UNIT ONE

UNDERTANDING CIVICS AND ETHICS

THE MEANING AND SCOPES OF CIVICS AND ETHICS

Civics and Ethics and citizenship education are synonymous words that are widely used across
countries. As evident in different countries, Citizenship education primarily deals with the rights
and duties of citizens in a state or political system. It deals with the reciprocal relationship of
state and citizens with respect to the legally defined rights and obligation.

In some countries, citizenship education primarily focuses on the civil and political rights of
citizens and the respective obligation as well as rights of state as defined by the constitution. In
such countries the rights of citizens are only limited to civil and political rights. As such the right
to elect and to be elected, the right to hold political views and freedom of expression,
association, right of privacy, life, security, the right to be treated equally and so on and so forth.
These rights presuppose the non- intervention of the state in the social and economical conditions
of the society. And hence the only obligation that is expected from the state and citizens is not to
infringe the rights of other individuals. Beyond respecting the rights of citizens the state is
required to enforce peace, order and stability. So, the state does not have obligation to full fill the
needs of the citizens such employment, social services and provisions.

In some other countries the scope of rights are extended to social and economic rights. Some
countries, especially Scandinavians regions are said to be welfare. Such welfare state do have
obligation to full fill the social and economic needs of the citizens. Thus, In addition to ensuring
peace and stability and order, such kinds of states do have social and economic responsibilities to
its citizens.

In countries like Ethiopia the scope of rights and duties are vast. As indicated in the third chapter
of the constitutions, the state has economical, social, environmental and developmental
obligations. In addition to ensuring peace and security, law and order at, the state has also

1
cultural responsibilities. Citizens, on the other hand do have civil, political, socio-economic,
cultural, developmental and environmental rights. The constitution has recognized group rights
in addition to individual rights. Accordingly, there are bundles of rights given to children,
women, Nation, Nationalities and Peoples, Labor, pastoralists, and farmers of Ethiopia.

When we see the vertical relations, that is, between the citizens and the state, rights and duties
are reciprocally shared. For example, citizens are entitled to have access to education; the
responsibility to full fill this service responsibility lays on the state. In this regard the state claims
the right to collect taxes/revenue/ from citizens. And hence citizens do have obligation to pay
taxes. So, there is definitely fair distribution of burdens and rights among and between citizens

In some political systems, like monarchies, and dictatorships, we have seen in the past, rights and
duties have not been shared. Indeed the state had more rights over the citizens. And citizens had
only mere obligation than rights. As evidenced in the monarchical era of Ethiopia, the peoples
did not have citizenship status. They were referred as subjects.

During the Emperor Hailessilassie time Moral Education had been offered with the purpose of
creating passive “citizens”. The term citizen is a misnomer because the people did not have any
political or social or economic rights to claim. The appropriate term which was evidently used by
the 1931 Constitution was Subjects-to mean the people. As the king claimed to be the ``Elect of
God``, the peoples did not have political rights to elect and get elected on the basis of universal
franchise. The very purpose of moral education at the time was to thus, inculcate the divine right
theory and the Solomonic legend so that people would accept his kingship without any claim
against his absolute power.

During the Durgue time, citizens hardly had political and civil rights. As a matter of fact the
Durgue ruled the country without any constitution. For about 10 and more years the country was
ruled under mere force and arbitrarily enacted proclamations. We can say that physical force-
coercion was the source of the government power than consent of the people. Political education
had been given with aim of indoctrinating the ideology of the government. Socialism was the

2
guiding ideology that the citizens needed to learn about it. Due to this the people’s economic
rights, let alone political rights, had been infringed upon.
The concept of citizen and citizenship is related to democracy. Because when we talk about
citizen we are referring a person who has right and of course with duty. And citizenship is a
status that is established between citizens and the state with regard to the sharing of rights and
duties. In democracy, citizenship, then, implies the sharing of duties or burdens and rights.
However in undemocratic systems citizens enjoys no or little rights but are expected to fulfill
duties.

As explained above the scope and focuses of civics and ethics-citizenship education varies from
countries to countries. It reflects the concrete legal, social, political and economic conditions and
the visions of respective society. And civic and ethical education of Ethiopia reflects the social,
cultural, Political and economic realities and the visions and future prospects of the country.

In Ethiopian context civics and ethics is a multidisciplinary field of study that primarily deals
with the duties, rights and expected roles of citizens and the state in the social, economical,
political and cultural affairs of the country. Its focus is not limited to the legal rights and duties
of citizens, but also extends to the moral rights and duties of citizens and the state.

Civics and ethics thus teaches citizens about the socio-cultural, economic and political
conditions, challenges and prospects of the country. Accordingly one can identify at least five
categories of citizenship in the Federal Democratic Republic Ethiopia Constitution: political
citizenship, economic and developmental citizenship, social citizenship, cultural citizenship,
environmental citizenship.

3
 Defining Civics
It is the study of civic affairs i.e. the duties and rights of citizenship. Civics looks at both the
duties and entitlements of citizens, extending from paying taxes to receiving health care.
They may also examine some of the larger ethical issues involved in politics, along with the
workings of specific systems of government.

Civics informs people about the societies they live in, and how they can interact with the
government. Civics can involve an exploration of the social issues of a society, and look at
the way in which history, social norms, economic policy, and other factors influence the
health of a nation and its government.

Let's start by breaking down the definition of "civics":

"The study of civic affairs. . . "--By studying civics, you will learn how our
government, economic system and political system are supposed to operate. You will,
for example, be better able to determine who is right in controversies over "big, active
government" vs. "small, limited government".

Civics is the study of the theoretical and practical aspects of citizenship, its rights and duties;
the duties of citizens to each other as members of a political body and to the government.
It includes the study of civil law and civil code, and the study of government with attention to
the role of citizens as opposed to external factors in the operation and oversight of
government.
Within a given political or ethical tradition, civics refers to educating the citizens. Civic
education is partly based on the study of democracy and on an exploration of national
identity, including issues related to social cohesion and social diversity.

What is Ethics?

Ethics is basically defined as rules or standards for governing the relations between people to
benefit all concerned, with mutual respect for the needs and wants of all parties involved.

4
Moral principles that govern a person’s behavior or the conducting of an activity: medical
ethics also enter into the question.

Ethics tend to be codified into a formal system or set of rules which are explicitly adopted by
a group of people. E.g:- Medical ethics, Academicals Ethics, Military Ethics etc.

Ethics relates to the philosophy behind a moral outcome. The term 'ethics' also refers to
understanding and adopting moral values within the home or workplace that should be
defined.
What is Morality?
Morality refers to an adopted code of conduct within an environment and a set of agreed upon
rules for what is 'right' and 'wrong'. Morals have formed the spine of modern society, religion
and every individual's conscience. The conceptions changed in time and take on a new
meaning.
E.g:- ‘murder is immoral', but 'on the battlefield murder is permissible'.

Morality addresses the ethical queries on the moral outcome of a specific situation. The code
of conduct formulated probes prohibitions, controversial behavior, standards of belief
systems and social conformity of morally 'right' behavior.

Morality is better understood as an assimilation of beliefs about the essentials to lead a 'good'
life. Moral codes are based on value systems that have been tried and tested. Among those
who use morality normatively, all hold that “morality” refers to a code of conduct that
applies to all who can understand it and can govern their behavior by it.

In the normative sense, morality should never be dominated, that is, no one should ever
violate a moral prohibition or requirement for non-moral considerations.
All of those who use “morality” normatively also hold that, under plausible specified
conditions, all rational persons would endorse that code. A society might have a morality that
takes accepting the traditions and customs of the society, including accepting authority and
emphasizing loyalty to the group, as more important than avoiding and preventing harm.

5
What is the difference between Morality and Ethics?
Ethics is a set of theories that determine right and wrong; morals involve practice of these
theories or principles. ... Individual morals are defined as their standards for behavior or their
beliefs as a standard for behavior or beliefs about what is wrong.
Morals define personal character, while ethics stress a social system in which those morals
are applied.
Morality is a more personal concept than ethics; ethics can be a list of guidelines passed
around to employees by supervisors. Personal morality involves the concern with and ability
to distinguish between right and wrong, good and evil, and act with sincerity upon those
concepts.
Ethical behavior, on the other hand, is less personal and could deal with laws, restrictions,
ethics of dealing with a visiting board of directors, honesty with an organization’s financial
assets, a set way employees should deal with questions or situations according to ethical
behavior.
While morals define our character, ethics dictate the working of a social system. Ethics point
towards the application of morality. Ethics lay down a set of codes that people must follow.
Ethics are relative to peers, profession, community, society and nation. Morals are dependent
on an individual’s choice or beliefs or religion and can mean doing the right or wrong thing.
An example to help you understand the difference would be: - Abortion is legal and therefore
medically ethical, while many people find it personally immoral.
Ethics can be relatively simple to follow, while applying morals can be decidedly tougher.
There can be a moral dilemma, but not an ethical one. While good morals represent correct
and upright conduct, ethics act more as guidelines. Ethics are applicable or adhered to by a
group or community or society, whereas morals relate to individuals.

While morals constitute a basic human marker of right behavior and conduct, ethics are more
like a set of guidelines that define acceptable behavior and practices for a certain group of
individuals or society.

6
Citizen and Citizenship

An effective citizen is someone who takes time away from their “pursuit of happiness” to do
things that sustain our freedoms and keep the country safe. These things, call them citizen
actions, are done on a day-to-day, week-to-week basis; when the opportunities arise; and when
action is needed. Some are easy, some are fun and some require sacrifice.

Cultural citizenship implies the rights and responsibilities established among cultural groups
and individuals and state. One of the cultural rights, for instance is related to the equality of
language. In this regard, Article 5 proclaimed that all languages shall enjoy equal state
recognition.

Political citizenship involves the reciprocal relationship of rights and duties which are
established among citizens and between citizens and states with regard to the political affairs or
domains of the country. In this regard, for instance, Article 38 stipulated that every citizen has
the right to vote and to be elected. Here the obligation of the state is to ensure peace and order,
and thus the state is not expected to intervene in the election process.

Another dimension of citizenship is social citizenship. The whole notion of economic and social
citizenship has been captured by the following provisions as revealed in Article 41 from sub
articles one to eight.
1) Every Ethiopian has the right to engage freely in economic activities and to pursue a
livelihood of his choice anywhere within the national territory.
2) Every Ethiopian has the right to choose his or her means of livelihood, occupation and
profession.
3) Every Ethiopian national has the right to equal access to publicly funded social services.
4) The state has the obligation to allocate ever increasing resources to provide to public
health, education and other social services.
5) The state shall, within available means, allocate resources to provide rehabilitation and
assistance to the physically and mentally disabled, aged, and to children who are left
without parents or guardians.

7
 6) The state shall pursue policies which aim to expand job opportunities for the unemployed
and the poor and shall accordingly undertake programs and public works and projects.

Another important dimension of citizenship is developmental citizenship. This notion of

citizenship has been reflected in Article 43 of the constitution. The following are the main
provisions:
1) The people of Ethiopia as a whole, and each Nation, Nationalities and People in Ethiopia
have the right to improved living standards and to sustainable development.
2) Nationals (citizens) have the right to participate in the national development and, in
particular, to be consulted with respect to policies and projects affecting their community.
3) All international agreements and relations concluded, established….shall protect and
ensure Ethiopia’s right to sustainable development.
4) The basic aim of development activities shall be to enhance the capacity of citizens for
development and to meet their basic needs.

Dear learner, what do you think is the duty of citizens? You know poverty and under
development undermine the freedom of citizens to live a descent life-free from hunger,
malnutrition and diseases. So, citizens have an obligation to become hard working and
industriousness. It is when the efforts and citizens are combined that citizen can won economic
freedoms-or freedom from poverty. So, developmental citizenship shares obligations and
burdens fairly among citizens, between citizens and the state.

What do you think will be the role of civil societies and international donor organization in
ensuring sustainable development? You know fighting poverty and hunger has becoming the
responsibilities of all actors at each level of human association. The families, the community, the
local government, the federal government and the international organizations have moral
obligations to eradicate poverty from the scene of the world.

Developmental right presupposes the, among other things, solidarity and cooperation among all
actors concerned from the local to international level.

8
The last, but not the least category of citizenship is what is referred as environmental
citizenship. Article 44 of the constitutions provides that:
1) All persons have the right to a clean and healthy environment
2) All persons who have been displaced or whose livelihoods have been adversely affected
as result of state programme have the right to compensation, including relocation with
adequate state assistance.

As indicated in sub article one, citizens have rights to live in a healthy environment. Such notion
of citizenship is similar to developmental rights in sense that the realization of it requires all
concerned bodies starting from each individual citizen to international organizations or
international communities

As you know the concept and practice of democracy is foreign to Ethiopia. In order to build up
democracy, citizens need to know about democracy, its principles, values, processes, structures,
challenges and prospects. In addition to such knowledge, citizens are required to up hold
democratic values and exercise them in their day to day decision making processes. As the
saying goes democracy without democrats will not sustain. The commitments and democratic
qualities of citizens are most required to having a well-functioning and sustainable democratic
system in the country.

Democratic citizens are not born but they are created through education. So we learn civics and
Ethics to up hold democratic principles and values and exercise them. Indeed civics and Ethics
teaches you about self-government. Dear learner! There are different levels of self-government.
The primary level of self-government is the individual realm. In democracy citizens are required
to govern themselves with the external impositions and coercions. The family could be taken as
the secondary level wherein democracy could be exercised.

The second major rational why we learn civics is to have good knowledge and awareness
about the social and economic conditions and challenges of the country. As a matter of fact
Ethiopia is one of the poorest countries in the world. The country has been hit by famine and
food shortage. Its economy has been vulnerable to climate change and erratic whether condition.

9
For long the country has been aid dependent because of low economic performances. As the
society lives under extensive poverty for many decades, and perhaps, centuries, this definitely
has adverse effect on the democratization process.

So, the creating citizens who ensure their freedom from poverty, disease and ignorance requires
knowledge and awareness about these facts. In civics and ethics we learn thus, about the socio-
economic conditions of the country. This definitely will scale up the general knowledge of
citizens which would motivate them to become hard working and economical citizens.

Before we see the qualities of good citizens, what do you think citizen mean?
Citizen refers to a person who has rights and duties with bound of a certain political system or
country. A person can automatically acquire citizenship status at birth through either of birth
place or blood line. So, becoming citizen is a base line but is not a guarantee to become good
citizen.

Who do you think is a good citizen?

A good citizen is one who:
- Up holds democracy and support the democratic system
- Pursue wisdom
- Respects law
- Actively participates in the cultural, socio-economic and political affairs of the society
- Develops culture of saving
- Is hard working and industrious
- Is patriotic for his country and peoples
- Responsible
- Up holds and fights for the realization equality of groups and individuals
- Stands for justice and fairness
- Is self-reliant and confident

One important indicator of good citizen is that the positive tendency and effort of the citizen to
up hold democratic values, principles and structures of the political system. As you know

10
democracy implies a political system whereby the supreme power vests on the people. The
source of the government power is the people and the people are the government. Do you
remember the Abraham Lincolns definition of democracy?

Democracy is the government of the people, by the people and for the people. This definition
tells you three important things:
1) In democracy the sources of government power is the people themselves. It is not the
divine power or force that leads to the formation of democratic government.
2) People can exercise democracy directly or indirectly. i.e. the government requires the
participation of the people.
3) The ultimate purpose of government is to serve the people not vice versa

Upholding democracy means, therefore, accepting the view that the people are the source of
political power. Citizens need to believe that the government is made up of themselves. Election
is the tool to form government.

Another important quality of which expected from good citizen is his/her tendency and action to
be governed by the law of the country. In democracy, the constitution is the highest law that both
the officials and the peoples should observe. In line with the constitutions there are hierarchy of
laws that governs the actions and behaviors of citizens. And good citizen not only respects laws,
but also fights those who violate laws. So, a good citizen is not a bystander when he/she comes
across a person doing illegal activities.

Good citizens are also active participants in the affairs of the society or the community. In the
country like Ethiopia, where problems are compounded, the role of citizen should go beyond
political participations. As we mentioned earlier, no doubt, democracy requires the participation
of citizens, not only, during election but also before and after elections. However that is not
enough citizens are expected to engage themselves in community services.

Another cardinal quality that good citizens need to develop is equality. You know there are
different forms of equality: Gender equality, equality of Nations, Nationalities and Peoples,

11
equality of individuals are some, but very essential values which are recognized by the
constitution. Citizens are expected to up hold and show commitment for the realization of theme.

Good citizens are also expected to stand for justice and fights any form of unfair discrimination
in the society. As you have learned in lower schools there are three types of justice:
1) Distributive justice
2) Corrective justice
3) Procedural justice

As you know procedural and corrective justice are concerned with the fair or the equal
treatment of the individual with respects to giving equal access to information, and attaching
penalties or rewards in the compensation. Distributive justice however implies the fair
distribution of resources and benefits to all sections of society. It involves affirmative action
policy intervention so as to ensure equality principles.

Dear Learner, as you might remember in your lower grade, good citizens have also a duty to
improve themselves. Ignorance is one manifestation of poverty. Good citizens are those who
fight ignorance. Education, both formal and informal is critically significant to boost of our
thinking horizon. In these competitive world citizens are expected to be capable and skillful.
Knowledge can be broadening not only in schools or universities; citizens have ample
opportunities to upgrade themselves. One source of knowledge and information could be
internet. Another could be books, media, and others.

Knowledge is critical in democracy. As you know decisions are made on the basis of discussion
and persuasion. To encourage your colleagues, you need to be informed, and of course
articulative. Knowledge helps you develop skill of critical thinking. What is critical thinking? It
is a stage where a person argues or counter argues with evidences and reasons. Here emotions
and passions, and mere opinions are not manifestations of critical thinking.

Some of the challenges of critical thinking involves: Resistance/ alishenef bay/, distractions,
personal abuse and the like. In any dialogue and discussion, citizens should not attack the

12
personality of the discussants, rather it is expected that citizen attacks the view or the position.
Attacking the personality of the discussants might lead to conflicts.

To sum up, the ultimate purpose of civic and Ethics education is to create competent and
responsible citizen who can effectively participate in the social, cultural, economical,
environmental and political affairs or domains of the country. In short, we can say that the
purpose of the course aims at creating good citizenship. So, active participation is the manifested
qualities of good citizen. But you have to bear in mind that any kind of participation may have
dysfunctional. All activities and participation of good citizen are always justifiable and
responsible. That is, the activities of citizens need to be justified morally and legally. Thus, good
citizens need to make sure that their actions and activities in the society are in line with the
cherished values and norms and legal rules of the country.

COMPETENCES OF GOOD CITIZENS

Dear Learner: What are the competences that are expected from Good citizen? As we have
indicated above, mere membership to a certain state or political society does not qualify a person
to be good citizen. Everyone us are having Ethiopian citizenship states just because we are born
from our parents. Good citizenship needs qualifications beyond mere membership to a country.

As the roles of good citizens are multifaceted and many, there are minimum competences that
are required from them. These are civic Knowledge, civic skills and civic attitudes. Civic
knowledge implies general information and awareness about the social, Cultural, political,
environmental, historical and economical conditions and realities of the past and the present and
also the challenges and prospects ahead of the country. Citizens need to know their country, its
peopling, history, culture, resources and the like. To that end, knowledge of history, politics
(democracy, constitutions, state and government), sociology, globalization, environment,
philosophy, and economics is very valuable.

Dear learner, the sources of information is not limited to formal education where you learn
through reading books and documents. Informally you can also get information, through media,
internet, attending meetings, and so on.

13
Another component, which required from citizens, is what we call civic attitudes. Civic attitudes
involve those character traits, or dispositions which are engrained in the mind of citizens. Civic
attitudes or orientation will develop once citizens acquired civic knowledge. In order to
discharge ones responsibility, for example, community service, citizens need to develop positive
outlook and concern for the community. Altruistic qualities are required to help the poor and
vulnerable ones in the community.

Can you mention some of the civic attitudes required from good citizens?
The first and primary disposition that is required from good citizen is tolerance. Political
tolerance and cultural tolerance is critical to build up democratic system in our country. In
democracy, peoples are allowed to hold and express their own political view. As result of such
freedom, different view are circulated and reflected in the society. That is the beauty of
democracy. Citizens will have options to choose in such political markets. In order to ensure the
freedom of expression an assembly, the culture of tolerance is a pillar. So, tolerance could mean
accommodation of political differences. At societal level, tolerance would mean, for instance, a
peaceful co-existence of different cultural, linguistic and religious communities. In Ethiopia
where you have more than 80 linguistic communities, tolerance becomes critical. It would
include, then, accepting diversity, valuing diversity and respecting diversity.

Respect: diversity need to be respected. Respect is the key principle to live with difference.
Accepting diversity: it refers to recognizing the fact that Ethiopia is diverse and plural having
different cultural, linguistic, religious and social structures.
Valuing diversity: implies that citizens need to appreciate diversity. Diversity is natural and
hence need to be valued positively. It provides options for citizens, too.

Another vital disposition of good citizen is open-mindedness. It implies citizens’ readiness to

enter dialogue, listen others and change positions consequently. In dialogue the stronger idea
wins! A related, but different disposition is what we all it civic mindedness. This implies
citizens’ readiness to scarify their individual interests and values for the sake of promoting the

14
collective inters tot common good. It involves the altruistic qualities of citizens. So, good
citizens always stand for the public interest and die for it!

Loyalty is another element of civic dispositions. Loyalty involves things like keeping promises
or keeping ones words, keeping relationship. Loyalty is required at different capacity of citizen.
For example an office holder or official is expected to be loyal to the people that voted for him.
Similarly the civil servant is expected to serve the public loyally. In doing so, a public servant or
employee is expected to respect the rules and regulations of the employer. In addition, good
citizens are expected to govern their own behaviors without fear of external actors. As the saying
goes virtuous citizens’ act virtuously!

Aristotelian notion of virtue implies the ability to do the right thing at the right time in the right
way for the right purpose. Citizens are expected to act virtuously at any circumstance of life. We
know that a robber would act rightly in the presence of police. But we know that the Robber
might do his business -robbery after the police leave the place.

Civic Skills: Civic skills are the third elements which are required from good citizens. These
involve skills of decision making, communication, conflict resolution, compromise, persuasion,
creativity and the like. The following can be listed in this regard:
- To take part in political discussions; consciousness of current political issues; to be able
to evaluate a position or decision, take a position, defend a position
- To resolve conflicts in a peaceful way
- To interpret the media messages (interests and value systems that are involved etc.)
- To have media skills to look, choose, and ‘use the buttons’
- To have language competence, reading and writing;
- To be capable in critical handling of information and information technology;
- To possess communication skills
- To know how to vote; to monitor and influence policies and decisions
- To use the media in an active way (not as consumer, but as producer of media content)
- To participate in voluntary organizations;
- To build coalitions; to co-operate; to interact

15
 - To be capable to handle multiculturalism

In order to participate effectively, thus, Citizens are required to have competence of civic
knowledge, attitude and skill.

Dear Learner, Minimally expected forms of participation might include the following:

1) Political participation. This could involve voting during elections at different levels of
government, be it at kebele, wereda, Regioal and national level. Influencing the decision
making when opportunities are offered or via informal ways. It can also involve another
form. Citizens can come up for their own interest by contacting civil servants of
politicians.
2) Social participation: Citizens becoming a member of voluntary associations, take active
participation in that association
3) Cultural participation: this might include citizens’ participation to fight exclusion and
discrimination and promote social cohesion. Fight exclusion and discrimination, Promote
social cohesion and inclusion
4) Economic participation: Contribute to the production process, consume or buy national
products, save money.

Dear learner: if we expect citizens to vote, to participate in local decision-making, to be active in

civil society, that they do not discriminate, and be active in their work place what minimal
information, attitude and skills does a citizen then need?

Vote: In order to be able to vote, citizens need knowledge and insight in the essence of the
political system; in the way the representative system functions in a parliamentary democracy;
how the separation of powers is organized; what the role is of political parties; know the
differences between political parties; read party programme; understand how election campaigns
function; they should know how votes are cast, how the counting and allocation of seats in
parliament works, how to establish a political party, how a new government is formed after
elections.

16
Influencing Decision making: Citizens need to know how the formal and actual policy- and
decision-making takes place (at local, state and federal level, what the role is of civil servants,
the elected, the (local) government, advisory councils, ways of influencing policymaking; know
how to contact officials, collect information, contact interest groups and political parties; know
how societal wishes are transferred in political demands; what the role is of the media; know
how the implementation of decisions can be influenced.
Bureaucracy: Know what institutions or organizations to contact for specific problems.
Civil society: Know what organizations play a role in society in between government and the
society. What their role is in the democratic process. How to become a member of voluntary
associations? Know how the boards of these associations function?

Exclusions: Fight discrimination in personal relations at the workplace, in the neighborhood, at

school etc.

Underdevelopment: Worry about third world poverty. Fight inequality. Know what role
national and international organizations play in relieving poverty. Know the role of voluntary
organizations in this field.

17
 CHAPTER TWO
UNDERSTANDING SOCIETY, STATE AND GOVERNMENT: ETHIOPIAN FOCUS
2.1. Understanding of society
Different scholars define society differently but the central meaning of the concept remains the
same. The word society originated in the Latin word societies, which means "friendly association
with others," For example; some may say that it is an autonomous group of people engaging in a
wide range of cooperative activities.

Generally a group of people can be termed as a society when its members fulfill the following
issues, such as:-
1) They should live together for a long period of time;
2) They should possess common values and interests and
3) They should share common culture, traditions and life styles. This may be to mean that
society involves different groups of people sharing common values and making
interactions with various regards.

A large number of communities that have social, cultural, and economic interactions constitute a
society. Therefore, society is a large group of people who live together in a common
environment and have common traditions, values, institutions, activities, and interests. In other
words, society is the totality of modes of human life, interactions, norms of behavior, and
underlying structures, of which the most typical is the state. Thus, state is located within a larger
system of human society.

In general society denotes a collection of people occupying the same territorial area. Society is
characterized by regular pattern of social interaction in a given social structure.

2.1.1 Elements of society

As discussed supra, most scholars commonly defined 'society' as a sizeable community of
persons who have interacted together for some considerable period of time, possessing common
institutions and generally, if not always, accepting common values and norms which regulate

18
their interaction. This definition comprises certain concepts or attributes; such as community,
institutions, norms, beliefs and values which require further clarification.

A) Community
In order to constitute a society a group of people must attain a sense of community. A
community is a group of people who have common attachments to a given area and who possess
strong ties of identity. This sense of communal identity might arise out of blood or kinship-ties,
out of possession of common culture or religion, out of attachment to a certain neighborhood or
common territory, or, most commonly, out of some combination of these elements. But, in any
case, community is the achievement of a common sense of belonging by a group of people which
comes from the recognition of a common problem and prospects of living together. Because
living together confronts men with common problems and prospects, it usually determines
common interests to be attained. This necessitates some form of social organization for the
fulfillment of specific goals of the community. The need to achieve common societal ends in part
pushes societies to create institutions. Equally, however, living together tends to give rise to
different interests, to competition between them and so to the probability of serious conflict
within community. Institutions are also created, therefore, both to promote those different
sectoral interests and to judge or arbitrate between them, whether through courts and judicial
system at the individual level or through policy and law -making at the collective level.
B) Institutions
We use the term institutions to refer not merely to habitual practices of society, but rather to
specific institutions or organizations that are formed for the purpose of coordinating the
achievement of a known set of goals. A church or mosques will qualify to be called institutions if
the groups of persons belonging to it are consciously pursuing a common objective, in this case,
the objective of attunement with the supernatural. A business corporation is an institution if it is
deliberately organized to attain a common end. The army is an institution for the defense of the
collectivity. It is also in this sense government is considered as an institution of society. In this
case, society is organized into numerous institutions, each pursuing its set of goals and in the
process interacting with other institutions of society.

19
One important aspect of social organization is that it requires different persons to take the
leading role in the performance of different functions. In short, social organizations imply
specializations of functions, and this usually leads to the definition of occupations and
occupational groups. These groups differ in their 'status', which means the ranking of persons
and groups according to a hierarchy of prestige and rewards. A Manager in a given organization,
for example, enjoys a higher prestige and income than a clerk. Thus formal organizations have
leaders and members. Furthermore, different members of the leadership perform different
functions, and different followers also have different tasks. In addition, different institutions
perform different functions and are ranked accordingly in society. It is this ranking of men and
groups of men which is usually referred to as a social stratification. Persons, as well as groups,
might change their relative posmjitions within the accepted hierarchy. But the extent to which
there is mobility within the hierarchy will differ from one society to another and from one period
to another in the life of any one society.
C) Norms
In order for an organization or purposeful association to exist, there has to be an acceptance of a
set of rules which govern the interaction among its members. 'Norms ', in a nutshell, are those
generally accepted rules which define the role of different individuals in social institutions. They
are explicit or implicit criteria that guide members in their conduct when they perform their
respective roles. As such, they can be expected to define not only the functions or roles of
specific individuals, but also the manner in which these roles or functions may be performed.
Moreover, the norms operative in an organization or group also define the status attributed to
various members who perform certain function and roles.

Of course, different organizations, occupations, groups and even classes exhibit different norms.
This variety is seen, for example, in the roles that are defined for leaders in these groups. Some
organizations may give few functions to their leaders while others may make them perform many
important functions. Some groups may reward the leadership in such a manner as to create wide
differences between leadership and followers; while other groups may maintain only moderate
differences in reward and honor. One group may attach the greatest importance to
accomplishment as a qualification for leadership; while another group may consider birth by a
particular parent, or age, as the important qualification for leadership.

20
 D) Values and belief
As we shown above, society is composed of numerous interrelations of men who are organized
in a variety of different ways, and whose conduct is regulated by established norms, customs and
laws. Laws, in this sense, are understood to be a special class of rules. They are distinguishable
essentials in that they convey greater compelling forces of compliance. This compelling force is
due principally to the existence of the power of the state to ensure the enforcement. Like norms
and customs, laws define the rights and duties of persons in specific social contexts within the
political society.

An important feature of rules, however, is that, once accepted, they soon acquire the property of
'rightness ' that is, of being regarded as the way things 'ought to be'. Keen observrs of society
have noticed that this becomes especially clear when certain rules are under attack. It usually
becomes necessarily for the change. This is because the existing rules have already developed
through time their own set of justifications which make members 'believe' that it is right to
conform to them. And this how, in part at least, though also through religion, the mental
phenomena known as 'values' develop.

The mental phenomenon which we call a 'value' is a standard or a principle which human beings
use to justify or oppose a course of action. This mental phenomenon is apparently characteristic
being
of man because he/she is rational and moral being. It is by values that we judge action in
terms of what ought or ought not to be done, of what is right or wrong. In other words, they are
short hand mental codes for deciding what is desirable. For this reason, values are powerful
influences in directing and motivating human action in society.

Values are usually transmitted as an important part of a people's culture. They are taught by
many agents, both formal and informal, in society. Some of the best known-societal agents for
the transmission of values are the family, the school, per groups, and the Mass media. The
process is known as socialization.

21
Beliefs, then, are very influential in leading us to evaluate something as being desirable or
undesirable. Beliefs may be concerned with accepting a declaration as true or false, or with
accepting a thing as good or bad. It is interesting to note, however , that we may accept that
something is true or false, good or bad, either because we have experienced that event or
because we accept the conventional social view held by most other people, or, finally because
someone whose truthfulness we acknowledge has declared that event to be true or good.

2.1.2 Contending theories of society

There are various theories, which basically deal about the social system and social interaction of
the society. Most of these theories, in fact, developed following the birth of sociology as a
distinct field of study in social science after 19 th century. Some of these prominent theories like
conflict, Structural-Functionalist and Inter-actionist theory will be briefly review in this section.

 Conflict theory
The several social theories that emphasize social conflict have roots in the ideas of Karl Marx
(1818-1883), the great German theorist and political thinker. The Marxist, conflict approach
emphasizes a materialist interpretation of history, a dialectical method of analysis, a critical
stance toward existing social arrangements, and a political program of revolution or, at least,
reform.

The materialist view of history starts from the premise that the most important determinant of
social life is the work people are doing, especially work that results in provision of the basic
necessities of life, food, clothing and shelter. Marx thought that the way the work is socially
organized and the technology used in production will have a strong impact on every other aspect
of society. He maintained that everything of value in society results from human labor. Thus,
Marx saw working men and women as engaged in making society, in creating the conditions for
their own existence.

Marx summarized the key elements of this materialist view of history as follows:" In the social
production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent
of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of
their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the
22
economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political
superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of
production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life.
It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that
determines their consciousness.

Marx divided history into several stages, conforming to broad patterns in the economic structure
of society. The most important stages for Marx's argument were feudalism, capitalism, and
socialism. The bulk of Marx's writing is concerned with applying the materialist model of society
to capitalism, the stage of economic and social development that Marx saw as dominant in 19th
century Europe. For Marx, the central institution of capitalist society is private property, the
system by which capital (that is, money, machines, tools, factories, and other material objects
used in production) is controlled by a small minority of the population. This arrangement leads to
two opposed classes, the owners of capital (called the bourgeoisie) and the workers (called the
proletariat), whose only property is their own labor time, which they have to sell to the
capitalists.
Owners are seen as making profits by paying workers less than their work is worth and, thus,
exploiting them. (In Marxist terminology, material forces of production or means of production
include capital, land, and labor, whereas social relations of production refer to the division of
labor and implied class relationships.)

Economic exploitation leads directly to political oppression, as owners make use of their
economic power to gain control of the state and turn it into a servant of bourgeois economic
interests. Police power, for instance, is used to enforce property rights and guarantee unfair
contracts between capitalist and worker. Oppression also takes more subtle forms: religion serves
capitalist interests by pacifying the population; intellectuals, paid directly or indirectly by
capitalists, spend their careers justifying and rationalizing the existing social and economic
arrangements. In sum, the economic structure of society molds the superstructure, including
ideas (e.g., morality, ideologies, art, and literature) and the social institutions that support the
class structure of society (e.g., the state, the educational system, the family, and religious
institutions). Because the dominant or ruling class (the bourgeoisie) controls the social relations

23
of production, the dominant ideology in capitalist society is that of the ruling class. Ideology and
social institutions, in turn, serve to reproduce and perpetuate the economic class structure. Thus,
Marx viewed the exploitative economic arrangements of capitalism as the real foundation upon
which the superstructure of social, political, and intellectual consciousness is built.

Marx's view of history might seem completely cynical or pessimistic, were it not for the
possibilities of change revealed by his method of dialectical analysis. (The Marxist dialectical
method, based on Hegel's earlier idealistic dialectic, focuses attention on how an existing social
arrangement, or thesis, generates its social opposite, or antithesis, and on how a qualitatively
different social form, or synthesis, emerges from the resulting struggle.) Marx was an optimist.
He believed that any stage of history based on exploitative economic arrangements generated
within itself the seeds of its own destruction. For instance, feudalism, in which land owners
exploited the peasantry, gave rise to a class of town-dwelling merchants, whose dedication to
making profits eventually led to the bourgeois revolution and the modern capitalist era.
Similarly, the class relations of capitalism will lead inevitably to the next stage, socialism. The
class relations of capitalism embody a contradiction: capitalists need workers, and vice versa, but
the economic interests of the two groups are fundamentally at odds. Such contradictions mean
inherent conflict and instability, the class struggle. Adding to the instability of the capitalist
system are the inescapable needs for ever-wider markets and ever-greater investments in capital
to maintain the profits of capitalists. Marx expected that the resulting economic cycles of
expansion and contraction, together with tensions that will build as the working class gains
greater understanding of its exploited position (and thus attains class consciousness), will
eventually culminate in a socialist revolution.

Despite this sense of the unalterable logic of history, Marxists see the need for social criticism
and for political activity to speed the arrival of socialism, which, not being based on private
property is not expected to involve as many contradictions and conflicts as capitalism. Marxists
believe that social theory and political practice are dialectically intertwined, with theory
enhanced by political involvement and with political practice necessarily guided by theory.
Intellectuals ought, therefore, to engage in praxis, to combine political criticism and political
activity. Theory itself is seen as necessarily critical and value-laden, since the prevailing social

24
relations are based upon alienating and dehumanizing exploitation of the labor of the working
classes.

Marx's ideas have been applied and reinterpreted by scholars for over a hundred years, starting
with Marx's close friend and collaborator, Friedrich Engels (1825-95), who supported Marx and
his family for many years from the profits of the textile factories founded by Engels' father,
while Marx shut himself away in the library of the British Museum. Later, Vladimir I. Lenin
(1870-1924), leader of the Russian revolution, made several influential contributions to Marxist
theory. In recent years Marxist theory has taken a great variety of forms, notably the world-
systems theory proposed by Immanuel Wallerstein (1974, 1980) and the comparative theory of
revolutions put forward by Theda Skocpol (1980). Marxist ideas have also served as a starting
point for many of the modern feminist theorists.
 Structural- Functionalism
It was one of the dominant sociological theories in 1940's and in the aftermath of WWII.
However, currently the importance of this theory has been declining dramatically. Kingsely
Davis and Wilbert Moore developed this theory in 1940's. According to them social stratification
is both universal and necessary. They argued that no society is ever unstratified or totally
classless. Stratification is, in their view, a functional necessity. All societies need such a system,
and this need brings in to existence a system of stratification. For them, stratification does not
imply an individual in the system as structure rather it refers to a system of positions. They
focused on how certain positions come to carry with them different degree of prestige and not on
how individuals come to occupy certain positions.

Given to this, the major concern here is that how a society motivates and places people in their
'proper' positions in the stratification system. This is reducible to two problems. First, how does a
society instill proper individuals in accordance to their desire in certain positions? Second, once
people are in the right positions, how does society then instill in them the desire to fulfill the
requirements of those positions? Proper social placement in society is a problem for three basic
reasons. First, some positions are more pleasant to occupy than others. Second, some positions
are more important to the survival of society than others. Third, different social positions require
different abilities and talents. Although these issues apply to all social positions, Davis and

25
Moore were concerned with the functionally more important positions in society. The positions
that rank high within the stratification system are presumed to be those that are less pleasant to
occupy but more important to the survival of society and that require the greatest ability and
talent. In addition, society must attach sufficient rewards to these positions so that enough people
will seek to occupy them and the individual who do come to occupy them will work diligently.
Accordingly, low ranking positions in the stratification system are presumed to be more pleasant
and less important and to require less ability and talent.

Davis and Moore did not argue that a society consciously develops a stratification system in
order to be sure that the high level positions are filled, and filled adequately. Rather, they made it
clear that stratification is and unconsciously evolved device. In order to be sure that people
occupy the high-ranking positions society must provide these individuals with various rewards.
Including great prestige, high salary and sufficient leisure.

The structural functional theory of stratification has been subject to much criticism. One of basic
criticism is that the functional theory of stratifications simply perpetuates the privileged positions
of those people who already have power, prestige and money. It does this by arguing that such
people deserve their rewards; indeed they need to be offered such rewards for the good of
society. It also criticizes for assuming that simply because a stratified social structure has existed
in the past; it must continue to exist in the future. It is possible that future societies will be
organized in other, non-stratified ways.

It has been argued that the idea of functional positions varying in their importance to society is
difficult to support. Because people who occupied lower strata may play a profound role in the
social structure of the society than people who set in the upper ladder. There will be a shortage of
people who can possibly fill the higher level positions in the social structure of the society if
many people are prevented from obtaining the training they need to achieve prestigious positions
even though they have the ability.

 Interaction theories

26
Interactionism for short is one of the major theoretical perspectives in sociology. This
perspective has a long intellectual history, beginning with the German sociologist and economist,
Max Weber (1864-1920) and the American philosopher, George H. Mead (1863-1931), both of
whom emphasized the subjective meaning of human behavior, the social process, and
pragmatism. Although there are a number of versions of interactionist thought, some deriving
from phenomenological writings by philosophers, the following description offers a simplified
amalgamation of these ideas, concentrating on points of convergence. Herbert Blumer, who
studied with Mead at the University of Chicago, is responsible for coining the term, "symbolic
interactionism," as well as for formulating the most prominent version of the theory.

Interactionist focus on the subjective aspects of social life, rather than on objective, macro-
structural aspects of social systems. One reason for this focus is that interactionists base their
theoretical perspective on their image of humans, rather than on their image of society (as the
functionalists do). For interactionist, humans are pragmatic actors who continually must adjust
their behavior to the actions of other actors. We can adjust to these actions only because we are
able to interpret them, i.e., to denote them symbolically and treat the actions and those who
perform them as symbolic objects. This process of adjustment is aided by our ability to
imaginatively rehearse alternative lines of action before we act. The process is further aided by
our ability to think about and to react to our own actions and even ourselves as symbolic objects.
Thus, the interactionist theorist sees humans as active, creative participants who construct their
social world, not as passive, conforming objects of socialization.

For the interactionist, society consists of organized and patterned interactions among individuals.
Thus, research by interactionist focuses on easily observable face-to-face interactions rather than
on macro-level structural relationships involving social institutions. Furthermore, this focuses on
interaction and on the meaning of events to the participants in those events (the definition of the
situation) shifts the attention of interactionist away from stable norms and values toward more
changeable, continually readjusting social processes. Whereas for functionalists socialization
creates stability in the social system, for interactionist negotiation among members of society
creates temporary, socially constructed relations which remain in constant flux, despite relative
stability in the basic framework governing those relations.

27
These emphases on symbols, negotiated reality, and the social construction of society lead to an
interest in the roles people play. Erving Goffman , a prominent social theorist in this tradition,
discusses roles dramaturgically, using an analogy to the theater, with human social behavior seen
as more or less well scripted and with humans as role-taking actors. Role taking is a key
mechanism of interaction, for it permits us to take the other's perspective, to see what our actions
might mean to the other actors with whom we interact. At other times, interactionist emphasize
the improvisational quality of roles, with human social behavior seen as poorly scripted and with
humans as role-making improvisers. Role-making, too, is a key mechanism of interaction, for all
situations and roles are inherently ambiguous, thus requiring us to create those situations and
roles to some extent before we can act.

Language is itself a symbolic form, which is used to anchor meanings to the symbols. Key
aspects are:
- We act toward others based on the meaning that those other people have for us.

- Meaning is created in the interactions we have with other people in sharing our
interpretations of symbols.

- Meanings are modified through an interpretive process whereby we first internally

create meaning, then check it externally and with other people.

- We develop our self-concepts through interaction with others.

- Culture and social processes, such as social norms, influence us.

- Our social structures are worked out through the social interactions with others.

Ethnomethodology, an offshoot of symbolic interactionism, raises the question of how people

who are interacting with each other can create the illusion of a shared social order even when
they don't understand each other fully and in fact have different points of view. Harold Garfinkel,
a pioneer in these investigations, demonstrated the problem by sending his students out to
perform "experiments in trust," called breaching experiments, in which they brought ordinary

28
conversations to an abrupt halt by refusing to take for granted that they knew what the other
person was saying, and so demanded explanations and then explanations of the explanations.

Accordingly, the idea is studying human interactions by deliberately disrupting social norms and
observing how individuals attempt to restore normalcy. The idea is that to study norms, one must
first break those norms, because the subsequent behavior of the people involved will reveal just
what the norms were in the first place. Ethnomethodology is based on the premise that human
interactions takes place within the consensus and, further, that interaction is not possible without
this consensus. The consensus will be raveled by people background expectancies, namely the
norms for behavior that they carry with them in to situation of interactions. It is presumed that
these expectancies are to great degree shared, and thus studying norms, by deliberately violating
them-will revel the norms that most people bring with them in to interactions. The
ethnomethdologist argues that you cannot simply walk up to someone and ask him or her what
norms they have and use because most people will not be able to articulate what they are.

Interactionist tend to study social interaction through participant observation, rather than surveys
and interviews. They argue that close contact and immersion in the everyday lives of the
participants is necessary for understanding the meaning of actions, the definition of the situation
itself, and the process by which actors construct the situation through their interaction. Given this
close contact, interactionist could hardly remain free of value commitments, and, in fact,
interactionist make explicit use of their values in choosing what to study but strive to be
objective in the conduct of their research.

Other sociologists for being overly impressionistic in their research methods and somewhat
unsystematic in their theories often criticize symbolic interactionists. These objections, combined
with the fairly narrow focus of interactionist research on small-group interactions and other
social psychological issues, have relegated the interactionist camp to a minority position among
sociologists, although a fairly substantial minority.

Symbolic interaction theory based on the following basic principle:

1. Human beings, unlike lower animals, are endowed with the capacity for thought
2. The capacity for though is shaped by social interactions

29
 3. In social interactions people learn the meaning and the symbols that allow them to exercise
their distinctively human capacity for thought.
4. Meanings and symbols allow people to carry on distinctively human actions and
interactions.
5. People are able to modify or alter the menacing and symbol that they use in action and
interactions on the basis of their interpretation of the situation.
6. People are able to make these modifications and alterations because, in part, of their ability
to interact with themselves, which allows them to examine possible courses of actions,
assess their relative advantage and disadvantage, and then choose one.
7. The intertwined patterns of actions and interactions make up groups and societies.

2.2 Understanding of state

As a concept, state refers to a territorial entity that is politically organized and has a government
and people. The state can be understood as the highest and most powerful political organization
of society. It possesses the monopoly of power to use within its territory. The state is the final
source of all laws within its territory. It is subject to no other power above itself whatsoever. This
implies that the state is sovereign. This is to say that the state has legitimacy to exercise power
internally (internal sovereignty) in its relations with its people and externally (external
sovereignty) in its relations with other states. The state also determines how this power shall be
organized and exercised in its territory. The agency that is entitled to always exercise the power
on the behalf of the state is called government.
From the above explanations, to precisely define what the state is there are essential attributes
that must be fulfilled. These are population, territory, government and sovereignty. Therefore,
simply a state is composed of people living together, a defined territory having an international
recognition, a government which is responsible for the administration of its people and
sovereignty which denotes independence both internally and externally. In other words,
particularly modern state is defined as a politically organized body of people permanently
occupying a definite territory, living under a national/central government, which is almost, in
principle, free from any external control and internally competent to secure regular obedience
from all people.

30
When we say there essential elements of state, it means that they are the necessary/compulsory
attributes determining the existence of the state. That is, a state cannot survive without its
population, territory, government and sovereignty. They are universally accepted criteria of
statehood under international law that the state should fulfill as an international person. Looking
at how they are important requirements for existence of the state seems sound here.

A) Population
Population refers to people permanently settling on a definite territory of the state. As far as the
state is the (highest form of) organization of people, population is the necessary element of the
state. It is people constituting what the state is all about, without which it is quite difficult to call
the state organization of what it is. However, as far as the number of people constituting a given
state has not yet decided the size of people whether it is too large such as that of China or too
small like that of Vatican cannot determine the existence of a given state. That is, there are states
with large number of people and other states with small number of people: whatsoever the
number of people there may be, there are states in this world.

B) Territory
Territory is another essential element of state referring to an area or a certain portion of earth’s
surface, which is internationally delineated or demarcated and on which people of a state are
expected permanently reside. Once people are mandatory for survival of the state there must be
an internationally bounded area on which they must settle. To J.C Johari, an area devoid of
population, or, temporarily traversed or settled by people cannot be a territory; that is, it should
be permanently settled. Putting it differently, territory of a state consists of the land bodies, water
bodies and their resources, and the airspaces exactly above the area of the state. No state should
have the right to claim up on the territory of another state.

C) Government
Governmentis the agency or machinery of state exercising both internal and external aspects of
sovereignty on behalf of the state. Since state is an abstract entity, government undertakes both
internal and external functions in the name of the state. It is the element that has put an end to the
prevalence of chaotic and disordered nature of society.

31
D) Sovereignty
It signifies the ultimate or supreme authority of the state in both its internal and external affairs.
The state would not compromise its authority to any supreme entity both internally and
externally: because it is implies that there is no power and authority which is beyond and above
that of the state. Since a state is sovereign it determines its own form of government, economic
systems, domestic and foreign policies, and on all matters of its own.

There is another not essential but supplementary element of the state: that is international
recognition. It is simply an external acceptance of a newly emerging independent state by other
states in the world. Recognition is an accessory not necessary element for the reason that it
cannot determine the survival of a given state in this real world. That is, a state can exist without
getting international recognition. Take for example, Somaliland; it exists as a state but not
international recognition is conferred to it.

2.2.1 Theories on the origin and development of state

The major contending theories on the origin of state are the natural or evolutionary, the divine
right, and the social contract, force and Marxist theories.
 The natural or evolutionary theory
This is sometimes named as Genetic theory, which is a theory that considers the state as natural
to organized and settled social life. It claims that the state gradually evolved from out of earlier
forms of settled human communities, such as the family, the clan and the tribe. That is, state is
the product of the natural or gradual expansion of the family. It is the oldest theory that has lost
its ability to explain the complex phenomenon of the rise and function of the state.

 The divine right theory

This is perhaps the oldest or earliest theory concerning the origin of the state. It claims that the
state to be of a divine creation. That is, the state is considered as an institution created by God,
and rulers were regard as the representatives or vice reagents of God on the earth. It is the will of
God that in human society some are born to rule while others are born to be ruled. Moreover, this
theory asserts that the social order, in which the position of the individual is determined
32
hierarchically on the basis of the birth, was God-given and thus immutable. There is hereditary
succession of authority of the rulers who should be held responsible for and accountable to God
only, not to people.

The rulers, particularly kings, considered themselves and their male descendents to be elect of
God to rule over the rest of the society whom they considered as subjects, not citizens. This was
predominantly used by the feudal emperors in Europe during the middle ages. Even in Ethiopian
context in the contemporary period you can take as example that of Hailesilasie’s government. In
short, the point here is that the will of God is the source for creation of state and authority of the
rulers.

 The social contract theory

This theory argued that state is an artificial creation based on the contract or agreement among
the people at large. This theory came into being in the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries whose strong
ground of argument was the doctrine of popular sovereignty. According to the theory, the source
for establishment of the state is the consent (will) of the people and hence the main purpose of
such state is to protect and safeguard the inalienable rights of the people such as the right to life,
liberty, and property.

The social contract theory was further developed in the age of revolutions in the fight against the
rule of non-democratic systems in general and against absolute monarchies in particular. It firmly
advocated popular sovereignty, limited government and individual rights. Though it gave priority
to individuals over society as its limitation, this theory is currently operational in international
politics. Its exponents were the British political thinkers like Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and
John Locke (1632-1704), and the French thinkers Jean – Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). They
were great thinkers who contributed much to the development of contemporary democratic
political system.

 The force or conquest theory

This theory associates the emergence of the state to wars and conflicts (i.e., inter- communal or
inter-societal) that have been endemic in history of human beings. According to this, the state is

33
the result of naked force applied by the stronger over the weak. That is, wars of conquest resulted
in the occupation of more and more territories and lead to the creation of the state. This theory
argues that warfare or military might and physical strength plays a defining role in the formation
and continued sustenance of the state: state is an entity created by the use of physical force. The
establishment of the state is done through the process of conquest, subjugation and coercion of
the week by the strong. In other words “might (force) make right” lies the ground for
establishment of state in this theory.
However, although the state can and does use force, military might and physical force alone
cannot explain the complex phenomenon of political systems, for mere force cannot maintain the
lasting relationship between the ruler and the ruled.

 The Marxist theory

This theory claims that the state emerges due to warfare within a society: this is more of intra-
societal war carried out between classes. Particularly, Karl Marx popularized this view by
analyzing the state as an agency of class warfare by which the capitalist classes control the
working classes. In other words, the state was originated from the split of society into social
classes with sharp and polarized economic interests. The formation of social classes is associated
with the emergence of private property.

The rise of the state with its agent, the government established to make laws, is therefore,
directly related with the emergence of private property and the need to safeguard it. That means
the state in its function is a partisan political organization that stands for the interests of the rich
against the poor. Therefore, the supporters of this theory suggest that with the historical process
of disappearance of private property and antagonistic social classes, the state will wither away
and a classless society should be established within which everybody will be equal and all have
whatever they want.

2.3 State Structure

Structures of state refer to forms of state indicating the nature and distribution of power and
authority at various levels or tiers of government. Here, therefore, in view of the nature and
distribution of political power and authority, one may broadly classify states into two structures:
namely, unitary and federal.
34
2.3.1. The unitary state structure
Generally speaking, unitary state is a form of state in which the nature of political power is
highly centralized at the centre up on the national government. National government is the
central unit upon which constitutionally all political powers are usually centralized to carry out
all administrative affairs on the behalf of the state. Accordingly, legislative authority is only
versed in the national government.

Legislative authority is simply an authority legally given to state agency to enact or make
constitution or law. And, this authority is only of the national unit in most unitary form of state
and hence, the expectation is that there is constitution only at the national level. That is, all
administrative policies and principles originate only from the centre. This is because no shared
legislative authority to regional units.

Well, your answer may be yes, or no. It could be yes, because all powers are constitutionally in
the hands of the national units and hence all administrative activities should be undertaken by
this unit. In effect, the national government sometimes be overburdened with huge activities and
may design some mechanisms on how to relax and particularly to bring about smooth
administration at the localities. Typical of these ways is the national unit should establish
regional units based on its interest and share or decentralize some responsibilities or activities to
them. So, in this case there may be regional governments in unitary state not established by
constitution but only by the will of the national government. Again if you reply no, still you are
right. Regional units may not be in this form of state for the simple reason that the constitution
doesn’t allow for their existence, which is unlike the national government whose source of
creation is the constitution.

As far as the source of establishment of regional units here is the interest of the national
government, their legal existence significantly depends upon still the will of the central unit.
Having established them, it can grant them certain power and authority or leave them without
any. So, in unitary state there will be only one source of creation and power and authority for

35
regional governments, that is the central government. This indicates that there are no authorities
and powers left to local units that they can independently exercise from the central government.
Whatever activity the local units going to perform should first be commanded from the center
from where most policies and decisions are shaped and sent down to local units. In this case,
local/regional units have no independent decision making power and authority at least for some
particular matters of their own. In unitary states the justification or the rationale for the existence
of local/regional units is just to serve as an administrative agent of the central government and
they are considered as a means to the central government to have a reach to local areas or to
facilitate smooth administration there. This means they are created just to bring administrative
convenience for the government. The other point is that the existence of the local units in unitary
states is dependent up on the will of the central government. The national government can at any
time reduce their power, or diminish it or even end their existence. Therefore, these regional or
local units are highly subordinated or subservient to only the will of the national government:
that is, they feel inferior to the centre while the latter feels superior to them.

Advantages of Unitary System of Government

 It can bring about the uniformity of law, policy and administration throughout the
country. This result in the creation of a unified and integrated government authority in a
country.
 In such a state there cannot be conflict of authority, no conflict or confusion of
responsibility for work to be performed, no overlapping of jurisdictions, nor duplication
of government work or activities.
 It is simple in structure or organization and less expensive than a federal state because of
the absence of duplication of governmental department and services.
 A unitary constitutional Government is especially suited for a small country with a
homogeneous population.

Disadvantages of Unitary System of Government

 The main demerit of a unitary form of government is the absence of strong provincial and
regional institutions and the regulation of local policies and affairs by distant and far off
authorities.

36
  The responsibility for local regional administration places an additional burden on the
central government and result in greater red-tapism and rigid bureaucratic administration
in short. The central legislature will be overburdened by numerous local matters.
 Very often the central authorities do not possess the necessary knowledge of local
conditions and requirements, and consequently the local interests suffer.
 It tends to repress local initiative and discourage interest in social problems. It is a
hindrance to popular local self- government and local liberty.

2.3.2. The federal state structure

Federal state is almost the direct anti-thesis (opposite) of the unitary whereby there is
constitutional decentralization of power from the centre to the regional governments(i.e.
devolution of power), and hence both the centre and regions have certain independent spheres of
authority to make decisions independently of each other. That is, unlike the unitary, the source of
creation and powers of both the federal (national or central) government and of the regions are
the constitution. This poses limit on the extent of power to be enjoyed by the central unit and
distributes power to the federated units to allow them decide on their specific affairs.

Accordingly, there are two levels or tiers of government, or federal state is composed of two
federated units, in between which legislative authority is constitutionally shared. Although that
of the federal has supremacy upon the regional, one can find constitutions at the national and the
regional levels since both units have the legal authority to legislate at their respective levels.
Consequently, dual subjectivity is one of the central features of the federal states.

Needless to say, dual subjectivity is usually common in federal form of state that simply to mean
the situation in which citizens of a given state are being subject to (when they observe/obey) two
constitutions simultaneously: one, of the federal constitution, the other, of the regional
constitution once at a time. In other words, citizens in federal state should observe regional
constitutions to which they belong. And they are expected to be subject to the federal
constitution because federal constitution has supremacy upon all regional constitutions. This is
primarily attributable to the shared or legally divided legislative authority between both the
central and regional units.

37
Since the source of establishment and the power and authority of both is the constitution, the
extent of this power and authority granted, and the legal existence of the regional governments
depends upon the constitution, not on the consent of the national/federal government. Unlike the
unitary, there is no a sort of superior – subordinated relationship between them rather a kind of
collaborative (cooperative) relationship is expected as a crucial feature of federal form of state.
It is a theoretical establishment that a federal state is known of decentralizing state power from
the centre to regional/local units, which is termed as devolution. The following are some sets of
powers in a federal arrangement of state.

 Exclusive power: - is a power which is granted constitutionally either to the federal or

regional governments to perform different tasks independently of each other. That is, there
are certain national matters or activities to be independently carried out by national
government using this exclusive power; and there are certain regional matters or activities to
be undertaken only by the regional governments independently of the national using such
exclusive power.
 Concurrent power: - this is common power granted to both governments to be exercised in
performing the same activities by coming together cooperatively.
 Residual power: - refers to all powers out of the jurisdiction of the federal government, which
are not explicitly stated in a constitution and usually granted to the regional governments.

Advantages of federal state structure

 It provides opportunity to small and weak states to unite into a powerful state without
losing their independent status and separate existence.
 Since it combines the twin advantages of national unity and local independence a
federation becomes valuable to big states with vast population and with racial, cultural
and linguistic diversities.
 Efficient and satisfactory administration of government may happen when government is
carried out closer to the people who are affected and when those with local knowledge
are involved in making the decisions. And this enables high local participation of the
people.

38
  Sub national government are also often seen as laboratories of democracy or centers of
experimentation where new ideas can be tried out , and if they are seen to work and be
popular in one locality, it can then be applied on a national basis later.
 It can take some of the administrative burdens from central government. In modern states
there are so many demands made on national government to solve society’s problems and
to respond to all sorts of issues that there is a danger that its desire to act exceeds its
capacity for effective delivery, so it suffers from the so called ‘administrative overload’
 It may help check the opportunity for a tyranny to develop at national level. As a result it
prevents national governments not to encroach or tramp individual liberties.
Concentration of power at the national level alone is seen as dangerous. This is best
expressed in Lord Acton’s aphorism that power tends to corrupt and absolute power
corrupts absolutely. So power need to be devolved to the sub-national levels.
 It is also the best system of government in maintaining balance between centrifugal and
centripetal forces with in the country.

Disadvantages of federal state structure

 There exist a great diversity of legislative policy and administration.
 It results in duplication of governmental organization, activities and departments, making
administration more and more complicated and inefficient.
 There may exist the danger of possible conflict of jurisdiction between the national and
state governments.
 A federal system creates a twilight zone/gray area that becomes a source of unnecessary
complexity and confusion. There is duplicity of legislation, administration, taxation,
adjudication, etc. It entails heavy expenditure at the cost of the tax payers. Uniform state
action is difficult.
 There also exist, albeit in rare circumstances, the danger of secession. By weakening
centers power, pressure for greater autonomy particularly when the sub national units
boundaries coincide with ethnic and cultural identities, can exacerbate divisions in
society, leading to increased conflict and eventually fragmentation.
Examples for the federal form are Ethiopia (after 1991), Nigeria, USA, Switzerland, Germany,
Canada and etc.

39
2.3.3. Confederation (Co- federal state)  
Confederation in modern political terms is a permanent union of political units for common
action in relation to other units. Usually created by treaty but often later adopting a
common constitution, confederations tend to be established for dealing with critical issues such
as defense, foreign affairs or a common currency, with the central government being required to
provide support for all members.

The nature of the relationship among the states constituting a confederation varies considerably.
Likewise, the relationship between the member states, the central government and the
distribution of powers among them, is highly variable. Some looser confederations are similar
to intergovernmental organizations, while tighter confederations may resemble federations. In a
non-political context, confederation is used to describe a type of organization which consolidates
authority from other autonomous or semi-autonomous bodies. Examples include sports
confederations or confederations of pan-European trades unions.

2.4. Understanding government

Government in simple terms may refer a group of individuals and institutions authorized to
formulate public policies and conduct the affairs of the state. They are empowered to establish
and regulate interrelationships of the people within their territorial confines, the relation of the
people with the community as a whole, and the dealings of the community with other political
entities. It is also a body that has the power to make and enforce laws within an organization or
group. In this sense government broadly implies administering or exercising control over a
specific territory over its inhabitants and all other matters falling in that jurisdiction. In such
senses government can exist whenever and where ever ordered rule occurs.

Government is an institutional process through which collective and usually binding decision are
made. Therefore, government is the administrative machinery or agency of state that brings the
intangibility (invisibility) of the state in to a concrete reality. It is held responsible to carry out
the day to day affairs of state. It is an essential political organ that coordinates the routine
activities of the state & maintains law and order. That is, it carries on state’s functions and
realizes its policies and objectives. Simply putting, government is an organization, institution, or

40
apparatus through which state sovereignty is instrumental zed and hence functions of state are
accomplished.

More generally government can be seen in two senses government as a process and government
as an institution. According to Encyclopedia of Governance (2007), government has at least two
main implications depending on whether it is used in a strict sense (government as an institution)
or in a broadest sense (government as a process).

A) Government as an institution
In a strict sense, the government (usually with the article), refers to the authoritative expression
of the state and describes the group of persons that has authority in a given unit at a certain time.
In non- Anglo Saxon languages the word government has even more limited meaning because it
refers precisely to the institutions that exerts executive power within the political system. For
instance, the Merkel government of Germany or the Italian government of Berlusconi, such
restrictive definition of government thus corresponds to the British term cabinet (example the
Blair government) or the American expression administration (The Bush administration). In
countries using the Westminster system, the government will also usually control the legislature.
We will see such systems later in detail.

As government is understood as the centre of power, it exists in the majority of human

communities. The institutionalization of government as a complex organization separated from
the rest of society appeared with the division of social work whatever the types of regimes, the
government expressed the sovereignty of the state by exercising its sole right to legitimately use
force in a specific territory.

B) Government as a process
In a strict sense we have seen government as an institution. In a broader sense however
government (usually without the article) is the way of governing a given entity at a certain time.
Government here is an abstract term referring to the method, range, purposes, and degree of
control of society by state rather than implying a group of persons authorized to carry out state’s
activities.

41
In some sense, therefore, government as a process (the act of governing) referred to as a
synonym of governance where multiple actors, formal as well as informal networks involve in
governing the society.

Whatever the diversity and controversy surrounding the nature and meaning of government , all
systems or forms of government performs three major functions; making laws , executing or
implementing laws and interpreting of laws.

2.4.1 Roles and functions of government

Despite its universality and the necessity of government that most people and political-thinkers
accepted it without hesitation, what role governments should play remained controversial. Again
in spite of such controversy, another fact is clear and implied the inevitable growth of the role of
government. Wherever technology advances, wherever private business extends its range
wherever the cultural life becomes more complex, new tasks are imposed on government.

Liberals view the role of government to be more limited to confine only in areas of maintaining
law and order in the society (a ‘night-watchman’ state) from domestic order to preventing from
external attack. Such minimal states existed in the 19 th century but become increasingly rare in
the 20th century. However since the 1980s associated with the globalization pressure there has
been a worldwide tendency to minimize or roll-back state’s power. For much of the 20 th century
however there was a general tendency for the state’s role progressively to expand. This had
occurred in response to electoral pressures for economic and social security. The recent financial
crisis in the world indicated the importance of greater role to be played by governments.

The most extreme form of state control is found in totalitarian states. The essence of
totalitarianism is the construction of an all embracing state whose influence penetrates every
aspect of human existence, the economy, education, culture, religion, family life and so forth.
Examples are Nazism; Fascism and Stalinism which politicize every aspect of human existence,
seek to establish comprehensive state control. Despite diversities and the extent of which the
state play a role generally, governments perform the following general functions;

42
  Maintenance of law and order
The stability and security of states are the prime objectives of all governments. For this purpose
governments make regulations governing the activities of all members of the society. Indeed
providing security, law and order are among the most essential tasks that governments are
traditionally required to perform. In particular the maintenance of law and order has two
dimensions: the domestic and external. The external dimension of security emphasizes the
protection of the state against any attacks from outside or foreign countries. To that end national
defense forces such as armies, navies, and air forces are typically created to perform this
function. Domestic security implies maintaining social order through protecting citizens against,
theft, aggression and violence from members of one’s own society. And this function in most
societies is carried out by the police force. Government as Max Weber rightly observed enjoy the
legitimate monopoly of overwhelming force. Hence they can enforce its decisions and rules
whenever and wherever necessary. Government makes regulations governing the activities of all
members of the society. Such regulations seem to be omnipresent. They are found in economic,
social, political and even cultural matters.

Generally, governments seeks to resolve all the conflicts in the society through the police force,
defense, the court system and prison systems in a way to avoid any serious security breach that
could endanger social harmony and state survival.

 Community and nation-building

The prime purpose that governments can perform is to help create and maintain a stable and
peaceful community. While humans are social beings, it is not always easy to build a community
in which large number of individual can communicate, feel at home and engage in constructive
interaction such as settle family life or trade. This in particular is undoubtedly a serious challenge
especially in multi-ethnic, multi- cultural societies. As a result governments will face serious
burden to inculcate and foster common identities among large and diverse communities living in
an extended area without regular interaction with one another.

43
Governments can help generate such communities in many different ways, for example by
teaching a common language, instilling common values and norms, creating common myths and
symbols supporting a national identify and so forth. Nation building activities help-instill
common world views, values, and expectations. Government activities in this regard help very
much to homogenize the political culture of their citizen’s. The more homogeneous the political
culture, the easier it is to live in peaceful coexistence and engage in activities for mutual gain
such as commerce. Therefore governments must strive to integrate the various sections of the
society. This is because if government is unable to unify them behind its policies and activities it
will find it difficult to achieve most of its goals. Centrifugal forces within the state must
therefore be adequately counter balanced by the necessary institutional and unifying forces
within the state.

For instance, in Africa and other multi-cultural societies the prominence of dissension or discord
along ethnic lines forces attention to be focused entirely on the aspect of national integration.

 Regulating the economy

Government can help promote economic development by establishing and enforcing effective
property rights and by facilitating trade. Neo- classical economists show that market economies
are efficient when property rights are defined and protected, competition rigorous and
information freely available. When one or several of these conditions do not hold however
market failures may result, and supply may not efficiently meet demand. Public goods are
particularly susceptible to market failure. Public goods have two defining characteristics;
a) If they are provided to one consumer, they cannot be withheld from anyone else.
b) One person’s enjoyment or consumption of the good does not detract from anyone else’s
For instance, clean air or national defense, it is impossible to provide one person with such
services without also giving it to his / her neighbors. Moreover my enjoyment of clean air or
national security does not mean that my neighbors have any less of it. It is only government can
by taxing its citizen’s step in & provides such public goods as parks, roads, light houses, national
defense, and environmental protection.

44
  Protecting property and other rights
Locke saw the establishment and protection of economic and political rights as the most essential
purpose of government. Though his greatest concern may have been with economic property
rights, there are many other social and political rights that government and perhaps only
governments can provide. Among them are freedoms of speech and association, and protection
against various forms of discrimination and harassment. Hence modern governments assume
responsibilities for protecting the political, social and other rights of citizens.

Without effective protection of property rights people will not invest much of their goods and
energies in productive processes. And unless property rights exist and credible contract can be
negotiated and enforced, people will not trust their neighbors enough to engage in much trade
and commerce. Therefore anything beyond the mere subsistence economy requires effective
property rights and contracts.

 Social justice
In addition a government playing a role in promoting economic growth it also concerned in
dividing the fruits of such growth equitably. In many countries the distribution of income is
highly uneven. In many societies’ income and wealth inequalities have been getting worse
overtime. In such circumstance government intervention may be needed to redistribute resources
from the better off to the poor.

The term is difficult to define and may mean different thing to different people and scholars.
Social justice is often referred to as a moral virtue: It is linked with religious or other similar
movements. Social justice is also often referred to (or designated) as part of certain political
movements: It is associated with socialism, Marxism, and other radical or progressive political
parties. Finally, social justice is often seen as a social or economic movement; it is associated
with national and international movements for peace, equity, economic justice, racial justice,
human rights, women’s and children’s issues, living wages, and social and physical safety and
security.

45
Some theorists of distributive justice argue that such transfers should attempt to equalize the
conditions of all citizens. Others would instead prefer government to redistribute enough to
“create a level playing field and thus equalize opportunities but then let individual be responsible
for their own fortunes. In either way citizens in many societies would agree that there should be
efforts to make the distribution of wealth & income more even.
Distributive justice is often closely linked to the concepts of human dignity, the common good,
and human rights. Distributive justice refers to what society owes individual members in
proportion to: the individual’s needs, contribution, and responsibility; the resources available;
and society’s responsibility to the common good. Also implicit is that all individuals are entitled
to equal access to the basics necessary for living humanely. Distributive justice is not the same as
legal justice, which is defined as the rights and responsibilities (social contract) to honor and
obey laws and regulations deemed necessary to protect peace and social order.
Many tax and welfare policies are indeed designed to do just that, though how successful they
are, or how far such redistribution should go, is often hotly debated. Even many individuals
who do not think that governments have a general responsibility to redistribute wealth would
agree that they should at least provide certain minimum standards of living, a social safety net,
for all citizens.

 Protecting the weak

Normally we rely on government to protect individuals and groups, such as future generations,
that are not able to speak for themselves. Such groups cannot act to protect their own interests.
Governments can protect the interests of the unborn and prevent them from getting saddled with
economic debts or environmental degradation. And in recent decades, governments have become
much more involved in protecting groups that for various reasons are politically weak or
unfranchised, such as children, the old, and the infirm or disabled, as well as nonhuman parts of
the creation – from whales and birds to trees and other parts of our natural environment.

2.4.2 Government structure

2.4.2.1. Vertical arrangement
Although there is a variation from one government to another, generally any government is
vertically arranged in to central/federal and sub national/constituent government levels where by

46
each government level posses some sort of jurisdiction and authority and hence makes and
implements policies thereof. But for our purpose here, a detailed discussion on horizontal
arrangement of a government is emphasized.

2.4.2.2. 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?

A. Legislative body
General 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.

- Controlling the administration:- This involves the legislative body’s role of supervising
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 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

47
 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.

B. 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 execute the other hand consists of professional civil servants whose
job is to offer advice and administer policy subject to the requirements of political neutrality and
loyalty to their ministers. This being the case some of the principal functions of the executive
body include:

- Enforcement functions: - This is the function of enacting (implementing) all laws, rules,
decisions made by the legislative body and the judiciary body (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.

48
 - 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 politics.

C. 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:

1. Formulating case laws: Case law is judge-made law which then becomes binding on all
other courts.
2. 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.

2.4.3 Forms of government

Generally speaking, in view of how a given society is organized or on the basis of the extent to
which the power of the state is exercised by the government, one may classify government into
democratic and the non-democratic. Non- democratic governments have other alternative names
like unlimited or non-constitutional governments. There are various forms such kinds as

49
authoritarian, totalitarian, military, dictatorship, etc. or we can add the Aristotelian classification
of government in antiquity. He put sex type of government; those were polity, aristocracy,
monarchy, tyranny, oligarchy, democracy from the best to the worst. Our point of discussion in
this course is not with non-democratic forms of government or Aristotelian rather with forms of
government which are democratic in nature.

By nature of relationship existing between the legislative and executive branches of government,
one may classify forms of democratic governments into three. These are parliamentary,
presidential and the hybrid. They are also limited or constitutional governments. Let us treat
them separately.

2.4.3.1 The Parliamentary form of government

Parliamentary form is a form of government in which there is fusion, integration or overlap of
political power and authority (and hence membership and function) of both the legislative and
executive branches of government and consequently, members of the former can constitutionally
be members of the latter. In other words, members of the government have two roles at the same
time in parliamentary government. They are not only ministers as members of the executive but
also are members of the legislature. However, this does not mean that all the ministers are the
members of the law making body in parliamentary form of government. For example, in some
states like Great Britain though all of them are the members of the legislature, in some others
such as Ethiopia some of the ministers may not be members of the parliament.

This fusion shows that the executive authority emerges from the legislative body in
parliamentary government. And thus, the executive is directly responsible to the legislature. That
is, ministers are both individually and collectively responsible to the law making body of
government but they are indirectly responsible to the people at large. The legislature conducts
control over the executive’s functions nearly on the day-to-day basis. Members of the Council of
Ministers (are called the cabinet, which is the other name of parliamentary government) may be
required to report, respond to questions, etc. to the legislature whenever they are requested to do
so. This still shows that the legislative branch in parliamentary government is more power than
other organs and this is because it is constituted by the representatives of the people at large. In

50
other words, members of legislature are elected (by the people) from which the decisive
executive officials such as prime minister and other most ministerial officers are nominated.

In parliamentary form of government, position of Head of government is occupied by the prime

minister (premier or chancellor) who is the leader of the dominant/ruling political party. He/she
is also a member of the legislature for fusion of political authority and hence, is vested with
chief/real executive authority. In this form of government, it is the one who is vested with chief
executive authority empowered to deal with the day-to-day political activities. The prime
minister is either appointed by the Head of State or elected by the legislature from the
majority/ruling party there. After the appointment or election, prime minister appoints or
nominates other ministers. In simple terms, from the total parliamentary seats the political party
that secured the majority seats is, constitutionally authorized to nominate & elect the prime
Minster, who is further authorized to nominate other ministries either from within or out of the
rank of the parliament. All such nominations are subject to approval by the parliament. So in
this system the cabinet ministries are drawn from the ranks of the legislature and they are
responsible to it whereas, the responsibility and accountability of legislature is directly to the
people.

The other important feature of the parliamentary is that very crucial executive decisions shall be
made by a team: that is by the cabinet or the Council of Ministers. The prime minister shall not
usually make an individual decision unlike the case of the presidential form of government.
Because the decisions are made in group, no individual member of the Council of Ministers
escapes liability for faulty decisions, even if he/she is personally against such a group decision.
This is why members of the Council of Ministers are collectively responsible to the legislature.

When one comes to the Head of State, on the basis of how it is to held, parliamentary
government may be classified into two: the monarchical and the republican parliamentary forms
of government. In the case of the former, in states such as Great Britain, Head of State is
occupied by the monarch, king or queen particularly through the hereditary succession whereas
in the case of the latter, in states like Ethiopia, Head of State is held by the president through

51
election. Those who occupy the Head of the State are holding formal and ceremonial function as
the figure head in the state.

2.4.3.2 The Presidential form of government

Just like the parliamentary, the presidential systems in different states have certain differences.
Usually, it is the American presidential form that can be taken as the model. However, the
following features may be taken as points of communality.

The presidential form of government is an opposite (antithesis) of parliamentary system. It is

based on Montesque’s theory of separation of power. This theory suggests that branches of
government should separate from each other & function independently. They should be
formulated independently and one should not originate from the other. It is also further stated
that if branches of government are interfused it may lead to the authoritarian dictatorship of one
branch of government. Accordingly, Presidential government is the form of government which is
characterized by the separation of power and authority between the legislature and the executive
by virtue of which members of the law making cannot constitutionally be members of the law
implementing body of government.

In most of this form of government, the posts of both the Head of Government and the Head of
State are fused in the office of the president who is the leading the dominant party and is, as a
result, vested with the chief executive power. Here, the president alone passes executive
decisions though he is consulted by his ministers. But he and his ministers do not sit to pass a
collective decision although they conduct the meetings for the purpose of advising the president.
That is, passing an individual executive decision by the president would enable him to pass
decisions within a short period of time. As the Head of the Government, the president dominates
the cabinet completely. They are merely the instruments through which the president’s policies
are carried out, if not he is free to dismiss any of them. They are not responsible to the legislature
nor do their function on the basis of collective responsibility. The president himself is
responsible to the constitution, not to the legislature.

52
2.4.3.3 The hybrid form of government
The hybrid is the semi-presidential and semi-parliamentary, or half-presidential and half-
parliamentary form of government whereby it is not purely the presidential and not purely the
parliamentarian. Rather, it is something in between them. It is the system where the president is
powerful and he is, along with members of the legislature, directly elected by the people in such
states as France. If you take France, a separate election is conducted to elect the powerful
president for seven years term & members of the parliament directly by the people.

The elected powerful president is in return given the authority to appoint the prime minister. The
prime minister nominates other ministries up on the recommendation from the powerful
president from outside of the parliament. The installed cabinet is responsible to the parliament
(national assembly), who can declare a vote of no confidence to dissolve it but with absolute
majority vote. So there is cabinet accountability to the legislature hybrid form. The powerful
president is given the authority to dissolve the parliament & call up on a new election. He may
also dismiss the prime minister at will. Even if it is not applied, the president has the power to
bypass or circumvents the parliament by taking issues to popular referendum than decided by the
later.
Therefore, the hybrid form has parliamentary elements like; the institution of the prime
ministerial office, the accountability of the cabinet ministries to the national assembly with its
power to declare vote of no confidence. It also constitutes some presidential elements like the
election of the president directly by the people, the strong and determinant power given to him &
his accountability to the people. Most Latin American states have adopted such form of
democratic government.

2.5. The difference between state and government

It is a different matter that most people use the concept of ‘state’ interchangeably with other
terms like ‘government’. This is due mainly to lack of precise understanding about the concepts.
Here, to take up with correct understanding of the two terms, the following are some of the
grounds for their principal differences forwarded by J.C. Johari (2006). These are:
 Relatively, the state is a wider/broader entity including all citizens of the country while
the government is a smaller unit covering only those that are employed to perform its

53
 functions. That is, the state is the bigger entity for the promotion of common ends and the
satisfaction of common needs. But government is the essential element and agency of
state through which the will of the state is formulated. That is the ends and purposes of
the state are executed through the instrumentality of the government;
 The state is an abstract entity, but the government has its existence in a concrete form
because it includes all persons in the legislature, executive and judiciary departments. In
other words, the government is a practical & concrete organization through which the
will of the state is formulated, expressed & realized;
 While the power of the state is primary and original, the authority of the government is
something delegated and derivative. That is, the power of the state is absolute and
unrestricted by anything on account of being a sovereign entity, whereas the authority of
government is limited by the provisions of the constitution
 Primarily owing to its sovereignty, state is regarded as permanent and independent
institution. State survives and is always there unless its sovereignty is destroyed by the
invasion of some other states. But government is changeable or dynamic; it always comes
and goes. As far as one party is changed by another new party, office holders of
government are changed. The frequent changes in government cannot affect the
continued existence of state
 Because all state across the world is made up of their four essential elements, they are not
of various kinds. That is, they are the same throughout. But governments are of different
forms such as monarchy, aristocracy, oligarchy, democracy, dictatorship etc.
 The other crucial point is that membership to the state is something compulsory whereas
that of government is an optional matter. Aristotle asserts that because people are
political animals by nature and necessity it must for them to belong to the state. But it is
up to in interest of the people to have or not to have posts in the government; and, so
forth.

54
 CHAPTER THREE
UNDERSTANDING CITIZENSHIP: ETHIOPIAN FOCUS
3.1 Definition of Citizenship
As there can never be citizenship without citizens, understanding first what a citizen is of a
paramount importance. The term citizen is understood as a person or an individual who is born in
(or native to) a given state or naturalized therein, and who owes allegiance to such a state and is
entitled to reciprocal protection from it. A citizen is an individual who is legally recognized as a
member of a state. In other words, citizens are people that have full rights to be full members of
a particular state. Each citizen has full and equal rights under a state’s constitution/law. All
citizens are endowed with fundamental rights and privileges on the one hand, and entrusted with
certain duties. That is, it is the citizens who exercise certain rights and privileges in a given state,
which those that are not citizens may not exercise. At the same time, the state also expects
certain duties and responsibilities from its citizens, which it may not legally claim from those
that are not citizens.
When one comes to the concept of citizenship, it has been and is one of the most difficult terms
to define. There is no agreement on the definition of citizenship since it has different criteria as
designed by different states. However, it can be explained as follows. The idea of ‘citizenship’ is
not fundamentally different from the idea of ‘citizen’. First of all, the word ‘citizenship’ comes
from the Latin word called ‘Civitas’, which means a member or a citizen of a city. Here, it is
explained associating with residence of a city.
Therefore, in this context, citizenship simply implies full membership of citizens in a particular
state: it is the actual legal status of (citizens being) membership to the state.
This is to say, citizenship is the legal status of an individual member to be a citizen of the state.
In other words, it refers to the official recognition of an individual’s integration into a given
political system, or, citizenship is the status of a person (whose importance is) to be a full
member of a particular state. And, this legal status usually arises from exercising full rights and
discharging the corresponding duties in a state, which people that are not citizens are not entitled
to exercise and expected to fulfill and due to which they are not citizens of, or full members to,
the state. Therefore, obtaining the status of citizenship involves the legal and official recognition
of the state to exercise citizenship rights and to fulfill the responsibilities/duties.

55
Citizenship is also defined as the rights and duties of citizens residing within a state. That is, it is
about the benefits they require from their membership in the state and the obligations that
individuals have to fulfill in the state. When citizens exercise or enjoy with their rights and
discharge their obligations in a state to which they belong, what is expected usually in
democratic political system is a sort of strong and peaceful relationship between the people and
their government. In connection with this, citizenship can further be understood as a political and
legal relationship existing between individuals and their state. This in fact indicates the symbol
of good citizens whereby they take part in political activities and obey or behave in accordance
with the law of their state. The political and legal relations individuals have with their
government can be changed depending on certain circumstances: the relations citizens have with
their government are something that can be changed to other government. Thus, citizenship right
can also be changed accordingly. Citizenship is not static or rigid in nature; rather it is
characterized by its flexibility.
Moreover, citizenship is an instrument of identification. This means, it is a way or mode by
which citizens of a state can be distinguished from citizens of other states. This is done when
states enact/make laws related to citizenship within their respective municipal/national laws.
All individuals residing within a state may not be its citizens: some are obviously foreigners or
aliens and still there may be some others that are named as subjects. Foreigners are individuals
that are temporarily members of host states but are from abroad. Wherever they go they are
expected to exercise some rights, human rights because they are human beings, but not
democratic rights.
Apart from foreigners, there are also some individuals within a state that are called subjects but
not citizens. This implies that, although the idea of citizenship indicates membership or
belonging to a given state, citizenship in all states is not the same. The idea here is that,
depending on the nature of states and their respective governments, members of various states
may be with different rights and privileges and hence with different citizenship status. For
example, in states that are democratic and constitutional in nature, all citizens should have equal
rights, privileges and duties before the law. That is, here, there are no some citizens that may
have superior rights over the others. To the contrary, in states that are not democratic or non-
constitutional, all individuals of a state do not have equal legal rights and privileges. There may
be some individuals that may have superior rights and privileges over others. There are some

56
individuals that are absolutely obedient to those in power, not to the law; the rulers have more
sovereign rights over such individuals.
These individuals are subjects. Thus, subjects are individuals belonging to a state that have
inferior and subordinate status relatively from some other individuals. They are not exercising
equal rights and privileges as well as discharging identical duties with others. Subjects are those
who fulfill much duties but exercising little or no rights. They are simply those individuals
absolutely obedient, or subjected, to the authority rulers of the state. Subjects have little or no
choice to determine who should rule them and what policies should be made for them.
3.2 The Historical Survey of Citizenship
Historically, citizenship denoting equal political rights with their corresponding duties and
obligations, in the ancient Greek city-states. However, initially not all members of the city-states
were provided with equal rights. This is to say that the Greek city-states that exercised
democracy for the first time had not opened the door of democracy for all members of the city-
states. The community of Greece was divided into three social groups: namely, citizens,
plebeians and slaves.
The citizens, who were very few in number, were free to participate directly in public affairs and
decision-making processes. They had the freedom to debate and make political speeches. They
also had the right to elect or be elected to public offices of the city-states. They also enjoyed the
right to own private property, including slaves. The plebeians were free members of the society.
They, however, did not enjoy political rights like the citizens. They constituted the lower class of
the society. In simple terms, they were free laborers who owned little property and depended on
their labor for earning their living.
The slaves were not free members of the society and had no rights whosoever. They were rather
held as properties of their owners, who could use them in any way they wished. Though, the
originators of democracy, the political systems of ancient Greek city-states were discriminatory,
where citizens alone enjoyed with exclusive social, economic and political rights. In fact, even
the degree of the actual participation of citizens in the affairs of the cities varied from one city-
state to another. Likewise, in ancient Rome, citizenship was limited to a small and privileged
group of the Romans only. These were men who owned property. Women, however, were not
considered citizens. Citizens had the right to movement in the city-states, they could sit in the
councils of governments and could vote to elect their leaders and make laws. Later on,

57
citizenship that was reserved only for the Romans, extended to all free residents of the Roman
Empire, whether natives or inhabitants of conquered territories, which was done to promote
loyalty to the Empire and its rulers.
However, during the medieval periods, the idea and practice of citizenship significantly declined
due mainly to the expansion of feudalism in Europe coupled with collapse of Roman Empire. At
this time, people owed their full allegiance to the landlords, who were expected to give their
loyalty to the kinds. But the people were not recognized as citizens and the term ‘citizenship’
was not used to include the people at large. The people were remained to be subjects. It was only
the economically privileged persons that were considered as citizens. Consequently, there
political and legal relationship between people and their rulers was non-existent. It was during
the transition from small feudal kingdoms to the creation of the nation states that the notion of
citizenship was extended to members of the urban middle class in Europe due to increasing
economic importance of this class.
During this time, the Renaissance periods, though the dominance of churches upon the states
obliterated and people began to give their allegiance directly to the states, there were political
systems that were non-democratic in nature. As a result, people were still citizens but regarded as
subjects. And hence, the political and legal relations during this time were non-existent. It was
after the changes that came into being, because of the movements and struggles of the people
against such repressive rulers, that the idea and practice of citizenship began to re-emerge just
like that of democracy in the modern period. Generally, it could be said that the emergence of the
modern concept of citizenship is associated with the rise of the demands of the people for
increased freedom and participation in political, economic and social affairs of their states.
Especially, the political developments that followed the American and French Revolutions of the
18th century were crucial milestones in the crystallization of the idea of citizenship. In due
course, the idea of citizenship came to be accepted as an instrument to promote popular
governments, individual liberties, and political equality and participation.

Furthermore, with the consolidation of modern states, citizenship continued to be a strong

political force that inseparably attached the individual with the state. Therefore, in this sense,
citizenship is a relationship between an individual and a state originating under terms prescribed

58
by the law of that state and giving rise to certain rights and duties which such law attaches to
citizenship.
3.3 Aspects of Citizenship
Aspects of citizenship are the legal, social and political areas.
The legal aspect of citizenship constitutes laws and rules members of a society expected to
behave accordingly. Rules and laws do have many purposes. In families and in other less
complex societies, customs, traditions, and rules play an important role in guiding behavior and
establishing order. They do have the same functions even in more complex societies. In general,
laws enacted in such societies can be used to provide order, predictability, and security. They
describe ways people should behave and they can protect rights, provide benefits and assign
responsibilities.
The social aspect of citizenship refers to civility of members of a society whereby people treat
others with respect regardless of whether or not one likes them or agrees with their viewpoints,
being willing to listen to other points of view, not insulting when arguing with others. It also
refers to civic mindedness and compassion: i.e. concern for the well-being of one’s community
and state and concern for the well-being of others especially for the less fortunate.
The political aspect of citizenship is the meaningful participation of citizens in the political
process. Political participation of citizens includes their participation in the government
formation, in election program and other civic affairs. Particularly in democratic political system,
unless people make effective participation, democracy cannot be realized and hence no self-
government.

3.4 Qualifications for Citizenship

Qualifications for citizenship are usually the legal requirements or criteria serving as ways of
acquiring and losing citizenship of a state. They usually exist in different states in terms of rules,
laws or principles. However, there is no uniformity of qualifications for citizenship in the world.
They vary from state to state: different states may have various principles, or rules serving as
ways of acquiring and losing citizenship rights. Consequently, there may be a number of ways of
acquiring and losing citizenship across the world. The section has two sub-sections. While the
first sub-section deals with ways of acquiring citizenship the second will take up with ways of
losing citizenship.

59
3.5 Philosophical discourses on Citizenship

In political theory, there are three perspectives on the conception of citizenship: Liberalism,
Communitarians and Civic republicanism.

Liberalism refers to those theories that consider the individual as preceding polity and
citizenship as specific rights that protect the individual. The bearer of rights is individual and the
granter is the nation-state. They argue that the function of the political realm is to render service
to individual interests and purposes, to protect citizens in the exercise of their rights, and to leave
them unhindered in the search of whatever individual and collective interests they might have. In
liberalism political arrangements are thus seen in utilitarian terms. To participate in the political
sphere is a right and citizens choose- on the assumption that they have the resources and the
opportunity-when and whether to exercise this right. Their status of citizen is not derogated or
jeopardized if they choose not to be so active. While citizens are assumed to be skilled in debate
and procedure and empowered to express their views on political matters, to propose alternative
political or social arrangements, let alone work towards achieving them, is not considered part of
citizenship.

 What is the concept of liberalism in political theory

Despite the fact that some liberal doctrine is also established legal and political practice in
modem democracies in the West, the assumption has been persuasively challenged. There is a
cogent literature on govern mentality that interprets liberalism as a practice rather than a
philosophy. In this view, liberalism emerges as a series of technologies of government that does
not quite resemble liberalism as defended or attacked by philosophers. Moreover, other scholars
argue that modern liberalism has been at best ambiguous about group rights, and its future as a
credible philosophy of government will depend on its ability to accommodate such rights.
Likewise, the new social movements and resultant cultural politics have severely criticized the
liberal conception of citizenship in practice. They have demonstrated that individual freedom
conceived in negative terms (freedom from) is not an adequate conception of political life in
which many citizens also seek positive liberties (freedom to) to alter their conditions of existence
as a group. As well, the assumption of the individual as the sole bearer of rights is challenged by
the formation of effective sub-national groups that seek rights by virtue of membership in these
groups.

60
The other perspective is Communitariansm’ that criticize the libera1 conception of self-
regarding or sovereign individual as debilitating and demeaning for the 'common good'. While
Communitariansm takes issue with the assumption that the individual exists prior to polity, it
does not contest the principle that the individual is the sole bearer of rights. These two political
theories are at odds with one other in the sense that the conceptions of the individual they show
and desire are fundamentally different. While liberalism advances a model of the self-regarding
individual protecting and advancing his or her interests, Communitariansm claims that
individuals are situated and embedded and thus not isolated and independent. In other words,
Communitarianism adheres to a strong view of community, in the sense that to say that the
members of a society are bound by a sense of community is not simply to say that a great many
of them profess communitarian sentiments and pursue communitarian aims, but rather that they
conceive their identity-the subject and not just the object of their feelings and aspirations-as
defined to some extent by the community of which they are a part. While a communitarian vision
asserts that the civic virtue distinctive to our time is the capacity to negotiate our way among the
sometimes overlapping, sometimes conflicting obligations that claim us and to live with the
tension to which multiple loyalties give rise how such loyalties and obligations are formed
remains unanswered. In the end, the debate revolves around the extent to which individuals are
formed under the influence of community.
Civic republicanism argued that there does not need to be a contradiction or conflict between a
self-regarding individual and an egalitarian one. They define citizenship as a problem of what
draws a body of’ citizens together into a coherent and firmly organized political community, and
keeps that allegiance durable. They identify a series of political crises such as ethnic conflict,
changing sovereignties of states in Europe and elsewhere, dislocating shifts of identity provoked
by mass migration and economic integration that raise deep questions about 'what binds citizens
together into a shared political community'.

Republicans criticize both universalistic claims of liberalism, which argues for the virtues of the
individual, and communitarian and postmodern claims of group identity and pluralism. On the
one hand, there are the various kinds of universalism that exalt the inviolable moral worth of
individuals above and beyond any collective or civic identity. On the other hand, there are the
forces of exclusivity that celebrate and affirm just those forms of group identity that distinguish
individuals from one another. These tend to generate the kind of ethnic and nationalist outbursts

61
whose outcome, as we have seen more and more in the last few years, is the self-dissolution of
citizenship.

Civic republicanism also believes that there is a 'civic identity' that all citizens can share in
pursuit of the common good while also pursuing their individual ends. The problem with such a
view is that it assumes a unitary and singular conception of political community. Many groups
that demand rights today are not merely interested in abstract arguments about the common
good. They are seeking legitimate recognition and citizenship rights. To claim that we all share a
civic identity is inadequate to deal with deeply sustained forms of oppression and discrimination
in society. Similarly, others attempt to develop a group-differentiate conception of citizenship is
a laudable, if unsuccessful, attempt to respond to this question. They argue that liberalism can
accommodate group rights so long as we make a clear distinction between self-government
rights, poly ethnic rights and special representation rights.

While these three perspectives struggle for a new conception of citizenship that resolves the
tension between universalism and particularism, there is also an apparently radical view of
democracy that sees such a tension as constitutive of the democratic process. That, they argue
that a radical democratic conception of citizenship can only be adequately formulated within a
problematic that conceives of the social agent not as a unitary subject but as the articulation of an
ensemble of subject positions, constructed within specific discourses and always precariously
and temporarily sutured at the intersection of those subject positions. Accordingly, they advocate
developing a non-essentialist conception of the subject and regarding identity as identification
with groups rather than as essential properties of the subject. Itis clear from the language that
although their positions themselves within the debate over citizenship and community, their
theoretical resources are drawn from postmodern political and cultural theory.

In order to formulate a satisfactory concept of the political community, political theory must go
beyond liberal individualism to questions of justice, equality and community. Such a concept
must be responsive to the new political demands, which social democracy was unable to address
and which have contributed to its crisis. It has to meet the challenge of the new movements and
acknowledge as legitimate concerns relating to ecology, issues, ethnicity and others, as well as
the struggles around class, race and gender. The emergence of new political subjects, and the
creation of new forms of identity and new types of community, has rendered inadequate a

62
conception of justice centred principally on economic inequality. Its failure to address other
means of domination makes it inappropriate for capturing the imagination of the new
movements.

Exclusive concern with individual rights cannot provide guidance for the exercise of those rights.
In other words, the limitation of democracy to a mere set of neutral procedures, the
transformation of citizens into political consumers, and the liberal insistence on a supposed
‘neutrality’ of the state have emptied politics of all its substance. It is reduced to economics and
stripped of all its ethical components. Thus, group rights do not in conflict with citizenship.
Rather, radical democratic citizens depend on a collective form of identification among the
democratic demands found in a variety of movements: women, workers, and ecological as well
as other oppositional movements. Radical democracy ‘is not an alternative to liberal democracy’
because ‘[a] radical democratic society will still be a liberal democratic society’. Therefore,
despite claims of “radicalness” (read as different and challenging). Where liberalism theories that
individuals exist a priori and that their identities are essential.
3.6 Ways of Acquiring Citizenship
Although there are different ways of acquiring citizenship within domestic laws of various states,
the most common ones are two: namely, citizenship by birth and naturalization. That is, they are
the commonly used ways by which citizenship can be acquired in most states. To treat them
separately, with regard to citizenship by birth, a majority of people in almost all states acquires
citizenship at birth. Usually they don’t change their citizenship after acquiring by birth. This
simply means you become a citizen (or acquire citizenship) of your state since the time of your
birth therein.
Citizenship by birth has two broad principles. The first principle is that the right that a child has
to citizenship in its parent’s country. This is acquiring citizenship in a state simply by
considering country of the child’s father or/and mother. There is Latin name given for this
principle called Jus Sangunius, which means the Right of Blood. In other words, citizenship can
be acquired through the right blood or in the country of mother (i.e. Jus Sangunius Materni) and
through the right blood or in the country of father (i.e. Jus Sangunius Paterni).Thus, this
principle emphasizes on descent or blood relation of the child and its parents irrespective of its
birth place.

63
The second principle is acquiring citizenship right in a given state by considering the native or
birth place of the child. According to this, a child born in a particular state, but having parents
with citizenship of different state, automatically becomes a citizen of the state in which it is born
irrespective of its parent’s citizenship. This principle has also another Latin name and it is Jus
Soli, which implies the Right of Soil. This is, therefore, determining citizenship by the birth place
of an individual. Naturalization is the alternative method of acquiring citizenship after birth. It
can be defined as a process by which a state confers (gives) its citizenship on an individual, who
is originally not its citizen, as a result of some voluntary acts and intentions of the individual.
Putting differently, to bring process of naturalization into effect, the person to be naturalized
should satisfy the specific criteria, usually legal, set by the particular state into which he/she
wishes to be a citizen. That is, the criteria set by the state and interest (willingness) on the part of
the concerned person is crucial here. The other issue to be considered for effectiveness of
naturalization is right of expatriation. It is the official permission or legal right given to the
person under question by government of his/her native state to go abroad and be naturalized in a
new state.
Apart from by birth and naturalization, citizenship may also be granted in the process of
acquiring a new territory (by a state from, usually its neighboring, and another state) through the
means of either cession (peacefully) or subjugation (violently). This is to mean that when either
some part of the territory of a state voluntarily united with that of another state or the territory of
the former forcefully subjugated to be united to that of the latter. In due course of doing this,
people residing on a specific territory of a state, either peacefully through cession or forcefully
through subjugation, would be united to another state and hence be citizens of the latter, which
means acquire its citizenship. Such process is known as substitution. People may sometimes
come across two citizenship rights (dual citizenship), or more (multi-citizenship), in various
states simultaneously. This is due mainly to the availability of various laws, rules or principles
related to citizenship in the world. Needless to say here, there is no uniformity of laws or
qualifications of citizenship in different states. Such variation has brought with it the prevalence
of people with dual and multi-citizenship status in this world.
3.7 Ways of Losing Citizenship
As it has been discussed above, because the criteria for citizenship are different in different states
one can find, like that of acquiring, numerous ways of losing citizenship. In spite of such

64
variation, not the only but, the most common ways of losing citizenship are renunciation,
deprivation, substitution and lapse.
1. Renunciation
Renunciation can serve as a way of losing citizenship in view of two aspects. The first one is that
it is the right that has to be given to everybody to renounce (give up) citizenship from his/her
native state and search for citizenship in another state in accordance with his/her interest. This
aspect has got even international acceptance by the United Nations. Thus, this is more of the
legal way of renouncing ones citizenship and hence one can expect right of expatriation here.
The other aspect of losing citizenship by renunciation is undertaken when citizens, without
getting permission, sometimes make personal decisions to stop citizenship of their native state
and go somewhere else primarily because of political, economic and social reasons.
2. Deprivation
Deprivation is a way of losing citizenship carried out when citizens commit certain serious
crimes against the regime and national interest. For instance by transferring secrets to other
states, to side enemy state in time of war or to spy on economic, military, political intelligence of
once own state for others. Thus, due to performing serious crimes within your state there may be
a possibility that you would be forcefully deprived of your citizenship rights. This seems the
same as the second aspect of renunciation, but practically not. This is done for committing
crimes whereas that of renunciation is on the basis of the willing of the concerned individuals.
3. Substitution
Dear student, you have already been clear with substitution as one way of acquiring citizenship.
But here, it is not only the way of acquiring but also way of losing citizenship at the same time.
That is, in the process of gaining a new territory undertaken between two states either peacefully
or violently, when the people on the area leave their former state they are losing citizenship, and
while they are joining another state they are at the same time acquiring citizenship.
4. Lapse
A way of losing citizenship because of staying outside of one’s state for a long and continuous
period is referred to as lapse. For example, according to the law of India, if an Indian citizen goes
abroad and stays there for more than seven yeas, constitutionally he/she will no longer be Indian
citizen or be with Indian citizenship. Those and other ways of losing citizenship may take people
to a situation of statelessness. Statelessness is a condition in which people remain without

65
exercising their citizenship rights in any state. That is, when they are no longer considered as
citizens of any state across the world, they are in the condition of statelessness. It is lack of
citizenship from anywhere: i.e. it is losing citizenship from a state without the corresponding
acquisition from a new one. From the above, the second aspect of renunciation, deprivation and
lapse may or may not amount people to condition of statelessness. What matters here is the
criteria of citizenship set by the state in which they are, different from their native state.
However, substitution can never result in statelessness.
3.8 Overview of Citizenship and nationality laws in Ethiopia:
In Ethiopia citizenship law was first enacted in 1930. Before that time, the issue of citizenship
was largely based on custom and tradition. Even if there was no formal law, individuals strongly
identified themselves with the state. Nevertheless, the status of citizenship was more of subjects
than citizens. Acquiring of citizenship was conferred to various nations, nationalities and peoples
due to their integration in to the Ethiopian state.

As mentioned above, citizenship law of Ethiopia was first issued on July 22, 1930 and amended
on October 5, 1932. Moreover, the 1995 Ethiopian constitution (F.D.R.E constitution) stipulates
some important principles with regard to citizenship in Ethiopia. It could be said that both are
generally similar to each other. However, few departures or changes are made in the 1995
constitution. In order to help you identify the similarity and difference between them, each of
them are discussed as below.
3.8.1. The 1930 Citizenship Law of Ethiopia
The Ethiopian law of nationality (citizenship), which is still in force, was issued on July 22,
1930, and amended on October 5,1932. This law is based on the general principle of jus
sanguinis. Unlike jus soli, which awards the status of nationality by birth place irrespective of the
nationality of one's parents, the principle of jus sanguinis gives a child the nationality of his
parents, irrespective of his or her birth place. On the basis of the principle of jus sanguinis,
Ethiopian law provides that any person born in Ethiopia or abroad, whose father or mother is
Ethiopian, is an Ethiopian. This general principle is however, qualified. (There are exceptions).
The first qualification provides that every child born in a lawful mixed marriage follows the
nationality of the father. The second qualification stipulates that the child legitimated through
subsequent marriage follows the nationality of his/her foreign father only on condition that the

66
nationality law of the father confers upon him the foreign nationality with all inherent rights.
Otherwise, the child preserves his/her Ethiopian nationality.
Loss of Ethiopian nationality occurs when:
a) An Ethiopian woman contracts a lawful marriage with a foreigner and acquires her
husband's nationality.
b) A child born in a lawful marriage between an Ethiopian female and a foreigner follows
the nationality of the father, and
c) An Ethiopian subject changes his nationality and acquires foreign nationality.
However, Ethiopian nationality may be retained by an Ethiopian woman who married a
foreigner, if the law of the country of which her husband is a national does not entitle her to the
nationality of her husband. Ethiopian nationality may also be retained by a child born outside
wedlock where his parents subsequently marry if the national law of the child's father does not
confer upon him his father's nationality with all its inherent rights.
Acknowledgement of paternity of a child born from an Ethiopian mother by a father who is a
foreigner deprives the child of his Ethiopia nationality only if the child can acquire his father's
nationality with all its inherent rights. Adoption of an Ethiopian child by a foreign national made
in accordance to the national law of the adopting person does not cause a change of the adopted
child's original nationality.
A woman who had lost her Ethiopian nationality by marriage to a foreigner may recover it after
the dissolution of the marriage by reason of divorce, separation or death of her husband, if she
returns to reside in Ethiopia, although for a limited time, she may be stateless under such
circumstances. Any person who had lost his Ethiopian nationality may recover it when he/she
returns to reside in Ethiopia.
A foreigner may acquire Ethiopian nationality if he:
a) has attained the age of majority according to the law of his/her country;
b) has lived at least for five years in Ethiopia;
c) can earn his/her living (for himself and his family);
d) can read and write the Amharic language; and
e) Produces evidence to the effect that he/she has not been previously convicted of a crime.
Notwithstanding non-compliance with the five-year residence requirement, the Ethiopian
Government may, pursuant to the October 5,1932, amendment, accord Ethiopian nationality to a

67
foreign applicant, if he is deemed to be useful to the country or if there are some special reasons
for granting it to him. Thus, the Ethiopian law of nationality by prescribing the exclusive
determining factors under which Ethiopian nationality can be acquired and lost, has minimized
the instances in which problems of statelessness and dual (multi) nationality may occur.

3.8.2. Ethiopian Citizenship as Stipulated in the1995 Constitution

An important right the constitution deals with is the right of citizenship. Under the general
provisions of the constitution, citizenship is defined. Any woman or man both or either of whose
parents is an Ethiopian citizen automatically becomes an Ethiopian citizen. The is a reaffirmation
of the jus sanguinis principle for the acquisition of nationality. Thus, irrespective of where a
child is born. If one of his/her parents is an Ethiopian citizen, the child automatically becomes an
Ethiopian citizen. In a mixed parentage situation, the traditional more or less universal approach
has been for the child to follow the father's nationality. Where problems arise, then one falls back
on the mother's nationality, but not automatically. The exceptions have been societies with
matrilineal inclinations. For example under Israeli citizenship law, the child being automatically
considered an Israeli citizen only if his/her mother was an Israeli citizen.
The Ethiopian definition of citizenship, which considers the nationality of either parent as being
equally important, is a departure with respect to the traditional patrilineal Ethiopian law. This
departure reflects the philosophical underpinnings of the equality of the sexes strongly
emphasized by the constitution.
Once citizenship is established, the relationship between the individual and the state is put in
place. This relationship creates the duty on the part of the state to look after the interests and
protect the citizen, and on the part of the citizen to be loyal and law abiding. The first general
principle established as a right is that once citizenship is established. No Ethiopian citizen may
be deprived of his/her citizenship without his/her consent. There may be no loss of citizenship by
way of penalty either, as has been common in some systems such as the now defunct Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics.
Although the Constitution does not go into the details, one issue that may arise is whether
citizenship acquired through naturalization may be lost, by way of penalty, if it was fraudulently
acquired. It is interesting to note that the Constitution takes up one type of juridical act i.e.,
mixed marriage and states that the Ethiopian spouse does not thereby lose his/her Ethiopian

68
citizenship. Commendable as it is that the Constitution goes to such an extent to protect its
citizen from loss of citizenship, the mechanism by which this may be achieved is not clear. For
an Ethiopian citizen involved in a mixed marriage to take his/her spouse's nationality may be
important from the point of view of property or other considerations.

Some foreign laws may also require the foreign spouse of their national to automatically become
a national of that country. For instance, the laws of Saudi Arabia, it has been reported,
automatically assume that the foreign wife of a Saudi national becomes a Saudi within six
months of the marriage. Hence, when the constitutional provision states that marriage of an
Ethiopian to a foreigner does not annul his/her Ethiopian citizenship, is it opening the way for
double nationality? This is a question which awaits further legislation.
Although one type of juridical act, mixed marriage, is mentioned by the constitution, presumably
because it has had the greatest effect on citizenship, other juridical acts such as adoption of
Ethiopian children by foreigners (or vice-versa) are not dealt with. In such cases, where the
children have the status of legal minority under Ethiopian law, the principle followed by the
courts in Ethiopia has been that they cannot assent to giving up their Ethiopian citizenship until
they reach the age of majority, irrespective of what the municipal law of the adoptive parents
may state. Although one can image difficult cases of private international law arising, providing
adopted minors with dual citizenship would be a simple way out. Obviously, where dual
citizenship is not part of the legal regime of one or both states, the adoptee would have to make
his/her choice once he/she reaches majority age.
That citizenship can be conferred upon foreigners in accordance with legal procedures consistent
with obligations Ethiopia has assumed under international law is provided for in the Constitution.
Citizenship through naturalization is not a right, it is a privilege that may be conferred upon a
foreigner who either renders outstanding service to the state of fulfills certain minimum
requirements. That citizenship is a matter of federal jurisdiction is specifically provided for. It is
also stated that the Council of Peoples' Representatives shall enact specific laws involving
citizenship. The citizenship acquired or granted is of Ethiopia and not of one of its federal states.
Thus, whatever role federal states may play in ascertaining the fulfillment of certain minimum
requirements, by way of certification, the final decision rests with the Federal Government and
the status the individual acquires is Ethiopian citizenship.

69
Out of citizenship status flows the right to the enjoyment of all rights, protection, and interests
that are provided by law. The political right to participate in the decision making processes of the
society at various levels comes at the forefront of such rights. The right to vote and to be elected
to any office and at all levels of government is a citizenship right. The opportunity to participate
in referenda and thereby take part in the conduct of public affairs is also a citizenship right. The
right to property, with reference to ownership of immovable property within Ethiopia, is also
circumscribed in favor of citizens. The right to equal opportunity to work would contain
enumeration of types of work exclusively for citizens. Beyond that, the government's constant
effort at improving the living standards of the people and making their socioeconomic
development sustainable is naturally geared towards the citizen. The government's role of
protection obviously comes to the surface where a foreign government adversely affects the
rights and interests of citizens of the former. Where situations arise that unfairly result in the
illegal loss or curtailment of the rights of its citizen through the decision of another government,
the citizen is entitled to demand his/her government's intervention in the matter on account of
his/her citizenship status.
Citizenship is basically a contractual relationship between the individual and the state. Such
relationship may be created automatically, as when an infant is born with an Ethiopian parent, or
it may be established through an adult, having fulfilled certain requirements, applying for it and
being granted citizenship. It is a characteristic of citizenship under the constitution that the
citizen cannot be deprived of citizenship. The contrary however is not true. The citizen has the
right to change his/her Ethiopian nationality. This is unlike the old German nationality law
prescribing that once a German always a German, whether you like it or not. Citizenship here is
not perceived as an unalterable status established "once and for all." The philosophical
underpinnings of the modern democratic state based on the notion of public contract are reflected
in the constitutional right to change one's citizenship. The freedom of movement that is provided
by the constitution entitles every citizen, as well as any other person legally in Ethiopia, the right
to move freely within the borders of the State, to choose his place of residence, and to leave the
country at any time.
The federal nature of the State does not affect the principle of the freedom of movement. Federal
states however, can establish criteria that conform to the broad constitutional requirements and
apply them non-discriminatingly to questions of movement and residence of citizens. The right

70
of every Ethiopian to return to his country is another right he accrues from citizenship. This right
has in the spirit of the constitution to be broadly interpreted to include spouse and children of a
mixed marriage. This right would also cover the return of the remains of an Ethiopian citizen for
a final resting place.
3.9 Right and Responsibilities of Citizens
There are several rights and responsibilities a citizen assumes.

Rights of citizens include, inter alia include:

 The right to legal recourse when their rights have been violated, even if the violator was
acting in an official capacity
 The right to life
 The right to liberty
 The right to equality before the law
 The right to presumption of innocence till proven gaily
 The right to privacy and protection of that privacy by law
 Freedom of thought conscience and religion
 Freedom of assembly and association
 The right to non- extradition, i.e. not to be delivered to other states even if the citizen has
committed a crime against those countries;
 The right to change one’s nationality

Responsibilities of citizens:

 The responsibility to vote

 The responsibility to defend the constitution
 To know and abide by the law
 To pay taxes voluntarily and happily
 To serve in the military where the need arises
 To actively participate in political and social life to be patriotic

Note that rights and responsibilities go side by side. A citizen should not demand the exercise of
those rights without discharging his or her responsibilities and like – wise the government should
not demand ( or does not have the moral ground to demand) the carrying out of those
responsibilities by citizens without ensuring the exercise of those rights by citizens.

71
 CHAPTER FOUR
CONSTITUTION, DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS: ETHIOPIAN FOCUS
4.1. Definition of the Constitution
Constitution is a body of fundamental laws and principles according to which a political state is
governed. It is a totality of legal rules, institutions, and customs whether written or not.
Constitution is a supreme of the land. Any law that contradicts the constitution is invalid. It is a
collection of principles according to which the power of government, the rights and duties of
governed and relations between the two are adjusted. Thus constitution is considered as ‘power
map’ because it indicates the formal distribution of authority with in a state.
Constitutionalism is political governance where the power of the state is exercised based on a
given constitution. Constitutionalism is also identified with the idea of rule of law where both the
public officials and government shall be held accountable for their action.
A constitution of a given country consists of power and responsibilities of the government,
territorial boundaries, the national flag, the political capital, power and functions of the head of
the state and head of government, foreign policy, political, economic and cultural rights of the
citizens and etc. In addition, the constitution of a country contain among other things the
structure and forms of government.
4.2. The purpose of the Constitution
The purpose of the constitution depends on the characteristics of the prevailing political systems
of government. For undemocratic government the constitutions are formulated to reinforce the
powers of those in power.
Compare and contrast the purpose of constitution in Undemocratic government with
constitutional governments? Use the space for answer
The Constitution aims at:
 Defining the nature of the given state: Unitary or federal or con federal
 Describing the composition and powers of the different state organs and regulating the
relationship of state organs
 Defining the material basis of the state (the socio-economic order in the society)
 Defining the form and structure of government

72
  Defining the relationship between the government and the people
 Defining foreign policy principles and directions
 Defining principles of national defense etc.
4.3. Forms /classification/ of constitutions
Constitution of state in different political systems differs from one another in many ways. The
following are such of this difference. These are:
 Their principles in the distribution of political power,
 On the structural separation of authority among, the branches of government,
 On the limitation they set on government authority, and
 On their form , content and patterns of political arrangement
These constitutional Variations among nations might have been caused due to different historical
backgrounds, social, traditional and political practices.
Comprehensively, speaking, constitutions are classified in to written or unwritten, rigid or
flexible, unitary OR Federal, democratic or undemocratic. But the two most common ways of
classifying constitution are the written and the unwritten ones.
4.3.1.1 Written Constitution
Classification of Constitution into written or unwritten is based on the breadth of written
provisions. Written constitution is systematically collected or arranged in a single document
(codified); whereas unwritten one is un-codified. Almost all countries of the world have written
constitutions.
Benefits of written constitutions
 It is full of clarity and definitions
 Has the quality of stability
 Has educational value in that it high lights the central values and over all goals
 All important points are put in writing
4.3.1.2 Unwritten constitution
Unwritten constitution is uncodified. This means it is not systematically arranged (compiled) in a
single document. E.g. Great Britain and Israel
Some benefits of unwritten constitution
 It has the quality of elasticity and acceptability to changing circumstances
 It is dynamic that it prevents chances of popular upheavals

73
  The legislatures are not busy
 List other benefits of the constitution.
4.3.2 Rigid Versus Flexible Constitution

4.3.2.1 Rigid Constitution

Rigid classification of constitution does not adapt itself to changing circumstances immediately
and quickly for it requires special procedures for amendment. Here amendment procedures may
be more or less complex or difficult. For instance, in Australia, Denmark, Ireland and Spain,
popular referendums are used to obtain the public approval for constitutional amendment. Again
in America Constitutional Amendment requires the consent of 2/3 majority in the congress plus
ratification by ¾ of federating states.
What about the case of Ethiopia?
4.3.2.2 Flexible Constitution
Flexible constitution is a constitution that adapts easily and immediately to changing
circumstances. It does not require special procedures for amendment. This type of constitution
can be changed by a simple majority at national legislature. Unwritten constitution is flexible
because there is no formal legalistic procedure for making a change.
4.4. Origin and Development of Constitution
The Origin of constitutional ideas in human society could be linked with the need to limit the
political authority and power of the governments. To this end, there were various attempts to
check the powers of rulers at different times. The evolution of constitutional practice can
therefore, be traced to historical periods during which different patterns of rules emerged. For
example, the ideas of constitution, and democracy obtained greater importance in ancient
Greece. The type of Democracy practiced in ancient Greek was direct democracy.
The experience of limiting the power of rulers was also seen by ‘Great charter’ (Magna Charta)
in England in 1215. In Magna Charta an attempt was made to make the king constitutional
Monarchy.
Later in 16th century, such ideas as popular sovereignty, limited government and separation of
powers influenced the development of constitutional rule. Philosophers such as John Locke, and
Charles Montesquieu raised the need for popular representation, rights and freedoms, equality,
liberty and separations of governmental powers among executive, legislative and Judiciary
bodies.

74
Lastly the coming in to effect of the American Constitution of 1787 witnessed the emergence of
constitutionalism in its modern sense
4.5. Constitutional Experience of Ethiopia
Introduction
Until the early 1930’s, the rule of the Ethiopian emperors was based on traditional and customary
political and legal premises. These traditional constitutional documents used by the rulers as a
guide line were the kibreNegest, FethaNegest and Seratamengist. For instance, the Kibrenegest
mystifies that the Ethiopian monarchs derived their power to rule from God, and therefore, they
were not accountable to any secular power. It depends on the legend of Solomonic dynasty.
There was no opportunity for the Ethiopian people to participate in political affairs of their
country.
4.5.1 The 1931 written Constitution
This was the first modern written constitution of Ethiopia. In this constitution the king was
presented as a representative of God, “NigusaNegestSeyumeEgziabiher”
Internal and external factors pressurized the king to introduce the constitution.
Externally several times Ethiopia was accused of her being uncivilized by Europeans. So by
introducing the constitution, the emperor wanted to give Ethiopia an image of modernity.
Internally, Haile Sellasie I planned to create a legal frame work that enable him to subordinate
(to bring under control) the traditional nobility.
 The 1931 constitution has no political freedoms and fundamental human rights to the
Ethiopian people
 The constitution gave all sovereign power to the emperor
However, the 1931 Constitution laid some foundations for modern practices of government in
Ethiopia
These innovations were:
 The creation of bi-cameral parliament
 Annual budget
 Judiciary branch and ministerial system

75
4.5.2 The Revised Constitution (1955)
New developments in the beginning of 1950s arise the need to revise the existing Constitutions.
These developments were:
1. The federation of Eritrea with Ethiopia in 1952 by the resolution of the General
Assembly of the UN
2. The UN had prepared a constitution for Eritrea which was more liberal and progressive
than the Ethiopian constitution. Therefore, there was a discrepancy b/n the 1931
constitution of Ethiopia and the Eritrean constitution .Hence to bridge the difference the
Emperor wanted to revise the constitution
3. The constitution remained Unrevised for long years (25 years)so it need revision so as to
cope up with the modern out looks & developments.
4. Change of the political climate because of emergence of intellectuals and different
uprisings.
Thus because of these and other factors, the 1931 constitution was revised in 1955. The revised
constitution was however, established on the some idea of the 1931 constitution. The US
constitution was its source. The constitution established bicameral parliamentary system.
It claimed about the inviolability of the powers of the Emperor and his sacred personality like in
the 1931 constitution the d/t nations, Nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia were considered mere
subjects of the Emperor not citizens.
Both the 1931 and 1955 revised constitutions were designed to affirm the absolute power of the
emperor. In both constitutions, the emperor Monopolized power and he was the ultimate power
of law. Thy only progressive idea here is that the political principles and objectives of the 1955
constitution were much clearer in pronouncing the powers and function of the imperial
government. It also included some provisions bearing advanced democratic ideas compared to
the previous written constitution. Though remained (left) on paper, there were new inputs, such
as the freedoms of speech, assembly, press and people’s participation in the election of the
members of the chamber of Deputies.

76
 4.5.3 The 1987 Constitution
Identify the major points in which this constitution differs from the two constitutions of imperial
regime?
From 1974 -1987 the military junta ruled the country by a series of decrees and proclamations.
To deepen its power, Dergue introduced single party i.e. Workers peoples party of Ethiopia. This
is a transition from a no party system to single party system.
The party further enhanced the dictatorship of the Derg. By 1987 the PDRE (People Democratic
Republic of Ethiopia) constitution was issued for the purpose of justifying the Derg’s rule, not to
enhance democracy. It was similar to its predecessors in terms of its deficiency to ensure the
democratic and human rights. People still are subjects, not the participants of their own affairs.
However, the PDRE constitution is different from previous constitution in some ways. It was
drafted by a constitutional commission through a program of public constitution. It was later on
ratified by the name of a popular referendum.
To sum up, the two constitutions of the imperial government and the military regime served only
to maximize the political powers of the central government
 There was no constitutionalism
 They failed to ensure the prevalence of the rule of law
4.5.4 The 1995 Constitution
Following the overthrow of the Dergue regime in May 1991, the Transitional Government of
Ethiopia was established in July 22, 1991. This government was made up of various political
parties which in one way or another fought with the military dictatorship of the Dergue. The
Transitional Government had many functions. One of these was drafting, improving and
ratifying the constitution of the FDRE through public participation. The country was led by the
transitional period charter. The charter of the Transitional government was formulated and
proclaimed by the peace and Democratic conference, which was held in Addis Ababa from July
1-5 formulated through public participation based up on the needs and demands of the Ethiopian
people. The formulation of the 1995 constitution passed through three stages:-
1st Drafting stage – the drafting task was carried out by a special body known as constitution
commission

77
 2nd Discussion and Development stage – includes public discussion on the draft constitution
where by citizens were given the opportunity to examine comment and improve the
provisions of the draft constitution
3rd Ratification stage – is the final stage of ratifying the draft to be nationally accepted as the
constitution of the country. The constitution was ratified by the constitutional Assembly
which is a special body that contains 535 elected representatives of the nation’s
nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia
In the final stage, the constitution was endorsed by the signatures of the constitutional assembly
on 8 Dec. 1994. The constitution came into force on August l, 1995
Generally, the 1995 constitution of the federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia,
 Establishes the federal and Democratic state structure
 States the powers and functions of the federal and Regional states
 Outlines the economic, social, political and cultural rights of citizens
 Outlines the principle of foreign relations
 States the sovereign authority of the state and its peoples
 Limits the power of government(rule of law)
 Clear separation of power.
 Serves as the supreme law of the country
 Free and fair universal suffrage.
 Gave rights for minorities.
 Legal and political processes were separated.(courts, the military)
The major changes that the 1995 constitution brought about are the transformation of the state
structure from unitary to federalism and granting for different Nations, Nationalities and peoples
of Ethiopia the right to self- determination including secession.
4.2 Democracy
Etymologically, the word democracy is derived from two Greek words: demos and kratos, which
means common people and rule (legitimate power to rule) respectively. In this case the word
democracy refers to the idea of rule by the people or government by the people.
Democracy is not an exclusive property of developed countries or Western societies. Democratic
norms and principles are universal, but the institutions which inform democracy and concrete

78
forms of its political practices may vary in time and space (i.e. through historical era and from
country to country).
Strictly speaking, there are conceptual and methodological difficulties in understanding and
defining democracy. In this case, one difficulty in defining democracy arises from the fact that
political systems are in a continual state of evolution. As ideas change, so the content of the word
democracy changes in people’s minds. A consequence of this change of attitude has been that the
term is now used to describe so many different forms of government. It is this very popularity of
the term that makes democracy a difficult concept to understand. When a term means anything to
anyone, it is in danger of becoming entirely meaningless.
The lexicon or dictionary definition of the term entails that democracy is a state of government in
which people hold the ruling power either directly or indirectly through their elected
representatives. Accordingly, democracy embraces the principles of equality, individual freedom
and opportunity for the common people, as those who actually wield political power.

Democracy is a people centered system where the people are the heart the
root and also the fruits.

Statesman, such as Abraham Lincoln (former US president) defined democracy as "….

government of the people, by the people and for the people." In this case, government of the
people represents the source of legitimacy as well as of government officials is from nothing but
the people, where as government by the people implies the idea of public participation in the
government process and governs themselves. This is what we call popular self-government.
Government for the people refers to the idea that government officials should act for the
advantage and according to the interest of the people.
Democracy is a set of ideas and principles as well as procedures and practices
about human and democratic rights, and freedoms
In addition, democracy is a peaceful resolution of conflict by applying the values of tolerance
(both vertical and horizontal), cooperation, compromise, consensus, pragmatism, civility, and so
on. These democratic values are instruments to resolve conflict peacefully. Moreover, democracy
is an ideology that calls for people to elect their government and hold that government
accountable to them via elections.

Forms or Ways of Exercising Democracy

79
 1. Direct (Pure, Ideal) Democracy
Direct democracy, which sometimes also referred as pure or ideal democracy, is a system of self-
governance in which all citizens participate in decision-making process. In today's politics such
type of democracy can only be exercised in areas of small number of population as for example
in kebeles, schools, or rural villages. In direct democracy, members of community meet at
certain place to discuss issues and arrive at decision either by consensus or by majority vote.
The followings are some of the brief descriptions of direct democracy.
 Referendum: an important bill passed by the legislature must be put to the voters' final
ratification. In case, if it is adopted by the required vote, it becomes a law. Thus, veto
power is in the hand of voters.
 Plebiscite: it is a synonym of referendum. It means that any important issues that cannot
be solved by the government for some reasons should be decided by votes of the people,
that means let the decision of the people be final.
 Initiative: it is an arrangement whereby specified number of voters may prepare the draft
of law and may then demand that either be adopted by the legislature or referred to the
people for acceptance at a general or special election. If approved by the required
majority, it then becomes a law.
 Recall: means that voters have the right to call back their elected representatives in case
they are not satisfied with their roles or behavior and then elect someone else instead.
2. Indirect (Representative) Democracy
This is the modern type of democracy that we have today. In political parlance democracy differs
from all other forms of government in that it postulates the free organizations of opposing
options. In this regard, the mining of representative form of democracy is that the whole people
cannot directly participate in their own affairs but through their representatives, which are
periodically elected by the people themselves. That means a few represent the many. In this case,
leaders must maintain some contact with voters so as to stay in power. This involves some
organized form of consultation with the people as we discussed earlier. Representation, per se, is
not in itself guarantee for democracy and may be neither elective nor democratic.

4.2.2 Approaches of Understanding Democracy

80
 1. Substantive Views of Democracy
The substantive view concentrates on what a government actually does, that is, the policies it
makes should fulfill democratic ideals. A substantive theorist would not recognize a decision that
violated those ideals as ‘democratic’ even if it were made in response to majority wishes.
Substantive theorists, however, do not agree on the contents and nature of these democratic
ideals.
Substantive democracy is a form of democracy in which the outcome of elections is
representative of the people. In other words, substantive democracy is a form of democracy that
functions in the interest of the governed. Though a country may allow all citizens of age to vote;
this characteristic does not necessarily qualify it as a substantive democracy.
In a substantive democracy, the general population plays a real role in carrying out its political
affairs, i.e., the state is not merely set up as a democracy but it functions as one as well. This type
of democracy can also be referred to as a functional democracy.
2. Procedural Views of Democracy
The procedural view stresses the form and process of government, or how the people govern.
Procedural democracy emphasizes the principles of universal participation, political equality, and
majority rule. Modern nations are too large to employ direct (or participatory) democracy, and
they must rely on indirect democracy in the form of representative government. The procedural
view of democracy also insists on the principle of responsiveness, that the government should
follow the general thrust of public opinion.
In brief, procedural democracy is a democracy in which the people or citizens of the state have
less influence than in traditional liberal democracies. This type of democracy is characterized by
voters choosing to elect representatives in free elections. Procedural democracy assumes that the
electoral process is at the core of the authority placed in elected officials and ensures that all
procedures of elections are duly complied with.
Procedural democracy is quite different from substantive democracy, which is manifested by
equal participation of all groups in society in the political process. To understand better what we
sow above let’s see the theories of democracy including: liberal democracy, economic
democracy, social democracy, and developmental democracy.

3. Liberal Concept of Democracy

81
Liberal democracy advocates the principle of private enterprise and the guarantee of basic civil
and political rights such as freedom of speech, religion, the right to elect and to be elected, etc.
The state intervenes in order to protect an individual and sections of society from the evils of free
private enterprise, and to promote greater social efficiency.
Liberal democrats, however, have emphasized individual freedom and demanded that the state
shall not lose sight of this in the search for social justice. Liberal democrats accept inequality or
privilege so as to safeguard individual freedom.

Liberal democrats accept inequality or privilege so as to safeguard individual

freedom.

A basic belief of liberal democracy is that people of different interests and backgrounds have
different political opinions. Democratic government rests on public opinions since in such a
system there is a freedom of expression. Liberal democracy aims at the just and rational
organization of authority in human society under the guise of the system of capitalism.
4. Economic Democracy /Socialist Democracy/
Economic democracy is the transfer of economic decision making power from the few to the
many. Capitalist democracy according to economic democracy advocates, does not guarantee
universal rights to decent food, housing, employment, child-care, education, or health care. There
are no rights guaranteeing control over the fruits of one's labor and control over the work process
itself. This is because of the fact that these rights contradict the unequal distribution of wealth
and power and the desire to get rich. Formal liberal democracy helps to legitimize corporate
capitalism.
True democracy, however cannot exist without economic democracy and economic democracy
cannot exist under the principles of capitalism. Here, to speak of economic democracy is to
advocate democracy for the 'poor' as well as the rich. As such, economic democracy is the
transfer of economic decision making from the few to the many. In this case, the assumption is
that when workers and the poor control production, democratic choices to work, employment,
income, technology, and the like can be extended.

According to this democracy, true democracy cannot exist without economic

democracy and economic democracy cannot exist under the principles of
82
capitalism.
 5. Social Democracy
Social democracy is the result of two factors. These are: the changing nature of national
economies, and the changing nature of economic relations among society. Social democracy is
sometimes called social equality, which aims to give all citizens equal rights under the law. All
laws apply equally to all citizens regardless of their wealth, race, and religion, ideological
outlook, sex, and the like. The goal of social democracy is to bring about equality and classless
society through reform within the guise of capitalism.
In this case, it recognizes that individual background, inabilities, efforts and so on determine his/
her way of life. And hence this is to ensure everyone an opportunity to make full use of his/her
abilities. In other words, social democracy calls for social justice and economic empowerment of
the subaltern classes. To this effect, it concerned with the provision, among others, provision of
social security service, housing, free education, health and medical cares, and the like.
6. Developmental Democracy
Another model, the developmental democracy, views human beings as capable of civic virtue.
Supporters say that through involvement in government and community affairs, persons can gain
an understanding of the public good and what it requires. Good citizens aware of and participate
in government and civic affairs through voting, expression of their opinions to representatives,
and sometimes even public service. Involvement in democracy is both a way of educating people
and increasing their ability to better themselves. Through the exercise of judgment on political
issues, citizens can better exercise judgment in other areas of their lives. The Developmental
model utilizes indirect representation simply because of the impracticality of direct involvement
such as that of the participatory democracy. Political and social equality exist in a developmental
democracy which advocates that people can achieve civic virtue and become conscious through
active participation in democracy.

Some of the attributes of a good citizen include: civic-mindedness, open-mindedness,

tolerance, patriotism, civility, peaceful resolution of conflicts and the like.

4.2.3 Fundamental Principles and Values of Democracy

83
‘What distinguishes democratic political system from none or anti-democratic systems?' Well, a
given political system to be qualified as democratic, it must exhibit certain universal and
fundamental values and principles.
The followings are some of the most frequently mentioned universal principles of democratic
governance.
1. The idea that legitimate power or authority emanates from the people
2. The concept of rule of law, which means that power should not be arbitrary, and that its
exercise must be circumscribed by a set of rules with respect to its limits and mode of
operation.
3. The principle that the rulers are chosen by and are accountable to the people.
4. The right of citizens to participate in the management of public affairs through free,
transparent and democratic elections
5. The right of people to change a government that no longer serves their interests, or
the right to recall.
6. Tolerance refers to the accommodation of divergent views, believes, cultures languages
etc.
7. Liberty: democracy as a system ensures freedom to the possible degree for all the people
so that they could develop their own capacity and potential. Liberty refers to the freedom
enjoyed by citizens to lead their life in their own way.
8. Majority Rule with Minority Rights
9. Accountability and Transparency:
10.Multiparty system- the existence of different competing political parties is an important
feature of a democratic political system.
4.2.4 Actors in Democratization Process
Modern democracy has procreated the system of political parties, organized interest groups and
an independent media as indispensable factor for its operation among others. The fact behind is
that the representative system arrange the mobilization of political participation by enjoying
upon the members of politically active people to take the mass, as much as possible in
confidence either for the sake of demonstrating their faith or to justify the very legitimacy of
their leadership and authority.

84
Building up of democracy is not an overnight program it needs not only time but different actors
must also involve building democracy and democratic culture. Thus, in this lesson you will look
at the roles of different actors in the democratization process.
1. Political Parties
In a political regime characterized by representative democracy, political parties are vectors of
democracy. They are essential to the functioning and durability of democracy since they are
not only the instruments through which power is attained by means of free, fair and transparent
elections but also the setting for working out practical ideas and proposals which may
constitute alternative programs to the government. They also constitute the means through
which individuals may influence public affairs, express their discontent or support
governmental action. Open competition between political parties in the framework of elections
is one of the indispensable characteristics of representative democra cies. Open competitions
between parties contend for the management of a country's affairs is a socially and politically
divisive factor and the stakes are generally high for those involved in this competition. It is
therefore important and this is one of the conditions for democracy's survival.

Political parties so they perform as effective actors of democratization and good

governance trusted by voters representative and responsive to public needs and
concerns equipped to support government and a constructive opposition thus
playing a role in ensuring transparency and accountability of government.

2. Party Systems
Party systems refer to the number of parties and pattern of relationships among the parties with
in a nation. Taking in to account the number of dominant or existing political parties with in a
state, party systems are classified in to three major categories.
1. One party system
2. Two party system
3. Multi party system
2.1 One Party System
One party system is, most of the time, ideological in its outlook and authoritarian in its structure.
In this system, other parties are not usually allowed to function either de jure or de facto. As
such, the party in power and its ideology are the main determinants of governmental policy,

85
style, and the very existence of the media and interest groups and the like. In its case, the party
requires that important government officials are members of the party or of satellite groups and
expects their behavior to conform to the policies and ideology.
2.2 Two Party Systems
Two party systems are characterized by a regular alternation in office between two major
dominant parties. In two party systems, although minor parties exist, two major parties dominate
government. It is argued that the system provides the people with a choice of policies and leaders
while at the same time guaranteeing governmental stability. The devices of the electoral
arrangement in such a system assure a majority for one party or the other, thus enabling that one
will have the power to carry out its election promises.
The origins of many one-party systems are obvious, but the question often arises as to why some
modern countries function as two-party system when these societies are so complex and that it
should be impossible for two parties to aggregate all the prevailing interests present and still
stand for anything. Two party systems are common in the political system of Britain, which is
mostly dominated by the conservative and labor party and USA as a country dominated by the
Democratic and Republican parties.
2.3 Multi Party Systems
Multiparty systems are systems in which we have at least three or more major parties. In
multiparty system, one party rarely wins enough seats in the legislature to form government.
Consequently, several parties combine forces to obtain a majority and form a coalition
government to direct the nation’s affairs. As you might expect, when groups with different
ideologies attempt to share power with different ideologies, coalitions often break down when
disputes or disagreements a rise requiring new elections. In such countries voters have a wide
range of choices on election days. The parties in multiparty system often represent widely
different ideologies or basic believes about government.
3. Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
Like political parties, non-governmental associations and organizations are valuable vectors of
democracy. They differ from political parties only in their final goal, but they all contribute to
consciousness raising, defense of the legitimate interests of groups of individuals and the
protection of individual and collective rights and freedoms.

86
The efficacy of the work of civil society depends on the extent to which such associations are
autonomous or institutionalized. When they have relatively formal links to the State or political
parties, they lose some of their autonomy and thus their ability to intervene in all freedom in
the management and conduct of public affairs and in the working of institutions according to
arrangements deriving from their governing principle of special interests. NGOs, while being
associations, have more pronounced concerns in the area of the protection of human rights and
humanitarian law. Such concerns urge them to intervene in the political field even if they claim
to have nothing to do with politics.
3. Interest Groups
Interest groups, as associations on the basis of the free will of individuals, play a prominent role
in the process of democratization.
Consistent with the freedom of association granted to citizens in democracies, democratic states
are characterized by the emergence and operation of several kinds of interest groups. Interest
groups are organizations or groups of people, which are autonomous from government or
political parties with the objective of influencing government. In democracies we find several
interest groups who are attempting to promote and influence the policies of government. In fact
interest groups are regarded as essential transmission belts between people and government.
They play an important role in helping people interact with government, which is often remote
and difficult for the individual to influence. Interest groups, bridge the gap between the citizen
and government. Through interest groups, citizens communicate their wants on policy goals to
government leaders.
4. Public Opinion
Public opinionis of a crucial importance for democracy. Public opinion is made up with
citizens or specific groups that reflect on their community and express their criticisms, their
proposals or their agreement to influence the construction of political will. It is not possible
to talk about only one, but of several public opinions because in a plural society, there are
always several stands.
Public opinion is then a tool to control the politicians that lead the country. On the one hand,
this is important for the opposition as the latter is only potentially active in front of the
government through this public opinion. It is when the opposition represents its stands and
opinions, finds itself obliged to react, otherwise it is running the risks of disaffection or

87
destitution, from its citizens. Moreover, public opinion serves the whole population in its
effort to display criticisms and its incitements to well defined actions. Public opinion then
constitutes a controlling tool, which is very important in a democracy.
5. Mass Media
Freedom of the media is essential in a democracy. The mass media refers institution and to the
methods of communication, which can reach large number of people at the same time. It includes
newspapers, television, radio, books, posters, magazines, and cinema etc.Media plays a role in
the political training of citizens and democratic culture by informing them of the scope of
public policies, the management and conduct of affairs by those responsible at both the State
and grass-roots level, by providing and offering the members of the community the means of
communicating with each other. But if the media is to perform those functions, it must be free
and independent; it must have sufficient material and human resources to deal with all the
important problems of society. The importance of the mass media in a country is not dependent
on the number of newspapers or private radio and television stations but on the quality of the
information provided to the public.

4.3 Human Right

Human rights refer to rights we all have merely by being human. The idea of human rights then
is based on the idea that although we may be of different religions, nationalities, have different
skin colors, come from very different cultures, our common humanity means we all share a set of
human rights. This applies even if we don’t belong to a particular country. They don't emanate
from government will or from individual's conventions.
Pre World War II Developments
The origins of human rights may be found both in Greek philosophy and the various world
religions. In the Age of Enlightenment (18th century) the concept of human rights emerged as an
explicit category. Man/woman came to be seen as an autonomous individual, endowed by nature
with certain inalienable fundamental rights that could be invoked against a government and
should be safeguarded by it. Human rights were henceforth seen as elementary preconditions for
an existence worthy of human dignity.

88
Before this period, several charters codifying rights and freedoms had been drawn up
constituting important steps towards the idea of human rights. The first -were the Magna Charta
Libertatum of 1215, the Golden Bull of Hungary (1222), the Danish Erik Klippings
Håndfaestning of 1282, the Joyeuse Entrée of 1356 in Brabant (Brussels), the Union of Utrecht
of 1579 (The Netherlands) and the English Bill of Rights of 1689. These documents specified
rights, which could be claimed in the light of particular circumstances (e.g. threats to the freedom
of religion), but they did not yet contain an all-embracing philosophical concept of individual
liberty. Freedoms were often seen as rights conferred upon individuals or groups by virtue of
their rank or status.
The Enlightenment was decisive in the development of human rights concepts. The ideas of
Hugo Grotius (1583-1645), one of the fathers of modern international law, of Samuel von
Pufendorf (1632-1694), and of John Locke (1632-1704) attracted much interest in Europe in the
18th century. Locke, for instance, developed a comprehensive concept of natural rights; his list
of rights consisting of life, liberty and property. Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) elaborated
the concept under which the sovereign derived his powers and the citizens their rights from a
social contract. The term human rights appeared for the first time in the French Déclaration des
Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen (1789).
The people of the British colonies in North America took the human rights theories to heart. The
American Declaration of Independence of 4 July 1776 was based on the assumption that all
human beings are equal.
The French Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen of 1789, as well as the French
Declaration of 1793, reflected the emerging international theory of universal rights. Both the
American and French Declarations were intended as systematic enumerations of these rights.

The classic rights of the 18th and 19th centuries related to the freedom of the individual. Even at
that time, however, some people believed that citizens had a right to demand that the government
endeavour to improve their living conditions. Taking into account the principle of equality as
contained in the French Declaration of 1789, several constitutions drafted in Europe around 1800
not only contained classic rights, but also included articles which assigned responsibilities to the
government in the fields of employment, welfare, public health, and education. Social rights of

89
this kind were also expressly included in the Mexican Constitution of 1917, the Constitution of
the Soviet Union of 1918, and the German Constitution of 1919.
In the 19th century, there were frequent inter-state disputes in connection with the protection of
the rights of minorities in Europe. These conflicts led to several humanitarian interventions and
called for international protection arrangements. One of the first such arrangements was the
Treaty of Berlin of 1878.
The need for international standards on human rights was first felt at the end of the 19th century,
when the industrial countries began to introduce labour legislation. This legislation, which raised
the cost of labour, had the effect of worsening their competitive position in relation to countries
that had no labour laws. Economic necessity forced the states to consult each other. It was as a
result of this that the first conventions were formulated in which states committed themselves
vis-à-vis other states in regard to their own citizens. The Bernlin Convention of 1906, which
prohibited night-shift work by women can be seen as the first multilateral convention meant to
safeguard social rights. Many more labour conventions were later drawn up by the International
Labour Organisation (ILO),which as founded in 1919. Remarkable as it may seem, therefore,
while the classic human rights had been acknowledged long before social rights, the latter were
first embodied in international regulations.
Post World War II Developments
The atrocities of World War II put an end to the traditional view that states have full liberty to
decide the treatment of their own citizens. The signing of the Charter of the United Nations (UN)
on 26 June 1945 brought human rights within the sphere of international law. In particular, all
UN members agreed to take measures are there really such large number of articles in UN
Charter which deals will human rights protection? to protect human rights. The Charter contains
a number of articles specifically referring to human rights. Less than two years later, the UN
Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR),which was established early in 1946, submitted a draft
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The UN General Assembly (UNGA) adopted
the Declaration in Paris on 10 December 1948. This day was later designated Human Rights
Day.
During the 1950s and 1960s, more and more countries joined the UN. Upon joining the UN, they
formally accepted the obligations contained in the UN Charter, and in doing so subscribed to the
principles and ideals laid down in the UDHR. This commitment was made explicit in the

90
Proclamation of Teheran (1968), which was adopted during the first World Conference on
Human Rights, and repeated in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, which was
adopted during the Second World Conference on Human Rights (1993).
Since the 1950s, the UDHR has been backed up by a large number of international conventions.
The most significant of these conventions are the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
(ICESCR).
These two Covenants, together with the UDHR, form the International Bill of Human Rights. At
the same time, many supervisory mechanisms have been created, including those responsible for
monitoring compliance with the two Covenants.
Human rights have also been receiving more and more attention at the regional level. For
example, in the European, the Inter-American and the African context, standards and supervisory
mechanisms have been developed have already had a significant impact on human rights
compliance in the respective continents, and promise to contribute to compliance in the future.
Basic Features of Human Rights
The following are fundamental features of human rights. These are not exhaustive but contain
the main features of human rights.
1. Human rights are based on equality, because these rights are consistent and based on
human nature. The following elements are not factors of difference in the application of
human rights. They are applied equally at any condition, place and time irrespective of sex,
ethnic group, color, language, nation, age, citizenship, religion, political outlook, social
position, etc.
2. Human Rights are unassailable. They cannot be attacked during promotion and protection.
3. Human rights are eternal. As far as human society exists on earth human rights continue to
exist. In addition, any change in government, and any change in social, political, economic
outlooks do not have impact on human rights.
4. Human rights are irreducible. Human rights cannot be reduced to different interpretation.
Human rights are applicable in their fuller forms.
5. Human rights are indisputable. Human rights are not subjected to different arguments. As
they are natural, we cannot argue over the elements of human rights.
6. Human rights are inalienable. Human rights cannot be separated from human nature. We

91
 cannot alienate human rights from human nature because they are fundamental.
7. Human rights are not to be given by government. Government is not a body that gives
human rights. In the meantime, we cannot inherit human rights rather we possess them by
our nature of human being. They are not transferred rights.
Limitation on Human Rights
For the peaceful existence of individuals in the society, every person has responsibilities
(Obligations). This by implication indicates the existence of limitation on human rights; for
example, even if we have freedom of movement we can’t enter in to other person's home without
permission.
When, we say, human rights have limitation in a sense that enough and legal imitation. Human
rights should be limited by taking in to consideration the rights of the individual with respect to
the interest of the Society.
All human rights are to be guaranteed and enforced unless special circumstances justify the
suspension of some rights. Respecting and protecting human rights are duties of states; however,
states may be relieved of their duty in certain exceptional circumstances. As an exception to the
general rights of states to be relieved from their duties to respect and protect human rights during
state of emergency, they are always bound to respect and protect certain rights regardless of the
existence of emergency situations.
Categories of human right
Though it is difficult to identify the categories, which constitute human rights there, are three
generational categorization of human rights as: first generation rights named Civil and Political
Rights or Liberty Right; the Second Generation Rights named Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights---Equaliy Rights; and the third Generation Rights named solidarity rights or fraternity
Rights.

92
 Challenges of Human Rights
Some of the challenges of Human Rights are
 Universal Human Rights and Cultural Relativism
 Poverty and global inequities
 Discrimination
 Armed conflict and violence
 Impunity
 Democracy deficits
 Weak institutions
 The knowledge gap
 The capacity gap
 The commitment gap
Human Rights as Enshrined in the FDRE Constitution
One-third of the provision of the Constitution of 1995 deals with fundamental rights and
freedoms. This is an unusually high percentage, which reflects the importance attached to
fundamental rights and freedoms by this constitution. The chapter on fundamental rights and
freedoms opens with the absolute and comprehensive requirement that all organs of federal and
state government at all levels have the 'responsibility and obligation to respect and enforce' the
provisions dealing with fundamental rights and freedoms. Moreover, their interpretation has to
conform to international standards of the Bill of Rights, such as the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and the international human rights covenants, which are specifically mentioned.
Rights to Life, Liberty and Security of A person
Within the category of human rights, the first set of articles deals with the right to life, liberty,
and the security of the person. The "inviolable and inalienable right" to life, liberty, and the
security of the person is guaranteed because of the "human dignity" every person is endowed
with. The constitution however, in expressing the right, simultaneously establishes a limitation.
The constitutional provision that affirms the right to life states, "no person shall be deprived of
his life except as punishment for grave crimes defined by law."In doing so, this provision creates
the basis for the death sentence as the ultimate punishment for grave crimes.
Thus, the right to life is not an absolute right in Ethiopia because the constitution permits death
sentence for grave crimes as defined by law. The right to the security of the person is the next

93
right considered by the constitution. The provision reads, "Every person has the right to
protection from bodily harm." It recognizes no limitation on the right of protection from bodily
harm.
The right to liberty stipulates that no person may be deprived of his or her liberty except in
accordance with procedures established by law. That deprivation of liberty can be one of the
punitive measures taken by the state is assumed. What is important is that such deprivation of the
right takes place only in accordance with legal procedures.
Another interesting thing to note in this provision is that the constitution has gone out of its way
to emphasize the right to liberty for women. There is no question that the concern reflected deals
with certain customary practices in which young women are forcibly abducted from home for
marriage purposes. Thus the is provision dealing with the right to liberty is made one specific
vehicle for tackling aspects of both the gender issue and certain customary practices that infringe
upon certain universal rights.
Criminal Law Rights
Rights flow into each other. Thus the right to liberty leads directly into the prohibition of
arbitrary arrest and detention without trial or conviction. The rights of persons arrested or
detained in connection with alleged crimes is one area that has traditionally been carefully
examined in different constitutional systems. The constitution her provides the necessary
minimum procedural safeguards.
The provision on the rights of arrested persons deals exhaustively with the various aspects of
their rights in six sub-articles. A most important aspect of the rights of the arrested person is the
fact that he has the right to appear before a court of law within 48 hours of his arrest.In other
words, the arresting officer or institution has the constitutional obligation of physically bringing
the arrested person before a court of law within 48 hours of his arrest.
The three common deadlines set by constitution for the appearance of an arrested person in court
revolve around 24, 48, and 72 hours from the time of arrest. Ideally, the shorter the better
however, the practical aspects would also have to be taken into consideration. One has to make
sure that it not be too strict a legal regime that is considered unrealistic by law enforces, because
such a state of affairs could lead to a divergence between the law in reality and the law on the
books, encouraging law enforcers to habitually flout the law.

94
 Accused persons have the right to:
 A public trial
 Be given the charges in written form.
 Be considered innocent until evidences prove that they are wrong doers.
 Be released on bail
 Be represented by legal counsel.
 Request for an interpreter
 Appeal to the higher court for the reconsideration of the case.

Most of the provisions of the Human Rights Part of Chapter 4 of the Constitution revolve around
rights connected with the application of penal law. The famous "non-retroactivity of criminal
law" principle is made a constitutional right: that no one shall be punished for an act, the
commission or law as an offense did not define omission of which at the time. So too is any
penalty greater than the maximum penalty applicable for the offense at the time it was
committed, prohibited by the Constitution. The traditional favoring the accused or guilty person
(by which a law promulgated subsequent to the commission of the offense and favoring the
accused or guilty person is made to apply) is included as an exception to the general rule.

Imprisoned persons have the right to:

 Be treated with respect to their human dignity
 Communicate with relatives, spouse, friends, etc.

Equality, Privacy and Religion

The rest of the provisions of the constitution in the human rights part deal with the right to
equality, before the law, the right to the protection of privacy, and freedom of religion, belief,
and opinion. They will be considered next. The right to equality guarantees all persons the equal
and effective protection of the law. Discrimination on grounds of race, color, sex, language,
religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth, or other status is
specifically guaranteed against.
Six objectives for the limitation of the right to privacy are enumerated in the constitution. These
are national security, public safety, the prevention of crime, the protection of health, public
morality, and the rights and freedoms of others.

95
Democratic Rights as Ensuring in the FDRE Constitution
According the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia's Constitution (chapter three) rights are
divided into two broad categories: Human rights (part one) and Democratic rights (part two).
Bellow you will study democratic rights and their scopes.
i. Freedom Of Thought, Opinion And Expression (Art.29)
ii. The Right To Assembly, Demonstration And Petition (Art. 30)
iii. Freedom Of Association (Art. 31)
iv. Freedom Of Movement (Art. 32)
v. Citizenship Rights (Art. 32)
vi. Marital And Family Rights (Art. 34)
vii. The Rights Of Women (Art. 35)
viii. Rights Of Children (Art. 36)
ix. The Right To Justice (Art. 37)
x. The Right To Elect And Be Elected (Art. 38)
xi. Right Of Nations, Nationalities And Peoples (Art. 39)
xii. The Right To Property (Art. 40)
xiii. Economic, Social And Cultural Rights (Art. 41)
xiv. The Right To Labor (Art. 42)
xv. The Right To Development (Art. 43)
xvi. Environmental Rights (Art. 4)

CHAPTER FIVE
ETHICS AND CIVIC VIRTUE
5.1 Conceptual Approach: What is Ethics, and Morality?

96
It goes without saying that human beings are faced with numerous choices, day in, day out,
throughout life. We choose what clothes to wear, whether to go to work (or to school) today,
what to eat for lunch, how to spend our leisure, what career to undertake, how to conduct our self
around others, whether to consume alcohol, and so on. Sometimes our choices seem
unimportant; there is nothing earth shaking about them. Nevertheless, other times, they can have
profound effects on our lives and the lives of others.
But whatever their significance or difficulty, we are responsible for all our actions, at least in so
far as we choose them or are their agents.
In this case, then, the process of living gives rise to human beings to the need of determining
what is right and wrong, and of establishing ideas with which they can praise or blame others,
and even themselves. Some acts are approved and are called right or good while other acts are
condemned and are called wrong or evil. Moreover, human beings want to know and understand
their own obligation, i.e. what they ought to do.
Having said this, now let’s proceeds to some prominent conceptual definition of ethics and
morality.

Ethics is a field of study that deals with what constitutes good and bad human conduct
including related actions and values.
♣ It deals with good (moral) and bad (immoral) aspects of human conduct and moral judgment
of an action, and moral duty and obligation.
♣ It is a study of a set of principles or generally accepted guidelines for right and wrong
behaviour.
♣ It is an–in-depth field of study questioning moral principles and thinking. And, it attempts to
raise fundamental moral questions and provide logical and meaningful answers to them.
It follows, from the above given certain definitions that a question of ethics arise when we ask
whether a course of action is moral or immoral, fair or unfair, just or unjust, honest or dishonest.
And, it is the task of ethics to help us realize more clearly the nature and content of our moral
consciousness.

Morality refers to the degree to which an action confirms to a standard or norm of human
conduct.

97
♣ It deals with the aspects of good and bad actions themselves depending upon individuals act.
In the end, it is worth noting that though people erroneously use the term morality and ethics,
interchangeably, however, the term morality and moral refers to the conduct it self while ethics
and ethical refer to the study of moral conduct (morality) or the code that one follows. We should
also take note of the fact that ethical decisions are not concerned with what one would do (an
essentially psychological) but what one ought to do (a matter of duty and obligation).
5.2 Contending Theories of Ethics
Before we directly go to major contending theories of ethics, it is essential and imperative to
conspicuously understand certain criteria (parameters) to be met by ethical theories, like most
other theories, so as to be rationally and reasonability acceptable.
Criteria (parameters) to be met by ethical theories
A. The most basic criterion of an acceptable ethical theory is the requirement for clear, well-
defined concepts. Concepts are the building blocks of theories; and ambiguity at this level
will affect the whole theory with vagueness and imprecision. In a good ethical theory, we
need a clear definition of concepts such as “good” and “bad”. For example, “Lying is wrong”
is an ethical statement.
B. A good ethical theory of ethics will have consistent statements. Consistency is a basic
requirement of logic because two contradictory statements could not both be true and
because contradictory statements would give conflicting suggestions about how we ought to
act. In ethics, statements vary according to degrees of generality.
Example 1: “Persons deserve respect” is a general statement (principle)
Example 2: “Do not lie” “ Do not murder” are rules (derived form principle as specific
statements)
C. A good theory of ethics must be complete. That is, it should help us to decide how to act in
all significant problem areas of life. And, hence it should not be limited in its ability to tell us
how to act in a given situation.
D. Good theory of ethics should have simplicity. It should not have more statements than
necessary to be complete. Simplicity implies means that the rules and principles can be
simple to be learned and understood by most people, for that is the function of an ethical
theory, to provide guidelines for all rational persons.

98
E. A good theory of ethics must be based on the fullest set of relevant available, relevant
evidence and facts for it to be rationally acceptable.
The need for combining the criteria of theories of ethics with certain Rational Mental
Attitudes
We must combine the criteria for theories of ethics (A-E stated above) with certain conspicuous
and rational mental attitudes in the following ways:
1. Avoiding Hasty generalization: we need to avoid hasty generalization (i, e, to generalize
from few and diminish our reasoning ability; therefore, we should not decide important
issues while under the influence of strong feeling.
2. Avoiding Emotionalism: Emotionalism refers to using emotion or “gut” felling to prove
moral point or Moral theory. Emotions could and diminish our reasoning ability;
therefore, we should not decide important issues while under he influence of strong
feeling.
3. Avoiding closed Mind: (i.e. becoming open – minded). Rationality requires that we resist
the temptation to assume that our society’s values are necessarily correct; we must accept
the possibility of our own error.
4. Reason: (sound justification). Attitudes about what one should (ought to) believe ought
to ultimately based not on to personal authority but on reason.
Theories of Ethics
Ethicists often disagree about the nature of those standards and desirable qualities and follow
different path in establishing standards and discovering which qualities are desirable. However,
their theoretical views about ethics can be discussed, for the sake of convenience by categorizing
in to broad fields of ethics. These are:
1. Normative Theory of Ethics
2. Non – normative theory of Ethics
1. Normative theory of ethics
Normative ethics is concerned with developing rational rules, guidelines, or standards according
to which we ought to live out life. Put it differently, it deals with an effort to discover, if there
are, or if we can, and formulate any moral accord with which we can apply in the game of life.
And, hence, it attempts to determine what moral standards to follow so that our actions may be
morally right or good.

99
 A. Applied Normative ethics
B. General Normative ethics
A. Applied Normative Ethics: deals with attempts to explain and justify positions on specific
moral problems like sex outside marriage, capital punishment, abortion, euthanasia, and
reverse discrimination. It is said to be applied because ethicists apply or use general ethical
principles in an attempt to resolve specific moral problems.
B. General Normative Ethics: General normative ethics, in part, tries to formulate and defend
a system of basic ethical principles, which presumably is valid for everyone. General
normative ethics can be categorized into two broad normative theories. These are:
i. Teleological (Consequentialist) theory ethics; and
ii. Deontological (non – Consequentiality) theory of ethics.
(i) Teleological (Consequentialist) theory ethics;
Teleological ethics (from the Greek telos, meaning purpose or end) one which emphasizes on the
intended consequences or results of an action as the criteria for their rightness. In other words,
this theory of ethics maintains that the morality of an action depends the non–moral
consequences that the action brings about.
In plain English, an action is judged as right or wrong, moral or immoral, good or bad depending
up on what happens or results of its pay-off (consequence). And, hence, rightness is solely a
function of producing goodness or having good consequence.
Probably, the best examples of teleological sort of ethics are Egoism and Utilitarianism. The
former (Egoism–also called egoistic hedonism) holds that the criteria of right action is the
promotion of personal pleasure and focuses on the best consequences for self and hence it takes
the “Self” as the central concern for the beginning of the end of all considerations. i.e. (Ask what
you will do for your self”. Egoism has two aspects.
1. Cyrenacism-it focuses on bodily pleasure
2. Epicureanism-it emphasizes on mental pleasure
The latter (Utilitarianism – also called social hedonism) asserts the promotion of every one’s best
interest is the standard of morality. To put it differently, an action is right if it claims that we
should always act so as to produce the greatest possible ratio of good to evil for all concerned
there fore, utilitarianism holds that an action is right if it tends to produce the greater happiness
for the greater number of people. Otherwise, it is wrong. The two philosophers associated with

100
utilitarianism are Jeremy Bentham (Quantitative Utilitarianism) (1748 – 1832) and John Stuart
Mill (Qualitative Utilitarianism) (1806 – 1873).
(ii) Deontological (non–Consequentialist) Theory of Ethics
 Deontological theory of Ethics is one that set up as the criterion of moral behaviour, not what
might or might not happen, but rather the intent (motive) to perform one’s duty through a
certain action.
 It maintains that the morality of an action depends on the factors (motives) rather than
consequences (achievements).
 It holds that the morality of an action is not primarily determined by its consequences but by
certain intrinsic features of the intention or mental aspect of the contemplated action. A
deontologist emphasizes doing one’s duty and the natures of our motives and intentions, not
the consequences that may result from our actions. On this view, moral correctness means to
follow certain universal rules or to be true to a moral insight, such as honesty, integrity, etc,
regardless of the consequences. For more clarification and clear understanding of this theory
of ethics, the following terms of concepts would get definitions:

 Motive is any thing whatsoever which by influencing the will of sensitive being is
supposed to serve as a means of determining him/her to act
 Intrinsic (an end by itself): A thing has intrinsic value of (feature) when it is valued for its
sake. For example, pleasure has intrinsic value (feature) i.e. it is worth while in itself, not
because it can yield something else
 Extrinsic (a means to an end): A thing is said to be with extrinsic value when it a means
to an end. For example, a film could be said to have extrinsic value i.e. it is not a value in
itself but it can yield (or produce) a value perhaps, pleasure.
N.B intrinsic and extrinsic values are not necessary mutually exclusive because what is valued
in itself may also be a means to something else. For example, knowledge is worthwhile in itself
but also a means to a job.
 The deontological theory of ethics, which is discussed above at a length, is associated
with Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804), a German Philosopher.
The deontological theory of ethics involves two sub categories (formal) theories. These are:
Categorical Imperative, and the Devine command theory.

101
  Categorical Imperative: This, which is associated with Immanuel Kant theory of
demonological ethics, is a statement that commands one to act in a given way without
laying down any conditions what so ever. It states that one must do such and such, and it
states this with out any qualification. Therefore, according to this principles, it is the duty
of every one to seek the happiness of others, and this entails treating each individual as an
end in him self, not as a means to other ends. It is because of this that Immanuel Kant
considered categorical Imperative as a moral law, which is true for all rational beings at
all, times. Kant believed that nothing was good in itself except a “good will”.
Intelligence, judgment, and all other facets of the human personality are perhaps good
and desirable, but only if their will that makes use of them is good.
 The Devine command theory: is a single rule non – Consequentialist normative theory
that says we should always do the will of God. Put it differently, whatever the situation, if
we do what God will, then we do the right thing, if we do not do what God wills, then
no matter what the consequences, we do wrong. God established laws are generally
interpreted in a religious tradition. The Ten Commandments are good example. They are
universally and absolutely binding for all people everywhere.
B. Non – Normative Theory of Ethics.
Non – normative Ethics is the study of either a factual investigation of moral behavior, or
analysis of the meaning of the terms used in moral discourse and an examination of moral
reasoning by which moral beliefs can be shown to be true or false.
Non-normative Ethics has two aspects (fields). These are:
1. Scientific/ Descriptive study
2. Metaethics study
1. Scientific/Descriptive study: This deals with how people actually behave, not with whether
such behaviour is right or wrong. In other words, this study of morality involves factual
investigation of moral behaviour. This non normative theory of ethics has in turn two
doctrines:
(i) Ethical Absolutism: - This deals with the description of the existence of only one and
one moral code. Absolutists maintain that this code applies to every one, at all times,
everywhere. Example, if cannibalism – the belief in eating human flesh – is wrong, it is
wrong for every one, at all times, everywhere.

102
 (ii) Ethical Relativism: - This insists that morality is relative, not absolute or universal.
Moral codes take root in diverse social contexts and environments. Ethical relatives
maintain that any morality is relative to the time, place, and circumstances in which it
occurs. In brief, ethical relativisms believe that what is thought right is right. This is to
mean that what is “right” is what works in a society, and what “works” is what works in a
society is therefore right. Notions of right or wrong are therefore relative to a particular
society, and they differ from one society to another. Therefore, ethical relativists hold that
one can make meaningful ethical decision only in social context in which an ethical
problem occurs. For example: Polygamy (but not more than four wives) may be right in
Egypt, but not in Israel. Moreover, it is wrong for Jews and Moslems to eat pork; but may
not be wrong for other religious people (out of Jews and Moslems).
2. Metaethics:
Metaethics concerns the meaning of ethical terms such as “right”, “good” and “obligation”. Does
“good” mean that which is commanded by God or Allah, or does it meant that which maximizes
happiness? Therefore, it is highly technical discipline investigating the meaning of ethical terms,
concepts and natures of moral philosophers, including a critical study of how ethical statements
are verified.
5.3 Morality and Law: A Juxtaposition of Morality and Right
and Obligation
Moral declaration involves the good will of community/ society and as such they receive social
recognition. However, all moral declarations may not be protected by the state. But, moral
declarations become rights when they are accepted and recognized as having common interest by
society and at the same time protected by the state. Therefore, it follows that morality (moral
declaration) that are accepted and recognized by the society of a given state is an essential aspect
(ingredient) of a right. Hence, it is self – evident that a right has the following three essential
ingredients:
A. Moral foundation and recognition: Rights are ethical (moral) when we deal with
claims of individuals based on their real wills, and therefore recognized by the
community.
B. The goodness /wills/ common interest of society: This to mean that it (a right) must
get universal application and hence rendering a public service. Therefore, the impetus

103
 (the driving force) should be a national consideration of the public interests and not
personal caprice of the individual.
C. Protection by the state: Rights are legal when they are translated into law by the state
and protected by the state.
Therefore, it needs to be emphasized that morality is a conspicuous foundation of a right and
hence the moral values, norms and customs are remarkably taken into account in framing
(making) a right. There fore, aright is a claim of individual(s) that is recognized and accepted by
a society, and translated into law and protected by the state.
Morality and law are intrinsically and remarkably related in many aspects. Like wise they also
differ from each other in their content, sanction, and definiteness. In the case of relationship, the
following are aspects of relatedness:
A. Both of them base their source in the rational nature of human beings . i.e. morality and
law bound individuals by the common virtue of being reasonable creatures.
B. Both of them are related in the sense that they seek to enforce what is desired by a norm
and values of morality. For example, morality requires that one should not practice unfair
means in one’s public life and inorder to make it mandatory, law prohibits fraud and
cheating. In this way, a precept of morality is enforced by coercive legal authority.
C. Both of them are also related in the sense that law cannot undermine or violate a well –
established norms and values of morality.
On the other extreme, morality and law also differ form each other in the following aspects:
A. Laws are the outward acts of man . i.e. the regulation of the objective behaviour of man
where as morality deals with the inner motives (i.e. morality has its connection with
subjective aspect (behaviour) of man.
B. The purpose of law is to restrain a man from doing a crime like theft or burglary where as
the purpose of morality is to save him from committing a sin and evil things that are against
conscience of his/her self and the community like honesty, practicing in gratitude, etc.
C. Moreover, they differ from each other interms of their imposition : i.e. law is imposed by
the state universally in that given society where as morality is developed and imposed by the
society. While there may be a sanction behind the rules of morality, it is not applied by
organized machinery (state), nor is it determined in advance.

104
D. Morality lacks a relative precision, technical and precise than law . That is, rules of law,
relatively unlike rules of morality, are expressed in technical and precise language.
E. Morality is relatively more diversified than rules of law. Different societies may evolve
different codes of morality. This is what is known as Relative theory of morality. On the
other hand, law is relatively uniform across countries. For example, eating the flesh (meat) of
a donkey or a Dog is immoral in societies of Ethiopia while it is moral in societies of china or
Korea. But, killing a person is illegal relatively in all societies.
F. With regard to the nature and type of punishment, In most case, violation of law
entails punishment, which is physically painful, On the other extreme; violation of moral
norms (values) entails only psychological pain like social ostrasization, etc.
5.4 Moral Values and Norms
No society has ever been without some value system, a collection of codes of values. What do
we mean by moral values? Before we directly go to see what moral values and norms are, we
shall look at distinguishing between a fact (factual judgment) and value (a value judgment).
 A factual judgment: describes an empirical relationship or quality For example, Addis
Ababa is the capital city of Ethiopia; Water boils at 212 degree Fahrenheit at sea level, are
factual judgment.
 A value judgment: Assesses the worth of objects, acts, feelings, and attitudes, even people.
A value judgment is of two kinds: These are illustrated below using examples:

o “I should (ought to) visit my sick brother” are value judgment that lend
themselves to rational analysis
o “You were wrong in lying” and may be debatable
o “I ought to help poor people”
o “I should not do evil things” etc
o “I like the flavor of real Italian spaghetti (taste)
o “I think Susan is beautiful” (vision – although beauty as such is not actually seen
but is created from visual perceptions and past experiences)
o I enjoy walking in the rain (touch)
It is observed that the nature of value judgment in ethics involves relatively two values. Firstly,
those that are statements of personal taste and temperamental and are not debatable; and
105
secondly, those that lend themselves to rational analysis and empirical investigation and are,
therefore, debatable.
Following this, in this section, we shall look at moral values i.e. Collective values judgment that
lend themselves to rational analysis is based on conscience and reasonableness in societal
context.
Values: are a culture’s general orientations to ward life – its notions of what is good and bad,
what is desirable and undesirable, value themselves are abstractions. They can best be found by
looking for the recurring patters of behavior that express them.
 Values refer to special traits of human beings i.e. to ask thoughtful questions and to act in the
desirable manner and the worth ness of different way of life or human behavior. Therefore,
moral values are in tangible and acquired from culture, not born. Therefore, Moral values of
conceptions of an individual or group. Characteristics of the desired values that influence the
selection form available modes of means and ends of action.

 Societal values
 Group values
 Individual value
Hierarchy of values

Norms: - are rules of behaviour that are agreed upon and shared with in a culture, which
prescribe limits of acceptable behaviour.
Well can see norms by categorizing it in to two parts: These are: -
i) Mores: - are strongly held norms that usually have a moral connotation and are based on
the central values of the culture. Violation of mores produces strong negative reactions,
which are often supported by the law. For example, sexual molestation of a child, rape,
murder, incest, and child beating are some examples. Mores, therefore, usually have
absolute conformity.

106
 ii) Folkways (traditions): are norms that permit a wide degree of individual interpretation as
long as certain limits are not over stepped. People who violate folkways are seen as
peculiar or possibly eccentric. For example, a dress style is different culture to culture.
They (folkways) change with time. For example, in Ethiopia, it is customary to thank some
one for a gift. To fail to do so is to be ungrateful and ill – mannered Subtle cultural
differences can make international gift giving, however, a source of anxiety or
embarrassment to well meaning business travelers. For example, if you give a gift on first
meeting an Arab businessman, it may be interpreted as a bribe if you give a clock in china,
it is considered as bad luck.
5.5 Ethics and Morality in the context of profession
The term profession refers to the knowledge, skill and ability, which can be acquired through
formal educational institutions such as universities, colleges and training centers that are filled by
those persons who posses such knowledge, and skills in any fields of study.
General Distinguished Features /Characteristics of a Profession
A. Prestige: - this refers to a degree of esteem. As such, inorder to be a professional, this to
incorporate:
 A body of knowledge that includes general, specialized, and professional knowledge.
 A body of skills, which includes needs science its own.
B. Inorder to be a profession, it should stand for the well – being and improvement of
human society.
C. A profession should be practical. That is, a professional person must change the
knowledge and skills to practical and tangible way of life.
D. It should be organized. This is to mean that a profession must be strong, respected,
secured and continuous.
Professional Ethics:
 Professional Ethics: refers to ethics that enables professionals to distinguish what is right
from what is wrong using morality as standard of evaluation. Hence, it (professional
ethics) serves as parameter by which actions and behavior of a professional or
(professionals) can be judged as right or wrong.
 It follows that, there fore, Professionals are expected to behave and manifest their actions
by which a profession conspicuously demands and each profession as a profession has its

107
 own codes and principles (standards) of ethics. And, the codes of ethics each profession
demands are a sort of conspicuous guidelines and standards, which enable professionals
to differentiate the right way of conduct from wrong way of conduct. There fore, these
guidelines enable professionals to posses’ proper conducts and actions, and to develop
proper relationship with other workers. Consequently, fertile and conducive working
environment would be created and effective, efficient, just and ethical services would be
delivered to their clients and particularly to the public (people). It is if this is
conspicuously developed by each profession that poor people, like Ethiopian society, and
come out from the wretched and grinding poverty and effective and just services
particularly that of public services, can be delivered.
Fundamental Codes and Principles of Professional Ethics
It is not beyond imagination that different professions may have different codes of ethic and
rules of conduct with in which their professional’s actions and behaviors are judged as right or
wrong against their profession. But there are also common codes of ethics and rules of conduct
of workers in all professions. Hence, these rules, which will be discussed in the following
section, are universal applied and must be applied across all professions. The following are,
among others, the most important and common codes of ethics and principles of conduct for all
professions.
A. Punctuality
Punctuality refers to the state of being strictly observant of an appointed or regular time. Across
all professions, a worker is said to be, and should be, punctual not only when he/she comes to
work place on the time but also when he/she meets deadlines and when he/she is always
available during working hours.
B. Honesty and Integrity
Honesty basically refers to the art of telling the truth. Employers and institutions expect their
workers to be honest, but many workers and instructors (teachers) are not. When you are
employed for a certain job of a given profession, you have entered into agreement to sell both
your time, and knowledge and skill to your institution. And hence, your working hours (time)
don’t belong to you! Rather it belongs to your employer (the institution) employer/institution.
C. Proper Utilization of Instruments of Labour

108
A worker in any profession, be it a farmer, a teacher (instructor), or physician, should handle the
instruments in a way that she/he can use the instruments for longer time. That is, any worker of a
given profession should use restores – be it financial, material, etc – efficiently, effectively and
in a just and proper manner. This is particularly applied by public institutions that deliver service
to the public by any worker in a given profession. For example, avoiding wastage of material and
financial resourse putting off the light when leaving the office, this is an ordinary example.
D. Loyalty and Self – Efficacy
The maxim common to many societies that “Do not bite the hand that feeds you”. This is
certainly true in your relationship with your employer or institution whether public or private
institution. Any worker, in a given profession must stand for, not against your relationship with
your employer or institution. There fore, always think what you can do to promote the
organization or office or university you work for. This also includes the need to maximize
productivity of your employer or institution i.e. the quantity and/or quality of work done. More
over, an ethical professional must develop self–efficacy, which an appraisal or evaluation that a
professional about his/her professional and personal competence to succeed in a particular task
i.e. he has to develop his personal and professional belief in the ability to perform tasks
successfully.
E. Working in cooperation with colleagues:
A worker of a given profession should make sure that he/she has a good relationship with other
workers. The main rationale behind these codes of professional ethics is to create a fertile and
good atmosphere conducive for cooperation and better productivity. He/she should serve hand in
hand with other professional workers in the interest of effective provision of service.
F. Anti – Corruption spirit
It is well known that corruption severely hampers development and it is an impediment for
building democracy. One way of fighting corruption is by making professionals to comply with
the laws, rules and regulations of the state. But most importantly, it is plausible that every
professional should enhance or develop the spirit (mentality) that is anti or against corruption so
that development, equality, democracy and justice can remarkably be fostered.

G. Confidentiality

109
A worker of a given profession conspicuously needs to keep some information that should be
kept secret. For example, in a case of physicians or nurse he/she has to keep all the information a
regarding the patient contained in a patient’s chart. Therefore, the physician or nurse should
never voluntarily divulge information of a confidential nature unless the patient’s best interest
requires this to be done. Another example is that a teacher should keep all information of
students achieve confidential.
H. Commitment
A professional should help his/her client and the whole community to maintain and satisfy
societal (public) demands. More over, he/she holds paramount the safety; health and we fare of
the public and shall strive to comply with the principle of sustainable development in the
performance of their professional duties.
I. Persistent Tolerance and Democratic Culture
Any worker or professional have to develop the ability and willing ness to accommodate
differences in ideas, outlooks, views, etc due to various behaviour of human beings. For
example, conflict of ideas, outlooks, or views is indispensable able but it should be carefully and
peace fully managed and resolved so that fruit full produces and progress can be achieve. Having
said this, it is also imperative to accompany or back difference or conflict of ides outlooks, etc by
tolerance.
J. Respecting the Dignity of People
A professional or worker should respect the dignity of all persons serving them in accordance
with their basic needs, irrespective of their sex, personal status, religion or by other supernal
factors involved.
K. Impartiality (Non–Partiality)
A professional should be impartial i.e. non – parties a to his client or all persons that the/she
contacts. Rather, he/she treat all equally in this service delivery to his clement or people with out
any discrimination. A teacher (instructor) should treat his/her students equally on the basic of
their academic performance or achievement.
Therefore, a professional (worker) should keep a fair and impartial attitude to the public, clients,
of his/her work, and serve sincerely.

L. Accountability and Responsibility

110
Any worker in a given profession has professional responsibilities or duties. In an organization
where you are engaged, you have to be obedient for the chain of command, which are presented
to you. As you are part of a given organization you have to be answerable for your actions.
M. Transparency
It is also imperative for a professional to be transparent i.e. his/her works must be open to the
public to whom he delivers public service. Confident professional who work for the people
effectively and efficiently are usually transparent.
N. Responsiveness
Refers to the extent that a professional satisfies the needs, preferences, or values of his clients
and/or the society. Since he/she has connections and professional relationship with his clients or
public, he/she has to able to reply or respond to the people’s demand.
5.6 Understanding and Internalizing Civic Virtues
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 civic virtue is described interms of civic dispositions and civic commitments.
Civic Dispositions refers to those attitudes and ingrained habits of mind that are conducive to
behavior that leads to the healthy functioning and common good of the democratic system. These
dispositions also enhance the individual’s ability to participate competently and responsibly in
the political system.
Dispositions of the citizen conducive to the healthy functioning of a constitutional democracy
include the following:
1. Civility: - is a polite way of acting or behaving towards others. It is the need to respect
others. This includes the respect and politeness we show to those with whom even we may
disagree. In this case, thus, we are expected to respect the rights of those who are in dispute with

111
us. It is an element of civilized behavior. Moreover it is a way of peaceful living and co-
existence with others.

In its civic context, civility has the following characteristics:

1. Respect. Civility includes treating others with respect and as individuals inherently
worthy of regard whether or not one agrees with their positions.
2. Civil discourse. Civility includes a disposition to take part in public debate and in doing
so to adhere to commonly accepted standards of discourse such as:
a. Addressing the issue. Debate should be based on the substance of opponents’
argument or positions on the issue and not on personal attacks on their character.
b. Respecting the right of others to be heard. Disruptive tactics that undermine
debate in a public forum should be avoided. However, when people are unjustly
denied their right to express their views, disruptive tactics such as civil
disobedience and similar non – violent activities can be justified.
2. Individual responsibility: - refers to the moral and legal obligation of citizens, and hence
citizens should be disposed to care for and take responsibility for themselves and their actions
and activities.
3. Self – discipline: - 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. These
rules and regulations help to guide our actions. Thus, we should be able to respect these rules and
standards in our day-to-day activities. When we do this freely and from our own initiative, our
actions can be referred as self-disciplined. Thus self-discipline comes from inside of us without
being forced or controlled by outside expectations or impositions.
4. Civic – mindedness: - this refers to citizen’s readiness and desire to give concern to the
public. Thoughtful citizens recognize that there is often a tension between private interest and the
common good. Citizens should understand that there are times when they should place the
common good above their personal interests. Civic-mindedness is unselfish behavior that enables
us to do good and make sacrifice ourselves to the society and to our nation.
5. Open-mindedness: - This is the disposition to be receptive to different ideas and arguments.
This includes the following attributes:

112
 A. Openness: - citizens should be open to considering opposing positions and changing or
modifying their own positions. Openness to opposing positions and arguments,
however, does not mean that all views are of equal value or validity.
B. A healthy skepticism: - A healthy skepticism is an appropriate response of the citizen
to unsupported generalizations and dogmatism.
C. Recognition of ambiguity: - citizens should recognize that actions and situations are
sometimes capable of more than one interpretation and that the character of political and
social reality is therefore sometimes ambiguous. It may therefore be difficult to achieve
full understanding or certainty.
6. Compromise (Negotiation/bargaining): - is one form of behavior that should be observed in
settling conflicts 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 outcome. That
means, whenever we are in conflict with others on a certain issue, there is a need to give up some
of our positions or interests. However compromise never allows abandoning basic principles and
interests.
Therefore, compromise is based on the principle of give and take spirit and hence involves
concession and counter concession by each party or individual person engaged in conflict.
7. Toleration of diversity: The disposition to tolerate, appreciate, and support diversity includes
respect for the right of others to differ in ideas, ways of life, customs, and beliefs etc. Support for
diversity in everyday life should be based upon an understanding of benefits of having people of
diverse beliefs and ethnic and racial backgrounds as a part of the community.
8. Patience and persistence: - Citizens should understand that forming or changing public
policy usually requires a great deal of time and persistent effort. They should not be dissuaded
from this fact or by the inevitable delays and failures that result when trying to exert influence on
governmental decision-making.
9. Compassion: - Compassion is the disposition to empathize with others and show concern for
their welfare, and hence, it is an essential attribute of citizens in a society devoted to the common
good.
10. Generosity: - Generosity means the disposition to expend time, effort, and resources in a
civic context for the benefit of others. The virtuous citizen shows generosity to others and to the
community at large.

113
11. Loyalty to the Nation and its Constitution: - Citizens should habitually act in accord with
the fundamental values and principles of the constitution of the F.D.R.E and be committed to
narrowing the gap between those values and principles ands the actual practice. In doing so,
therefore, the F.D.R.E constitution conspicuously effective and hence constitutionalism
profoundly prevails across the nation and the society.
Civic Commitment and Internalization
Civic commitments are reasoned devotion or commitment expected to be discharged or fulfilled
by all citizens of a given state. Civic commitment is profoundly applied or practiced if and on if
citizens and students conspicuously and persistently internalized the aforementioned and other
civic virtues, and there by, making them part and parcel of their behaviour conduct. It is only if
civic commitment is essentially practiced by each and every citizen that our social system and
solidarity get effective, and hence not fragile.

114
 Unit Six: Issues in Civics and Ethics
6.1 National and national issues in Civics and Ethics
6.1.1 Poverty/inequality
Understanding of poverty is critical to political, social, economic, policy and academic debates
about the concept. It is bound up with explanations and has implications for solutions. Value
judgments are involved. Definition thus has to be understood as a political as well as a social
scientific act and as such has often been the source of controversy. There is no single ‘correct’
definition. However, most researchers now accept that any definition has to be understood, at
least in part, in relation to particular social, cultural and historical contexts. This has implications
for studies that attempt to compare poverty in very different kinds of society.
The phenomenon of poverty has to be understood both as a painful reality experienced by
millions of human beings and as a construction of competing conceptualizations, definitions and
measures. The category of ‘the poor’ and what we describe as ‘poverty’ is thus, at one level, an
artifact. Until recently, poverty was understood largely in terms of income or a lack of one. To be
poor meant that one could not afford the cost of providing a proper diet or home. But poverty is
about more than a shortfall in income or calorie intake.
It is about the denial of opportunities and choices that are widely regarded as essential to lead a
long, healthy, creative life and to enjoy a decent standard of living, freedom, dignity, self-esteem
and the respect of others.
People don't live in the squalor of the slums, favellas, squatter communities, low-rent districts or
beside garbage dumps because they want to. They have no other choice. Possessing little money,
little education, few skills for the marketplace and a multitude of health problems, nearly half of
all the people in the world live in poverty, without much opportunity to improve their lives.
The other definition on poverty, the Copenhagen Declaration: Absolute poverty is a condition
characterized by severe deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water,
sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information. It depends not only on income but
also on access to social services.
Poverty is the state of one who lacks a certain amount of material possessions or money.
Absolute poverty or destitution refers to the deprivation of basic human needs, which commonly
includes food, water, sanitation, clothing, shelter, health care and education.

115
Relative poverty is defined contextually as economic inequality in the location or society in
which people live.
Generally speaking, poverty is multidimensional isssue. That denotes people’s exclusion from
socially adequate living standards and it encompasses a range of deprivations.
The dimensions of poverty cover distinct aspects of human capabilities:
A. economic (income, livelihoods, decent work),
B. human (health, education),
C. political (empowerment, rights, voice),
D. socio-cultural (status, dignity) and
E. protective (insecurity, risk, vulnerability).
Poverty reduction is a major goal and issue for many international organizations such as the
United Nations and the World Bank. The World Bank estimated 1.29 billion people were living
in absolute poverty in 2008. Of these, about 400 million people in absolute poverty lived in India
and 173 million people in China. In terms of percentage of regional populations, sub-Saharan
Africa at 47% had the highest incidence rate of absolute poverty in 2008. Between 1990 and
2010, about 663 million people moved above the absolute poverty level. Still, extreme poverty is
a global challenge; it is observed in all parts of the world, including the developed economies.
Regarding poverty reduction interventions in international levels, the following seven goals and
sets a specific timetable for their implementation by United Nation (UN) as Millennium
Developmental Goal (MDG):
 Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
 Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education
 Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women
 Goal 4: Reduce child mortality
 Goal 5: Improve maternal health
 Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
 Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability
 Goal 8: Develop a global partnership for development

116
6.1.2 Climatic Change
Global Warming
Global Warming is the increase of Earth's average surface temperature due to effect of
greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels or from
deforestation, which trap heat that would otherwise escape from Earth. This is a type of
greenhouse effect.
Global Warming Impacts
Many of the following "harbingers" and "fingerprints" are now well under way:
1. Rising Seas:- inundation of fresh water marshlands (the everglades), low-lying cities, and
islands with seawater.
2. Changes in rainfall patterns:- droughts and fires in some areas, flooding in other areas.
See the section above on the recent droughts, for example!
3. Increased likelihood of extreme events:- such as flooding, hurricanes, etc.
4. Melting of the ice caps --- loss of habitat near the poles. Polar bears are now thought to
be greatly endangered by the shortening of their feeding season due to dwindling ice
packs. 
5. Melting glaciers:- significant melting of old glaciers is already observed.
6. Widespread vanishing of animal populations:- following widespread habitat loss.
7. Spread of disease:- migration of diseases such as malaria to new, now warmer, regions.
8. Bleaching of Coral Reefs due to warming seas and acidification due to carbonic acid
formation:- One third of coral reefs now appear to have been severely damaged by
warming seas.
9. Loss of Plankton due to warming seas:- The enormous (900 mile long) Aleution island
ecosystems of orcas (killer whales), sea lions, sea otters, sea urchins, kelp beds, and fish
populations, appears to have collapsed due to loss of plankton, leading to loss of sea
lions, leading orcas to eat too many sea otters, leading to urchin explosions, leading to
loss of kelp beds and their associated fish populations. 
6.1.3 Corruption/rent seeking
Corruption is common in both the developing and the industrial worlds. The essential difference
between the developing and industrial worlds is that while corruption has been a relatively small
concern in the industrial world, it has not remained so in the developing. In fact corruption has

117
become a major focus of policy in developing countries, particularly since ever more aid is tied
to 'good governance' criteria. While there is much evidence suggesting that corruption has
negative links with economic growth and development, it is not entirely clear whether the
solutions proposed by certain international organizations are squarely aimed at the underlying
causes of corruption.
It could well be argued that corruption, as a universally demonized concept, is simply utilized as
a tool to label governments inefficient; the solutions to which are the same liberalization policies
of old, disguised with increasingly numerous but essentially meaningless corruption-tackling
add-ons.
The ambiguous nature of corruption has fuelled such suspicions, and there has been a tendency
towards attributing it to any number of wider social and institutional problems. Rent-seeking -
with which corruption is often associated, has also been the target of much neo-classical disdain;
especially with regards to its hampering of the free market, and thus crushing effects on growth.
When a company, organization or individual uses their resources to obtain an economic gain
from others without reciprocating any benefits back to society through wealth creation.
Corruption is bad not because money and benefits change hands, and not because of the motives
of participants, but because it privatizes valuable aspects of public life, bypassing processes of
representation, debate, and choice.
6.1.4 Issues in Globalization
Globalization is often understood as a phenomena, or a process characterized by increasing
interconnectedness or interdependence. The economy, culture, politics/ideology/ and
communication technology have been the driving forces as well as forms of globalization.
Economic logic seems to be the underling pushing force of globalization. After the collapse of
USSR and the ideology of communism, Capitalism driven by its logic of private property, free
market, and the rolling back of the state( market liberalization), and growth oriented sort of
development policies have emerged as the sole way to progress of mankind. These policy issues
and ideas are collectively known as Neo-liberalism which has been prescribed by global forces
(actors such as IMF and World Bank, and of course the WTO. Technology is also a central to
any a count of globalization since it is a truism that without modern communication
infrastructures, in particular, a global system or worldwide economy would not be possible.

118
Politics- short hand here for ideas, interests, and power constitute the other logic of globalization.
There has been politics and interests working for and against globalizations. There are countries
and forces that work as gents of globalization to promote their underlining interests, security,
profit and ideological motives. United States and other Western Countries are often more
enthusiastic to enhance the process of globalization; whereas most of the developing countries
are more of skeptical of the benefit of globalization. The developing countries thus felt the
challenges of globalization, more than the opportunities globalization might offer.
Generally, the process of globalization experience of everyday life, marked by the diffusion of
commodities and ideas, is becoming standardized around the world. Factors that have
contributed to globalization include increasingly sophisticated communications and
transportation technologies and services, mass migration and the movement of peoples, a level of
economic activity that has outgrown national markets through industrial combinations and
commercial groupings that cross national frontiers and international agreements that reduce the
cost of doing business in foreign countries. Globalization offers huge potential profits to
companies and nations but has been complicated by widely differing expectations, standards of
living, cultures and values, and legal systems as well as unexpected global cause-and-effect
linkages.
From economical point of view, globalization is the system of interaction among the countries
of the world in order to develop the global economy. Globalization involves technological,
economic, political, and cultural exchanges made possible largely by advances in
communication, transportation, and infrastructure.
Effects of Globalization
According to economists, there are a lot of global events connected with globalization and
integration. It is easy to identify the changes brought by globalization.
1.   Improvement of International Trade. Because of globalization, the number of countries
where products can be sold or purchased has increased dramatically.
2.  Technological Progress. Because of the need to compete and be competitive globally,
governments have upgraded their level of technology.
3.  Increasing Influence of Multinational Companies. A company that has subsidiaries in
various countries is called a multinational. Often, the head office is found in the country where
the company was established.

119
4.   Power of the WTO, IMF, and WB. According to experts, another effect of globalization is
the strengthening power and influence of international institutions such as the World Trade
Organization (WTO), International Monetary Fund (IMF), and World Bank (WB).
5.   Greater Mobility of Human Resources across Countries. Globalization allows countries
to source their manpower in countries with cheap labor.
6.   Greater Outsourcing of Business Processes to Other Countries. China, India, and the
Philippines are tremendously benefiting from this trend of global business outsourcing. Global
companies in the US and Europe take advantage of the cheaper labor and highly-skilled workers
that countries like India and the Philippines can offer
7. Civil Society. An important trend in globalization is the increasing influence and broadening
scope of the global civil society.
Civil society often refers to NGOs (nongovernment organizations). There are institutions in a
country that are established and run by citizens. The family, being an institution, is part of the
society. In globalization, global civil society refers to organizations that advocate certain issue or
cause.
Still most of African, despite some recent time, live under the condition of under development.
With exception few exceptions to this have been Botswana and Mauritius, and to a degree,
democratic South Africa. After almost four and a half decades of independence, most countries
on the continent are characterized by underdevelopment. The evidence for this state of
underdevelopment can be found in any social and economic indicators one cares to examine.
The negative effects of globalization for the Africa has been marked by:
 The dominance of the primary sector – agriculture, oil and minerals - partly as a result of
the inability of the African state to foster an environment for high value added economic
activities
 Low domestic capital formation and declining direct foreign investment
 Foreign aid dependence
 Heavy indebtedness
 High unemployment and the informalisation of the economies where the majority of its
people live in poverty.

120
Some kind of consensus seems to be reached among scholars and policy makers that neo-
liberalism-as ideology is not fruit full to address such complex and profound problems of Africa
scholars and policy.
6.1.6 Terrorism
The topic of terrorism is both complex and emotive. It is complex because it combines so many
different aspects of human experience, including subjects such as politics, psychology,
philosophy, military strategy, and history, to name a few. Terrorism is also emotive both because
experiences of terrorist acts arouse tremendous feelings, and because those who see terrorists as
justified often have strong feelings concerning the rightness of the use of violence.
Without a doubt, terrorism evokes strong feelings whenever it is discussed. A key challenge of
understanding terrorism is both acknowledging the moral outrage at terrorist acts, while at the
same time trying to understand the rationale behind terrorism.
Terrorism is not a new phenomenon in human experience. Violence has been used throughout
human history by those who chose to oppose states, kings, and princes. This sort of violence can
be differentiated from what is termed as terrorism. Violence in opposition to a government is
often targeted against soldiers and those who govern. Terrorism, however, is characterized by the
use of violence against civilians, with the expressed desire of causing terror or panic in the
population. Terrorism is not unique to the 20th and 21st centuries.
Terrorism existed in 18th century revolutionary France during the reign of terror, Jacobinic terror
period (French Revolution, 1793-1794), as well as among the Zealots of Palestine in opposition
to Roman rule some 2000 years ago. Today, terrorist activity can be found in Israel, Indonesia,
United Kingdom, Sri Lanka, Colombia, and the United States, to name a few. Of particular
concern here are the September 11 suicide attacks against the World Trade Center and the
Pentagon and the attempted attack that resulted in the plane crash in Pennsylvania.
The difficulty in defining “terrorism” is in agreeing on a basis for determining when the use of
violence (directed at whom, by whom, for what ends) is legitimate; therefore, the modern
definition of terrorism is inherently controversial.
The use of violence for the achievement of political ends is common to state and non-state
groups. The majority of definitions in use has been written by agencies directly associated with
government, and is systematically biased to exclude governments from the definition. The
contemporary label of "terrorist" is highly pejorative it denotes a lack of legitimacy and morality.

121
As a practical matter, so-called acts of “terrorism” or terrorism are often a tactic committed by
the actors as part of a larger military or geo-political agenda.
Legal statutes in most countries around the world regard terrorism as a crime. Yet there is
considerable variation in how these laws define terrorism, even in countries whose laws derive
from a common origin. In the United Kingdom, for example, legislation titled Terrorist Act 2000
states that terrorism is “the use or threat of action . . . designed to influence the government or to
intimidate the public or a section of the public . . . for the purpose of advancing a political,
religious or ideological cause.” The legal system and code of law of the United Kingdom has
influenced those of the United States, Canada, and Israel.
United States federal statute defines terrorism as “violent acts or acts dangerous to human life
that . . . appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the
policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government
by assassination or kidnapping.” This definition appears in United States Code, Title 18, Section
2331 (18 USC 2331). Canada’s Anti-terrorism Act (Bill C-36) designates “terrorist activity” as
“an act or omission . . . that is committed in whole or in part for a political, religious or
ideological purpose, objective or cause and in whole or in part with the intention of intimidating
the public, or a segment of the public, with regard to its security, including its economic security,
or compelling a person, a government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to
refrain from doing any act, whether the person, government or organization is inside or outside
Canada . . . .”
Israeli law does not address terrorism specifically. But in the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance
No. 33, it defines a terrorist organization as “a body of persons resorting in its activities to acts of
violence calculated to cause death or injury to a person or to threats of such acts of violence.”
The UN Member States still have no agreed-upon definition of terrorism, and this fact has been a
major obstacle to meaningful international countermeasures. Terminology consensus would be
necessary for a single comprehensive convention on terrorism, which some countries favor in
place of the present 12 piecemeal conventions and protocols. Cynics have often commented
that one state's "terrorist" is another state's "freedom fighter".
The UN General Assembly Resolution 49/60 (adopted on December 9, 1994), titled "Measures
to Eliminate International Terrorism," contains a provision describing terrorism: Criminal acts
intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or

122
particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the
considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other
nature that may be invoked to justify them.
The Arab Convention for the Suppression of Terrorism was adopted by the Council of Arab
Ministers of the Interior and the Council of Arab Ministers of Justice in Cairo, Egypt in 1998.
Terrorism was defined in the convention as:
Any act or threat of violence, whatever its motives or purposes, that occurs in the advancement
of an individual or collective criminal agenda and seeking to sow panic among people, causing
fear by harming them, or placing their lives, liberty or security in danger, or seeking to cause
damage to the environment or to public or private installations or property or to occupying or
seizing them, or seeking to jeopardize national resources.
UN Security Council Resolution 1566 (2004) gives a definition: criminal acts, including
against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of
hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of
persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international
organization to do or to abstain from doing any act.
European Union
The European Union defines terrorism for legal/official purposes in Art.1 of the Framework
Decision on Combating Terrorism (2002). This provides that terrorist offences are certain
criminal offences set out in a list comprised largely of serious offences against persons and
property which: given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international
organization where committed with the aim of: seriously intimidating a population; or unduly
compelling a Government or international organization to perform or abstain from performing
any act; or seriously destabilizing or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional,
economic or social structures of a country or an international organization.
There are different types of Terrorism:-
Experts have identified at least 12 different types of terrorism:
1) Nationalist-Separatist Terrorism: violence undertaken by those seeking to establish a
separate state for their own national/ethnic group [e.g. the Irish Republican Army (IRA),
Basque Homeland & Liberty (ETA), the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK)].

123
2) Religious Terrorism: the use of violence by those seeking to further what they conceive as
divinely commanded purposes, often targeting broad categories of ‘enemies’ in an attempt to
bring about sweeping changes [e.g. Aum Shinrikyo, al-Qaida, Hizbollah, Hamas].
3) Left-Wing Terrorism: violence undertaken by those seeking to destroy capitalism and
replace it with a communist or socialist regime [e.g. Red Army Faction (RAF), German Red
Brigades, Prima Linea, the Weather Underground/Symbionese Liberation Army]
4) Right-Wing Terrorism: The use of violence by those seeking to dispense with liberal
democratic governments [e.g. Timothy McVeigh].
5) Agro-Terrorism: The malicious use of plant or animal pathogens to cause devastating
disease in the agricultural sector. It may also take the form of hoaxes and threats intended to
create public fear of such events”.
6) Anarchism: The promotion of terrorism against political enemies as a way of inspiring the
masses and catalyzing revolution.
7) Bio-terrorism: Is terrorism by intentional release or dissemination of biological agents
(bacteria, viruses or toxins); these may be in a naturally-occurring or in a human-modified
form.
8) Eco- Terrorism: Is used to describe threats and/or acts of violence (both against people and
against property), sabotage, vandalism, property damage and intimidation committed in the
name of environmentalism.
9) Nuclear Terrorism: Denotes the use of nuclear weapons, radiological weapons (dirty
bombs), or attacks against local facilities that handle nuclear material with mass destruction
in mind.
10) Narcoterrorism: Have had several meanings since its coining in 1983. It once denoted
violence used by drug traffickers to influence governments or prevent government efforts to
stop the drug trade. In the last several years, narcoterrorism has been used to indicate
situations in which terrorist groups use drug trafficking to fund their other operations.
11) Cyber-terrorists: use information technology to attack civilians and draw attention to their
cause. This may mean that they use information technology, such as computer systems or
telecommunications, as a tool to orchestrate a traditional attack. More often, cyber terrorism
refers to an attack on information technology itself in a way that would radically disrupt
networked services.

124
12) State Terrorism: Many definitions of terrorism restrict it to acts by non-state actors. But it
can also be argued that states can, and have, been terrorists. States can use force or the threat
of force, without declaring war, to terrorize citizens and achieve a political goal.
The purpose of State Terrorism is to dominate and intimidate the population through violent acts
or threats, to cause terror and repression and obtain obedience to strict rules dictated by the State
or the participation in State activities, utilizing systematic punishment, communication media,
monopoly and the creation of disciplinary centers for dissidents. A variation of State Terrorism is
the State-Supported Terrorism, in which terrorist groups are protected or funded by the
government and they engage in violent attacks and general oppression of the people of a nation.
The Reign of Terror in France and the Holocaust in Germany are considered by some to be good
examples of State Terrorism in history.
Targets of terrorism
Terrorism often targets innocent civilians in order to create an atmosphere of fear, intimidation,
and insecurity. Some terrorists deliberately direct attacks against large numbers of ordinary
citizens who simply happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. More selective terrorist
attacks target diplomats and diplomatic facilities such as embassies and consulates; military
personnel and military bases; business executives and corporate offices; and transportation
vehicles and facilities, such as airlines and airports, trains and train stations, buses and bus
terminals, and subways. Terrorist attacks on buildings or other inanimate targets often serve a
symbolic purpose: They are intended more to draw attention to the terrorists and their cause than
to destroy property or kill and injure persons, although death and destruction nonetheless often
result.
Despite variations in the number of attacks from year to year, one feature of international
terrorism has remained constant: The United States has been its most popular target. Since 1968
the United States has annually led the list of countries whose citizens and property were most
frequently attacked by terrorists. Several factors can account for this phenomenon, in addition to
America’s position as the sole remaining superpower and leader of the free world. These include
the geographical scope and diversity of America’s overseas business interests, the number of
Americans traveling or working abroad, and the many U.S. military bases around the world.

125
 Weapons of Terrorism
Bombing historically has been the most common terrorist tactic. Terrorists have often relied on
bombs because they provide a dramatic, yet fairly easy and often risk-free, means of drawing
attention to themselves and their cause. Few skills are required to manufacture a crude bomb,
surreptitiously plant it, and then be miles away when it explodes. Bombings generally do not
require the same planning, organization, and knowledge required for more sophisticated
operations, such as kidnapping, assassination, and assaults against well-defended targets.
Not surprisingly, the frequency of various types of terrorist attacks decreases in direct proportion
to the complexity or sophistication required. Armed attacks historically rank as the second most-
common terrorist tactic, followed by more complex operations such as assassination of heads of
state or other well-protected people, kidnapping, hostage taking, and hijacking.
Bombs
Bombs can consist of commercially produced explosives such as black powder, TNT, or
dynamite; military supplies such as plastic explosives; or commercially available materials made
into homemade explosives, such as fertilizer (ammonium nitrate) mixed with diesel fuel. Bombs
can be either explosive or incendiary (designed to cause a fire upon impact). The most effective
bombs typically employ a shaped charge (explosive) that channels the force of the blast in a
specific direction. Bombs are detonated (made to explode) by a variety of means. Time-delay
detonators use a clock, wristwatch, or other timing device. Remote-control detonators rely on
radio or other electronic signals. In command-wire detonation a button is pressed or a plunger
pushed to trigger the explosion.
Firearms
Many terrorists have favored firearms, including automatic weapons such as assault rifles,
submachine guns, and pistols; revolvers; sawed-off shotguns; hunting rifles with sniper sights,
especially for assassination; and machine guns. During the 1990s, terrorists increasingly used
rocket-propelled grenades and other armor-piercing projectiles in their attacks. These weapons,
more powerful forms of the bazookas used in World War II (1939-1945), can penetrate
successive layers of ceramic and reinforced-steel that protect vehicles used by the police and
military forces. Another favorite terrorist weapon is the hand grenade or its homemade
equivalent, the Molotov cocktail. This crude grenade is made by filling a glass bottle with
gasoline, stuffing a rag down the bottle’s neck, and igniting the rag just before tossing the bottle
at a target.

126
 Chemical and Biological Weapons
Concern over terrorist use of chemical and biological weapons increased after the 1995 sarin
nerve gas attack on the Tokyo subway and the discovery in 2001 of anthrax spores mailed in the
United States. Chemical weapons consist of toxic chemical compounds, such as nerve gas or
dioxin, whereas biological weapons are living organisms or their toxins, such as anthrax spores.
Chemical weapons can be divided into five main classes: incapacitating, choking, blistering,
blood, and nerve agents. Incapacitating agents are the only deliberately nonlethal chemical
weapon. They include the tear gases and pepper sprays typically used by police and other law
enforcement agencies for crowd control or to subdue a person temporarily. Choking agents
attack the victim’s respiratory system and hamper breathing, leading to death by suffocation.
Blister agents produce large blisters on exposed skin that do not heal readily and therefore easily
become infected. Blood agents, which victims absorb through breathing, enter the bloodstream
and lead to convulsions, respiratory failure, and death as they shut down the body’s functioning.
Nerve agents are especially effective. They can be either inhaled or absorbed through the skin
and quickly attack the central nervous system, obstructing breathing.
Biological agents are disease-carrying organisms that infect people through inhalation,
contaminated food or water, or contact with the skin. They include bacterial toxins, such as
anthrax, Clostridium botulinum (botulism), and salmonella; plant toxins such as ricin; and
viruses, such as tularemia, yellow fever, and smallpox
VI COUNTERTERRORISM
A Jurisdiction over Counterterrorism in the United States
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), created by the Homeland Security Act of 2002, is
the primary agency responsible for directing the U.S. government’s efforts to prevent and
respond to terrorism. Its creation stemmed from criticism of how the U.S. government was
organized to address the threat of terrorist attack in the United States. The act consolidated in one
department dozens of existing government agencies that all share some responsibility for
preventing and responding to terrorism, including the Coast Guard, the Border Patrol, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service, and the Transportation Security Administration. The
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), also transferred to DHS, retains
responsibility for assisting in recovery from terrorist attacks.
Although the DHS unified many of the government’s counterterrorism functions, others remain
outside the department. As the nation’s largest law enforcement agency, the Federal Bureau of

127
Investigation (FBI) maintains responsibility for investigating acts of terrorism, and its
counterterrorism division works to protect the country from terrorist activity. The Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA) collects intelligence in foreign countries about terrorist activities.
Other U.S. government agencies with counterterrorism responsibilities include the departments
of State, Defense, Energy, Justice, Health and Human Services, Transportation, Agriculture,
Commerce, Treasury, and Interior; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives;
the Nuclear Regulatory Agency; and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Jurisdiction over Counterterrorism in Canada
The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) is the Canadian government institution with
primary responsibility for the country’s security and intelligence, and within this context, for
counterterrorism. Because of concerns over the scope of surveillance powers accorded to CSIS,
the Canadian government in 1984 created an oversight agency, the Security Intelligence Review
Committee. Its primary responsibility is to act as an independent body to investigate complaints
about the CSIS. The Solicitor General’s Office oversees measures to improve airport security, to
improve applications of technology in counterterrorism, and to enhance and strengthen
cooperation between Canada and the United States against terrorism. The Royal Canadian
Mounted Police is the national law enforcement agency of Canada with powers of arrest and
search and seizure of evidence relating to terrorist crimes.
Methods of Counterterrorism
At times of extraordinarily serious terrorist threat, many governments have accorded law-
enforcement authorities special powers of arrest and detention. These powers have generally
been temporary and were meant specifically to aid the government in capturing and prosecuting
terrorists and eliminating extremist threats to society, while avoiding the imposition of unjustly
severe measures that might infringe on civil rights and civil liberties. These expanded powers,
however, have generated public concern and criticism of government, especially when coupled
with the suspension of long-standing and cherished democratic protections such as habeas corpus
and due process of law.

The United Kingdom provides a good example of a democratic country that has made extensive

use of such emergency powers. Since 1973 the United Kingdom has enacted no less than three
separate laws sanctioning extrajudicial measures. They include successive Northern Ireland
(Emergency Provisions) Acts, first signed in 1973; the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1975; and
128
the Terrorism Act 2000. These laws must be formally reconsidered and approved by Britain’s
Parliament on a regular basis. In various forms, they have allowed arrests without warrants
(written authorizations) and prolonged detentions of terrorist suspects without the bringing of
charges; broader police powers of search and arrest; trial by judge alone rather than by jury;
denial of access to the media for banned groups; and the outright banning of organizations
designated as subversive (intending to overthrow the government).
International Counterterrorism
International cooperation against terrorism historically has had a somewhat uneven record.
During the early 1970s international cooperative efforts produced various aircraft antihijacking
agreements, including the 1970 Hague Convention for the Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft and the
1971 Montreal Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil
Aviation. Attempts were later made to extend these treaties to embrace a broader array of
international antiterrorist agreements. Almost without exception, however, those efforts
foundered because of the international community’s failure to agree on a definition of terrorism.
Recent events suggest greater progress toward meaningful cooperation among governments in
fighting terrorism. Even before September 11, 2001, the United Nations had taken important
steps to punish Afghanistan’s Taliban regime for providing sanctuary to Osama bin Laden. U.N.
Security Council Resolutions 1267 (passed in 1999), 1333 (2000), and 1363 (2001) imposed
sanctions on the Taliban for harboring bin Laden and failing to close down al-Qaeda terrorist
training camps in Afghanistan. These resolutions demonstrated a change in international attitudes
toward terrorism along with a commitment to isolate states that refuse to adhere to international
norms.
On the day after the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks the UN Security Council
approved Resolution 1368, which reaffirmed the UN’s commitment “to combat by all means
threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts”; recognized the “inherent
right of individual or collective self-defense in accordance with the [UN] Charter” against
terrorism; and unequivocally condemned “in the strongest terms” the September 11 attacks. Two
weeks later, Security Council Resolution 1373 was approved. It called for the prevention and
suppression of terrorism financing and greater exchange of the operational information needed
by UN member-states to fight terrorism.
THE FUTURE OF TERRORISM

129
Terrorism has existed for at least 2,000 years and is likely to remain a fixture on political
agendas, both domestic and international, for years to come. Terrorism provides a means by
which the weak can confront much stronger opponents. It therefore has an enduring appeal to the
alienated and the disenfranchised, the aggrieved and vengeful, the powerless and the would-be
powerful. In addition, it is relatively inexpensive to conduct while offering a vast potential
payoff: the ability to evoke fear and alarm and inflict pain and suffering in the hope of
compelling agreement to demands made.
Terrorism, moreover, is evolving constantly to overcome governmental countermeasures
designed to defeat it. Terrorism thus involves an ongoing search for new targets and unidentified
vulnerabilities in its opponents. This quest also raises the possibility that terrorists may pursue
unconventional means of attack, such as chemical, biological, or radiological (radioactivity-
spreading) weapons, or nuclear weapons. Future terrorist tactics could include cyberterrorism
(sabotage using computers to destroy computer networks or systems) or electronic warfare that
targets critical infrastructure, such as communications and power facilities, or societies in
general.
Throughout the world, terrorism reinvents itself in new and more dangerous forms. As older
groups are defeated or exhausted, more radical and more violent successors often take their
place. Although terrorism likely can never be completely eradicated, countering its threat
requires continuing vigilance. The highly individual nature of terrorism’s causes, the diversity of
its perpetrators, and the complexity of its fundamental characteristics present enormous
challenges to those who must effectively counter this menace.

Piracy
Piracy is typically an act of robbery or criminal violence at sea. The term can include acts
committed on land, in the air, or in other major bodies of water or on a shore. It does not
normally include crimes committed against persons traveling on the same vessel as the
perpetrator (e.g. one passenger stealing from others on the same vessel). The term has been used
throughout history to refer to raids across land borders by non-state agents. Piracy is the name of
a specific crime under customary international law and also the name of a number of crimes
under the municipal law of a number of States. It is distinguished from privateering, which is

130
authorized by national authorities and therefore a legitimate form of war-like activity by non-
state actors.
Those who engage in acts of piracy are called pirates (Freebooter.) Historically, offenders have
usually been apprehended by military personnel and tried by military tribunals. In our today’s
world, the international community is facing many problems in bringing pirates to justice.

131