialized UN bodies (e.g. the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights [UNHCHR] and the Committees) to develop mechanisms of monitoring and better implementation of rights. 4.3.3. Classification and Obligations of Human Rights Obviously there is a diverse array of rights that human beings claim, be it by virtue of the strength of laws or of morals. The classification of these diverse rights has generated a degree of controversy among human rights law scholars. Karel Vasak, drawing from the motto of the French Revolution of 1789--which propagated the principles of liberte, egalite, and fraternite— developed the generational division of rights. Thus, he came up with the idea of “First Generation” rights of civil and political type, “Second Generation” rights of economic, social, and cultural type, and “Third Generation” rights of development, peace, environment, and others. His generational division of rights has led to the emergence of the idea of what are called liberty rights (i.e., civil and political rights), equality rights (i.e., economic and social rights), and solidarity rights (i.e., rights to development, environment, and peace). Rights are also classified based on the kind of duties that they impose upon the duty-bearers (which, often, is the state). Thus, scholars identify rights that impose negative duties on the state, (i.e., the duty to keep away from the free exercise of rights by citizens unhindered) and those that impose positive duties (i.e., the duty to act to protect or promote or/and fulfill some rights). It is important to note that civil and political rights often impose duties of the former kind while economic, social and cultural rights tend to impose duties of the latter kind. From this division come the difference between obligations to respect on the one hand and obligations to protect, promote, and fulfill on the other. Obligations to respect are obligations to refrain from doing violative acts. Obligations to protect, promote, and fulfill impose obligations to act in certain ways so that states can create conditions for a decent human living within which to exercise even civil and political rights. Rights are also categorized into “individual” and “collective” depending on their active subjects (or beneficiaries), the latter being associative or organic groups as the case may be. In the process of the development of the International Bill of Rights, although the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) of 1948 had a comprehensive catalogue of rights with no hierarchy among them, the division between civil and political rights on the one hand, and the economic, social, and cultural rights on the other, came out to be pronounced in the international covenants that emerged subsequently bearing the names that echo the division we stated above. 4.3.4. Human Rights in Ethiopia: Past and Present There is no disagreement that human rights are generously recognized in the contemporary constitutional system of Ethiopia. In this regard, the FDRE Constitution of 1995 marks a departure from the past. Ethiopia’s constitutional past suggests that the concept of human rights was not developed and that the practice of human rights was not one that is a cause of legitimate pride. In the era of unwritten constitutions, i.e., in the time preceding 1931, citizens were mere subjects of the Emperors having privileges and benefits emanating from the Omni-benevolent Emperors merely on their goodwill. Citizens are not assumed to have rights in the sense of entitlement although they do assume duties towards the emperors (personally) and the government (officially). Human Rights under the 1931 and 1955 Constitution In the era of written constitutions since 1931, this trend continued unmitigated. The 1931 Constitution being an Imperial grant (to the beloved subjects), it did not recognize human rights as such. Rather, it stressed duties while the notion of their being “entitled” to special privileges and benefits depending on the whims and conjectures of the Emperors from whom all benefits and privileges, and all justice and power, flows was maintained. The state is considered to owe no duty to the people. There was hardly any constitutional limit to state power save that which is tacitly imposed by religion and tradition (the principal sources of legitimacy in Ethiopia for centuries). As a consequence, even after Ethiopia was ushered into the era of written constitutions, the Monarchy was, at least theoretically, absolute. In the Revised Constitution of 1955, continuity (rather than change) was dominant. The monarchy continued to be absolute. The state (and the bureaucracy) tended to be aristocratic. In spite of the fact that there was a stride made to embrace the ideals of rudimentary democracy and human rights, there was much to be desired in practice in this regard. There was recognition of a number of human rights in the constitution (including the right to assembly, association, and election, etc) but often constrained by the claw back clauses marked by the phrase such as “in accordance with the law”, or “as shall be determined by law”. One of the pressing problems of the time was the lack of access, on the part of the peasants, to economic “facilities” (such as land) that undermined the economic freedoms of large proportion of the population. Human Rights under the 1987 PDRE Constitution In 1974, the cumulative effect of long held popular discontents, the increasing radicalization of the intelligentsia, and the progressive activism on the part of the (often underpaid) military, led to a socialist revolution that dethroned the Emperor, suspended the constitution, dismissed the parliament, and established, eventually, a Provisional Military Administrative Council (PMAC) of a committee (Derg in Amharic) of junior military officials who ruled the country for about 13 years without a formal body of law one can conventionally call a constitution. During the time from 1974 to 1987, the state of human rights deteriorated both conceptually and practically. One should note however that there was an emphasis, in rhetoric at least, on the importance of respect for socio-economic and cultural rights although they are not couched in words that reflect the notion of human rights. The redistribution of land and urban houses emboldened some aspects of socio-economic rights. The secularization of the state led to the declaration of equality and non-discrimination on the basis of religion albeit much less to freedom of religion. Recognition of linguistic and cultural equality led to the denunciation of discrimination on linguistic and cultural grounds. This trend to emphasize socio-economic and cultural rights was continued in the 1987 Constitution of the Peoples’ Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (PDRE). Nevertheless, the constitution was overtaken by the growing liberationist struggles that started in the wake of the 1974 Revolution and mounted a pressure on the government until it fell in 1991. While there was a protectionist state that put a high premium on the importance and primacy of economic, social, and cultural rights, there hardly was the concept of human rights as entitlement, especially among the populace. As a result, there was hardly a vibrant human rights culture that specially fostered the assertion of civil and political rights. Human Rights under the FDRE Constitution One of the distinguishing features of the FDRE Constitution is the emphasis given to internationally recognized human rights norms. This fundamental principle is stipulated in Article 10 of the Constitution, which articulates, “Human rights and freedoms, emanating from the nature of mankind, are inviolable and inalienable”. Thus, one can readily observe that the long list of rights embodied in Chapter Three of the Constitution is the reaffirmation of these principles. 1/3rd of the provision is devoted to the human rights. In addition, the principles of human rights are the background of the political, social, cultural, economic and environmental policy objectives of the Ethiopian government. The aspiration to promote rights of self-rule and equality (especially ethnic groups), as well as to ensure the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights seems to be a programmatic statement of the commitment to human rights as a principle. The weight attached to fundamental principle of human rights is observable not only in this provision but also in the overriding concern the Constitution extends to rights starting from its preamble to its amendment close. There are additional illustrations that prove the degree of importance human rights norms are given under the Constitution. There are provisions for establishment of Human Rights Commission and Institute of Ombudsman (see Procl.110/2000 and Procl.11/2000), the possibility of federal intervention in the states on the ground of rights violations, the tilting of policy objectives (especially the political, economic, socio-cultural and environmental ones) towards rights protection, taking the fulfillment of most of the rights as subjects of continuous concern(Arts.88-92), the need for extra-cautious for rights in the exercise of emergency powers of the executive, and the need for rigid requirement in the amendment of human rights provisions of the Constitution. These all testifies the Constitution’s concern for human rights, there by reinforcing the importance of rights as one of the basic principles of the constitutional order. All organs of government at all levels have the responsibility and duty to respect and enforce the human right provisions under the Constitution (Art.13). In its chapter three (the chapter that can qualify for being the Ethiopian Bill of Rights), the constitution offers a long list of rights that are divided into two categories, namely that of ‘Human Rights’ and ‘Democratic Rights’. Article 13-44 are devoted to “Fundamental Rights and Freedoms” in general. Accordingly, Article 14-28 are dubbed “Human Rights” while article 29-44 are dubbed “Democratic Rights”. Enumerating major human rights under the Constitution A) Right to life It is part of personal right which includes of right of privacy. It is the most basic right upon which all other rights are premised for the purpose of protection. Human rights can only attach to living human beings. All other human rights articles would be of no use without the right to life. In this sense the right to life is primary. It is a trumpright. It is protected under all international and regional treaties and in almost all state constitutions. The right to life, as important as it is for the enjoyment of all other rights, is not absolute, however. There is a limitation on this right more importantly in the case of committing a grave crime which may leads to capital punishment/death penalty by the government. B) Right of persons accused and arrested The rights of accused and arrested persons set out in the Constitution and other laws of the country are fundamental aspects of the criminal justice system. The provision on the rights of persons arrested deals with various aspects the right. A crucial aspect of this right is the fact that one has the right to appear before a court of law within 48 hours of his/her arrest. The responsibility lies on the arresting institution or officer. The arrested person is not simply at the mercy of the arresting institution. A violation of these rights is an abuse of power by the government or its agents for which they should be accountable. Article 12(2) states that ‘any public official or an elected representative is accountable for any failure in official duties.’ An example of public officials includes police and other enforcement officers. An independent court will ensure such abuses are not committed. The arrested person has also right to receive a full explanation of the reason of his arrest. C) Non-retroactivity of Criminal laws The principle of non-retroactivity of criminal laws is provided in the Constitution. Hence no one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence at the time when it was committed. A heavier penalty cannot be imposed on any person other than the one that was applicable at the time when the criminal offence was committed. However, if a law promulgated subsequent to the commission of the offence is advantageous to the accused or convicted person then it will be applied. Article 22 says that, “No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offense on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offense at the time it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed on any person than the one that was applicable at the time when the criminal offense was committed” and a law promulgated subsequent to the commission of the offense shall apply if it is advantageous to the accused or the convicted person. D) Right against privacy Article 26 stated that everyone has the right to privacy. This includes the right not be subjected to searches of his home, person or property, or the seizure of any property under his personal possession. Everyone has the right to inviolability of his notes and correspondence including postal letters, and communications made by means of telephone, telecommunications and electronic devices. Public officials shall respect and protect these rights. No restrictions may be placed on the enjoyment of such rights except in compelling circumstances and in accordance with specific laws whose purpose shall be the safeguarding of national security or public peace, the prevention of crimes or the protection of health, public morality or the rights and freedoms of others. E) Freedom of Religion, Belief, and Opinion The Constitution provides for freedom of religion. Thus everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right includes freedom to hold or to adopt a religion or belief of one’s choice and the freedom to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching either individually or commonly with others and in public or private. Any restriction to this effect is against the law unless it is prescribed by the law and is necessary to protect public safety, peace, health, education, public morality or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others and to ensure the independence of state from religion. State and religion are separate and there shall be no state religion; besides, the state does not interfere in religious matters and vice versa. Religious influence in education is prohibited. In Ethiopia there is a strong tolerance among various religions; and peoples from different religions lived in harmony for a very long time. In order to show religious tolerance and recognition, government media transmits celebrations of religious holidays giving due focus on how they exercise it with its cultural significance. Traditional religious practices are also respected. For instance, the Oromo practice of "Erecha", neglected in the past, is now recognized and practiced every year with wide publicity The rights incorporated under this Article are: Freedom of thought, belief and religion Freedom to practice religion in private or public and either individually or collectively Freedom to teach one's religion Protection from coercion or any other means that restricts or prevents the enjoyment of this freedom The rights of parents and legal guardians to bring up children in accordance with the religion and moral education of their own convictions. FUNDAMENTAL DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS The followings are some the democratic rights enshrined in the present day fdre constitution. A) Freedom of association, assembly, and demonstration The right to freedom of association is laid down in the Constitution. The Constitution provides that every person has the right to freedom of association for any cause or purpose. However organizations formed in violation of appropriate laws or to illegally subvert the constitutional order or which promote such activities are prohibited. Freedom of association allows a voluntary grouping of people to come together to achieve a common goal. The freedom of association also includes the right not to associate. Here the Constitution deals with the “freedom of association" and not with the types of associations. Persons can associate for any reason as long as the common goal does not violate appropriate laws of the country, does not illegally subvert the constitutional order, does not to engage in subversive activities. Subject to these restrictions and limitations, persons can associate to establish business enterprises, workers can establish trade unions, citizens can form advocacy groups or non-governmental organizations (NGOs), etc. The Associations chapter of the Civil Code, the Associations Registration Regulations of 1966 and the Code of Conduct of Associations of 1996, among others, are the relevant legal regimes under which associations operate in Ethiopia. On the basis of these laws, the Ministry of Justice, at federal level, is empowered to register associations (which are generally classified into professional, civic, religious, development and others) The other vital democratic right is freedom of assembly. The right to assemble freely with others is enshrined in the Constitution. Art.30 states that everyone has the right to assemble and demonstrate with others peaceably and unarmed and to petition. This right does not exempt from liability under the laws enacted to protect the well-being of the youth and the honor and reputation of individuals, and laws prohibiting any propaganda for war and any public expression of opinions intended to injure human dignity. The right to assemble peacefully is a fundamental right and is also regarded as the foundation of any democratic society. As provided under Articles 38 and 89, the rights of citizens to participate in the political, social and economic life of the country has been recognized. It is through such participation that citizens can hold government officials accountable to the promises they have made to the population. Article 12 (2) states that "any public official or an elected representative is accountable for any failure in official duties". Citizens can expose public officials for abuse of power or failure to perform what is expected of them. The right to assemble peacefully also includes the right to petition any public official. The right to petition means that the citizens can in writing require that a government official respond to their concerns. Everyone has the right to assemble and to demonstrate together with others peaceably and unarmed, and to petition. The Constitution, however, allows the imposition of restriction on the manner of exercise of this right. Appropriate regulations may be made in the interest of public convenience relating to the location of open-air meetings and the route of movement of demonstrators or, for the protection of democratic rights, public morality and peace during such a meeting or demonstration. This right does not give exemption from liability under laws enacted to protect the well-being of the youth or the honour and reputation of individuals, and laws prohibiting any propaganda for war and any public expression of opinions intended to injure human dignity. B) Right to elect and be elected Art.38) Under Art.38 the constitution recognizes the right to elect and be elected. The following set of rights is recognized under this article: The right to take part in government. The right to democratic government. The right to vote and to stand for election. The right to be a member of his/her own will in a political party or association. An election provides citizens the opportunity to vote and decide on the future of their country as expressed through elected representatives. In a democracy this is the way by which citizens show their approval or disapproval of a government. An election involves both the right to vote for a candidate of one’s choice or to stand and compete with others to be elected to represent a particular interest or issue. In a democracy elections should be carried out periodically, should be conducted in an impartial manner, and should be free and fair. Usually political parties are the main organizations which take part in elections. These organizations often enter elections with a political program around which they solicit support from the voters. Citizens have the responsibility to vote, but they cannot be forced to vote because the right to vote also includes the right to choose not to vote. By participating in periodic, impartial, fair and free elections, citizens contribute to the development of a democratic society where the wishes of the people will be considered. In Ethiopia, elections for government representatives are held at the various levels: At the federal level, all citizens elect members of the House of Representatives who serve in the National Parliament for five years. The House also elects the Prime Minister from the majority party winning the elections; at the regional level, citizens within a region elect members of the RegionalCouncil who serve for five years. The Regional Council then elects the President of the Region; at local level, citizens elect the Woreda Council which serves for five years. The Woreda Council elects the Woreda Administrator and other officials. At the kebele level, residents of the kebele elect the Kebele Administrators and other officials every two years. C) Freedom of movement This right is guaranteed under the Ethiopian Constitution and international instruments (see Art. 32 of FDRE Constitution and Art.12 of ICCPR). The Constitution considers it a democratic right. Here also, there are differences, in scope of the right among the different instruments. The right has two important components: 1) right to liberty of movement with in a country, 2) right to choose one’s residence within a country. Additional component is the right to leave any country, including one’s own country. Governments have obligation to facilitate ones ability to leave. The Constitution of South Africa, for example, included one’s entitlement to a passport. Another component is right to enter to his country. Note that foreigners are not equally entitled to claim this right, and each of the components are subject to different levels of restriction. E) Freedom of thought, opinion and expression Part II of the constitution, which deals with democratic rights, starts with the freedom of thought and expression. It guaranteed every principle of the right. Everyone is entitled to hold opinion without interference. Freedom of expression means that everyone has the right to say what they want to in any language, manner, and in any form. It protects an individual’s rights to receive and communicate ideas, information etc. The following important considerations flow from the freedoms of expression, thought and opinion: Freedom of opinion and expression form the cornerstone in building a democratic society; and governments are called upon to refrain from interfering in the exercise of these freedoms; Governments assume an obligation to respect these freedoms which are necessary for the building of a democratic society; In a democracy it is essential that people have the right to get information and, particularly, information of public interest; People's participation in a democracy depends on their rights to seek and obtain information through the media; Independence of the press is ensured and the press is required to be non- partisan in entertaining diverse views and opinions. The Press is free from any form of censorship; Limitation on the freedom of expression is through laws and not by the whims and desires of government authorities. Limitations will be imposed as follows: to protect the well being of the youth; to protect the honor and reputation of individuals; and to prohibit any propaganda for war as well as the public expression of opinion intended to insult human dignity. The rights to receive information and to express and disseminate opinions are ensured in the Constitution. The Constitution provides that everyone has the right to hold opinions without interference and has the right to freedom of expression without any interference. This right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any media of his choice. Freedom of the press and other mass media and freedom of artistic creativity is guaranteed in the Constitution. Freedom of the press shall specifically include the following elements: Prohibition of any form of censorship and access to information of public interest. In the interest of the free flow of information, ideas and opinions which are essential to the functioning of a democratic order, the press shall, as an institution, enjoy legal protection to ensure its operational independence and its capacity to entertain diverse opinions. Any media financed by or under the control of the State shall be operated in a manner ensuring its capacity to entertain diversity in the expression of opinion. These rights can be limited only through laws which are guided by the principle that freedom of expression and information cannot be limited on account of the content or effect of the point of view expressed. Legal limitations can be laid down in order protect the well-being of the youth, and the honour and reputation of individuals. Any propaganda for war as well as the public expression of opinion intended to injure human dignity shall be prohibited by law. Any citizen who violates any legal limitations on the exercise of these rights may be held liable under the law. Freedom of the Mass Media and Access to Information Proclamation (Proclamation No. 590/2008), which ensures the rights to receive information and to express and disseminate opinions, has been issued in order to facilitate the enjoyment of this right. Due to the country’s history of State’s monopoly of the media, government-owned media channels were the principal sources for information for the public until recently. With the government’s commitment to democratization and human rights, press and media laws were issued, aiming at the free ownership of media channels. As a result, more and more private and community channels have started and presently constitute major sources of information and entertainment to the public. Most of the channels operating nation-wide use the major languages of the country such as Amharic, Afan- Oromo and Tigrigna. Foreign languages such as English and French are also used. In Ethiopia this right is equally protected with right of thought and opinion. Opinion is also repeated in Article 27. In South Africa, right of expression alone is protected (Art.16). Under Article 19 of ICCPR, there is right to hold opinion and expression, but only right to hold opinion is absolute. Right of thought is absolute. Right to adopt opinion, belief and conscience is not subject to restriction. F) The right to property The right to property is guaranteed in the Constitution and other enabling laws. Every Ethiopian citizen has the right to the ownership of private property. Unless prescribed otherwise by law on account of public interest, this right shall include the right to acquire, to use and, in a manner compatible with the rights of other citizens, to dispose of such property by sale or bequest or transfer. The right to ownership of rural and urban land, as well as of all natural resources, is exclusively vested in the State and in the peoples of Ethiopia. Land is a common property of the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia and is not subject to sale or to other means of exchange. Ethiopian peasants have right to obtain land without payment and the protection against eviction from their possession. Ethiopian pastoralists have the right to free land for grazing and cultivation as well as the right not to be displaced from their own lands. Without prejudice to the right of Ethiopian Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples to the ownership of land, government shall ensure the right of private investors to the use of land on the basis of payment arrangements established by law. Every Ethiopian shall have the full right to the immovable property he builds and to the permanent improvements he brings about on the land by his labour or capital. This right shall include the right to alienate, to bequeath, and, where the right of use expires, to remove his property, transfer his title, or claim compensation for it. Without prejudice to the right to private property, the government may expropriate private property for public purposes subject to payment in advance of compensation commensurate to the value of the property. The Constitution ensures the right of women to acquire, administer, control, use and transfer property. In particular, they have equal rights with men with respect to use, transfer, administration and control of land. They shall also enjoy equal treatment in the inheritance of property G) Economic, social, and cultural rights (Article 41) Rights incorporated under this Article are: The right of every Ethiopian to engage freely in economic activity and to pursue a livelihood of his choice anywhere within the national territory. The right of every Ethiopian to choose his or her means of livelihood, occupation and profession. The right of every Ethiopian to have equal access to publicly funded social services. The right of farmers and pastoralists to receive fair prices for their products, and the right to obtain an equitable share of the national wealth commensurate with their contributions. With respect to this Article, the obligations of the government are: To allocate ever increasing resources to public health, education and other social services. Within available means, to allocate resources to assist physically and mentally disabled, the aged and children who are left without parents or guardian. To pursue policies to expand opportunities for the unemployed and the poor. To undertake all measures necessary to increase opportunities for citizens to find gainful employment. Responsibility to protect and preserve historical and cultural legacies, and to contribute to the promotion of arts and sports. Social benefits and opportunities for which the government has assumed obligation/responsibility by their nature will be realized progressively through programs which the government initiates. Examples of publicly funded services are government hospitals, schools etc. List some other publicly funded services that the government provides. What do you understand by the term “the right to equal access to publicly funded social services”? Does it mean that a poor person on the street has equal access to the facilities of BlackLionHospital as the Minister of Health? If yes, why? If not, why not? Every individual has the right to culture. Under the Constitution, equality of languages and preservation of historical and cultural legacies are guaranteed. Each individual has the right to speak his language and practice his culture. This is enshrined in the Constitution through the right of regional and local governments to freely determine their respective educational and work languages. In an article providing for the rights of nationalities, the Constitution states that “Every nation, nationality, and people in Ethiopia has the right to speak, to write and to develop its own language.” They have also the right to express, to develop and to promote their culture and preserve their history. The cultural policy also reflects the above entitlements to the peoples. The policy aims at, among others, enabling all languages, heritages, histories, fine arts, oral literatures, and other features of nations, nationalities and peoples receive equal recognition, respect, preservation and conservation; creating conducive conditions to carry out scientific research on these features and ensuring their prosperity; and promoting the culture of the different nations, nationalities and peoples. Strategies for implementation of the policy include: taking a scientific inventory of cultures, including the languages and dialects of the country and making a scientific study; while determining the language for use, developing alphabets to those languages that do not have script and put these into service taking into account the psychological attitude of the speakers. Radio and Television channels owned by the government have also programs exclusively intended to promote and preserve the culture, language, historical and natural heritages of nations and nationalities. Every effort is exerted to make peoples aware of each other’s culture and language.