CHAPTER ONE

Understanding Civics and Ethics

1.1. Defining Civics, Citizenship, Ethics and Morality
1.1.1 What is Civics?
Civics is understood and analyzed in different countries differently depending on the distinct
realities and challenges of states and societies. Given this, civics is separate fields of academic
study in the social sciences dealing with citizenship. More specifically, civics is devoted to the
study of the legal and political rules and values governing the relations between the individual
and the state.re
Civics, as a separate field of study, is defined in terms of citizens. As a result it has the following
definitions:
 It is a branch of social sciences which deals with the rights and duties of citizens;
 It is a science which deals with the theory and practice of free and open democratic
society;
 It is a branch of social sciences that deals with international and domestic socio-
economic and political conditions
 It is a science that studies the purpose, function and systems of government and state
structure, the nature of the law , and the way private behavior affect public order and
the political system;
 It is also an intensive study and understanding of political institutions which includes
the law making, executive and law interpreting institutions, political parties, etc.
1.1.2 What is Citizenship?
Citizenship: is a relationship between an individual and a state, defined by the law of that state,
with corresponding duties and rights in that state. Nationality, although often synonymous with
citizenship, includes the relationship of an individual to a state but suggests other privileges,
especially protection abroad.
Citizenship: is full membership in a state or in some other unit of government. Almost all
people have citizenship in at least one country. Not all the people in a nation are citizens of that
country. For example, many countries have noncitizen nationals. The word national is often
used as another word for citizen. In some cases, however, noncitizen national means a person
who owes loyalty to a country but lacks full membership in it. Noncitizen nationals of the

1
United States include the people of American Samoa, a group of pacific islands controlled by the
United States. The people of American Samoa have the protection of the U.S government but
lack some of the special rights of citizens.
1.1.3 What is Ethics?
Ethics as a separate academic filed can be limited to a study of the meaning of moral language
basing itself in another broad field known as Moral philosophy- the study of moral choices and
the arguments that spring from them. From this we can also say that ethics is about the art of
living – seeing our life through the choices we make and gradually we construct a work of art. In
other words, we human beings are more than flesh, bones and mortgages. We cannot solely be
defined by our financial, work, social or political status. We are not simply consumers, nor
unthinking slaves in society. We are not automata, programmed by genetic, environmental and
social factors instead we have feelings, intuitions, dreams, and ambitions. Hence, our lives are
continually being shaped by the choices we make, and by the convictions and values that
underline them. In this way, our lives are like works of art: they are what we make of them, and
they ‘say’ what we are. In line with thinking, Ethics is therefore concerned with what is right or
wrong, just or unjust and good or bad about peoples’ ideas and then dictates how people
should/should not live accordingly. It examines the choices people make and the values and
reasoning that lie behind them.
The study of ethics can thus offer two things.
1. It helps to appreciate the choices that others make, and evaluate the justification they give
for those choices.

2. It involves a reflective sharpening of one’s own moral awareness – a conscious

examination of values and choices, of how these have shaped one’s life so far, and (more
importantly) of how they can be used to shape the future.

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

2
have to know the term ‘utilitarian’ in order to see the sense in wanting to choose what promises
to give the greatest benefit to the to the greatest number of people .
1.1.3 What is Morality?
The term morality is derived from the Latin word’’ moralitas’’ which means ‘’manner, character
and proper behavior’’. It is the belief or recognition that certain behaviors are either ‘good’ or
‘bad’. It is the conformity of human behavior to the established code of conduct. Morality is
concerned with principles and practices of morals such as:
♣ What ought or ought not to be done in a given situation?
♣ What is right or wrong about the handling of a situation?
Therefore, morals are the welfare principles enunciated/articulated by the society/ the wise
people, based on their own their experience and wisdom. However, it can be changed, modified
or edited in accordance development of science and technology, human development and time.

1.2. Similarities and differences of Civics and Ethics

Generally speaking, civics studies the political and legal aspect of the life of an individual citizen
where as ethics is focused with the study of the cultural aspect of his/her life. Although strictly
speaking civics and ethics are separate academic fields of study they however share certain
commonalities. The followings are some examples of the common features between civics
(citizenship) and ethics (morality).
A. The issue of membership
Membership to a certain groupings is the very essence of both citizenship and morality. In the
absence of the concept of membership both lose their fundamental meanings and status as
subject matters to be studied. In citizenship study membership is meant that of individual
citizen to a political and legal community of the highest order (the state) whereas in morality
study it largely denotes to that of a cultural community tied up by common moral and value
bonds whether there is government or not. In other words, Citizenship basically needs two
parties and their relations for its existence under minimum conditions—the state and the
individual citizen, while morality needs the relation between the individual and the larger social
group as well as the state directly and indirectly as a rule maker and protector. As such, civics
tends to focus on the vertical and artificial relation of the individual while ethics studies the
horizontal and natural relations. Put differently, citizenship needs some kind of political and

3
legal arrangement to determine who is a member of the state and who is not. Similarly, morality
is a value arrangement that describes and prescribes the conditions for the individual member to
be accepted as a ‘good” element as judged and rated by the society itself which is the biological
and cultural breeding ground of its members. However, under both conditions member ship to a
certain grouping and community is an established common factor shared by citizenship and
morality. The reason is, as Aristotle also holds it, that humanity is destined by its exceptional
nature to be a social creature with an inherent duty to tie itself to a political company.
B. The issue of rights and obligations
Human beings are social animals under inherent trend to live together in a social gathering. But
this social gathering is not any where a haphazard and accidental aggregation of individuals
without some kind of systematized organization and common orientation. There are rather
certain unavoidable rules and procedures with lists of privileges and concomitant obligations
attached to the individual person as a condition of social attachment with the vast social
surrounding. For instance, Citizenship entails a set of rights and obligations for individual
members thus the violation or respect of which results in some arrangement of punishment or
reward by the group as well as the state. Morality on its part is nothing but a list of values
standardizing bad and good behaviors and dispositions of the individual by the larger mass or
group. Both underscore the fact that the individual person is accountable to two sets of rights and
obligations mostly set and protected by social forces out of his control.
C. The issue of institutionalized protection
Both citizenship and morality are founded on institutionalized origin, development, operation,
supervision and protection within the community. An institution here signifies a sociological
establishment and organization of people formed strictly with a degree of executive right to
exercise coercive power on the individual in the name of the community. It bases itself on certain
sets of rules and procedures accepted by the majority of the people in the community and
practices hierarchic structures to apply its control over the behavior of the individual. The
institution obtains and maintains its legitimacy to rule over the behaviors of the individual
member of the group from majority approval and its capacity to transcend itself across
generations. With the major differences in the authority of the institution, it is commonly
responsible to protect civic and moral sets of rights and obligations by applying formal and
informal supervisory mechanisms over the individual. The state through the government and all

4
agencies under it regulate and administer citizenship on day-today basis while such social
institutions like the church, family, neighborhood and others inspect morality and ethical
standards more informally. This institutional protection of citizenship and morality helps to make
individual relations and actions within the community predictable and subject to proportional
rewards and punishments.
D. The issue of interactive duality
Although Citizenship differs from morality in that it is formal, official, predominantly rational,
highly authoritative and regular in its operation because it finds its strength from the legitimacy
of the government and its formalized authority, both categories of social formulations have a
strong tendency to reinforce each other in application which leads to some sort of interactive
duality. In other words, the list of rights and duties in citizenship are officially communicated,
documented, and guarded by full time public institutions in the name of the well being and peace
of the state, the people and the nation. Morality on the other hand, lists recommended
prescriptions of good behavior and denounces a long list of bad actions within the community
but it lacks formality, regularity and immediacy unlike citizenship or legal rule. Despite this
duality, however, both citizenship and morality reinforce each other as the political community
of citizens is at the same time the cultural community of human beings. Most legal rules,
restrictions and controls over the behaviors of the citizen get their origin from the moral
traditions and thoughts of the people over its individual member. For instance, homicide is as
seriously punishable crime by the law of citizenship as it is unacceptable and denounced by the
moral rule of cultural community. This implies that most legal-political rules are formalizations
of moral standards and derive their justifications for their authoritative application from them.
Similarly, moral rules function with a state back for formalization though not all the time. This
gives them a dual existence with a high level of positive interaction.
E. The relative nature of the fields
Both citizenship and morality bear a degree of relativity with morality tending to be even more
relative due to its nature. The following factors, among others, supply the reason for their
relative nature.

1. The relative nature of existing philosophy/outlook of the government

5
Based on sources of legitimacy of rulers and in the context of citizenship and morality
governments’ outlooks could be generally classified as authoritarian or democratic .Given this,
the conduct of governments makes citizenship to be a relative politico-legal concept and practice.
i.e some states are excessively authoritarian thus in their politico-legal arrangements they give
individuals the status of “subject” with only obligation to respect the expectations and orders of
the rulers but with no privileges. Besides, under such government systems, the personal and
group beliefs, religions, cultures, values and attitudes of rulers become equated with national
values and moral standards with a wide coverage on the media and the national education
system. At present, this outlook of governments is under pressure from global standards of
behavior and norms and hence is in transformation towards democracy though exceptions are
always there. This in turn gave rise to a relatively modern citizenship and humane moral
standards of political rules. The same trend of relativity also applies to the conceptualization and
practice of morality.
2. The relative nature of levels of Civic and Moral Awareness of the citizens at large
Citizens’ level of awareness about fundamental civic and moral values also shapes the relative
nature of citizenship and morality. This gives us the relative nature of the two concepts not
among different societies but among citizens within the same society and state. In the strict
sense, citizenship and morality are meaningless without some kind of bottom up participation by
citizens on state’s affairs; its policies and rule philosophy. This participation also depends on
how far civic awareness is there among the people on political processes and ethical aspects of
citizen-state relations. Civic awareness is probably the most relative issue in the study of civics
and ethics, for there are always background factors that affect it. For example, citizens’
awareness level is affected among others by the following notable factors;
I. Level of Income
In the analysis of why there is difference in the level of awareness among citizens regarding their
politico-legal relations with the state and moral ties with their people, it is widely believed that
their level of income really matters. i.e wealth/ income places citizens of the same state at
different positions in their access and concern about the state, government policies and the rest of
the society. Accordingly, the upper class society which consists of few citizens commanding
the largest concentration of wealth and thus are stable/ comfortable in their life styles due to their
privileged economic positions in the society tend to be conservative in their political and moral

6
dispositions with a strong need to see only little or no change of the statuesque in the political,
moral, legal and social setting. They heavily need a great degree of national stability and political
predictability in order to maintain their unchallenged advantages. They also tend to be
remarkably nationalistic with maximum loyalty to the state and the constitution as they guarantee
them peace and protection for their property and wealth. These citizens are close to politics and
government with keen interest areas of government policy that would greatly affect their civic
and moral positions within the state. The most important issues of interest for them are policies
of taxation, inflation, labor, environment and foreign relations in general.

The Middle class society which includes section of the society that economically stand next to
the upper income group on the other hand is highly dynamic and with the best opportunity to
uninterrupted rise of income as it works hard tends to be vibrant, participatory and active social
group for it consists of probably young, professional, ambitious and liberal section of the society.
It was this social group that successfully led the bourgeois revolutions in Western Europe that
transformed society in to a capitalist socio-economic and political community. The political
efficiency and determination of this group comes from its very middle position between the
richest upper income group which seeks it to effect policy changes to its advantages. It equally
tends to master the support of the lower income group which believes that this group understands
more about the life conditions across the ordinary and helpless people. Finally, the Lower class
society which constitutes those large elements of society whose annual income is extremely low
and with little opportunities to leave the group tends to be scarcely interested at what is going on
at the national and regional governments. They are hardly tuned to the media nor do they seek to
access almost all information sources though they generally tend to be law abiding citizens. The
lower income group gets alerted occasionally by particular domestic and foreign political
developments and unusual events that captivate their interest and influence their hopes for better
life in the negative or the positive. Politics is too complex, elusive, and unmanageable for them
hence they want to maintain a long distance from it and strongly feel to reject elections as
meaningless to change conditions by the vote of poor people. Generally, low income groups are
grossly marginalized from the main stream of politics and moral debates worrying little about
rights and the nature of their relation with the state.

7
 II.Civic Culture
Civic culture is generally defined as a trend (of behaviors, attitudes and orientations) among
citizens to be concerned about political processes and being efficacious in the political climate.
Based on this definition, residents of a given state usually demonstrate participatory,
passive/subject or parochial civic culture and each affects the level of awareness they develop.
For instance, participant citizens are those with good general knowledge and understanding
about policies and government activities and thus are assertive on civic participations. This in
turn implies that in states with a proportional size of participant citizens politics has been found
to be stable, civilized and predictable though dynamic. Besides, economic progress would be
consistent/ uninterrupted and also with little or no massive report of violent conflict.
In contrast, subjects (citizens with passive civic culture) are those with inconsistent interest in
politics may be because they feel their private conditions are too good to be concerned about
politics(say join national elections) or they have largely poor general knowledge and
understanding about national politics. At any rate, this group of citizens tends to be passive in its
civic participation.
The worst case is, however, that of parochial civic culture in which we have citizens with
neither the knowledge about political developments at national level nor the interest to
participate at any level and agenda of discussion. They strongly believe that they have no power
to change or affect things even at local levels but simply observe political developments only
that are local and close to them. In other words, Parochials are largely self- marginalized from
politics unusually due their day to day concern to win their daily bread which they feel has no
relations with what the radio or the television may say. They lack all the means to divert their
attentions to politics and may go to the extent of having no information about who rules the
country or wins in a hotly contested national election. They virtually have no record of visiting
the polling station at all.
The general lesson to be derived from the above is thus the stability of the state and its socio-
economic developments are largely dependent on how reasonably it maintains the balance
among these three gradations of civic cultures. More ever, a society dominated by a majority of
Parochials is more likely to face even dangers of national disintegration and fragmentation.

1.3. Why study Civics and Ethics? Or Goals of Civics and Ethics

8
There are several and complex real life problems that make the need to study civics and Ethics
highly imperative and hence justifiable for its problem solving profession nature. Although the
degree of their severity vary from state/society to state/society, the following challenging
societal problems can be identified as the most crucial ones demanding an effective and
constructive study of citizenship and morality to be solved. The problem areas can be classified
as legal-politico-cultural and socio-economic related ones.
A. Civic/political culture related problems
Although the desired civic culture is the one with a good level of civic consciousness in which
citizens’ posses a tendency to be reasonably concerned with the conduct of politics and to get
actively participated. The following are still seen prevailing as the most frequent cultural
problems in many states/society today;
Large Imbalance between Rights and Duties
This undesired civic culture manifests itself interalia in the following ways:
1. A good number of citizens regardless of differences of age, sex, religion, profession, etc,
are usually observed to be more concerned and conscious about their civic rights, while
they tend to forget their civic duties recognized by the constitution. An even clearer
example here is that a lot of citizens demand and guard the right to safe, peaceful and
predictable life. They weight the efficiency of the state solely on its capability to ensure
a day – to – day safe life for the individual citizen. These citizens, however, tend to forget
their civic duty to co-operate with the law by often cooperating with illegal citizens, not
reporting crimes of all kind to the police or not fighting crime and initiating the society
for the prevention or control of crimes etc.
2. The other group of citizens is those standing at the opposite pole of the above. These
citizens feel that they are weak and helpless to protect their rights even when they rights
are arbitrarily violated against constitutional limits. These citizens are more sensitive to
discharging duties at the price of their rights because they regard the state as all powerful,
unquestioned, unaccountable and naturally rightful to do all its wishes upon citizens. For
these citizens, complete submission to the state without an equal or parallel concern and
assertiveness about their constitutional rights benefits, advantages and official
entitlements is the most reliable guarantee for their individual safety and security. They
have a strong tendency to distant themselves from visiting public institutions, like kebel

9
 administrations, courts etc, and regard them as sources of unexpected danger to one’s
safety. This extreme imbalance in the form of sacrificing legal rights (benefits) in excess
of civic duties adversely affects positive civic culture.
3. The other group of citizens, which is said to be dominant, by researchers, in many
societies particularly of the developing world, is the one lacking a good understanding
about the general list of civic rights and civic duties. The level of their consciousness
about what is going on in the society and the state is at best, inadequate and blurred, and
at worst, they are ignorant and devoid of any relevant information. Thus, with regard to
their relation with the state on the protection of their rights and discharging their civic
duties, these groups of citizens tend to do as per the instruction of others without self
civic skill, in a passive and uncritical manner. On the other hand, when they are asked
why they violated the rights of others and failed to discharge their civic duties, they
innocently and intuitively say that they know little or nothing that their action was illegal.
Under civic conditions where such group of citizens is a majority, leave a lone the
development in the life of the society, the existence of the state is at foreseeable danger.
These citizens negatively contribute for the growth of a civic culture that cultivates
societal peace and security.
In sum, the consequences of the above civic culture problems can be;
• Incivility, self – centeredness and bad – faith at societal level;
• Passive, non patriotic and unresponsive citizenship which in turn negatively
affects social transformation;
• Ignorance, unprincipled citizenship and civic immobilization;
• Weak, Irregular and uncritical participation in the political process etc
B. Virtue/Ethicate of socio-economic life related problems
Civic mindedness is a highly desirable quality/virtue of a citizen due to its positive contribution
for the development and transformation of society. i.e when the mentality of civic –mindedness
becomes a dominant national spirit, citizens develop a strong tendency to be committed to and
concerned daily with the well – being of the general public. As a result, they do things often
voluntarily as far as their service provides some benefit for the good life of their people.
Moreover, civic – minded citizens have a clear understanding and awareness about the strategic
importance of public infrastructures, common natural resources and properties and thus they

10
never hesitate to guard and preserve such public utilities and infrastructures as roads, bridges,
school buildings, hospitals, water pipelines, electric poles and cables, etc. against any damage
and misuse. Despite all theses, however, there still are several evident problems regarding the
virtue of socio-economic lives of both governments and societies manifested mostly in the form
of repeated and uninterrupted records of ‘’abuses and careless treatment” by citizens and
government of ‘common goods’. This can be seen from three recognizable angles. One is a
virtue of Vandalism in which citizens tend to intentionally and illegally destroy public
infrastructures, utilities and properties like wild animals, forests, water, electric and
communication facilities. Secondly, citizens usually demonstrate a virtue of public good
abuse/misuse (a behavior of using public goods and wealth illegally and unethically for one’s
computed benefits ) either via Patron – client relations (clientalism) mechanism - a situation
where a few government officials abuse their political decision – making power to divert public
resources for sectional benefit of themselves and their supporters or through Prebendalism- a
concept denoting the use of state office as an instruments for the gains of individuals and their
ethnic brethren. The point here is that such behavior systematically undermines civic duty when
citizens begin to regard it as normal, unavoidable and at times, an established and rightful quality
of being a political leader. Prebendalism is also called ‘rent seeking’ behavior – gathering
wealth, not as a reward to one’s labor and innovation, but exploiting public resources. The third
way citizens display their non-civic minded virtue is via engaging in Kleptocracy –a behavior in
which the entire government system, relations between citizens and the state, citizens with each
other, etc. become dominated by official and proactive attitudes of corruption.

In conclusion, the study of civics and ethics which examines and analyzes undesirable civic
cultures and virtues of social life manifested in the above discussed different features thus
becomes justifiable against its cruciality to save us from their derived negative consequences.
This is so because the study of civics and ethics enables citizens to fully understand and
internalize among others the following fundamental elements of civic and ethical virtues:
Elements of Civic and ethical dispositions: Such as Civility, Duty-boundedness (both individual
and collective), Self – discipline, Civic –mindedness, Open-mindedness, Compromization,
Tolerance, Compassion/generosity and Loyalty to the Nation and its Constitution; and

11
Elements of civic and ethical commitments: such active and all inclusive
engagements/participation on political/ electoral processes, an overall influencing and
monitoring of public policies and also societies’ values and standards of life.

1.4 Competences of Good Citizen/ Characteristics of Good Citizenship

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

Patriotism: Is love, devotion and commitment to one’s country. It was said that a true patriot
should respect and adore his country’s symbols.

Responsibility: Citizens have various obligations in their society. These can be of moral, ethical,
and legal origins. Good citizens maintain the moral and ethical values of their society. They have
also the duty to uphold the constitutional principles and values and observe other laws. Every
member of the society has the duty to respect individual rights and freedoms. Citizens are
expected to actively participate in civic associations established for various purposes. Another
way by which responsibilities shall be discharged is through paying fair tax and protecting public
property from embezzlement and misappropriation. Moreover, citizens have the responsibility to
protect and preserve natural resources, environment, and historical heritage. The other issue in
which citizens are strongly expected to feel responsible is the threat posed by HIV/AIDS.
Fighting this killing disease, which threatens the existence of human race, is the major
responsibility of each and every citizen.
Industriousness: work, being necessary for the survival of the human race and civilization, is
the main concern of human beings. Ethical work conduct thus enables workers to possess proper
behavior and so as to develop proper relationship with other workers and help them create good
industrial environment.

12
Self-reliance: is a remarkable level of dependency on one’s power, resources and judgment. It is
an attribute shared by both individuals and communities. Individuals or communities that lack a
self –reliant character are dependent on others to satisfy their needs.

Active community participation: Community participation means active involvement of

citizens in the socio-economic and political spheres. The participation may take place at different
levels having different forms. It might take place at school, at community, regional, national or
international levels. It might also have different forms based on the purpose of the participation.
Community participation may include: political participation & civic participation.

Generally as it is mentioned above the goals of teaching civics and ethics at any level of
educational institutions it to produce or create competent and responsible citizens that can ask
and use their rights and fulfill their responsibilities or obligations in accordance with the laws of
their respective country. In addition teaching civics and ethics can make citizen to fill
responsible at any works they are engaged in and within the community they are living in.

Chapter Two
Understanding Society, State and Government

13
State, government and society are common terminologies and concepts to the study of civics and
ethics. Thus, they are given wide coverage in this material for they have the most identifiable
influence on each other and this mutual influence in turn affects the individual citizen in many
ways such as providing him/her opportunities and challenges of development and stability/
peace. Moreover, the triangular relations among these three institutions determine the level of
states’ general socio-economic development and their influence in international relations. Given
this, the meanings, origins /historical evolutions and the nature of systematic interaction of
particularly two of these institutions- State and Government- would be discussed in some detail
in the subsequent sections.
2.1. Society
The term society may refer to different things and concepts among different scholars
specializing in different fields of studies. For instance, the term and concept of society mean
differently between sociologists and anthropologists, and at the same time it may also mean
differently between political scientists and lawyers, etc.

From its etymological source, the English word society emerged since the 14th century and is
derived from the French word ‘’societe’’. This French word, in turn had its origin in the Latin
word ‘’socious’’ that means a friend association with others, earning companion, associate
comrade, or business partner. Thus, the meaning of society is closely related to what is
considered to be social.
In its broad sense, society, compared to other composition of individuals, is the largest
community of people living together. The term society refers to the collective existence of
human begins in varying forms of organization and relationships over a period of time in a
defined place. In this sense, society is broad grouping of people who live in a common
environment and have common traditions, institutions, activities, and interests. In other words,
society denotes the totality of modes of human life, interactions, norms of behavior and
underlying structures.
Furthermore, society can be explained by emphasizing two important perspectives, namely the
perspective of relationship and that of person. Viewed from the perspective of relationships,
society in the widest sense includes every kind of relationships entered in to by people, both men
and women. To be human is to interact with other human beings in everyday lives. When people

14
interact with each other, they affect others and are affected by others in one way or another. The
forms of relationships can vary from simple relations between individuals, such as friendship,
membership to a club, etc, to those complex interactions that occur at the level of large
communities leading to statehood, and by extension, to membership of world organizations, for
example the united Nations, the African Union, etc. social relationship can be conscious or
unconscious, organized or unorganized, direct or indirect, and cooperation or conflicting. Thus,
social life includes the whole issues of human relations without any boundary. It comprises the
web of societal relationships that are numerous, diverse, over lapping and dynamic.

In other ways, society can also be explained from the perspective of persons. In this sense,
society refers to a system of collective or group life within which men and women of all ages
live a shared life. As such all persons in a given society pursue their lives in terms their
relationships with other people such as their parents, teachers, friends, neighbors, supporters,
opponents and so on. In short, society is made up of individuals in societal relationships as
interconnected and overlapping groups.

A society can also define as a self perpetuating grouping of individual occupying a particular
territory, which may have its own distinctive culture and institutions. The term is most
commonly used to describe human societies, although it may be used to describe animal
societies. The term may also refer to a particular people such as the nation or to a nation state
such as Ethiopia. In political science, the term is often used to mean the totality of human
relationships general in contrast to the state.

The social scientists generally use the term society to mean a group of people that form a semi
closed social system in which most interactions are with other individuals belonging to the
group. More are with abstractly; a society is defined as a network of relationships between social
entities. A society is also sometimes defined as an inter-dependent community. An important
feature of society is social structure, aspects of which include roles and social ranking.

Generally the term society commonly refers to the following:

Society as

15
  Persons as an organized body; community, people, public.
 The totality of social relationships among humans.
 A group of humans broadly distinguished from other groups by mutual
interests, participation in characteristic relationships, shared institutions, and a
common culture.
 A group of people united in a relationship and having some interest, activity or
purpose in common such as association, club, organization, fraternity, order,
union, etc.

- The institutions and culture of a distinct self- perpetuating group.

2.1.1 Attributes/ elements of Society
A. A Common Geographical Area/Defined Territory: A particular society has been
demarcated by the other with natural or artificial boundaries. For example, the natural boundaries
such as the rivers, mountain ranges or forests, canals, and etc. The artificial boundaries are there
demarcated by political settlements. The people of the area share the resources in common and
participate to reach the common goals of population. The people develop unity, common feeling,
and integrity (oneness) and collection consciousness.

B. Variety of Interactions: The society is full of interactions and the different social processes
and going on in the society. The people come face to face and interact among themselves. People
share certain interests, attitudes, aptitudes/abilities/skills, traditions, customs, values, objectives
and mores/civilizations. The people of the society depend upon each other for their survival. The
division of labor among the individuals exists and the functions assigned to them are performed.
This develops functional inter- relationship among the members of the society.

C. Feeling of Solidarity: Since individuals of the society occupy a common territory, common
customs and traditions common values, common history, common cultures, self-contained
interdependence on each other obviously causes oneness and feelings of development and
solidarity among themselves. Though occasionally interact with other societies, they never lose
their identity and remains united as long as their society survives.

D. Total Culture/Common Culture: Each society has its own culture and the individual
relationships are organized and structured by the culture. Because of commonness in culture
content and tradition of the society unite together. The society will be differentiated by the other
16
society because of its unique culture/tradition/custom. Culture is present in human society and
the same is absent in animal society.

E. Social/Political Organization/Structure: Members of a society are socially organized.

Society itself has a structure and the important components/elements of social structure which
includes; norms, rules, status, power, authority, groups, associations and institutions. The norms
are important which give it stability, order and structure to human society that without them
social interaction would be difficult and chaotic/disorder. Organization of human society is
maintained with the help of norms and institutions that make the society peaceful. That is social
organization helps maintain society in social equilibrium.

F. Functional Differentiation: All the individuals in human society never perform similar
activities and functions. They perform different functions depending upon their sex, age, interest,
abilities, skills and other qualifications. There is more and more specialization in each work and
are expected to do their work allotted to them. Thus several persons work on a single activity.
Therefore, there is division of labor depending upon sex and age.

2.1.2 Contending Theories of Society

Sociologists view society in different ways. Some see the world basically as a stable and ongoing
entity. They are impressed with the endurance of the family, organized religion, and other social
institutions. Some sociologists see society as composed of many groups in conflict, competing
for scarce resources. To other sociologists, the most fascinating aspects of the social world are
the everyday routine interactions among individuals that we sometimes take for granted. These
three views, the once most widely used by sociologists, are the functionalist, conflict, and
interactions perspective.

A. Functionalism
Think of society as a living organism in which each part of the organism contributes to its
survival. This view is the functionalist perspective, which emphasizes the way that part of
society is structured to maintain its stability.

The proponents of the functionalist theory see any society as a vast network of connected parts,
each of which helps to maintain the system as a whole. The functionalist approach holds that if
17
an aspect of social life does not contribute to a society’s stability or survival–if does not serve
some identifiably useful function or promote value consensus among members of a society –it
will not be passed on from one generation to the next.

Society is seen as a resulting from agreement (consensus) about what is important (Values), and
how we should behave (norms) in particular situation (roles).

B. Conflict Theory
In contrast to functionalists’ on stability and consensus, conflict theorists see the social world in
continual struggle. The conflict perspective assumes that social behavior is best understood in
terms of conflict or tension between competing groups. Such conflict need not be violent; it can
take the form of labour negotiations, party politics, competition between religious groups for
members, or disputes over the governmental budget.

Throughout the 1900s, the functionalist perspective had the upper hand in sociology throughout
the world. However, the conflict approach has become increasingly persuasive since the late
1960s. The widespread social unrest resulting from battles over civil rights, bitter divisions over
the war in the World, the rise of the feminist and gay liberation movements, urban riots, and
confrontations at abortion clinics offered support for the conflict approach –the view that our
social world is characterized by continual struggle between competing groups. Currently, the
discipline of sociology accepts conflict theory as one valid way to gain insight into a society.
C. Inter-actionist Theory
Workers interacting of job, encounters in public places like bus stops and parks, behavior in
small groups–these are all aspects of micro sociology that catch the attention of interactionists.
Whereas functionalist and conflict theorists both analyze large scale society wide pattern of
behavior, the interactions perspective generalizes about every day forms of social interaction in
order to understand society as a whole. Interactionism is a sociological framework for viewing
human beings as living in a world of meaningful objects. These ‘objects’ may include material
things, actions, other people, relationships and even symbols.

18
The interactionists perspective is sometimes referred to as the symbolic interactions perspective,
because interactionists see symbols as an especially important part of human communication.
Members of a society share the social meanings of symbols. In the United States, for example, a
salute symbolizes respect, while a clenched fist signifies defiance. However, another culture
might use different gestures to convey a feeling of respect or defiance.

Consider the different ways; various societies portray suicide without the use of words. People in
United States point a finger at the head (Shooting); urban Japanese bring a fist against the
stomach (stabbing); and so forth. These types of symbolic interaction are classified as forms of
nonverbal communication, which can include other gestures, facial expressions, and postures.

2.2 State
The conceptions about the state show differences in the expression of political scientists,
political philosophers and Lawyers. In addition, definitions of the state are almost as numerous
as the authority who wrote about it. One scholar, Jacobsen Kidman, remarked the difference
where historians may regard the state as a concrete reality, philosophers may regard it as an
abstraction and lawyers regard it as a juristic person of formulating single definition that would
fit variety of state existence.
The concept of state is central to traditional approaches in political science. Different scholars
have various conceptions about the state. There are numerous philosophical explanations about
the state.
 The state is organized machinery of the making and carrying out of political decisions
and for the enforcing of the laws and rules of government.
 A state is a society politically organized and is more than a mere collection of families or
an agglomeration of occupational organizations.
 A state is the fundamental association for the maintenance and development of social
order, and to this and its central institution is endowed with the united power of the
community.
 The state is the institution or sets of institutions, which serve certain elementary common
purposes and conditions of life, unites under a single authority the inhabitants of a clearly

19
 marked territorial area. The ‘united power of the community’ and ‘single authority’
expresses the power authority to make law.

As part of its technical expression, political theories, define the state as a human association
having five essential elements –population, territory, government, sovereignty and recognition.
While the first two elements are taken as its physical elements, the rest are considered as the
spiritual or metaphysical elements.
For the purpose of civic and ethical study here, the state is technically defined as a political
association that establishes sovereign jurisdiction within a defined territorial borders and
exercises authority through a set of institutions over all the members of society. This definition
broadly distinguishes the state from both Society and Government in that firstly the former is
abstract while the latter two have physical existence and secondly the State tends to be broader
in scope than government whereas at the same time it is narrower than society.
2.2.1 Major attributes (elements) of State
As can also be inferred from its definition at the start of this chapter, the State basically consists
of at least four fundamental elements (attributes) namely population, territory, government and
recognized sovereignty to be really called a state. A nation or a state ceases to exist if any one of
these elements stops to exist. Given this, there are now nearly two hundred states or nations in
the world which are qualified as independent and sovereign states. Now let us see in brief what
each of these attributes means and what it consists of.
♦ Population
Nowadays, as many as approximately 6.2 billion people live curved up in about two hundred
states with a lot of political, sociological, economic, cultural and socio-historical variations
characterizing them. The following are some of these characteristic features:
Homogeneity: is one feature distinguishing nations and it denotes peoples’ similarity or sameness
in cultural-psychological identity. i.e they speak the same language, follow similar way of life,
share one and adjacent territory and similar psychological make-up Germany, Iceland in Europe,
Somalia and Swaziland in Africa, Korea and Japan in Asia are few examples of a relatively
homogeneous states in the world today.
Heterogeneity: refers to variation in cultural identity among the populations of states in language,
culture and traditions. Examples of heterogeneous states include, among others, Ethiopia (with

20
about 85 ethnic groups), Nigeria (with some 250 ethnic groups) and India (with about 800
languages).
Socio-economic diversity: is another feature of populations in a given state with developed
nations having a majority of urban, industrial and literate populations while fast developing
states are transforming from majority peasant and rural, uneducated and labor based population
to that of urban and literate one.
♦ Government
Government in this context broadly refers to groups of people who exercise political power in all
the 200 nations of the world. . All states by definition have governments of some kind that
exercises sovereign power on their behalf. But there have been a lot of differences among the
governments of the world due to different reasons. For instance, issue of Legitimacy (a condition
for a government to be legal and acceptable in the eyes of its people and externally) in that while
some states have tried to achieve legitimacy through democratic elections do this through socio-
economic transformation. Governments also differ on issue of Authority (a real capacity of a
government to exercise its legitimate or illegitimate political power to rule the people
effectively). i.e while some states have such required authority while others lack it due to
illegitimacy or political inefficiency born out of lack of either allegiance or obedience. Another
area of distinction of sates is the form/system of their governments (how the government is
organized and how it makes divisions of power among its different branches and institutions). i.e
while some states organize through constitutional mechanisms while other states do it through
force or some traditions -. Similarly while some states adopt Presidential system of government
in which ultimate authority lies under a strong president directly elected by the for a specified
term to serve both as the head of state and head of government other states still adopt
Parliamentary system in which the parliament is the most powerful organ with the ultimate
decision making power. The parliament exercises its executive authority through a strong prime
minister who is head of government usually supported by a president with little or only
ceremonial power and acts as head of the state.

♦ Territory

21
 Territory generally refers to three physical possessions over which the state and government
exercise their sovereign authority- landmass, space and water body. These territorial divisions
among the present states of the world are extremely irregular due to irregular political evolutions
in creating the state. In general, there can be no state without a territory of its own though its
boundaries might be clearly or ill-defined.
♦ Recognized sovereignty
Sovereignty is usually a very serious matter bothering all states due to the legal, political and
diplomatic consequences it brings to third party states during the process of (no)recognition.
This is so because once a certain community attains sovereignty, its rights and obligations in
international relations dramatically change. For instance, such sets of rights as to make decisions
on one’s matters without being subjected to any outside supervision or control would come to the
surface. It also equally brings duties to the state to be subjected to established norms and laws
that governed interstate relations. Thus, sovereignty particularly understood in the
internal/domestic sense, is a very sensitive right/ privilege rationed very carefully by the states of
the world
2.2.2 Theories on the origin and development of State
The origin and development of state is still subject to debate because various theories on the
subject supposed different factors which are often irreconcilable to justify state formation.
However, for the sake of convenience in this course, only one grand /holistic theory known as
evolutionary theory will be considered. Generally speaking, according to this theory;
• The State is not a make but a growth; and
• Not one but many factors have played their part in state building.
The implication of the above two points is that evolutionary theory underlines that the state is
the result of a very long process of evolution that involved many factors each with a pivotal
role in the origin and gradual development of the state
What then are some of these multiple factors? And how did each contribute?
 Kinship: - i.e blood relationship which naturally le ads to the creation of family
then to a tribe then to society eventually creates the state. In simple terms, the
state is the eventual extension of the family. This thinking is specifically derived
from what is known as Genetic theory of state formation.

22
  Social contract/ Agreement: This is taken from a social contract theory which
argues that the authority of the ruler is based on some kind of agreement between
himself/herself and his subjects which then implies that men/women had
originally created the state by means of a social contract (agreement) to which
each individual had consented.
 Force (physical force): - This factor is taken from theory of force which believes
that the state is the consequence of the forcible subjugation of successive
primitive groups by other groups in a long continued war-fare. I.e. the victorious
become the masters and the conquered had to accept the religion and servitude of
their lords. The coercive force exercised by the leader eventually developed in to
political organization called the state.
 Economics: - According to this factor which is derived from Marxist theory
difference in relative economic power (occupation and wealth) created economic
exploitation and the domination of one class by another. Therefore, the state arose
as a matter of necessity when society was divided in to hostile classes, each
having its own interest as an instrument of defense for the economic power holder
class. The implication here is that in primitive society where there was no private
property and then no class there was no state either. So, as the state had not
always existed it may not always exist also. It had come into being with the rise of
class contradictions, so it will wither away with the end of class antagonisms.

2.2.3 State structure: unitary Vs federalism

The classification of forms of state structure is fundamentally based on criteria of state power
distribution. Accordingly, there are so far three recognized forms of state structure namely;
unitarism, federalism and confederalism. However, only the first two will be discussed here as
they are the historically commonly practiced forms.
A. Unitarism
Unitarism is a form of state structure characterized by power centralization and indivisibility of
sovereignty. i.e the national government is legally supreme over sub-national territorial bodies or
units. At a more extreme case, a unitary state is even one in which no other governmental body
but the central government has any areas of public control. In a unitary state, sub national bodies

23
may be over ruled by the central government in any political decision they make. In most case
local units are merely agencies of the central government established for its convenience in local
administration. They owe their legal existence to it. Eg. Britain, the Netherlands, Romania,
Poland etc.
Key features of unitarism
By way of a summary presentation, the followings can be listed as some essential features
characterizing unitary State structure:
 Supremacy of the Central Legislature (Parliament). There is only one (unicameral)
legislature which is always absolutely supreme and hence it alone enacts and monitors the law.
Other bodies (sub-national bodies) are predominantly to implement the laws made by it.
 Absence of subsidiary sovereign bodies: i.e Sovereignty is vested in the national /central
government and hence sub national bodies are not sovereign because sovereignty in unitary form
of state structure is indivisible. The implication is that subsidiary legislatures normally exist
when represented by the central government but then they can also be abolished by the central
government at any time.
 Unchecked/unilateral (re) centralization of Power at the center: i.e. power that may have
been decentralized to sub-national bodies can be re-centralized at the will of the central
government unilaterally. Moreover, sub national bodies (regional, provincial and local bodies)
can be reshaped, reorganized and even abolished at will of the central government.

Major factors /rationales for opting unitarism: Looking to potential merits and demerits
Despite all the above features, there are still some important factors why unitarism might be
opted. The following potential merits/advantages summarize the justification for opting
unitarism. These are;
• Power organization in unitarism is relatively simple
• Conflict of jurisdiction is easily avoidable or manageable
• Services/functions duplication is comparatively rare because powers and
functions are centralized at the center /National government.
• There is big room for uniformity of laws, policy and administration throughout
the whole state. etc
Because of all the above unitarism is advantageous especially countries with relatively small
area and homogenous population. However, there are some potential demerits/disadvantages that
24
make unitarism relatively non-opt able. These are summarized as follows;
• It overburdens the national legislature with numerous local matters. Particularly, in this
fast changing world, the central authority cannot cope all with the issues prevailing.
• It leaves distant authorities and may lack adequate knowledge of local conditions to the
determination of policies and the regulation of matters, which may concern only the
localities affected. Hence, it is relatively less responsible to local needs and interests.
• Tends to responsive local initiatives and interests in public affairs and impairs the vitality
of local government.
• It restrains the self-governance and self-determination of sub-national bodies/units.
• It facilitates the development of central bureaucracy.

B. federalism
Federalism is a form of state structure in which power is formally (constitutionally) divided or
shared between the federal /national/ central government and sub-National (regional/ provincial)
governments, each of which is supreme in its own sphere. In federal state, the legislative,
executive and judicial powers are divided between central and sub national governments. In this
sense, it is a direct opposite of unitary structure. Today, federalism is becoming the basis of the
political organization of several states though its nature varies from one to another. Egs.
Ethiopia, Nigeria, India, Brazil, USA, Canada, Australia, Germany etc.
Key features of Federalism
By way of a summary presentation, the followings can be listed as some essential features
characterizing federal state structure:
• The existence of dual polities: i.e two relatively autonomous levels of governments- the
central and the regional- exist each possessing a constitutionally entrenched (unilaterally
non-encroach able) ranges of powers and functions.
• Written constitution: A federal state has most of the time but not necessarily always a written
(codified) constitution that stipulates formal (constitutional) division of authority between
the central government and sub national governments. Therefore, the relationship between
the government levels is conducted within a formal legal framework.

25
• Supremacy of federal Government and Constitution: this implies that in federalism the
federal government and constitution is usually superior and supreme over the sub national
government s and constitutions in conducting key issues and activities of the country.
• Absence of unilateral re-centralization of powers and authority by the central/federal
government at its will.
• Absence of unilateral amendment of the federal constitution or some of its provisions by
either government level. That is to say that the consent or agreement of the sub
national/regional governments is needed in the amendment process.
• Constitutional Arbiter. The formal provisions of the constitution are interpreted by a
supreme court (the judiciary) at the federal level, which there by arbitrates in case of conflict
(disputes) between federal and regional government. The respective fields of jurisdiction of
each level, the judiciary in a federal level (system) is constitutionally empowered to determine.
However, in Ethiopia, the House of Federation (HF) is in charge of this power.
• Linking institutions: In order to foster or develop cooperation, partnership and
understandings between the federal and regional (sub national) governments, federalism
normally offers the regional (sub national) governments representation through a bi-cameral
legislature.
Processes of Federalism
Two processes of federalism may be identified.
1. ‘Holding Together Federations’ (Federalism by Disaggregation)
They develop from unitary state, as government’s response to alleviate threats of secession by
territorially clustered minorities. Such federations often grant some sub-units particular domains
of sovereignty. For example, Over language and cultural rights in an asymmetric federation,
while maintaining broad scope of action for central government and majorities. Examples
include Ethiopia, India, Belgium, Canada and Spain.

2. ‘Coming Together Federations’ (Federalism by Aggregation)

Independent states may come together by ceding/giving up or pooling sovereign powers in
certain domain for the sake of goods otherwise unattainable, such federations are typically
arranged to constrain the center and prevent majorities form overriding a sub –unit. Examples
include the present USA, Switzerland, and Australia.

26
Power Distribution in Federal Form of State
The power distribution in federal form of state is categorized in Exclusive power, concurrent
power and reserved powers (residuary powers to federal authority and federating units). How
these power distributions do is practiced? Let see the practice of exclusive and concurrent power
distribution in Ethiopia.

1. Exclusive power: Exclusive powers refer to powers not shared powers, only exercised by
federal authority or federal units. Let's take the Ethiopian federal practice as an example. The
following are exclusive powers by the federal authority
♣ To enact laws and constitutional laws and follows its application, to keep the country's
constitutional system, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and printing and circulating of money
2. Concurrent powers: This refers to the powers exercised commonly by federal authority and
federal units.
♣ Social sectors (like education, health, labor and social affairs, culture and information,
civil service), Planning, Transport and communication, internal security, Agriculture,
Industry, Trade, Tourism, Finance , Justice, etc.

Major factors /rationales for opting federalism: Looking to potential merits and demerits
There are some important factors why federalism might be opted over unitarism. The following
potential merits/advantages summarize the justification for opting federalism. These are;
• Federal orders may increase the opportunities for citizen participation in public
decision–making; through deliberation and offices in both sub-unit and central
bodies;
• Local and regional governments are usually closer to the people and sensitive to
their needs. This ensures that government responds not merely to the overall
interest of society, but also to the specific needs of particular communities. In
this regard, federalism facilitates efficient preference maximization more
generally and specifically in the area of economic/ fiscal management.
• Local decisions prevent decision-making from becoming overloaded in the
central government and, thus, federalism may also minimize inefficiency and
bureaucratic chaos.

27
 • Federalism tends to combine national unity and local autonomy and the rights of
self-government and thus maintains balance between centrifugal (unifying) and
centripetal (integrating) forces in a sate.
Despite all the above merits that make it relatively advantageous particularly for large and multi-
cultural states, federalism, however, have the following potential disadvantages/demerits;
• The division of power between the central and federal government may lead to
conflicts of jurisdiction between national and local officials and thus a sort of
'No Man's Land" in which neither authority takes decisive action might be
created.
• There is duplication of activities and services, which results in expense. It is not
always easy to deal with a specific situation.

2.3 Government
2.3.1 Definition and functions of government
Working definition: Although Government can also be expressively defined as the administrative
wing of the state, technically it refers to group of people and set of institutions that make laws
(the legislative body), implement (executive body) and interpret them (the judiciary body).
In its broadest sense, to govern refers to rule or control others. Government can therefore be
taken to include any mechanism through which ordained rule is maintained, its central features
being the ability to make collective decisions and the capacity to enforce them.

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

In other words, government can also refer to political organization comprising individuals and
institutions authorized to formulate public policies and conduct affairs of state. Governments are

28
empowered to establish and regulate the interrelationships of the people within their territorial
confines, the relations of the people with community as a whole, and the dealings of the
community with other political entities. Thus, government applies both to the governments of
national states such as the federal government of Ethiopia and t the governments of subdivisions
of national states such as the regional states, provinces, and municipal governments, etc of
Ethiopia.
Simply, government can refer to either of the following.

 The act or process of governing, especially the control and administration of public
policy in a political unit.

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

 Exercise of authority in a political unit, rule

 The agency or apparatus through which a governing individual or body functions and
exercises authority.

 A governing body or organization as

a) the ruling political party or coalition of political parties in a parliamentary system.

b) The cabinet in a parliamentary system
c) The persons who make up a governing body.

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

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

 A body that has the authority to make and the power to enforce laws within a civil,
corporate, religious, academic, or other organization or group.

Broadly speaking, government is different from all other organizations because it possesses the
following features which others do not. These are;
• Comprehensive Authority: i.e rules made by any social organization other than government
are intended to apply to members of respective organizations. On the other hand, the rules of
the government are intended to apply to all members of society. Governmental authority is

29
 acknowledged (recognized) power to make all binding decisions and issue obligatory
commands.
• Involuntary Membership: Membership in most social organizations is voluntary and based on
conscious choices. However, membership in a nation is largely involuntary, i.e. most people
initially become citizens of a nation and subject to its rules without their deliberate/
conscious act/choice.
• Legitimate monopoly and use of force: all members of any society do not always obey all
government rules. All organizations impose sanctions on rule breakers but government
differs from other organizations in the kind of sanctions it is authorized to impose. i.e
Government can also impose two additional sanctions forbidden to other organizations
namely; imprisonment and death penalty.

Purposes/ functions of Government

In a modern state, government functions have greatly expanded given the fact that the institution
has evolved to be an active force in political, social and economic developments. Thus given,
some of the major purposes and functions of government include:
 Self-preservation: any government must by maintaining law and order ensure
predictability. To this end, government must in turn defend (using its police, defense
and court institutions) its citizens and territory from internal and external security
threats.
 Conflict management: This function of the government also involves conflict
management and resolution. i.e it builds institutions for resolving and managing
conflict which is inevitable because of resource scarcity and humanity’s selfish
behavior. Moreover, protection of citizens’ constitutionally enshrined fundamental
human and democratic rights is part of this function of a government.

 Distribution of Resources: all governments invariably play the role of distributing

resources in their societies. In addition, governments are the only institutions that
determine whether recourses are going to be controlled by the public or private sector.
Some governments may decide that the resources should be controlled by the public,
which commonly known as socialist states and others mates. In addition, other states

30
 may lie in between, that is the resources cold be controlled by both the public and
private sector.

 Fulfillment of Social or Group Aspirations: in addition to the aforementioned

purposes and functions, governments also strive to fulfill the goals and interests of the
society as a whole and of various groups within the society. These aspirations may
include the promotion of human rights, common good and international peace.

 Protection of Rights of Citizens : some governments, especially those of constitutional

and democratic governments, are established for the protections of every citizen’s
human, democratic, political, social, economic and cultural rights. Constitutionals and
democratic governments are created to serve and protect every citizen’s rights, not to
dominate them.

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

2.3.2 Government structure: vertical arrangement Vs horizontal arrangement

2.3.2.1 vertical Arrangement /organization
The vertical arrangement or organization of government specifically shows the relationship
between the central /national government and sub –national bodies or institutions (such as the
regional, provincial or local bodies).
A. the Central /National Government: the central/national government refers to the levels/ of
government that control the overall affairs of the state. This means, in most cases, that central
government assumes overall control of the state’s economic life, and supervises matters such as

31
internal trade, transport and communications. Accordingly, the central /national government is
the level of government that situated at the top of the governmental structure of any state.

Thus, the central /national government is the level of government that is responsible to enable the
state to function as an actor on the international or world state. It would possesses the machinery
for entering into strategic alliance, negotiating trade agreements, gaining representation at
international summit meatiness, or becoming a member of supranational bodies. This is why
central government is invariably responsible for a state’s external relations, as demonstrated by
this control of the foreign, diplomatic and defense policy. Moreover, some form of central
government is necessary to mediate between sub national bodies to ensure cooperation in areas
of mutual interest.

B. The Sub –National /local governments /: local or regional government, in its simples sense,
is government that is specific to a particular region or locality, for example a region, village,
district, town, city or country. More particularly, it is a form of government that has no share in
sovereignty, and is thus entirely subordinate to central authority, or in a federal system, to state
or regional authority. This level of government is in fact universal, being found in federal and
nonfederal systems as well as in unitary ones.

2.3.2.2 Horizontal arrangement

In today’s world, government is horizontally arranged in to the legislative, executive and
Judiciary bodies/organs. What does each branch primarily do?

(I) The Legislative Body

Generally speaking, the legislative body is responsible for the formulation of laws, policies and
strategies. It also provides a link between government and the people hence serves as a channel
of communication. But specifically, the organ undertakes the following functions:
Statue making: Statute literally means parliament made law. From this it becomes obvious that
legislative body’s one major function is statute making.
Representation: This is Assemblies’ /Parliaments’ role of linking the government with the
people hence smoothing the communication/relationship between the two.

32
Controlling the administration: This involves the legislative body’s role of
supervising/scrutinizing the executive that administers by implementing the laws and decisions
passed by the legislature itself. In this sense, the legislative body has the power to check and
balance the executive body and thereby to deliver responsible/ accountable government.
Constitutional making/ Amending: The legislative body also performs the function of
constitutional making/amending. This may, however, vary from country to country depending on
the nature of state structure they have. For example, in a federal form of state structure, the
constitutional amending or modification is usually carried by a joint agreement between the
federal and regional /state government following certain set of procedures where as in unitary
state structure the same function is normally done unilaterally by the central government.
Electoral and disposing functions: This function includes electing of the council of ministers
(also the Prime minister), voting on motion of “no confidence” to reelect or remove the
incumbent executive( prime minister) in parliamentarism and in presidentialism the role of
removing the president by the principle of impeachment.
Financial functions (“power of the purse”): this is the legislative body’s function of
determining the nature and amount of taxes and appropriations or simply approval of budget
presented to it by, for example, each ministry.
Investigative functions: often times, legislatives through the establishment of “standing
committees” such as commission of Inquiry also engage in digging up information regarding the
causes, the profile and the consequences of certain conflicts in any part of the country and
suggest solutions accordingly.

(II) The Executive Body

In its broadest sense, this branch of the government is responsible for the implementation of the
laws, rules, policies, and decisions made by the legislature. It consists of the head of government,
the head of state and other various enforcement agencies. However, it is usually divided in to two
broad categories namely; the political executive and the bureaucratic executive. Whereas the
political executive refers to almost all elected or appointed politicians from within or without the
parliament, the bureaucratic executive on the other hand consists of professional civil servants
whose job is to offer advice and administer policy subject to the requirements of political

33
neutrality and loyalty to their ministers. This being the case some of the principal functions of
the executive body include:
Enforcement functions: This is the function of enacting (implementing) all laws, rules,
decisions made by the legislative body and the judiciary body (court’s decision) a country.
Formulation of administrative policy: This is the executive body’s function of making
regulations (on sub- legislative powers and issues) and policies to allocate funds to various
public activities. In this sense, the executive plays a policy–making leadership in that it also
develops coherent economic and social programmes that meet the needs of society.
Control of military forces: The executive branch has the power to determine how and where
troops, the military warplanes and ships may be used in period of conflict and peace.
Control of foreign relations: This is the general function of conducting foreign relations with
other states which also specifically includes granting or withholding recognition to the
governments of foreign state. To this end, it appoints ambassadors and other Foreign Service
officers.
Bureaucratic leadership: this is particularly the task of the top management executive
(ministerial ones) and revolves around overseeing the implementation of policies by the whole
machinery of the government.
Crisis leadership: this is the power of political executive over the assembly/ parliament and
includes its ability to take swift and decisive action when crises break out in either domestic or
international.

III) The Judiciary Body

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

34
 2.3.3 Forms and systems of Government
2.3.3.1 Forms of Government
1. Monarchy: It is the oldest form of government in which the ruling power invested in a single
person who weak crown. In its widest sense, “any government in which the supreme and final
authority is in the hands of a single person is a monarchy. There are two types of monarchy.
♠ Traditional Monarchy: the king or the queen maintain his/her position by claim of
legitimate blood decent than their appeal as popular leaders. For example, Hohenzollerns in
Germany, Hapsburgs in Austro-Hungary, Romania, in Russia, Solomonic in Ethiopia …etc.
♠ Constitutional Monarchy: The king or the queen is ceremonial head of the state, an
indispensable figure in all great official occasions and a symbol of national unity and
authority of the state but lacking real power eg. Britain, Japan, etc.
2. Dictatorship (monocracy): The existence of dictatorship has its proof in the position of a
person who holds extra constitutional powers and identifies himself with the state. He is the head
of the state, of the government, of the party kind of opposition to his power invites mutilation. It
means absolute rule of a single person who occupies his position hymens of force and as such is
not accountable to any popular institution.
3. Oligarchy/Aristocracy: - It is rule by few. Many of the classical conditions of oligarchic rule
were found until recently in those part of Asia in which governing elites were recruited
exclusively from a ruling caste a hereditary social groupings set apart from the rest of society by
religion, kinship, economic status, prestige and language. In contemporary world, in some
counties that have not experienced the full impact of industrialization, governing elites are still
often recruited from a ruling class (a stratum of society that monopolizes the main social and
economic function in the system). Such elites exercise their power in the interest of the ruling
class.
4. Constitutional Government: - It is defined by the existence of a constitution that effectively
controls the exercise of political power. The two major constitutional governments are:
 The presidential system: - It is based on the doctrine of separation of powers, which is
practiced in USA, Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica, and Mexico…etc.

35
 Parliamentary system: - It is based on the fusion of powers (legislative and executive),
which is practiced in western European nations, Scandinavian countries, Japan, India,
Ethiopia etc.
2.3.3.2 Systems of Government
One defining characteristic feature of modern governments is that they are all constitutional in
nature. i.e they possess a constitution that effectively controls their exercise of political power.
Accordingly, in the modern world we have two major systems/forms of constitutional
governments namely; the presidential system (as in the case of the USA, Argentina, Brazil, Costa
Rica, Mexico…etc.) and the parliamentary system( as in the case of western European nations,
Scandinavian countries, Japan, India, Ethiopia etc.). Let us now look at the nature of each of
these systems in some detail.

1. Presidential system of Government

Presidential system of government is a form of government which is chiefly characterized by
strict separations of powers between the legislative and executive branches of government.
Given this, the followings are some of the key distinguishing features of a presidential system of
government:
Real authority of the president: i.e. the leadership of the executive is in the hands of the
president who is elected by the people for a constitutionally fixed period (four years in the case
of the United States). He may nominate his body of ministers to form the cabinet. The president
may also change the portfolios of his ministers as per his will, or may dismiss any one of them in
case he loses the confidence of the”boss”. He formulates national policy; orders mobilization of
troops declares state of emergency and takes all necessary steps for the enforcement of law and
maintenance of order in the country. In short, he is the real power holder of his country. In short,
the roles of head of state and head of government (the chief executive) are combined in the
offices of the president. As such, the executive authority is vested in or concentrated in the hands
of the president; the cabinet and ministers being merely advisors to and responsible for the
president.
Separation of the legislative from the executive: This implies that the president and his ministers
cannot be members of the legislature. In case the president appoints a member of legislature as
his minister, he has to leave his/her legislature membership. It is for this reason that the president

36
and his ministers do not take part in the deliberations of the legislature. The president may go to
the legislature only for delivering an important address. Even his ministers may attend a session
of the legislature and may also take part in the discussion, but they have no right to vote.
Moreover, the executive and the legislative organs of government are separately elected and
work independently and separately. Moreover, each of the executive and legislative are vested
with a range of independent constitutional powers.
Electoral terms of the president are constitutionally fixed: That is, the president is supposed to
govern the state for four years or one term, for example, in USA. And, he/she can be reelected
for the second term (having four years). But, he/she cannot be elected for more than two terms.
The president can neither “dissolve” the legislature nor be dismissed by the Congress
/Assembly except possibly through impeachment. The process of impeachment is provided to
remove the president in case he violates the Oath of office. For instance, the president is under an
oath that he will defend and protect the constitution of the state. In case he does otherwise, the
process of impeachment may be used to remove him from office. Usually the power of
impeachment is given to the legislature.
2. Parliamentary system of Government
A Parliamentary system/form of government refers to the form of government in which the
government governs in and through the parliament/assembly there by fusing the legislative and
executive branch of government. In other words, it is a system that vests the political leadership
in a legislative body (the parliament) which, in turn, selects the executive body (the cabinet +
prime minister) entirely or largely from its membership. This being the case, the principal
features of a parliamentary system/form of government include among others the following:
 Government is formed as a result of parliament/ assembly elections based on the strength
of party or coalition party’s representation. Therefore, there is no separately elected
political executive.
 A parliament of representatives is elected by the citizens of the state. For instance, in
federal state structure like Ethiopia, the citizens directly elect representatives both to the
Federal parliament and regional parliament.
 The executive power of the government (both political executives like the Prime Minster
and ministers at a federal and at Regional level) is vested in the hand of group of people
who are elected by the parliament.

37
  Most or all members of the cabinet (council of ministers) are usually members of the
parliament/ assembly. And usually, the party or coalitions of parties that have majority
seats take up executive responsibilities in addition to their legislative roles.
 The cabinet (council of ministers) retains executive power only as long as it has the
“confidence” of the parliament; that is, only as long as majority vote in the parliament
unseats a cabinet - a situation called “Government falling”.
 The government can, in most cases, dissolve the parliament. Just if the parliament holds
the cabinet (council of ministers) in jeopardy, the leader of the cabinet (usually the PM)
has the right to have the parliament disbanded with the consent of the majority members
of the parliament.
 As the head of the government is the Prime Minister there is a separate head of the state -
i.e., the constitutional monarch or non- executive president. In the Ethiopian case, for
example, the head of the state is the president, who is non-political executive and hence
cannot be a member of any political party. He/she is simply the figurehead of the state.
 The PM (Prime Minister), who is the head of the government, retains office as long as
he/she can command majority support in parliament. In other words, electoral terms of
the PM is not constitutionally fixed.

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

38
The structures and organizations of the state are, however, not as diverse and complex as those of
the society.
Rather, they are relatively clear cut, structured and identifiable in terms of government
institutions such as the parliament, the judiciary, and the executive authorities. In general,
besides the similarities shared between the society and the state, their differences can be
distinguished on the following grounds.
1. In terms of time, society is prior to the state. It means that society came in to being much
earlier than the state. Family and community are the oldest social institutions. Even the
hunters, the root digger and the fruit gatherers had their society, but authority came much
later.
2. State is just a part of the society. As stated before, society implies the general relations
and associations of human beings. Since human beings are social creatures by their
nature and necessity such relations are as old as humanity. Moreover these social
relations have diverse forms in the religious, cultural and economic directions, of these
devise forms, state is one part (political part) that has its purpose limited to the
maintenance of peace, order and security to the people.
3. The two may also be distinguished in respect of their functions. The society performs a
multiplicity of functions in order to meet multifold requirements of human beings. The
family, the community, religion, trade unions, clubs, etc, meet different kind of
requirements of people as intellectual, recreational, moral, cultural, and economic. But
the function of the state is to make and enforce a legal order so that people may lead a
life of peace, security and honor.
4. But the most important point of distinction is that state possesses the attribute of
sovereignty whereby it may coerce and compel others by the use of force. The society
has no such force and whatever force it has, it appears in the form of moral persuasion.
The customs and traditions of the society are followed by the people because of the force
public conscience but the laws of the state are obeyed, because their violation is visited
with suitable punishment.

2.4.2 The Difference between State and Government

39
Though state and government are similar when strictly studied in concrete and practical terms,
the two may be distinguished on a theoretical ground. These differences may include
1. The state is a bigger entity that includes all citizens, the territory sovereignty, recognition,
etc; the government is a smaller unit that over only those who are employed to perform it
functions and the agencies. That is, while the state is the politically organized entity for
the promotion of common ends and the satisfaction of common interests, the government
is a common name for the agencies, authorities, ministers, organizations through which
the will of the state is formulated. The government is an essential organ or agency of the
state but it is no more than the state itself.
2. The state is an abstract idea, but the government has its existence in a physical form. In a
broad sense, a government includes all persons in the legislative, the executive or the
judiciary branches from the president / prime minister at the top to a more ordinary
citizen at the bottom. Thus, in its wider or narrower form, the government has a
concrete /physical form.
3. The power of the state is original and primary, but the authority of the government is
delegated and derivative. In other words, it is said that while the power of the state is
absolute as being a sovereign entity, the authority of the government is limited by the
provisions of the constitution.
4. The state is a permanent institution. It survives until its sovereign power is destroyed by
the invasion of some other sate. But governments come and go. The office holders
/political elites are changed, i.e., it is quite possible that the rule of one party is changed
by another party.
5. The government is an agency for the fulfillment of the purposes of the state. Hence, the
people may have grievances against the government, but not against the state. They may
agitate for changing their rulers, but they would not like to destroy the state.

2.5 Ethiopian Society, State and Government

Formation of Modern Ethiopian State
2.5.1 State Formation in Ethiopia
The rise and foundation of states took place in different parts of Ethiopia at different historical
periods. Some of the developments took place in the north, while others were in the south,

40
southwest, east, and south eastern parts of Ethiopia. The span of development ranges from pre –
Axumite civilization to recent past. Out of the continue interrelations among them, the various
states of the different parts give rise to the present form of modern Ethiopia state.
I. Development in the North
The rise of ancient states in the northern part of Ethiopia goes back to the pre –Axumite period.
Even though much is not known, there are some recent evidences much is not known, there are
some recent evidences that show there were stets even before the rise of the Axumite state. But
there are enough facts about the Axumite state and its established political institutions as early as
100 B.C. the Axumite state was one of the most civilized few states of the ancient world. That
civilization made great achievements. The monuments that are found today as Axum are the
heritage of that ancient civilization. Axumite states was also well known for its commerce and
trade within Ethiopia as well as out of Ethiopia with Greece, Rome, India and others. The
Axumite state started to decline beginning from the 7 th century and was no more in existence
after the 10th century.

Following its decline, the political center shifted from, Axum to the northwestern part Wello.
Then political institutions developed in Latas. This political development is called the zagwe
Dynasty. Among others, king Lalibela was one of the famous kings of the Dynasty. The dynasty
is also well known for its wonderful construction works. One set of their works are the Rocke
Hewen Churches that are found in Lalibaela nad its surroundings. The zawe period came to an
end in 1270. the Agaw people that are found today in the Amhara region were the founders of he
zagwe dynasty.

After the fall of the zagwe kingdom, the political center shifted further to the south of lalibela,
that was marked by the foundation of the Christian Highwand kingdom called the solomonic
dynsty. Yekuno Amlak was the first king of the dynasty. The dynasty claimed descent from king
Solomon of Terusalem as it is explained in the Kibre Negest. The Solomonic dynasty moved its
center from shewa to Gondar in the 17th century.

Later, the political power at Gonder declined being followed by what is called as the zamene
mesafint. Zemene mesfint was a period of instability, civil war and struggle for power. As the

41
result of such chaotic political phenomena, the northern part of Ethiopia was decentralized. Thus,
the nobility established their own governance in their respective regions. As a result of this,
political power at the center was very weak. That situation continued up to the first half of the
19th century.

II. Developments in the South and Other Parts

While Christian states largely developed in the north, other states were also emerging in the
center, south, south –west, and eastern parts of Ethiopia region. The earliest Islamic state was the
sultanate of Ifat, Dawra, Bali, Fatagar, Hadiya, the Emirates of Adal and Harar. There were also
states in the kingdoms of kaffa, Walayta, Janjere and Enarya. They were formed at different
periods. Moreover, the various Oromo states such as Jimma, Limu – Enarya, Guma, Gima and
Gera. In the east, there were the Emirates of Harar. The Kambata and Gurage political
institutions were also parts of the formation of various states prior to the emergence of the
modern centralized Ethiopian State.

The Formation of Modern Ethiopian State

The formation of centralized statehood in Ethiopia goes back to the end of the 19 th century.
However, this does not mean Ethiopia did not exist before the end of the 19 th century. As a
matter of fact, the existence of Ethiopia as a state is as old as no less than there thousand years.
However, with its present form and extent of territory, the Ethiopian state can relatively be
viewed as a recent phenomenon.

The process of building a modern centralized sate in Ethiopia was significantly accomplished
during therign of Emperor Menilik II. But, the attempts to do so were started by Emperor
Tewodros right after the end of the Zemene Mesafint. The efforts of bulding a modern
centralized sate in Ethiopia made by Emperor Tewodros were also extended by his success or
Emperor Yohannes.

The campaigns carried out by Emperor Menilike during the second half of the 19yh century
incorporated the states in the southern south eastern and the eastern parts in to present –day
Ethiopia. With that process of expansion from the center, the various nations, nationalities and
peoples in different parts in the south, southwest an east were also brought under the Ethiopian
42
Empire. In the mean time, the present day boundaries of Ethiopia were established based on
international agreements between the Ethiopian government and the surrounding colonial powers
of the time. This took place at the end of the 19 th century. Therefore, it is clear to understand the
fact that today’s Ethiopia is shaped in to Modern centralized sate hood through the political
integration of the various states, nations, nationalities and peoples. They formed modern Ethiopia
with their respective languages, traditions, beliefs, religions and denied autonomy to their rich
historical diversities. This has been one of the major causes of the political questions for
freedom, equality and self –governance throughout the 20th century in the country.

43
 Chapter Three
Understanding Citizenship: Ethiopian Focus
3.1 Definition and Aspects/ dimensions of citizenship
Definition
States cannot be understood in the absence of citizens and citizenship. In the same way,
citizenship cannot be explained without the state. Thus, the notion of citizenship is important
both to the state and to individuals, since it denotes a basic relationship between the state and its
individual members. In this context, citizenship thus refers to the broad study of rights and duties
of citizens. It is the official recognition of an individual’s integration in to the political system by
denoting the status of a person as a member of a particular country. Put differently, without the
status of citizenship, a person would be “stateless” and hence would loss official recognition to
exercise citizenship rights and fulfill responsibilities.
However, citizenship in all states is not the same. For instance, while non-democratic states
usually reduce their people to mere subjects that have very limited or no rights but only duties in
democratic states, on the other hand, people govern themselves and thus enjoy equal rights in all
aspects of life. What this broadly implies is that the historical development of democracy and
democratization (from Greek- Rome- Western Europe-USA- elsewhere in the world today) has
very much affected the historical development of the meaning, scope and content of the concept
of citizenship.
Aspects of citizenship
Despite all these walks of historical evolution, the concept citizenship has now come to be
universally understood in terms of the following three basic aspects. These are:
The social aspects of Citizenship: this refers to the rights and duties of citizens that are directly
related to social and cultural norms and values. In other words, it refers to a situation in which
citizenship can be attained for example through parent’s nationality, adoption, marriage etc
which are all products of social processes. That is in the case of adoption, for instance, the full
rights and responsibilities of parenthood are transformed from natural to social parenthood and
the child’s social and kinship position is also transformed from the biological childhood to social
hood. In this case, a social person is created by appropriation and people became parents in every

44
sense other than the genetic factor. Therefore, the social aspect of citizenship discloses that the
rights and duties associated with citizenship status are socially determined and also distributed.
The legal aspects of Citizenship: this aspect can be best understood from the statement which
reads “citizenship entails a relationship between an individual and a state originating under terms
prescribed by the law of that state and giving rise to certain duties and rights, which such law
attaches to citizenship”. What this explanation reveals is, therefore, the fact that different
countries can pursue different laws in granting and denying citizenship status or even the same
country can have different laws depending up on the prevailing political conditions of that state.
The political aspects of Citizenship: this implies that the political system in a country affects the
citizenship status. For example, while in a dictatorial or authoritarian political system, the rights
and privileges of citizenship are enjoyed by a small group of the society but the majorities are
merely required to fulfill their responsibilities or duties as members of that country, in a
democratic systems, however, citizens are expected to express their allegiance to their nation and
obey the laws and reciprocally they are treated equally without any discrimination.
Modes of acquiring and loosing citizenship
The process of acquiring citizenship varies from country to country depending up on the
existing specific laws of each country. There is no clear cut uniformity in acquiring citizenship
status as there is no common standard that govern all state of the world. Thus different states
grant and deny citizenship to their citizens differently which in turn implies the fact that the idea
of citizenship is left to the domestic jurisdiction of a state. However, this does not mean that the
state should follow arbitrary and groundless decision in granting or denying citizenship. Some
broadly shared normative and customary principles are underscored to minimize arbitrary
deprivation of citizenship. In nut shell, the process of acquiring or losing citizenship involves
complex issues related with the interest of states as well as the interactions of individuals.
Accordingly, three major ways/modes of acquiring citizenship can be singled out here for a
discussion. These are:
A. Citizenship by Birth
The majority of peoples in almost all countries usually acquire citizenship at birth and hence
after they do not normally change their citizenship. Citizenship by birth has two principles
namely; jus soil and jus sanguinis. Whereas Jus soil (a Latin phrase for right of soil) means child
born in a particular state automatically becomes a citizen of the state irrespective of his/her

45
parent’s citizenship (what matters most is the birth place of the child), Jus-Sanguinis (a Latin
term for right of blood), on the other hand, does not consider the place of birth of the child as
important rather the child enjoys the citizenship of its parents automatically (what matters most
here is the citizenship of his parents). For instance, in the context of Ethiopia, it is clearly stated
in proclamation No378/2003 (Article 3) that any person shall be an Ethiopian national by descent
where both or either of his parents is Ethiopian.
B. Citizenship by Law
Naturalization (citizenship by law) is a mode of acquiring citizen ship after birth. It is a process
by which a state confers citizenship on an individual who is originally (by birth) not a citizen as a
matter of its voluntary acts and intention of the individual. Hence, naturalization is under the
authority of the state and the individual is expected to fulfill some sets of criteria set up by that
particular country. More specifically, Citizenship by naturalization includes among others
marriage, legitimization, option and acquisition of domicile. For instance, according to
proclamation No. 378/2003 of the Ethiopian nationality law (Article 5), a foreigner who applies
to acquire Ethiopian nationality by law is expected to fulfill the following conditions:
1) he/she has to attain the age of majority;
2) he/she has to establish a domicile in Ethiopia for a total of at least four years preceding the
submission of his application;
3) he/she has to be able to communicate in any one of the languages of the nations and
nationalities of the country;
4) he/she has to have a sufficient and lawful source of income to maintain him/her self and
his/her family;
5) he/she has to be a person of good charter;
6) he/she has to have no record of criminal conviction
7) he/she has to be able to show that he has been released from his previous nationality or the
possibility of obtaining such a released up on the acquisition of Ethiopian nationality or that he is
a stateless person, and
8) he/she is required to take the oath of allegiance stated under article 12 of the proclamation
which says that “I-----, solemnly affirm that I will be a loyal national of the federal democratic
republic of Ethiopia and be faithful to its constitution”. Marriage and adoption are two additional
examples of mode of acquiring citizenship by law. Here is how the process practically proceeds.

46
In the case of marriage for instance, if a woman marries a man of another country, she can have
the possibility of acquiring her husband’s country citizenship. i.e, the woman has the option of
choosing citizenship of her husband and deleting her own country. In the context of Ethiopia,
proclamation number 378/2003 article 6 clearly states that a foreigner who is married to an
Ethiopian national may acquire Ethiopian nationality by law when he/she fulfills the following
requirements:
1) The marriage is concluded in accordance with the laws of Ethiopia or the other country where
the marriage is contracted;
2) There is a lapse of at least two years since the conclusion of the marriage;
3) He/she has lived in Ethiopian for at least one year preceding the submission of the application;
and
4) He/she has fulfilled the conditions stated under article 5 (1, 7, 8) of the above proclamation.
Similarly, in the case of adoption, any child adopted by Ethiopian national, based on
proclamation No 378/2003, may obtain Ethiopian nationality by law when the following
conditions are fulfilled;
1) He/she has not attained the age of majority,
2) He/she lives in Ethiopia together with his adopting parent;
3) Where one of his adopting parents is a foreigner and so expressed in written statement; and
4) The condition stated under article 5(7) of the proclamation has been fulfilled. However, the
government of Ethiopia also grants citizenship rights to those foreign individuals who have made
an outstanding contribution in the interest of Ethiopia irrespective of the above stated conditions.
Such type of acquiring citizenship is called special case or functional nationality.
Legitimation and grant on application are also other mechanisms of citizenship acquiring. While
the former is about citizenship by recognition- i.e an illegitimate child has the right to get his/her
biological or caretaker father in accordance with Ethiopia’s proclamation no 378/2003) the
latter, on the other hand, refers to the possibility of obtaining an Ethiopian nationality by law via
the fulfillment of certain conditions. Nevertheless, different countries pursue different
requirements. For instance, according to the 1930 Ethiopian citizenship decree the requirement
for naturalized Ethiopian citizenship were; having a majority (legal age), staying in Ethiopia for
at least five years, being not dependant, being able to speak and write Amharic language and
not being accused of crime or other related illegal matters.

47
Besides, citizenship can also be obtained by political process in which case acquisition of
citizenship is by conquest or cession of territory. i.e. when the entire populations of the newly
incorporated area are made citizens of the conquering state.
C. Citizenship by mixed (dual) system
There are times when a person finds himself/herself with multiple citizenship status. Dual
nationality (citizenship) is when a person has citizenship status of two countries. This might be
due to an overlap of countries’ citizenship laws. i.e a person may have one because of his /her
place of birth (jus soil) and another because of his/her parent’s citizenship by blood (jus
sanguinis). Similarly, when a person has citizenship status of more than two countries it is
termed as multiple citizenship. Some individuals have more than two citizenship status as a
result of jus soil, jus sanguinis or naturalization laws.

• Modes of loosing Citizenship

As they pursue different principles in granting citizenship status, states also adopt different
principles to make citizens loss citizenship. For instance, in some states nationality may be
renounced i.e in case states harass the person and in turn he/she dislikes the policies or politics/
ideologies pursued by the state. On the other hand, a citizen may also be deprived of his/her
citizenship, if he/she is guilty of committing certain serious crimes against the state such as
making access national secrets to alien country, siding with enemy forces in time of war and so
on. Furthermore, Citizenship may be lost due to Lapse case- i.e in case the person stays outside
of his/her country for a long and continuous period.
How about in Ethiopia?
Ethiopia also pursues different mechanisms or ways of denying citizenship rights. As clearly
explained in article 19 of proclamation no 378/2003 of the Ethiopian nationality law one can loss
his/ her Ethiopian nationality via renunciation if; he/she has acquired or has been guaranteed the
acquisition of the nationality of another state. However, one who intends to do so shall in
advance inform the concerned authority. Moreover, he/she who has declared his/her intention to
renounce his nationality may not be released until he/she has discharged his/her outstanding
national obligations or where he/she has been accused of convicting a crime. Thus given, dual
nationality is impossible in the Ethiopian context. Article 20 of the above stated proclamation
supports this stating:

48
1) Without prejudice to the provision of article 19 (4) of this proclamation, any Ethiopian who
voluntary acquires another nationality shall be deemed to have voluntarily renounced his
Ethiopian nationality.
2) An Ethiopian who acquires another nationality by virtue of being born to a parent having a
foreign nationality or by being born abroad shall be deemed to have voluntarily renounced his
other nationality unless he has declared to the authority his option to retain it by renouncing his
other nationality within one year after attaining the age of majority or unless there has been an
earlier expressed renunciation of his Ethiopian nationality pursuant to Article 19(3) of this
proclamation.
3) An Ethiopian who acquires, in the absence of his own initiative, another nationality by the
operation of the law in connection with any ground other than those specified under sub-article
(2) of this article shall be deemed to have voluntarily renounced his Ethiopian nationality if he
starts exercising the rights conferred to such acquired nationality or fails to declare his option to
the authority to retain his Ethiopian nationality by renouncing his other nationality with in a
period of one year. And
4) A person who retains another nationality in addition to Ethiopian nationality shall be
considered an Ethiopian national until the loss of his Ethiopian nationality pursuant to sub-article
(2) or (3) of this Article.
Who is entitled to citizenship status?
Although it might sound surprising citizenship status is not a natural inheritance of only human
beings rather it also extends to non-human entities as well. Given this, the following elements are
normally entitled to citizenship status.
1. Human beings. All persons irrespective of religion, race, color etc directly have the right
to be citizens. Here, citizenship is a right not a privilege. i.e it is not a status that is
conferred by the will of government .
2. Dehumanized elements: These are institutions, plants, animals and materials that have
legal status. Example, commercial organizations, registered ships and planes, endemic
animals and plants etc. However, dehumanized elements cannot be categorized under
direct citizenship status which refers to exercising the title of citizenship directly without
the approval or will of any political body. Rather the government has the responsibility to
determine citizenship status of non-human elements. Thus, direct citizenship applies only

49
 to humanized elements although via legal status it is also possible to term dehumanized
elements as nationals of a country.
Chapter Four
Constitution, Democracy and Human rights
4.1 Constitution
Definition of constitution and constitutionalism
Constitution refers to body of rules and laws,(written or unwritten) that determine the
organization of government and the distribution of powers and functions to various organs of
government, regulate the relationship among themselves and also between the state and its
individuals through general principles on which these powers are to be exercised. Given this, a
constitution is also figuratively defined as the fundamental or basic law of a state which sets out
the structure of the state and also lists the rights of citizens alongside the limits on the power
exercise of a government.
On the other hand, Constitutionalism refers to a doctrine that governments should be faithful to
their constitutions because the rules and laws so provided are all that can protect citizens’ rights
from arbitrary actions and decisions of the government. Put differently, it is the belief that
constitution of a state is the best arrangement of things and activities in a society.

Purposes and classifications of Constitution

Purpose 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

50
 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.
• It protects individual and collective rights of citizens: To protect the individual and
collective rights and freedoms of people, the constitution of a state lay down the
relationship between the state and the individual by making out the respective spheres of
government on the one hand, and the individual and collective rights and freedoms on the
other.
• It serves as the supreme (highest) law of a country: this implies that constitution is the
source of and supreme over all laws in a country. I.e. No specific law will be valid if it
contradicts the constitution. All laws in a country are made to fulfill the objectives and
goals 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.

51
 Classification/ Types of Constitutions
For the convenience of studying constitution of state scholars of the subject find it valuable to
categorize constitutions in different categories based on criteria such as the principle they posses
pertaining to distribution of political power, separation of power among branches of government,
and the procedures employed for amending the constitution. Accordingly, constitutions in
different political systems differ from one another. They also differ in their form, content and
patterns of political arrangements as a result of variations in historical backgrounds, social
traditions and political practices. i.e In some cases constitutions are products of compromises
and consensus of differing social and political forces of society while in others they are drawn
by power holders in government with the aim of securing their desired political and socio-
economic interests.

These being the case, by form constitutions are generally classified as written /codified or
unwritten/ uncodified ones. While 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, an unwritten constitution on the other hand refers
to a set of rules, regulations, declarations and laws passed by either a parliament (the legislative
body) or other competent body (ies) at different times that are not compiled in a single document
containing key constitutional provision yet it renders advantages of elasticity/adaptability to
changing circumstances or situations.

Similarly, On the basis of the complexity with which provisions of the constitution can be
changed or amending process, constitutions are categorized as rigid or flexible ones. i.e whereas
a rigid constitution is one that does not adapt itself to changing circumstances immediately and
quickly or simply one whose amendment procedures are relatively complex or difficult ( For
example, as in the case of the USA where it needs 2/3 majorities in both Houses (the House of
Representatives plus House of the Senate) and in Ethiopia where constitutional amendment
requires a support by majority vote of all state councils, by a two-thirds majority vote of the
House of People’s Representatives and by a two-thirds majority vote of the House of the
Federation), flexible constitution on the other hand is one that adapts easily and immediately to

52
 changing circumstances or simply one whose amendment procedures are relatively simple as in
the case of UK, and Israel in which the central legislature can easily amend the constitutions.

Constitutions are also grouped in to effective or nominal ones on the basis of the degree to
which constitution of a state is observed in practice. 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. Last but not
least, constitutions can also be substantially classified as either Federal or Unitary ones
depending on the extent to which they concentrate government legislative, executive and judicial
powers at the center (the former) or distribute it among the different branches and levels of
government (the latter).

4.2 Democracy
Definition and ways of exercising democracy
Definition
Though democracy might be defined differently in different contexts, we can for our purpose here approach the
concept from two perspectives. One is to define it etymologically as government/rule of and by the people (i.e
‘demos’ in Greek means people and ‘kratia’ rule hence democracy means peoples’ rule) and the other is to give the
concept a socio-cultural and politico-economic context and accordingly define it as a moral value/ethical idea that
preaches about liberty and equality of individuals and groups and hence the need for government’s/other actors’
power limitation if they go against these values. Moreover, democracy signifies in the same contexts a political
system of rule in which values of tolerance, cooperation, compromise, consensus, compassion, civility,
pragmatism, etc. are uphold as instruments of peaceful resolution/management of conflicts and hence differences
accommodation. Generally, democracy refers to a political and social process through which people to people as
well as people –government relationships are guided by principles of popular sovereignty (a belief that
government’s legitimate authority emanates from the people) and rule of law (a belief that government power
should not be arbitrary rather its exercise must be circumscribed/limited by a set of rules).

53
 Ways of exercising democracy
If one maintains the definition of democracy to be a government system in which supreme power is vested in and
exercised by people, two broad ways of exercising it can be singled out namely Direct and Indirect. i.e while
direct democracy implies a form of government in which the right to make political decisions is exercised directly
by the whole body of citizens acting under procedures of majority rule (as in the case of referenda, local
meetings/discussions) indirect democracy on the other hand refers to a form of government in which citizens
exercise their rights and freedoms and discharge their obligations not in person but through representatives chosen
by themselves.
Fundamental values and principles of Democracy
There are three core values that are central in the discussion of the concept of democracy. These are values of
liberty/freedom, justice and equality. Lets 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

54
 equality (implying that all peoples of a country deserve equal and fair assessment to the national
resources services).
Although we can be exhaustive in our list, the followings constitute some of the fundamental principles
(both in the procedural and substantial senses) of democracy. These are;
1. The principle of popular sovereignty: this is the idea that the only legitimate source of government authority is
the consent of the governed which consist of the citizens of a state as a whole. Consent is given by the people
through their regularly elected representatives and approval of all constitutional changes. Popular sovereignty also
means that the people have the right to withdraw their consent when the government fails to fulfill its obligations
under the constitution. Technically, popular sovereignty in democracy assumes the principle of majority rule
which means that within some constitutional limits the majorities should have the right to make political decisions.
2. The principle of constitutional supremacy: This is a principle that puts the constitution at the highest level in
the hierarchy of laws. According to this principle, the constitution is above all laws and organs of a state. This
principle dictates all laws and governmental or non-governmental acts to be under the constitution. It also implies
that if an act is found to be against the constitution, it would out of effect or void. In the Ethiopian case, Article 9
of the FDRE constitution states that the highest power and authority is vested in the nations, nationalities and
peoples of Ethiopia to indicate that they are the sovereign in the land.
3. The principle of Rule of Law: it means that both government and the governed are and must be subject to the
laws of a country when they make decisions and take actions instead of doing so arbitrarily.
4. The principle of secularism: this is a principle that demands strict separation of religious and political affairs
and hence state and church operations basing on the philosophy that Individuals and groups in a free society
should have freedom of conscience (the right to decide for themselves what to believe in which case it can be
threatened if government becomes religious and supports some religions but not others). This principle is clearly
upheld in Article 11 of the FDRE Constitution which states that 1) State and religion are separate 2) There shall be
no state religion and 3) The state shall not interfere in religious matters and religion shall not interfere in the state
affairs.
5. The principle of accountability and transparency: this is a principle that as the ultimate power holder is the
people public officials at different levels should involve public participation in decision makings and also be
answerable for any misdoings. In fact, this principle is a natural consequence of the strict application of principles
of separation of powers (the idea that the law making, implementation and interpretation powers of government
should be separated horizontally among the legislative, executive, and judicial institutions and vertically between

55
the central and state governments) and checks and balance ( to mean that the powers given to the different
branches of government are balanced so that no branch can completely dominate the others).
6. The principle of civilian government and peaceful transition of political power: This is a general principle that
there must be a civilian control of the military often to be reflected in the form of making the head of government
or state also the commander in chief of the armed forces and most importantly giving the parliament constitutional
power to declare war. Parallel to this the principle is also about the prevalence of peaceful transition of political
power first from the public via. Elections to political contestants (parties or individuals) and latter from all
competitors to a winner(s). To this end, elections are expected to be fair, free periodic, competitive and all
inclusive.
7. The principle of protection and promotion of human rights: Human rights are those naturally given values that
reflect respect for human life and dignity hence their protection and promotion test the legitimacy and
constitutionality of a democratic government. There are different types of human rights that seriously need
government protection and promotion such as first generation rights( Civil and political rights), second
generation rights (Social and Economic and cultural rights) and third generation rights (Environmental and
developmental rights).
4.3 Human Rights
4.3.1 Definition, Nature and Classification of 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 even alternatively called as natural rights which are equally possessed by all
human beings everywhere. Human rights are understood to represent individual and group
demands for shaping and sharing of power, wealth, enlightenment and other values (like-respect
and its constituent elements of reciprocal tolerance, mutual clemency). Unlike Moral rights that
emanate from the consensus of two or more groups and Legal rights which are exercised as per
the legal permission of certain bodies and thus are accordingly amendable /violable human
rights are natural rights that do not emanate from government will or from individuals
conventions. Given this, human rights possess the following salient features that distinguish them
from other variants of right like democratic rights.

56
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.
Human Rights Instruments
United Nations: Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) contains 30 articles, which
includes different types of rights that are civil, political, social and cultural rights. It was
formulated by the General Assembly on 10 December 1948. Ethiopia is one of the signatory of
this treaty and the United Nations charter states all member states are expected to promote and
respect human rights. Therefore, UDHR has been important in that it has influenced the
constitutions, laws, and court decisions of many countries and international organizations since
its development.
European Union: The council of Europe adopted the European convention on Human Rights in
1950. The European convention has created two organs.
1. The European commission on Human Rights
2. European court of Human Rights
America: The North, South and Central American countries also formed the second regional
organization for the protection of human rights in 1948. This organization was the Organization
of American States (OAS). The OAS adopted the American Convention on Human Rights in
1969. This convention provides for two organs.
1. Inter-American Commission on Human Right

57
 2. Inter-American court of Human Rights
Africa: The organization of African Unity (OAU) was set up in 1963. In 1981 the OAU adopted
the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Arab Countries: The League of Arab States was founded in 1945 and has concern about human
right matters. It established an Arab Commission on Human Rights. Another related organization
called the organization of the Islamic Conference was also established in 1971. The organization
of the Islamic Conference adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam in 1990.

Human Right instruments in Ethiopia

Ethiopia has fully accepted the human rights provision of the UDHR of the 1948. The present
day constitution of Ethiopia has incorporated the fundamental and basic freedoms and rights that
are defined in the UDHR. For the implementation of these rights there must be a mechanism of
checking, monitoring and protecting the human rights of citizens against abuses and violations.
The prominent human rights instruments include; the Human Rights Commission and the
Ombudsman that operate for the protection of citizens against abuses and violations of their
rights and for redressing wrong doings. Article 55 sub Article 14 and 15 of the FDRE
constitution dictates that the House of Peoples Representatives responsibility to establish the
Human Right Commission and the institution of Ombudsman and determine their power and
functions.
The major objectives of these institutions are:
(a)To serve as public guardian for the growth of democracy and proper application of rights,
and stand for the fulfillment of human and democratic rights in Ethiopia; (b)To protect
Ethiopian citizens democratic and human rights as enshrined in the constitution from any
violations by societal forces including government authorities, administrative personnel and
community; and (c) To assist avoid injustice, misuse of governmental powers, embezzlement
and corrupt behaviors of some governmental officials.
More specifically under Proclamation No. 210/2000 Article 5 Human Right Commission was
established with the objective to educate the public be aware of human rights see to it that human
rights are protected, respected and fully enforced as well as to have the necessary measure taken
where they are found to have been violated. Under the same Proclamation article 6 stipulates the
duties and power of Commission as to: (1) Ensure that the human rights and freedoms provided

58
for under the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia are respected by all
citizens, organs of state, political organizations and other associations as well as by their
respective officials; (2) Ensure that laws, regulations and directives as well as government
decisions and orders do not contravene the human rights of citizens guaranteed by the
Constitution; (3) Educate the public, using the mass media and other means, with a view to
enhancing its tradition of respect for, and demand for enforcement of, rights upon acquiring
sufficient awareness regarding human rights; (4) Undertake investigation, upon complaint or its
own initiation, in respect of human rights violations; (5) Make recommendations for the revision
of existing laws, enactment of new laws and formulation of policies. (6) Provide consultancy
services on matters of human rights; (7) Forward its opinion on human rights reports to be
submitted to international organs; (8) Translate into local vernaculars, international human
rights instruments adopted by Ethiopia and disperse same; (9) Participate in international
human rights meeting, conferences or symposia; (10) Own property, enter into contracts, sue
and be sued in its own name; (11) Perform such other activities as may be necessary to attain its
objective.
Constitution, democracy and human right experiences in Ethiopia
The 1931 First Written Constitution of Ethiopia
The 1931 constitution was the first written constitution in the Ethiopian history. The introduction
of the written constitution however, doesn’t mean that a new philosophy was introduced to the
Ethiopian political system. Instead, it was an attempt to simply change the unwritten dynastic
claim in to a written form, in other words; it didn’t provide genuine freedom to the Ethiopian
peoples. Its main aim was to give the country and the Imperial Rule an image of modernity. By
and large, the major aim of the 1931 constitution was guaranteeing continuity to the rule of
the Emperor. This can be clearly seen in the constitution that the king was presented as the
representative of God. In the same constitution, the king is presented as “Niguse Negest Seyume
Egziabher,” which literally means king of kings elect of God. Those who were participating in
the political leadership were only the noblemen. Even then, the power was absolutely in the
hands of the Emperor.
The 1931 constitution was not initiated by the demand of the people and it was not also
initiated for the people. That is why there was no attention to guarantee popular sovereignty,

59
political freedoms and fundamental human rights to the Ethiopian people. And the people were
considered as subjects as they used to be, without granting any kind of political and civil rights.
In general the constitution was formulated or introduced mainly to attain two basic purposes that
would advance the Emperor’s authority and political control.
1. The constitution was intended to give Ethiopia the image of “modernity” in the international
community. i.e. to achieve recognition abroad and to give Ethiopia the image of modernity.
This was done in the hope of securing recognition to Ethiopia’s statehood and the Emperor’s
sovereign rule in the country. During that period, Ethiopia felt pressures from the European
powers that controlled colonial territories in Africa. Ethiopia was accused of being
“uncivilized” to be considered as a sovereign political entity in an international atmosphere by
the colonial powers. The colonial powers did that to justify their presence in Africa with a
“civilizing” and “modernizing” mission. Therefore, HaileSelassie issued the constitution to
impress Europeans with Ethiopia’s political modernity in search of external sovereignty for
Ethiopia.
2. More significantly than the above purpose, the constitution was introduced to strengthen,
and centralize the absolute power of the Emperor HaileSelassie by extending his power over
the regional rulers. In other words the constitution was meant to create a legal framework that
enabled the Emperor to subordinate the traditional nobilities. The emperor had greater desire to
centralize power, thus, he used the constitution as a legal basis to extend the power of the
central government over regional rulers. As the result, the emperor became the only person
that could give political titles and appointments. This helped him to end any tendency of
provincial autonomy by the nobility. Thus, the constitution provided him with legal framework
for political legitimacy to his personal rule.
This constitution served the interests of the Emperor. Thus, the 1931 constitution can be referred
as the Charter of the absolute power of the monarchy. The political and human rights, freedoms
and liberties of peoples of Ethiopia were denied.
However, the 1931 constitution laid some foundations for modern practices of government in
Ethiopia. These innovations can be summarized as follows:
1. Parliamentary System
One major contribution of the 1931 constitution was the creation of the parliament. The
parliament was bi-cameral. Namely the Chamber of the Senate (yehigMewesegnaMeker Bet) and
chamber of Deputies (YehigmemriaMiker Bet). These were the legislative body. The Emperor

60
had the power to appoint members of the chambers of senate from the members of dignitaries
(mekuwanints) who have for a long time served his empire as princes or ministers, judges or
army leaderswhile the Chamber of Deputies (YehigmemriaMeker Bet) were to be elected
through an indirect voting system in which only the nobility participated until the people are
capable of electing them themselves. Their term of office was not limited. The primary function
of the deliberative chambers was advisory. It was not an institution that decides on laws because
the chambers could neither refuse to deliberate on proposal sent to them nor initiate legislation
themselves. The law making power was vested on the emperor and the parliament was merely
meant to rubber stamp the legislation of the Emperor.
2. Annual Budget
The 1931 constitution introduced the idea of providing fixed annual budget for government. In
principle, Annual budget was meant to be proposed by minister of finance during deliberations
in the Chamber of Deputies and in the Senate, whose resolutions shall be submitted for the
approval of the Emperor.In practice, however, the assignment of budget as indicated in the
constitution had not been properly implemented.
3. Ministerial System
The constitution also provided the institutional framework for the ministerial system. While the
Emperor remained with the most important executive power, the ministerial system of
government was completely subordinate to the Emperor. The ministers both individually and
collectively were responsible to the Emperor. There was no prime minister; the ministry of pen
acted as the first among equals. Thus, the executive branch of government was heavily
dominated by the Emperor.
4. Judicial Branches
The traditional courts of law were formally institutionalized by the 1931 constitution. According
to the constitution, there were two separate systems of courts, known as, Regular Courts; and
Administrative tribunals. The former deals with civil and criminal cases. The Administrative
Tribunals handle civil cases that affect the government. At the top of the court system was
Emperor’s Chilot (YenigusChilot) where the emperor in person reviewed cases, and if
necessary, change judicial decisions. The highest judicial power was in the hands of the
Emperor.

61
 The Revised Constitution of 1955
After nearly 25-year experiment of written constitution, Ethiopia entered in to the second phase
of its constitutional development. The political principles and objectives of the 1955 constitution
were much clearer in pronouncing the powers and functions of the Imperial government than its
predecessor. It included some provisions bearing advanced democratic ideas compared to the
previous written constitution.

Like the constitution of 1931, however, the revised constitution did not involve popular process
for ratification. Indeed it was “gift” from the Emperor to his subjects on the occasion of
celebrating his twenty –five years in power, i.e. silver jubilee.
In terms of enhancing popular sovereignty, the principles and manners of implementing the
revised constitution made little or no progress.
There were major historical and political processes that forced the revised constitution to come
into being. One of the essential prerequisites for constitutional revision was the act of federation
of Eritrea with Ethiopia in 1952. Eritrea that had been under Italian colonial rule for decades, and
latter under the British protectorate, was federated with Ethiopia following the decision made by
United Nations (UN) General Assembly.
Under the supervision of the United Nations, the Eritrean constitution of 1952 was drafted
providing a separate system of government for Eritrea under the sovereignty of Ethiopian crown.
The federation of Eritrea, therefore, created abnormal political situation. Firstly, the federal act
was not strictly federal in its nature; Ethiopia remained a unitary state with absolute rule of an
Emperor, while Eritrea obtained an entirely different government. In other words, there emerged
two separate governments, based on entirely different principles i.e. elected government in
Eritrea and an absolute monarch in Ethiopia. Thus, both were exercising different powers over
the same territory. Secondly, in its nature, the Eritrean constitution implied a more liberal
government that incorporated some element of democratic society. Thus the Emperor saw it
necessary to settle this political anomaly by granting the revised constitution of 1955. Moreover,
it was also required to redress the inadequacies of the 1931 constitution to cope up with the
social and political dynamics of the period.

As far as the content and issues addressed are concerned, the revised constitution maintained
some of the basic principles of the 1931 constitution. However, it incorporated some new
concepts, and it was much more elaborated than its predecessor. It has 131 articles divided in to
eight chapters. The first two chapters, comprising nearly one third of the articles, were concerned

62
with defining the power and authority of the Emperor and privileges of the imperial family. Only
one chapter was reserved to deal with some rights and duties of the people. Its undemocratic
character can simply be inferred from the Emphasis given to the Authority of the Emperor. It
further developed the centralizing and “modernizing” themes of the 1931 constitution.
The Revised Constitution more strongly established the Absolute power of the monarch. It
declares the “inviolability of the emperor’s dignity”. He could appoint and dismiss the prime
minister and other ministers, judges, diplomats, and other government officials in all branches of
government as he wished. The emperor also had the power to dissolve the parliament. Any law
could not come in to effect unless he approved it. He was also provided with co-legislative
functions. Besides members of the parliament, only the emperor had the right to submit
proposals; and proposals approved by both house of parliament were not law unless and until
signed by him. Thus, the emperor has veto power on legislation and when parliament was not in
session the government issued imperial decrees. The emperor was not only commander in chief
of the army forces but was constitutionally empowered to meet threats to the defense or integrity
of the empire. The emperor exercised supreme direction in the foreign relations of the empire
and alone conferred and withdrew titles of prince and other honors and instituted new orders.
Moreover, his power also extended to the extent of determining the administrative affairs of the
church itself. In short, the 1955 revised constitution made the powers and authority of the
Emperor absolute and complete in the Ethiopian state and society. In contrast, little significance
was attached to the need to guarantee political and human rights of the Ethiopian people through
protecting individual rights in terms of property, life and private affairs. However, in practice the
mechanisms for implementing these limited rights were largely absent. There were no effective
means for representing and reflecting the needs and interests of the people in the government. In
the practical sense, Ethiopian people were still considered as merely subjects of the Emperor.
Although the revised constitution of 1955 was a step forward in the history of constitutional
development in Ethiopia, in effect it failed to lay down a democratic tradition in the Ethiopian
political process.
In the end, it is possible to identify some progressive elements, which were included in the
Revised Constitution of 1955. These were the following:
1. It gave at least textual recognition to rights and liberties of citizens, which included rights
such as freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of assembly, and people’s

63
 participation in election of the members of chamber of Deputies. But, there was no
observance (enforcement) of these provisions of rights and freedoms of individuals in
practice at all. It was only paper value to ordinary Ethiopians.
2. The Chamber of Deputies was made to have the power, at least in textual sense, to
question the ministers with the view to hold the government accountable.

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

By the mid-1970s, the undemocratic system of the Imperial government came under socio-
political challenges and crises that led to its ultimate collapse. The continued social, economic
and political crises led to the outbreak of the Ethiopian revolution in 1974 which has resulted in
the deposition of Emperor Haile Selassie from power.

In order to deepen its power, the Derg established its single party, the Workers’ Party of Ethiopia
(WPE) in 1987. This has marked the transition from no party system to the one party system in
Ethiopia. Nevertheless, this did not give rise to democratic orders. Through eliminating or
weakening internal opposition, the Derg moved on establishing the Peoples’ Democratic
Republic of Ethiopia (PDRE).

The PDRE constitution differed from the previous constitutions in some ways. It was drafted by
a constitutional commission through a program of public “consultation”. It was later on
ratified by the name of a popular referendum to provide it pretext of broad participation.
However, the discussions were not effective as planned because the public was in the state of
insecurity and intimidation. Discussions were carried out on matters of peripheral importance
and nobody dared to express his/her opinion on issues of central importance such as political and
ideological matters. The overall objective of the 1987 constitution was the establishment of a
proletarian dictatorship under the WPE. Following that the constitution put all three branches of
the government under the strict control of the party.

Under the 1987 constitution there was no separation of powers but unity of power following one
of the basic principles of socialist constitutionalism. In the PDRE years power was totally in the
hands of Mengistu Hailemariam and/or the WPE but allowing separation of functions only. In

64
other words, what is desirable in a socialist set up is the delineation of the competence and
practical activities of the different state organs and not separation of powers used in the capitalist
political system.

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

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

65
Contrary to the previous constitution, the 1987 PDRE constitution explicitly states the separation
of state and religion. So it appeared to be a meaningful solution to problem related to inequalities
among nationalities in Ethiopia. The establishment of the Institute of Nationalities was assumed
by many as a prelude and by the Derg to ending the civil wars. However, the most the Derg
could offer was regional autonomy, as is unable to implement genuine decentralization of
governance.

The 1995 Constitution of FDRE

The constitution affirms that the peoples of Ethiopia are the source of sovereignty and that this
sovereignty is expressed through this constitution. It explicitly states the rights and duties of the
federal government as well as the prerogatives and obligations of the regional states. It clearly
declares the areas that purely fall under the jurisdiction of the federal government and that of the
regional states as a well as their concurrent powers. It also states the political power shall be held
through periodic, fair and free elections, which entitles the Ethiopian citizens to exercise their
human, democratic, political, social and economic rights and freedoms. For this it recognizes and
affirms fundamental human rights and freedoms in conformity with the United Nations Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and other international human right instruments.

The constitution dictates that any official or governmental body shall not exercise power
arbitrarily. Officials and governments at all levels are to be held accountable to their people and
responsible for their actions and decisions. If the people lose confidence on their elected
representatives they have a constitutional right to recall them at any time.

The constitution established a parliamentary system of government and divides the legislative,
executive and judicial powers among the parliament, council of Ministers and the independent
Judiciary. Let us now examine the structure of the Ethiopian government under the Federal
Constitution. But, before that lets spend some time on the stages the FDRE Constitution goes
through in its formulation and the major objectives, of the constitution and other related issues
and more pints about the FDRE Constitution.

66
Principles of the 1995 FDRE Constitution
♠ The Principle of the full respect of the fundamental democratic and Human rights of the
Citizens at individual and collective levels; and
♠ The principle of living together. i.e. the principle of peaceful co-existence on the basis of
equality and without any ethnic, cultural, political, religions, gender, social status, or any
other form of discrimination.
Features:
The 1995 FDRE constitution has the following features:
1. System of Federalism
2. Recognition of diversity - Ethiopia is a home of various Nations, Nationalities and peoples;
and hence unity is to be conspicuously and essentially founded on this diversity.
3. Provisions of Basic /fundamental Democratic and Human Rights.
4. The Principle of Unity based diversity to be based on Equality Justice and rules of law.
5. Ethnicity as a major component is officially empowered-Utmost Significance is given to
the Ethno-linguistic components of the Ethiopia Society.
6. Parliamentary Democracy-The use of parliamentary democracy assumes the exercise of
freely and fairly contested, periodic elections and representative assembly or assemblies.
7. The Right to Self-determination up to Secession
8. State Ownership of Land- the right to ownership of rural and urban land is exclusively
vested up on the state and up on the peoples of Ethiopia. “Land is a common property of the
Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia and shall not be subject to sale or other
means of transfer.”
9. Equality of languages and their practical application in government- “all Ethiopian
Languages shall enjoy equal state recognition.”
10. Constitutional Interpretation- i.e. the highest authority, of interpreting the Constitution
is vested up on the House of Federation

67
 Chapter Five
5.1. Over view of Ethics and Ethical theories/school of thoughts
Within the broad categories of deontological and teleological ethics, philosophers have
developed five basic approaches to values to deal with moral issues. Teleological theories
give priority to the good over the right and evaluate actions by the goal or consequences that
they attain. The term “teleological” is derived from the Greek word “telos” which means end or
goal. Thus, right actions are those that produce the most or optimize the consequences of one’s
choices, whereas wrong actions are those that do not contribute to the good. Deontological
theories argue for the priority of the right over the good or the independence of the right from
the good. “Deontological” is also derived from the Greek word, “deon”, which means
obligation. Actions are intrinsically right or wrong regardless of the consequences which they
produce. The “right” or ethically proper action might be deduced from a duty or a basic human
right, but it is never contingent on the outcome or the consequences of the action. Deontological
theories include both duty-based and rights-based approaches to ethical reasoning. These are
sometimes referred to as pluralism and contractarianism.
This section will describe some of the competing ethical theories and frameworks and how they
might be applied to solve certain practical moral problems:
1) The Utilitarian Approach
Utilitarianism - maximizing good for the greatest number of people - was conceived in the 19th
century by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill to help legislators determine which laws were
morally best. Both Bentham and Mill suggested that ethical actions are those that provide the
greatest balance of good over evil. The ethical choice is the one that produces the greatest excess
of benefits over harm. An action or policy is right if it produce the greatest net benefits or
the lowest net costs. “Utility”– refers to the net benefits (of good) created by an action. Moral
principle of utilitarianism is persons ought to act in a way that promotes the maximum net
expectable utility, i.e., the greatest net benefits or the lowest net costs, for the broadest
community affection by their actions.
Utilitarianism argues that the consequences of an action make that action either moral or
immoral. An action that leads to beneficial consequences is right or moral; one that leads to
harmful consequences is wrong or immoral. Utilitarianism is known as a consequentiality
theory.

68
To analyze an issue using the utilitarian approach, we first identify the various courses of action
available to us. Second, we ask who will be affected by each action and what benefits or harms
will be derived from each action. And third, we choose the action that will produce the greatest
benefits and the least harm. The ethical action is the one that provides the greatest good for the
greatest number.

3. The Rights Approach

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

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

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

69
In deciding whether an action is moral or immoral using this second approach, then, we must
ask, ‘Does the action respect the moral rights of everyone?’ Actions are wrong to the extent that
they violate the rights of individuals; the more serious the violation, the more wrongful the
action.

3. The Fairness or Justice Approach

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

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

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

70
The principle of fair equality of opportunity, states that everyone has to get an equal opportunity
to obtain the most privileged positions and offices in society or in a just institution of that group.

4. The Common-Good Approach

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

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

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

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

5. The Virtue Approach

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

Virtues are attitudes or character traits that enable us to be and to act in ways that develop our
highest potential. They enable us to pursue the ideals we have adopted. Honesty, courage,

71
compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples
of virtues.

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

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

5.2. Selected issues in Applied Ethics

Development Ethics
The notion of “Development” is as equally a moral issue/concept as it is political, legal
and economic. Therefore, from the point of view of the study of ethics/morality, there are a
number of development related questions /issues that are worth of discussion and analysis.
For instance, one might legitimately ask questions like;
• In what direction and by what means should a society 'develop'?
• Who is morally responsible for beneficial change?
• What are the moral obligations, if any, of rich societies to poor societies? Etc. In fact , if
some is a development ethicist, he /she might even go as far as asking the following
more deeper and wider questions;
• What should be counted as good or bad development?
• What controversial moral issues might emerge in development policymaking and practice
and how should they be resolved?
• How should the burdens and benefits of development be distributed?
• What are the most serious local, national and international impediments to good
development? And the like.

At the heart of all the above questions is therefore a moral concern to find out sources for
moral assessment of theories and practices of development that exist today and thereby
prescribing a morally better way outs for future development. This being the case, studying

72
development ethics would be extremely crucial to identify major areas of moral consensus and
controversy on practicing and defining development and eventually develop shared general
parameters for ethically based development. As their points of convergence, almost all
development ethicists first underline that development practices and theories have ethical and
value dimensions hence they must be approached accordingly during analysis of support and
criticism. Second, although development is multidisciplinary lacking precise definition they tend
to agree on its minimum understanding as reducing human deprivation and misery
particularly in the material sense. Third, a consensus exists also on the fact that development
planners should seek strategies in which both human well-being and a healthy
environment jointly exist (i.e. the issue of sustainable development). A fourth and recently
evolving area of agreement is that development strategies must be contextually sensitive.
This is so because what constitutes the best means of development depends on a society's history
and stage of social change as well as on regional and global forces. For instance, some might
prefer state provisioning while others market mechanisms. Neither could be absolutely bad or
good.

Despite all the above points of agreement, however, there are several controversies and
unsettled issues on conceptualization and practice of development. This controversy starts
with scope of development ethics itself. Development ethics’ initial concern was
assessing the development ends and means of poor societies (third world societies). The
question is should it now go beyond this, there is no consensus. The same trend of controversy
exists on how to deal with kinds of currently existing North-South (and South-
South) relations and their effects on economic and political power gaps.
Development ethicists also are divided the moral norms that they seek to justify and apply. Three
positions have emerged in this regard. Universalists, such as utilitarians and Kantians, argue
that development goals and principles are valid for all societies. Particularists, especially
communitarians and postmodern relativists, however argue that universalism masks
ethnocentrism and (Northern) cultural imperialism. Instead, particularists support what can be
called procedural principle which asserts that each nation or society should grow only on its own
traditions and decide its own development ethic and path. The third approach in this respect tries
to avoid the extremism between the first two positions stating that development ethics should

73
forge a cross-cultural consensus in which a society's own freedom to make development choices
is one among a plurality of fundamental norms and in which these norms are of sufficient
generality so as not only to permit but also to require sensitivity to societal differences. The
above debate in short was on issue of procedure of development-how is it to be brought about?
How about on its contents? There is also an ongoing debate about how development’s benefits,
burdens and responsibilities should be distributed within poor countries and between rich and
poor countries. Utilitarian’s prescribe simple aggregation and maximization of individual
utilities. Rawlsians advocate that income and wealth be maximized for the least well-off
(individuals or nations). Libertarians contend that a society should guarantee no form of equality
apart from equal freedom from the interference of government and other people. Capability
ethicists defend governmental responsibility to enable everyone to be able to advance to a level
of sufficiency.

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

In sum, it is the existence of all the above complicated development oriented ethical issues that
directly or indirectly and positively or negatively affect the life of every one of us that justifies
studying development ethics via interdisciplinary and cross-cultural dialogue so that we
all could deepen and widen the current consensus and then apply ethical wisdom to enhance
human well-being and international development.

 Environmental Ethics
Environmental ethics is the discipline that broadly studies the moral relationship of human
beings to the environment. From the perspective of morality study it covers the challenge of

74
environmental ethics to the anthropocentrism (i.e., human-centeredness) and vice versa. More
specifically, there are many ethical decisions that human beings make with respect to the
environment. For example:
• Should individuals continue clearing forests for various consumption purposes?
• Should individuals continue making gasoline powered vehicles?
• What environmental obligations do individuals need to bear for future generations?

Is it right for humans to knowingly cause the extinction of other species for their own
convenience? Etc. With a view to develop answers to the above moral questions on
environment, three general ethical approaches have emerged over the last 20 years. The
following technical terms can be used to describe the approaches: Libertarian Extension,
Ecologic Extension and Conservation Ethics. According to libertarian extension approach, the
value of liberty must be echoed when we deal with environment to. (i.e. a commitment to
extend equal rights to all members of a community). The approach defined community as
consist of both non-humans and humans. In view of ecologic extension approach, however,
emphasis must not be placed on human rights on the recognition of the fundamental
interdependence of all biological and a biological entities. The point here is that as planet is
unified entity the human race alone is of no particular significance in the long run. Finally,
supporters of conservation ethics approach on the other hand tend to look at the worth of the
environment in terms of its utility or usefulness to humans .i.e the approach argues for the
preservation of the environment as long as it has extrinsic value to humans (it is instrumental to
the welfare of human beings).In other words, conservation must be understood as a means to an
end and purely concerned with mankind and intergenerational considerations. It is this ethic that
has been also widely pronounced at the Kyoto environment summit of 1997 and the three
agreements reached in Rio in 1992. How about in Copenhagen and the coming Cancun
conference? What are the main agendas? What are the main arguments and counterarguments?
Etc. (issues for discussion).

 Professional ethics
Profession has now become a very popular term in almost all world countries/societies including
Ethiopia partly due to new developments in the relations between citizens and government
as well as citizens and citizens in the ethical sphere. What then are profession and professional
75
ethics? The concept profession, though it may mean different things under different contexts,
can be generally defined as a systematic way of acquiring and continuous development of a
balanced combination of 1) Training (here to mean a formal, rational, systematized and
scheduled activity to transfer knowledge from the trainer and the environment to the trainee), 2)
Specialty/expertise (here refers to a situation in which the trainee ends up with being an almost
irreplaceable one/a referent point in a specific field), and 3) Full time activity and source of
livelihood (to mean that the individual now becomes fully engaged in the application of the
knowledge so gained on full time arrangement and that has to be the major source of his/her
income). This definition in turn provides us with the following distinguishing features of a
profession;
• Technicality/specialty/particularity: which refers to having a knowledge and skill about
parts of a whole regarding specific procedures in the operations of things, the specific
rules governing operations and relations that should be kept along the general process;
• Service delivery/relationality: any profession has the ultimate purpose of rendering some
sets of services for individuals, groups or the state;
• Decision making: This feature follows from the above because every service delivered to
the people is directly or indirectly a decision made by a professional. For instance, a
patient who goes to the hospital may be told by the nurse that he will undergo medical
operation. This is a professional decision made by the doctor as a professional and
hence cannot be shared by any other people inside or outside. Similarly, to give some
professional advice to a political leader at any level of government is by itself a decision
because it involves influence over the options before the leader. In precise terms,
the professional is there to give decisions and decisions are the integral part of service
delivery. Any professional decision is an official response of the government to the
demand of a citizen who needs the service. It may be a decision to give the service on
demand or it may be a rejection due to some failure in the process or it may be
a post-phoning until some preconditions are met by the service seeker; And

Complementarities: specialty and particularity cannot be the end points of a profession in this
dynamic and interconnected world requiring vast knowledge and skill in order to resolve a long
list of social problems widening ever and ever. As such, there can never be an encyclopedic type

76
of profession which contains all needed professional services by the people. This is so because
an average citizen may demand a dozen of services at one time as a matter of right. For example,
a man who wants to build his house may need service from a planner, then an architect, then a
consultant, then a banker then a designer and so on. It is thus becomes clear that all these
services cannot be full field at one instant and location as they are fragmented and naturally
belong to different professionals. This necessitates for the Complementarity of all professions.

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

Building on the definition of profession, professional ethics can also be generally defined as
ethics that enables professionals of different fields to distinguish what is right from what is
wrong using morality as standard of evaluation and thus judge on their actions and behaviors. It
follows that Professionals are expected to behave and act in accordance with the codes of
conduct each profession demands. In other words, professional ethics is concerned with the
moral issues that arise because of the specialized knowledge that professionals attain, and how
the use of this knowledge should be governed when providing a service to the public. What this
in turn implies is that a meaningful discussion of professional ethics is almost impossible in the
absence of the concept of professional responsibility attached to it. i.e. a professional carries
additional moral responsibilities to those held by the population in general. This is because
professionals are capable of making and acting on an informed decision in situations that the
general public cannot as the latter have not received the relevant training. For example, a layman
member of the public could not be held responsible for failing to act to save a car crash victim
because he/she could not give an emergency medical treatment. This is because he/she does not
have the relevant knowledge. In contrast, a fully trained doctor with the correct equipment and

77
thus capable of making the correct diagnosis and carrying out the procedure did wrong if he/she
stood by and failed to help in this situation. On the other side, this additional knowledge comes
to the professional with authority and power. i.e. the clients places trust in the professional on
the assumption that the service provided will be of benefit to them though. It is also quite
possible for the professional to use this authority to exploit the client. An example here can be
the case with a medical professional who undertakes unnecessary treatment on his patients in
order to gain more money. It is likely that the patient will not have sufficient knowledge to
question what is being done, and so will undergo and pay for the treatment. It is situations like
this that make the study of professional ethics-professional responsibilities nexus justifiable
and valuable.

As in all areas of human life, there are values of good and bad in the professional world too. A
professional is first and for most never an angel simply because he/she is of a specialty of the
most desired type. A professional is a human being as anyone with all human strengths and
weaknesses though with a strong tendency to modify them through rational thinking which the
training he/she supplied. Secondly, a professional is a citizen with a set of specified rights and
obligations shared with all other citizens regardless of educational standing and income level.
This brings additional duty to the professional to be integrated in to his mission and goal as a
professional. Thirdly, a professional is a member of one of the cultural groups of the society with
he/she shares commonality in language, religion, culture, and psychological make-up and thus it
is natural for him/her to develop tendency to have some kind of bondage. i.e. he/ or she feels
what other members of his/her cultural group members feel and strongly tempted to respond
somehow to pressures from the groupings. Fourthly, a professional is a citizen with an
exceptional knowledge and capacity which is not shared with all citizens and cultural groups.

Therefore, a professional is over stretched by a long list of socio-economic, cultural and political
factors nationally and internationally. For example, since all professional are either male or
female in their sex varied experiences are encountered every day simply because there is a
difference in sex. Similarly, a professional might be born in to low income families, urban
business or state servant family or from a farmer which has a great bearing on his/her
psychological set up and on later professional activities. Because of all the above settings, a
professional is then probably the most vulnerable citizen to morality and moral rules due to the

78
especial multiple roles he/she is expected to play among the society. Therefore, an in-depth
study and understanding of professional ethics and the universal as well as profession specific
principles with in the field becomes imperative. Otherwise, professions which are basically
creations of a need to give public service would be inefficient and ineffective in doing so once
they are deficient of knowledge and practice of some established standards of Professionalism.

Some Selected Fundamental Codes / Principles of Professional Ethics

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

79
5.3. Overview of civic virtue: Civic disposition and Civic commitments
It is viewed that the citizen committed to civic virtue as one who watches both sets of values-
those of the public good and those of freedom, diversity, and individual rights and who acts on
the basis of the best informed judgment that profoundly study and active participation can be
provided. It is believed that civic virtue embraces rational thinking and acting in such a way that
individual rights are viewed in light of the public good and that the public good includes the
protection of individual rights. Whether one prefers to stress balance, equilibrium, or tension
between these traditions, or views them as a blend, mixture, or tapestry it is believed that the
effort to identify and understand their ingredients is the first major step toward the practice of
civic virtue which is described in terms of civic dispositions and civic commitments which are
two important characteristics required from citizens in democratic society.
1. Civic Disposition: refers to habits or characters of citizens that are conducive or helpful to
healthy functioning and common good of democratic system. It includes all the behaviors and
actions that are good, desirable and acceptable. Such behaviors and habits are expected from
responsible citizens. Some of civic dispositions are the following:
 Civility: is a polite way of acting or behaving towards others. It is the need to respect
others. Civility includes respect and politeness to those with whom one may disagree.
Civility requires you to respect the rights of those who are in dispute with you. It is a way
of peaceful living and co-existence with others.
 Self-Discipline: acting and behaving according to some acceptable standards without
external controls and impositions.
 Individual Responsibility: fulfilling duties or obligations of citizenship. As we would
like to demand and enjoy our rights and benefits, we should also be ready to discharge
the responsibility that is expected from us.
 Civic Mindedness: It is readiness and desire to give concern to public interest. Civic
mindedness is a commitment to give priority to the common good than our private
interest. It is unselfish behavior that enables us to do good and make sacrifice ourselves
to the society and to our nations.

80
  Open mindedness: It refers to our willingness to listen to the ideas, views, and
arguments of others. It is the tolerance we show to carefully examine what others say or
suggest. It is also our ability to express what we feel what is in our mind.
 Compromise: It is one form of behavior that should be observed in settling conflict
peacefully. It involves the readiness and willingness to spare something on both sides of
the conflict in favor of the peaceful resolution of the problem and its outcomes. It
requires giving up some of our position or interests. However, compromise never allows
abandoning basic principles and interests.
 Tolerance: it is the ability and willingness to accommodate differences in ideas, out
looks, views, etc. Tolerance is the heart of peaceful co-existence in diversity. The first
important step in tolerance is to positively accept diversity itself as it is. Tolerance
involves recognizing, appreciating, and being patient with, others views, ideas,
languages, beliefs, etc.
 Honesty: It is the behavior and attitude of not telling and not accepting lies. It is a habit
of not cheating or stealing. Honesty is being free from corruption and dishonesty.
 Patriotism: patriotism is one of the most valuable responsibilities expected from
competent and responsible citizens. The attributes of patriotism includes:
- Constitutional patriotism
- Tolerance and culture of peace
- Respect for national symbols and a search for true history
- Safeguarding the country’s security
- Conscientious objectors- this refers to persons who refuse to participate in active
military activities for reasons of morality, religion and other forms of personal beliefs
and opinions.
- Keeping states secrets
- The case of whistle blowers- whistle blowers are people who expose wrong doings,
unethical activities or criminal acts happenings in their companies, government,
neighborhoods and other forms of organizations without identifying themselves as a
source.
2. Civic Commitment: is an active participation of citizens for their personal as well as the
common good in a democracy. It is the expressed devotion of citizens for the implementation of

81
the fundamental principles of democracy. In a democracy the political authority resides in the
people that are democracy is the self-governance of people. This it requires an active
participation of citizens in their own affairs.

82