INDIVIDUAL CIVICS AND ETHICL EDUCATION

ASSIGNMENT

STUDENT NAME: YONAS GETANEH

ID NO: UU78898R

DEPARTMENT: COMPUTER SCIENCE

SECTION: CCS1R1N3

SUBMISSION DATE: 14/12/2020

SUBMITTED TO:

1
Chapter Five: Constitution, Democracy and Human Rights

5.3. Constitution and Constitutionalism

5.3.1. Conceptualizing Constitution

The word ‘constitution’ is used mainly in many senses-constitution of a body, constitution of

trade union, constitution of political party etc. In a political sense, it signifies the constitution of
the state. Now the term has attained a normative connotation and has become another term for a
‘democratic political order.’ Every state must have constitution of its own and that its
government must be organized and conducted according to the rules of the constitution so that
the people must have a rule of law, it constitutes the case of constitutionalism.

Constitution is figuratively defined as the fundamental or basic law of a state which sets out the
structure of the state and also lists the rights of citizens alongside the limits on the power
exercise of a government. It is a blue print placed on top the hierarchy of laws on constitutional
governments. A constitution may be said to be a collection of principles according to which the
powers of the government, the rights of the governed, and the relation between the two are
adjusted. Constitution is the mothers of all laws; all other ordinary laws are derived from and
subjected to this blue print. Hence, since constitution is supreme law of a land, any other law
contradicted with the provisions of the constitution becomes void or invalid.

5.3.2. Peculiar Features of Constitution

With a few exceptions, all constitutions contain some common elements. From Magna Carta of
1215 to today, constitutional documents and traditions take the general form of a contract or an
agreement between the ruled and the rulers. Limitations on the rulers are exacted by the ruled in
exchange for allowing the rulers to preserve some elements of their right to govern and for
preserving the stability of the governing system itself. In addition, constitution has distinctive
features that distinguish it from any other laws. The following are some of the distinctive
features of a constitution.

A. Generality: a constitution provides the general principle of a state and carry on foundation
and sets out general framework of the law and the government. As other laws provide the details
of the subject for which they are created, Constitutional principles are guidelines for others laws.
The generality is very important because it give the constitution a feature of elasticity through
interpretation thereby to accommodate various questions.

B. Permanency: unlike laws constitution is made for undefined period of time. That means
constitution serve for a long lap of ages. It is purposely made to be stable and permanent. It is
made to be stable, i.e., not to be worked upon by the temper of the times or to rise or fall with the
occasional events. On the contrary, other laws are tentative, occasional and in the nature of
temporary existence.

2
C. Supremacy: Constitutions are laws about the political procedures to be followed in making
laws. They are supreme laws, taking precedence over all others, and defining how all the others
should be made. As a mother of law, it is original law by which the system of government is
created, and to which the branches of government must look for all their powers and authority. It
is original because it is directly made by the people as the direct expression of the will of the
people. All other laws are secondary or derivate being commands of representatives of the
sovereign.

D. Codified document: Constitutions are written down; often in a single document that presents
the constitution in a systematic manner. The constitutions are not intended to be perfect is
evidenced by expressly stated processes for revising or amending them. Constitutional change by
means of an orderly procedure is far preferable to overthrowing a government by force whenever
a country’s constitution has fallen out of favour with a majority of its people.

E. Allocation of powers: Constitutions outline the proper relations between institutions and
offices of the state, and between government and citizens. This is probably the most crucial part
because it,

allocates powers and functions to government and specifies the rights and duties of governments
and citizens-who can do what, to whom, and under what circumstances.

5.3.3. Major Purposes and Functions of Constitution

The existence of a constitution in a country is not an end in itself since the constitution is a
means for further prominent purposes. Hence, the following are some of the major purposes and
functions of constitution.

1. It serves as a framework for Government: This means that the constitution of state is a plan
for organizing the operation of government which in turn effectively guides the functions and
powers of the executive, legislative and judicial bodies of government. In other words, it is a
brief and a general outline of duties and rights of governments and also that of citizens.

2. It Limits the Powers of Government: In a constitutionally limited government, officials are

always abided by the constitution. However, Constitutional government protects the rights and a
freedom of citizens doesn’t mean that the government has no authority to effectively exercise its
functions. A constitutional Government is neither too powerful nor too weak because if a
government is excessively powerful, it tends to abuse the rights and freedoms of citizens. If, on
the other hand, a government is too weak it can’t protect citizens. Therefore, constitutions shall
grant Governments enough powers to effectively and consistently undertake their functions and
responsibilities but at the same time must put limits on their powers to make sure that they are
not in a position to endanger the rights and freedoms of citizens.

3
3. It protects individual and collective rights of citizens: To protect the individual and
collective rights and freedoms of people, the constitution of a state lay down the relationship
between the state and the individual by making out the respective spheres of government on the
one hand, and the individual and collective rights and freedoms on the other.

4. It serves as the Supreme (Highest) Law of a Country: this implies that Constitution is the
source of and supreme over all laws in a country. i.e. No specific law will be valid if it
contradicts the constitution. All laws in a country are made to fulfil the objectives and goals
clearly specified in a constitution of a given country. Because of this, the constitution of state is
referred to as “the law behind other laws or “the Mother of all laws” of a country.

5. It provides Government legitimacy/stability: as it formalize and regulate relationships

between political bodies and citizens and also provide mechanisms through which any potential
conflicts can be adjudicated and resolved, constitution usually provide the vital function of
introducing a measure of stability, order, and predictability of government. This in turn gives
governments a legitimate/legal right to rule or govern and by doing so it serves as the weapon for
legitimizing regimes.

6. Constitution Blue Prints for establishing Values and Goals: In a constitution there is also
an ideological aspect of constitution making where the people truly aspired for it. In such a
situation, it would be a common belief of the constituent, or at least, their leaders, what the
envisioned state should be geared towards providing the people either as citizens or as members
of any organization. This sort of positive declaration also usually has a way of offering bearing
to the operation of the constitution as well as affording the subjects the parameter for assessing
them. It, therefore, seeks to invest for unifying political values.

5.3.4. Classification of Constitutions

Constitutions are classified into different categories using different criteria. For instance, taking
the criteria, form, amendment procedure and degree of implementation/practice, constitutions
can be classified into the following categories.

A. Constitution based on form

Constitutions, in view of the breadth of written provisions, have been described as written and
unwritten constitutions. Or based on form/appearance constitutions can be classified as written
and unwritten.

1. Written Constitution

In simple terms, a written constitution is one whose provisions are written in detail. A written
constitution is one in which most of the provisions are embodied in a single formal written
instrument or instruments. It is a work of a conscious art and the result of deliberate effort to lay
down a body of fundamental principles under which a government is organized and conducted.

4
Thus, written constitution is a formal document that defines the nature of the constitutional
settlement, the rules that govern the political system and the rights of citizens and governments
in a codified form. It exists in a single document containing the fundamental laws and principles
specifying the rights of citizens, defines the political structure of a state and determines the
distribution of government powers; it serves as a supreme law of the state. For example, India,
Kenya, Ethiopia, USA, Germany, Brazil, Indonesia, Jordan, Venezuela and Nigeria have written
form of constitution. Written constitution has certain merits and demerits.

Merits of Written Constitution

 It is easily accessible to citizens that enable them to monitor the behavior of their
government thus preventing the emergency of dictatorship
 Citizens can easily learn about their rights and duties and the basic laws governing the
patterns of political processes of their nation
 It is full of clarity and definiteness because the provisions are written in detail.
 It has the quality of stability, since people know the nature of constitutional provisions ,
they feel a sense of satisfaction.

Demerits of written constitution

 It is easily accessible to citizens that enable them to monitor the behavior of their
government thus preventing the emergency of dictatorship
 Citizens can easily learn about their rights and duties and the basic laws governing the
patterns of political processes of their nation
 It is full of clarity and definiteness because the provisions are written in detail.
 It has the quality of stability, since people know the nature of constitutional provisions ,
they feel a sense of satisfaction

2. Unwritten Constitution

Unwritten constitution is basically means that the fundamental principles and powers of the
government are not written down in any single document. An unwritten constitution is one
whose written provisions are very brief and most of the rules of the constitution exist in the form
of usages and customs. It consists of customs, conventions, traditions, and some written laws
bearing different dates. The British constitution is the best example of unwritten constitution.
The most of the prescriptions of an unwritten constitution have never been reduced to writing
and formally embodied in a document. It is made up, largely of customs and judicial decisions.

Merits of Unwritten Constitution

 It has the quality of elasticity and adaptability. Since, most of the rules are in an
unwritten form, people may adapt them in response to the new constitution.
 It is so dynamic that it prevents the chances of popular uprisings.

5
  Unwritten constitution can absorb and also recover from shocks that may destroy a
written constitution. It looks like a natural outgrowth of a national life.

Demerits of Unwritten Constitution

 It is easily accessible to citizens that enable them to monitor the behavior of their
government thus preventing the emergency of dictatorship
 Citizens can easily learn about their rights and duties and the basic laws governing the
patterns of political processes of their nation
 It is full of clarity and definiteness because the provisions are written in detail.
 It has the quality of stability, since people know the nature of constitutional provisions ,
they feel a sense of satisfaction

B. Constitution based on complexity of amending process

On the basis of the distinction in the process of amendment, constitutions may be classified as
rigid and flexible.

1. Rigid Constitution

Here, the process of amendment is difficult. A special procedure is followed to make a change in
any rule of the constitution. A constitutional amendment bill must be passed by the parliament by
special majority. Then it is to be approved either by the provincial units or by the people in a
referendum or both. Thus, rigid constitution is one that does not adapt itself to changing
circumstances immediately and quickly or simply one whose amendment procedures are
relatively complex or difficult. A more difficult procedure of constitutional amendment is the
one which requires a national referendum. A referendum is the process of direct voting by
citizens to support or rejects at constitutional amendment or other major national issues. Those
countries like USA, Australia, Denmark and Switzerland are known to have rigid constitutions.

2. Flexible Constitution

Flexible constitution is the constitution which set up simple amendment procedure and there is as
such no special required procedure for amending a constitution. The simplest and commonest
amendment procedure is the one which requires an absolute majority (two thirds support) in the
parliament. If it is very simple and convenient, the constitution is flexible. Any new law made by
the parliament gives a new rule to the constitution. Flexible constitution is one that adapts easily
and immediately to changing circumstances or simply one whose amendment procedures are
relatively simple. For instance, constitutions, such as those of the United Kingdom and New
Zealand, may be altered by a simple majority vote in the legislature.

C. Constitution based on degree of practice

6
On the basis of the degree to which constitution of state observed in practice, or on the basis of
the relationship between constitutional rules and laws and principles, on the one hand, and the
practice of the government (the workings) of the constitution, on the other hand, we can have
effective and Nominal Constitution of State.

1. Effective Constitution: Effective constitution denotes to a situation in which

government/citizens practices correspond to the provisions of the constitution. Thus, an effective
constitution of state requires not merely the existence of constitutional rules and laws

but also the capacity of those rules and laws to constrain or limit government behavior and
activities, and establish Constitutionalism.

2. Nominal constitution: the constitution accurately describes government’/citizens’ limits yet

in practice either or both fail to behave accordingly. In short when the constitution only remains
to have paper value or when there is absence of constitutionalism. This is a constitution of state
that shows the texts, principles, rules and laws that may accurately describe the government
behavior but fail to limit government behavior and activities in practice. Therefore, a nominal
Constitution is not observed in practice but in form.

D. Based on the kind of state structure

Constitutions either concentrate powers at the centre or distribute it among the different branches
and levels of government. Such a constitution is called unitary and federal constitution
respectively. This classification of constitution is based on the kind of state structure made by the
constitution. In this regard, it can be classified as federal or unitary.

1. Federal Constitution: Federal constitution is one that distributes power among the different
units of a state administration. But the model that is followed by constitutions in distributing
state power differs from each other. Some constitutions purely classify and decentralize power
between the central government and regional/local units and such constitutions are referred as
federal constitutions. In many states, for example, the United States of America, Canada,
Australia and Malaysia, there exists a division of powers between central government and the
individual states or provinces which make up the federation. The powers divided between the
federal government and states or provinces will be clearly set down in the constituent document.

2. Unitary Constitution: On the other hand, in unitary constitution state power is concentrated
in the hands of the central government. And the central government can establish or abolish the
lower levels of government; determine their composition, and their power and functions. In this
case the local government has no guarantee for their existence. Powers and responsibilities are
delegated to them by the central government. The constitution of the unitary state presents a very
different arrangement from constitution of federal state outlined above.

5.4. Constitutionalism

7
It refers to a doctrine that governments should be faithful to their constitutions because the rules
and laws so provided are all that can protect citizens’ rights from arbitrary actions and decisions
of the government. It is being subject to limitations and that citizens and governments operate in
accordance with the general rules and laws rather than arbitrary. This is because the rules and
laws so provided are all that can protect citizens’ rights from arbitrary actions and decisions of
the government. In other words, constitutionalism is the belief that constitution is the best
arrangement of affairs in a society. Hence, the essential elements for constitutionalism are
constitution and its effective implementation.

5.5. The Constitutional Experience of Ethiopia: Pre and Post 1931

5.5.1. Traditional Constitution (Pre- 1931)

Ethiopia has a very little experience with a written constitution in spite of its long history of state
formation. For this reason, the first written form of constitution promulgated in Ethiopia in 1931.
But before that the country has a far back constitutional history of unwritten form. Such lack of

written constitution does not necessarily implicate the total absence of constitutional rules and
principles in the legal history of the country.

Beginning in the 13th Century until the early 20th Century the Ethiopian Orthodox Church was
the chief legitimator of monarchical rule. However, the rights and obligations of the Crown and
its subjects were not spelled out in a written secular constitution. Instead, there was developed by
monks of the Church an elaborate set of codes rooted in an Ethiopian national epic. Despite the
fact of existence of constitutionally significant documents in traditional Ethiopia, no written
constitution in the modern sense formed the basis for the constitutional process. Thus, documents
like the Kebra Nagast, the Fatha Nagast and serate mengest from the 13th Century until the
early 20th Century were the precursors to the formal written Ethiopian national constitutions of
the modern era.

Fetha Negest

The Fetha Negest (The Law of Kings) was a religious and secular legal provision than being a
definite constitution. Law of the Kings, is a collection of laws which in use in Christian Ethiopia
for many centuries. It was originally written in Arabic by the Coptic Egyptian writer Abu-l
Fada’il Ibn al-Assal (commonly known as Ibn al-Assal) when Cyril III was the Patriarch of
Alexandria (1235-1243). It was designed by monks in the Church the same time Kebre Negest
penned. It set out the laws and regulations that were used to govern all activities of the Ethiopia
society in the late middle age. It was used as the sources of constitutional, civil, and criminal
laws. It was compiled from the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Roman law. It serves
as both religious laws and legal provisions of state. It was fundamental laws upon which the
government and the administration were based and the king vested with absolute power. The
throne was hereditary, the king was thought to be appointed divinely, that is derives his power

8
directly from God. It contains the idea of divine rights of kings with the assumption that rules
have a God given power.

Kibre Negest

Kibre Negest was another traditional document that has constitutional relevance. Literally, Kibre
Negest means glory of king. The Kebra Nagast (The Glory of Kings) was written to document
for the first time the mythical origins of the royal house. This document was written by six
Tigrean clerics and completed in the early 14th Century. It was the most important traditional
document that even defined who should become king in Ethiopia i.e., it determine the succession
of the throne in Ethiopia. It was the principal sources of legitimacy for the kings. This document
takes the Ethiopian history back to the Solomonic dynasty, where the queen of Sheba made
romantic tripe to King Solomon of Israel and gave birth to the first Ethiopia king Menelik I.
Based on this the document determined that any king in Ethiopia must descend from the
Solomonic dynasty or must have such blood relationship with the dynasty.

Ser’ate Mengist

Ser’ate Mengist was another traditional document that had been used as constitution by the
traditional rulers before [Link] ser’ate Mengist was one of the traditional documents of the
nineteenth century that provided certain administrative protocol and directives in the 19th
century. The Ser’ate Mengist can hardly be considered to be a document of Constitutional Law
in its widest sense. Nonetheless, as it is the first document known to have been used for
allocating power among the Crown, its dignitaries and the Church, by means of “... a protocol of
ceremonies which had to be consulted whenever occasions required it…” and tried to lay out a
pattern of succession to power, though the problem of primogeniture was more theoretical than
practical as incessant rivalries among members of the royal house intermittently switched lines.

5.5.2. The 1931 First Written Constitution

first written form of constitution was promulgated on July16, 1931 by Emperor Haile Selassie,
the era of unwritten form of constitution came to an end. The constitution reinforced the
traditional position of the emperor as ‘Siyume Egziabiher, Niguse Negast Za Ethiopia’ which
literally means: Elect of God, King of Kings of Ethiopia’ but on the other marked the end of the
role of the nobility or at least the gradual reduction moral and of their role in local leadership, the
traditional check against the power of the king of kings, to insignificance.

It is believed that both internal and external factors forced the development of the 1931
constitution. Externally, the introduction of the 1931 constitution was the result of the growing
interaction between Ethiopia and the external world, particularly the western European countries.
Emperor Haile Silassie developed strong aspiration to view Ethiopia as a modern state to the rest
of the world. The emperor embodied the state itself and was the source and repository of all state
power. The emperor had to convince the world that his country was modernizing and taking her

9
place among the civilized states. A few years before that it became a member of League of
Nations, over some nations’ objection that it was not “civilized enough” to join the club of
civilized nations. The constitution unequivocally declared that the sole basis of legitimate
authority was the emperor, and that all titles and appointments descended from him. For
instance, Article 6 of the constitution declares that: In the Ethiopian Empire supreme power rests
in hands of the emperor However, the 1931 constitution was failed to achieve external goals as
intended by the emperor.

Internally, the 1931 constitution was intended to provide a legal framework for the suppression
of the powerful traditional nobilities to the emperor. The emperor has a deep interest of
centralizing the state power in the internal politics of the country. This was effectively done by
absolutist nature of the constitution. It was designed to unify and centralize all state power in the
hands of the monarch. This also marked the beginning of the culmination of the struggle for
centralization, which began with the attempt at unification by emperors during the 19th century
and reached its consolidation under the absolutist rule of Emperor Haile Selassie to be further
reinforced by the military. The consequence was the alienation of the bulk of the regional actors
leading to the center- periphery polemics.

5.5.3. The Revised Constitution of 1955

The 1931 constitution was revised and replaced by the revised constitution of 1955. There were
constellations of social and political events that urged the revision of the 1931 constitution. The
revision of the 1931 constitution was urged by both internal and external factors. The Revised
Constitution continued to reinforce the process of centralization. The sketchy provisions
regarding the powers and prerogatives of the Emperor were extensively elaborated in the new
Constitution. The Constitution spent one chapter settling the issue of succession on the rule of
male primogeniture. Detailed provisions vested in the Emperor wide powers over the military,
foreign affairs, local administration and so forth. Interestingly enough it also contained an
elaborate regime of civil and political rights for the subjects. In theory, the Constitution was the
supreme law of the land governing even the Emperor. It contemplated even an independent
ministerial government responsible to the monarch and parliament, an elected chamber and
independent judiciary but these liberal provisions were overshadowed by executive prerogatives
reserved to the Emperor who exercised them expansively. Despite the apparent inclusion of the
notion of separation of powers, little change was introduced regarding the position of the
Emperor. He was both the head of state and of the government and he continued to oversee the
judiciary through his Chilot (Crown Court). Fourteen years after the end of a five year colonial
suppression by the Italians in 1941, a revised constitution was embraced in the Ethiopian legal
system in 1955. It was revised because of internal and external factors mainly to cope up with the
social and political dynamics of the then period, global politics, and Ethio-Eritrean federation.
This revised version of the 1931 constitution comes with a slight modification in the structure of
the system of governance, limiting the power of the emperor to a certain extent and a relatively
better recognition of rights and freedoms. However, like its predecessor, the constitution declares

10
the inviolability of the Emperor’s dignity and the power of appointing and dismissing members
of the parliament and other offices were in the hand of the Emperor. The federation of Eritrea
with Ethiopia led to the addition of two new documents in to the Ethiopia legal system. These
were the federal act and the Eritrean constitution. The federal act was a document that specified
the terms of agreements for the federation between Eritrea and Ethiopia. The Eritrean were
established their own constitution with the support of UN. This constitution incorporated the
human rights provisions of the universal declaration of human rights and other progressive
concepts. It also implied a more liberal government that incorporated the values and ideas of a
democratic society as the result of colonial heritage and the influences of United Nations. Both
documents were far modern and better than the existing traditional 1931 constitution of the
imperial government. Thus, the emperor was forced to revise the 1931 Constitution.

5.5.4. The 1987 Constitution of People’s Democratic Republic Ethiopia (PDRE)

Immediately after came to power, the Dergue setup the Provisional Military Administrative
Council (PMAC) type of temporary government. The Provisional Military Administration was
also in the process of reconstituting itself. To legitimize itself within and broad it had, at least, to
take off the uniform and appear in a civil dress. The PMAC presented itself for elections through
a new party- the Workers’ Party of Ethiopia. The party became the vanguard communist party.
The establishment of the Dergue inevitably brought profound changes in the country. After
coming to power the Dergue issued a series of decrees and proclamations that was used as legal
rules until the adoption of 1987 constitution. It took sweeping measures through series of decrees
and proclamations that includes nationalization of rural and urban land, extra urban houses,
private schools and factories by passing series. In the Article 3, state would control key
production, distribution and service enterprises, which legalized the massive nationalization of
private businesses after the government came to power in 1974. However, these, decrees and
proclamations cannot be given a constitutional status because it does not touch basic
constitutional issues. This may lead us to the conclusion that the time from 1974-1987 was a
period of constitutional vacuum in Ethiopia. Though it was late, during the Dergue regime a new
constitution was adopted in 1987. The regime facilitated the adoption of a new constitution,
through a constitutional commission, which was different in its nature form the constitutions of
its predecessors. The People’s Democratic Republic Ethiopia constitution (1987) was different
from the 1931 and the 1955 imperial constitutions in that constitution:

 State and religion were separated (issue of secularism was included in the constitution)
for the first time;
 State the political power and sovereignty were declared to be the preserve of the working
people of Ethiopia.
 contains provisions on democratic and human rights;
 recognized the different cultural identities and the equality of Nation and Nationalities;
 Introduced a party system by giving recognition to the workers party of Ethiopia. Thus,
leading to a transition from a none party system to a single party system;

11
  aimed at the principles of Marxist and Leninist ideology;
 Aimed at giving power to the peoples so that they exercise through referendum, local
and national assembly.

Practically, however, the 1987 constitution was not different from the 1931 and 1955
constitutions.

5.5.5. The 1995 (FDRE) Constitution

The FDRE constitution has a wider coverage of both human and democratic rights. Of the total
106 articles of the constitution just about one third (approximately 33 articles) is devoted to the
discussion of rights. While the democratic rights enshrined in the constitution tend to be
essentially group-oriented and political in nature the human rights on the other hand are
individualistic and natural.

The 1995 Constitution has some salient features. Getahun (2007: 79) mentioned the
“introduction of a federal form of governance and the assignment of the competence of
determining constitutionality to the second chamber of the parliament” among the other things.
Besides, the FDRE (1995) Constitution takes a breakthrough departure in the constitutional
history of the country by embodying many of the core egalitarian principles including the
principle of self-determination of collectivities, rule of law, democracy, development,
fundamental rights and freedoms, equality and non-discrimination, sustainable peace and
affirmative action in its preamble part. In the second chapter, the Constitution gives recognition
to five fundamental principles; to be precise the principles of popular sovereignty (art. 8),
constitutionalism and constitutional supremacy (art. 9), sanctity of human rights (art. 10),
secularism (art. 11) and accountability and transparency of government (Art.12). The
Constitution embodied fundamental principles, which give a background to many of the rules
that emerge in subsequent Chapters there by setting the framework for a better understanding and
interpretation of the rules.

5.6. Democracy and Democratization

5.6.1. Defining Democracy

Democracy literally means the government of the people or government of the majority.
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. Hence, in its
original sense democracy means “rule by the people”. Gradually, however, the meaning of this
term is evolving and changing substantively. Hence, democracy may mean different things for
different people and in different times. You may have already heard about the most common
definition of democracy: “the government of the people, by the people and for the people”, given
by former US President Abraham Lincoln. To put it another way, we can say that a government

12
comes from the people; it is exercised by the people, and for the purpose of the people’s own
interests.

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. Moreover,
the definition entails, among others, in democratic system, state power involves compromise and
bargaining in decision-making process in a democratic system. One of the mostly quoted
definitions of (modern day) democracy is the one given by Joseph Schumpeter (1943: 269),
which defines democracy as an “institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in
which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the
people’s vote”. In democracies, rulers are held accountable for their actions in the public realm
and citizens act indirectly through the competition and cooperation of their elected
representatives.

Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as the virtues of what he called ‘government of the people,
by the people, and for the people’. In so doing, he defined between two contrasting notions of
democracy. The first, ‘government by the people’, is based upon the idea that the public
participates in government and indeed governs itself: popular self-government. The second,
‘government for the people’, is linked to the notion of the public interest and the idea that
government benefits the people, whether or not they themselves rule. The classical conception of
democracy, which endured well into the nineteenth century, was firmly rooted in the ideal of
popular participation and drew heavily upon the example of Athenian democracy. The
cornerstone of Athenian democracy was the direct and continuous participation of all citizens in
the life of their polis or city-state.

Democracy can also be conceived as the institutionalization of freedom. That means democracy
is a set of ideas and principles as well as procedures and practices about human and democratic
rights, and freedoms. In this case, it refers to the process of organizing agencies that can watch
the respect of rights and freedoms, the signing and ratification of international treaties and
conventions and introduction of these rights and freedoms in the fundamental law of a state. As
such, institutionalization of freedom is possible by the application of constitutional government,
human rights and equality before law and the like. In this regard, freedom means responsibility
to do in line with national interest and then answerable for one’s actions and inactions.

If one maintains the definition of democracy to be a government system in which supreme power
is vested in and exercised by people, two broad ways of exercising it can be singled out namely
direct and indirect democracy. Direct democracy implies a form of government in which the
right to make political decisions is exercised directly by the whole body of citizens acting under
procedures of majority rule. It is also known as pure/classical democracy. Every decision
concerning the government is decided based on popular vote. This kind of democracy was

13
mainly practiced in Ancient Greece city states. As the city states were relatively had small
population it was manageable to conduct direct democracy. In modern society/state, because of
the population size of countries direct democracy has lost its validity and substituted by indirect/
representative democracy. However even in modern times there are some cases that governments
applied direct democracy. These include referendum, recall, initiative and plebiscite. Indirect
democracy on the other hand refers to a form of government in which citizens exercise their
rights and freedoms and discharge their obligations not in person but through representatives
chosen by themselves. Citizens will submit their sovereignty for their representatives. The
representatives will act on the behalf of the citizens they are representing.

Like all regimes, democracies depend upon the presence of rulers, persons who occupy
specialized authority roles and can give legitimate commands to others. What distinguishes
democratic rulers from nondemocratic ones like monarchy, aristocracy and dictatorship are the
means by which governments/rulers come to power and the practices that hold governments
accountable for their actions. However, for democracy to flourish, specific procedural norms
must be charted (procedural democracy) and fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens must
be respected (substantive democracy). The overall concept of modern democracy constitutes
three key portions: democracy, constitutionalism, and respect for human rights. Each needs to
happen in a given polity or political system for it to be a genuine democracy. Thus, any state or
system of government that miscarries to levy such limits upon itself, that fails to follow the rule
of law with regard to its own procedures, should not be considered democratic. Robert Dahl
(1982:11) provides the most generally accepted listing of procedural minimal conditions must be
fulfilled for modern political democracy to be existent. The major ones are:

o Control over government decisions about policy is constitutionally vested in elected officials.

o Elected officials are chosen in frequent and fairly conducted elections in which coercion is
comparatively uncommon.

o Practically all adults have the right to vote in the election of officials.

o Practically all adults have the right to run for elective offices.

o Citizens have a right to express themselves without the danger of severe punishment on
political matters broadly defined.

o Citizens have a right to seek out alternative sources of information. Moreover, alternative
sources of information exist and are protected by law.

o Citizens also have the right to form relatively independent associations or organizations,
including independent political parties and interest groups.

Exercise: Think about the following questions;

14
 How does limited government help to fulfill the purposes of democracy?

 What responsibilities does democracy place upon citizens?

5.6.2. Values and Principles of Democracy

Democracy is a popular political notion in today’s world, fair and free elections are the
prerequisite of democracy and rule of the law, protection and freedom of human rights and
supremacy of the constitution are important elements in true democratic system. There are some
key elements that distinguish states organized under democratic principles from dictatorship. The
respect of fundamental freedom and fundamental rights, elections, citizen’s participation,
equality, rule of law, separation of powers, democratic pluralism, and multi-party political
system are among these key elements or sometimes called fundamental principles of democracy.

Hence, democracy is more than just a set of specific government institutions; it rests upon a well
understood group of values, attitudes, and practices - all of which may take different forms and
expressions among cultures and societies around the world. Democracies rest upon fundamental
principles, not uniform practices. There are three core values that are central in the discussion of
the concept of democracy. These are values of liberty/freedom, justice and equality. Let us now
briefly look at what each of them means.

o Liberty: This value includes personal freedom (to mean that Individuals should be free from
arbitrary arrest and detention and also their homes/property should be secured from unreasonable
searches and seizures), political freedom ( to imply that people of a nation have the right to
participate freely in the political process such as elections without being subject to arbitrary
arrest, harassment and electoral corruption such as buying votes, intimidation and obstruction of
voter) and economic freedom ( to mean that citizens should have the right to acquire, use,
transfer and dispose of private property without unreasonable governmental interference and
more over to enjoy right to seek employment wherever one pleases, to change employment at
will and to engage in any lawful labor unions or business corporations).

o Justice: This value of democracy can be understood in three general senses of fairness. These
are distributive Justice (the sense of distributing benefits and burdens in society via agreed up on
standards of fairness), corrective Justice (the sense that a proportional response should be in
place to correct wrongs and injuries) and procedural justice (the idea that procedures used for
gathering information and making decisions should be guided by such principles as impartiality
and openness of proceedings).

o Equality: Three notions of equality are of particular significance here for our discussion. These
are political equality (implying that all people who attain the status of adult hood have equal
political rights or in short one man-one vote- one value), social equality (implying that there
should be no social hierarchy at individual and collective level or no discrimination what so
ever) and economic equality (implying that all peoples of a country deserve equal and fair

15
assessment to the national resources services). Although we can be exhaustive in our list, the
followings constitute some of the fundamental principles of democracy. These are;

A. Popular Sovereignty

This type of sovereignty is associated with power and legitimacy. In this way, the citizen as a
whole is the sovereign of the state and holds the ultimate authority over public officials and their
policies. Consent is given by the people through their regularly elected representatives and
through approval of all constitutional changes. Popular sovereignty also means that the people
have the right to withdraw their consent when the government fails to fulfill its obligations under
the constitution. On the other side, popular sovereignty in democracy assumes the principle of
majority rule, which means that within constitutional limits, majorities should have the right to
make political decisions. Such decisions are made within the framework of regular elections and
include the choice of who should be elected to public office and what laws should be passed by
legislative bodies.

The notion that sovereignty came from the people (popular sovereignty) became one of the main
foundations of modern democracy and constitutional principle. John Locke’s notion of popular
sovereignty contrasted with a later model developed from the philosophy of the French
intellectual Jean-Jacques Rousseau in the 18th century. Rousseau asserted that sovereignty was
based in the general will of a population (or the common good) and that there was no distinction
between the source of sovereignty and its exercise. The general will was consequently the basis
for national sovereignty and the means through which state authority was manifested. It was
expressed through the structure of government (which Rousseau argued should be a form of
direct democracy but was implemented as a representative system). The general will could and
would supersede the individual rights of citizens.

To this end, sovereignty implies the power to have a final say on an issue. The preamble of the
Ethiopian Constitution for instance says, “We the Nation, Nationality and Peoples... adopted….
this Constitution”, expressly providing the doctrine of popular sovereignty, or rule by the people.
Article 8 of the Constitution is more explicit in providing that ultimate political authority resides
not in the government or in any single government official, but rather, in the Nations, Nationality
and Peoples of Ethiopia. In democracy, the peoples own the government. The delegation of
powers in no way damages or diminishes the peoples’ right as the supreme sovereign. The
government's legitimacy remains dependent on the people, who retain the inalienable right
peacefully to alter their government or amend their constitution. Besides, there are situations
where the people’s sovereignty in a democracy is expressed through their direct participation.

B. Constitutional Supremacy

This is a principle that puts the constitution at the highest level in the hierarchy of laws.
Constitutions are laws about the political procedures to be followed in making laws. They are
supreme laws, taking precedence over all others, and defining how all the others should be made.

16
Some analysts call them ‘meta-rules’ (rules about how to make rules), but the German
constitution calls them ‘the Basic Law’. As a mother of law, it is original law by which the
system of government is created, and to which the branches of government must look for all their
powers and authority. It is original because it is directly made by the people as the direct
expression of the will of the people. All other laws are secondary or derivate being commands of
representatives of the sovereign. Because, after all, the direct will of the people outrights the will
of any other single individual. Thus, according to this principle, the constitution is above all laws
and organs of a state. This principle dictates all laws and governmental or non-governmental acts
to be under the constitution. It also implies that if an act is found to be against the constitution, it
would out of effect or void. In the Ethiopian case, Article 9 of the FDRE constitution states that
the highest power and authority is vested in the nations, nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia to
indicate that they are the sovereign in the land.

C. Rule of Law

In contemporary time, almost in all countries, the concept of the rule of law has been reflected
either in their constitutions or statutes. There are two aspects of the rule of law that are
important. First, the law should govern the people and the people should obey the law. And
second, the law must be capable of being obeyed (‘good’ laws). This made the rule of law
different from ‘rule of men’ where the people were ruled by ‘bad’ laws. In order to maintain the
rule of law, an institution, independent from the legislative or executive or other forces, impartial
and free from interference or influence is required. In this case, the rule of law is the principle
under which a government exercises its authority in accordance with clear, objective, and
publicly disclosed laws. Laws must be adoptedand enforced through established procedure and
incompliance with international recognized standards.

The rule of law is a key component of a social order grounded in consistency, predictability, and
transparency. It is the foundation of a democratic society-the means by which people protect
their liberty. The principle is intended to be a safeguard against arbitrary rule. Thus, the concept
of rule of law is embodying the predominance of law over unrestricted authority; equality before
the law; and the law asserting individual rights. This also implies that due process of law and
lack of arbitrary treatment recognized and this has been added to the maintenance of order as
necessary for law to prevail. It requires government abided by written rules and statutes rather
than the arbitrary or absolutist “rule of man”.

D. Secularism

Secularism referred to as an approach that asserts to dismiss or ignores God, the divine, the
supernatural, and other religious viewpoints when discussing or participating in politics.
Emphasis is placed on human excellence, potential, fulfillment, “actualization,” and so on,
instead of the Godly, providential, or spiritual dimensions of life. Contemporary expressions of
secularism occur in the mainstream liberal media, business, public education, and social

17
organizations. In church and state matters, secularists demand a strict separation of religion and
politics, keeping prayer and religious instruction out of government, public schools, and other
common institutions.

Secularism is mostly understood to mean separation of state and religion. This principle demands
strict separation of religious and political affairs hence state and church operations basing on the
philosophy that individuals and groups in a free society should have freedom of conscience (the
right to decide for themselves what to believe in which case it can be threatened if government
becomes religious and supports some religions but not others). It asserts the freedom of religion,
and freedom from the government imposition of religion upon the people, and absence of state
privileges or subsidies to religions. Government should do only what is necessary to keep the
peace and prevent one religious group from violating the rights of others. To achieve this goal
government should not interfere with religion in any way.

E. Separation of Powers

The doctrine of separation of powers refers to the idea that political power should be divided
among several bodies or officers of the state as a precaution against too much concentration of
power. Most of the literature on federalism has emphasized the relationship between national and
sub-national governments but overlooked the organization of sub-national powers. Likewise, the
debate on the separation of powers in presidential and parliamentary systems has neglected the
role of federalism in strengthening the separation of powers. A federal polity is a constitutional
arrangement that creates executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government in its
constituent units. This definition is applied to all countries that are classified as federations, or
unions.

In order to promote accountability of government, hinder corruption and protect the fundamental
freedoms of citizens from the will of the government of the day, it is essential to keep separate
the parliament’s power to make laws, from the executive’s power to administer laws, and from
the judiciary’s power to hear and determine disputes according to the law. This separation is
designed to protect the people from a concentration of power, and the ability of individuals or
groups to manipulate government for personal gain and to ignore the will of the people.
Separation of powers is, therefore, an essential feature of constitutional government. Further,
constitutionalism ensures that the principal powers of government legislative, executive, and
judicial-were not monopolized by any single branch.

F. Free, Fair and Periodic Election

In order to establish democratic government, first the election should be free means all interested
parties to the election should get the chance to participate in the election. Secondly, fair means
after giving the chance of participation all of them should be treated equally without
discrimination. Finally, the election should be conducted periodically with fixed duration.

18
G. Majority Rule Minority Right

After conducting democratic election, those who gets the majority vote will establish a
government. The policies, programs and decisions of the majority will govern the country while
the right of the minority respected

H. Protection and Promotion of Human Rights

Human rights are those naturally given values that reflect respect for human life and dignity
hence their protection and promotion test the legitimacy and constitionality of a democratic
government.

I. Multiparty System

Democracy also requires having several political parties working together in one political
system. These political parties should get equal constitutional guarantee, support and treatment to
compete for elections and present their offer freely to the voters. That enables to establish market
of ideas to the citizens and encourage parties to come with better alternatives to be elected
among the competitors.

5.6.3. Democratization

Democracy is a variable not a fixed phenomenon; it changes and develops over time, so that
what was regarded as good democratic practice a hundred years ago may not be now. Democracy
does not automatically arise out of “primal mud” but needs to be planted and nourished by years
of practice and experience through various levels of democratization process. Democratization is
the process of transitions from nondemocratic to democratic regimes that occur within a
specified period of time and that significantly outnumber transitions in the opposite direction
during that period. It is not a simple process and will taken an extend period of time to complete,
if it wishes to be prosperous. There are three main elements in democratization such as the
removal of the authoritarian regime, installation of a democratic regime, and the consolidation,
or long-term sustainability of the democratic regime.

By democratization simply we refer to the institutionalization and routinization of democratic

ideals and principles and their effective functioning. Moreover, democratization is a conclusive
and extended process, which involves the emergence or presence of the formal elements of a
democratic political system such as the recognition of basic civil and political rights, multiparty
system, electoral system and etc. Democratization in this sense, involves the full-scale transition
from authoritarian regime and its replacement by democratically elected regime. It involves the
rupturing all the links and connections of authoritarian leaders, party or army to the state
apparatus. In this sense, democratization represents a true rapture and a political transformation.

5.6.4. Actors of Democratization

19
[Link]. Political Parties

The centrality of political parties for modern democracy is generally accepted both by
contemporary scholars and by policy-makers charged with fostering the development of newly
emerging democracies or with improving the quality of democracy in established democratic
politics. Despite their relatively recent appearance on the political stage, parties have put such a
strong mark on contemporary politics and democracy that twentieth century democracy could be
best described as party democracy.

It has been argued that parties are ―endemic to democracy, an unavoidable part of democracy.
In a democratic system, political parties provide the proper mode of functioning for the
government so that the majority party or a combination of parties controls the government, while
other parties serve as the opposition and attempt to check the abuses of power by the ruling
party. Citizens extend their desires, needs, and problems to the government through the political
parties. In fact, political parties represent an essential and important tool that acts as a bridge
between a society and its government. The existence of a strong and viable opposition keeps the
ruling party alert. It is also the duty of political parties to promote policies that will educate the
people about how a democratic system functions and offer different policy packages to the
electorates.

[Link]. Media

Mass Media and Democracy are always related to each other. Media is a mirror of the society
and how democratic a society is, can be represented through media. Opinion leaders influence
the public opinion regarding political leaders and political system of any country. Hence, media
has an influential role in strengthening democracy. Hence, media and democracy have strong
association. Countries which are strong democracies always have strong and free media. Studies
show that a free and democratic society is not possible without an independent, free and
responsible media and active civil society. Saeed (2009) argues that the maturing of mass
democracy in most societies has gone hand-in-hand with development of mass communication as
an important player in the organization of public life and opinion formation on issues significant
to the masses. To better understand how free press enhance democracy, we need to look at
various and distinct role of media, namely, media as source of information, media as a watchdog,
media as a civic forum and media as an agenda setter. Norris (2006) measures how press
freedom affects democracy, good governance and human development and concludes that there
is a strong relation between the critical role of the free press, as one of the major components of
democracy and good governance. Media in all countries serves as a watchdog, as a source of
information, a civic forum and an agenda [Link], the role of free media in processes
of democratization is straightforward. The free media serve as watchdogs, monitoring those in
power and provide citizens with the information they need to be free and self-governing and to
hold governments accountable for their actions. Therefore, freedom of the media is often

20
included in the measures developed to assess and compare the quality of democracy across
countries.

[Link]. Civic Societies

Civil society is the set of civil rights, including primarily everyone’s right to participate in public
life. Civil society forms the backbone of democracy. Larry Diamond (1999: 220-221) defines
civil society as “the realm of organized social life that is open, voluntary, bound by a legal order
or set of shared rules”. Diamond stated that civil society encompasses “private citizens acting
collectively to make demands to the state or to express in the public sphere their interests,
preferences and ideas or to check the authority of the state and make it accountable” (ibid: 221).
Following Diamond’s definition, civil society may contain a wide range of establishments
concerned with public matters. Civil society may comprise civic, issue-oriented, religious, and
educational interest groups and associations.

In large multicultural developing countries like Ethiopia, there are numerous gaps left by the
government in the development and democratization process. Civil societies have a potential of
playing numerous momentous roles for democratic development and consolidation. To mention
some: limiting the power of the state more generally, including challenging the abuses of
authority; monitoring human rights and strengthening the rule of law; monitoring elections and
enhancing the overall quality and credibility of the democratic process; educating citizens about
their rights and responsibilities; building a culture of tolerance and civic involvement;
incorporating marginal groups into the political process and enhancing the latter's responsiveness
to societal interest and need; providing alternative means, outside the state, for communities to
raise their level of material development; opening and pluralizing the flows of information; and
building a constituency for economic as well as political reforms.

Human rights are basic to humanity. They apply to all people everywhere. An understanding of
human rights is an important part of our individual status as human beings and of our collective
status as members of the global community of humankind.

The notion of human rights infers that fundamental entitlements belong to every member of the
human race. These are privileges someone can claim just because he/she is a human being
without any discrimination based on condition. The basic idea of human rights lies in people’s
recognition of the need to protect and affirm every other person’s individual dignity. It is also
common to call them ‘natural’ rights, since they are natural entitlements to everyone. Hence, one
of the points most scholars in the field agreed on is the fact that human rights derived from
fundamental human dignity and worth.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, Article 2), stipulates that human rights
belong to every human being “without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language,
religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status” (Art.
2). Thus, the only criteria someone must fulfil to enjoy these rights is being a human. However,

21
there is no universally agreed definition of the term human rights. Peoples understanding towards
the notion of human rights is changing from time to time. One prominent way of defining human
rights is to present them as a special kind of claim on others. For example, the right to education
denotes that everyone is entitled with the privilege to good education and the state have an
obligation to provide and fulfil the needed resources, structures, infrastructures and services.

Human rights provide the minimum standards indispensable for people to live worth-living life.
Human rights allow people to live the life they deserved to live, they aspire to live, and to live a
life with dignity and equality. Human rights give people a full control of their life and the
freedom to choose how they live, how they express themselves, and what kind of government
they want to support, among many other things. Human rights also guarantee people the means
necessary to satisfy their basic needs, such as food, housing, and education, so they can take full
advantage of all opportunities. Finally, by guaranteeing life, liberty, and security, human rights
protect people against abuse by individuals and groups who are more powerful. The United
Nations stated that human rights ensure that a human being will be able to fully develop and use
human qualities such as intelligence, talent, and conscience and satisfy his or her spiritual and
other needs.

Human rights are not just theoretical; they are recognized standards to which governments are to
be held accountable. There are basic tenets underlying human rights as they apply to all people.
Human rights are entitlements naturally endowed to all persons equally, universally and for a life
time. These are entitlements everyone can claim just because they are human beings. The only
precondition someone needs to fulfill in order to claim human rights is being a human. Hence,
they are necessarily imperative in forming and preserving a fair and civilized society. Human
rights are established upon some main principles including universality, inalienability,
indivisibility and interdependence.

When we say human rights are universal, it is to show their worldwide applicability. This means
all rights are expected to be applied equally everywhere, every-time and to everyone in this
world. They transcend time, geographical and cultural disparities. However, this is not to mean
that no room is available to contextual realities and value differences among various
communities around the globe. Article one of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR here after) stipulated that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and
rights.” It also stated that human rights belong to every human being “without distinction of any
kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status” (Art. 2).

Human rights are inalienable. That means you cannot lose these rights any more than you can
stop to be a human being. These entitlements are essential to live a human or worth-living life.
Human rights are not luxury or privileges we only enjoy after some preconditions are met, rather
part of our basic necessities. We may not die, but we cannot live the life we supposed to live a
human creature without our rights and freedoms. Human rights are indivisible. This implies that

22
human rights are inherent to the dignity of every human person. It is not possible for one to live a
worth living life without the full respect of these rights; this concerns all the civil, cultural,
economic, political or social rights endowed for all human beings.

Human rights are interdependent and interrelated. This is to mean that all rights have equal
weight/importance and it is not possible for one to fully enjoy any of his/her right without the
others. For instance, one cannot enjoy his/her right to life without his/her rights of health,
education, freedom from torture and inhuman treatment, right to an adequate standard of living
and the like. The violation of all these rights threatens one’s life and existence in general. That is
true for all our human rights, not possible to enjoy the one ignoring the other. That means we
cannot prioritize one right from others, because no right can stand on itself. The fulfillment of
one right often depends, wholly or in part, upon the fulfillment of others. The respect of one right
(e.g. right to life) is subjected to the respect of our other rights (e.g. right to an adequate standard
of living), and the vice versa. Thus, human rights are entitlements which apply to all equally, and
all have the right to take part in all the decisions that affect their lives.

The other important principle of human rights is the principle of equality and non-discrimination.
This principles pronounces that all individuals are equal as human beings and by virtue of the
inherent dignity of each human person. Accordingly, no one should face discrimination on the
basis of race, color, ethnicity, gender, age, language, sexual orientation, religion, political or
other opinion, national, social or geographical origin, disability, property, birth or other status as
recognized by many of the international and regional, national human rights frameworks.

5.7.2. Human Rights and Responsibilities

Human rights involve responsibility and duties toward other people and the community.
Individuals often have a responsibility to ensure that they exercise their rights with due regard
for the rights of others. For example, exercising freedom of speech should not infringe someone
else’s right to privacy. Human rights are part of a context of people living together in societies.
As part of this, there must be a legal, social and international order for human rights to be
realized effectively.

Promoting for the respect of human rights is one of the core missions of the UN and its agencies.
Besides, state parties to the UN are mandated with the promotion, protection and fulfillment of
human rights. Human rights protection and fulfillment is considered as one of the functions of
governments, one of the very reasons why people need a government or political system in
general. This is clearly states in various human rights instruments and resolutions issued by the
UN including the UN Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights (ICESC), Convention on the Rights of Children (CRC), Convention on all
forms Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Paris Principles. For instance, principle
63 (1 and 2) of the Paris Principles (1993) stipulated that:

23
A national institution shall be vested with competence to promote and protect human rights. A
national institution shall be given as broad a mandate as possible, which shall be clearly set forth
in a constitutional or legislative text, specifying its composition and its sphere of competence.
Mandates of state institutions in relation to human rights are also clearly stipulated in the FDRE
Constitution. The Constitution shows its dedication to human rights and freedoms by reserving
one of its eleven chapters, if not the biggest one, to human rights and fundamental freedoms. The
third chapter of the Constitution guarantees a list of civil, political, economic, social and cultural
rights (arts. 13 to 44) in consistence with the core international human rights instruments; mainly
the UDHR. The Constitution clearly declares the superior legal status given to international
human rights instruments over domestic laws in interpreting the constitutional provisions speak
human rights. Article 13 of the FDRE Constitution reads “the fundamental rights and freedoms
specified in this Chapter shall be interpreted in a manner conforming to the principles of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenants on Human Rights and
international instruments adopted by Ethiopia”.

5.7.3. Landmarks in Development of Human Rights

The modern human rights notions are the result of extended tussles to end many forms of
oppressions; including slavery, genocide, discrimination, and government tyranny, in history of
world societies. In their contemporary manifestation, human rights are a set of individual and
collective rights that have been formally promoted and protected through international and
domestic law since the adoption of UDHR in 1948. The following diagram shows the timeline of
major international human rights treaties or instruments with the dates of their adoption.

Source: UN, 2017

5.7.4. Rights Holders and Duty Bearers

Rights become rights when the job of identifying the two main actors is done. This works for
every rights we may possess as an individual or group. These are right holders and duty bearers.
Right holders are those who are entitled to enjoy, possess or claim a given right. Human rights
provisions usually started by mentioning the right holder using terms like “every human being,
all children, women, people with disability…” from that we can simple know for whom is a
given right intended. Duty bearers are those who carry the obligation of promoting, protecting,
and fulfilling these right to the right holders. There must be always someone you will claim the
protection, provision and fulfillment of your rights from and become accountable for any failures
to do so. The primary (not the only) duty bearer for almost all of our rights is the state. Besides,
individuals and other non-state actors may be named as duty bearers depending on the nature of
the right. Thus, it has been typically understood that individuals and certain groups are bearers of
human rights, while the state is the prime organ that can protect, provide and fulfil human rights.
Moreover, uninterrupted and cyclic relationship is expected among rights holders and duty
bearers. The rights holders should always claim their rights from the duty bearers and the duty

24
bearers should discharge their responsibility of promoting, protecting, and fulfilling the rights out
of sense of obligation or duty. The following diagram shows the relationship among rights
holders and duty bears from human rights perspective.

5.7.5. Categories of Human Rights

Human rights cover virtually every area of human activity. They include civil and political
rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom from torture. They also include economic and
social rights, such as the rights to health and education. Some rights apply to individuals, such as
the right to a fair trial: these are called individual rights. Others apply to groups of people, such
as the right to a healthy environment or to native title: these are called collective rights. There are
various ways used by different scholars to categories human rights. These writers use various
reference point in classifying rights in to different clusters. The common way of categorization is
the one developed by Karl Vasak (1982) who have classified Human Rights into three: First,
Second and Third generation rights. However, Vasak’s representation of generations is criticized
by many authors for its failure to capture the nature of human rights mainly in “one respect:
classes of human rights, unlike generations in life, don’t replace each other sequentially over
time” (Alston, 2000: 641). Carl Wellman states the problem in Vasak generational categorization
stunningly: “generations succeed one another, not only in that the members of one generation are
born before those of the next generation, but also in that parents tend to die before their children”
(Wellman, 2000: 641).

[Link]. Civil and Political Rights

Civil and political rights are the first generation rights which uphold the sanctity of the individual
before the law and guarantee his or her ability to participate freely in civil, economic, and
political society. Civil rights include such rights as the right to life, liberty and personal security,
equality before the law, protection from arbitrary arrest and the right to religious freedom and
worship. When protected, civil rights guarantee one's 'personhood' and freedom from state
sanctioned interference or violence. Political rights include such rights as the right to speech and
expression, assembly and association, vote and political participation. Political rights thus
guarantee individual rights to involvement in public affairs and the affairs of state.

Civil and political rights are seen as an immediately realizable right. This is to mean that all
states, regardless of their economic, social, cultural and political developments or realities, are
expected to ensure the realization of these rights immediately. No precondition could be
acceptable for any violations of civil and political rights. They have also been called as
‘negative’ rights to indicate the fact that they simply entail the absence of their violation in order
to be upheld. The state, as a primary duty bearer, is expected here to let citizens enjoy their rights
and freedoms and not intrude in their private life. Besides staying aside of the life of the rights
holders, the state is also responsible to protect them from any potential interventions from other

25
non-state actors; such as individuals, groups and organizations. Hence, protection is the main
obligation of the duty bearers for civil and political rights.

[Link]. Social and Economic Rights

In contrast to the above set of rights, the second generation (social, economic, and cultural) rights
are considered by many writers as an aspirational and programmatic set of rights that national
governments ought to strive to achieve through progressive implementation. Social and
economic rights include such rights as the right to education, health and wellbeing, work and fair
remuneration, form trade unions and free associations, leisure time, and the right to social
security. When protected, these rights help promote individual flourishing, social and economic
development, and self-esteem. Cultural rights include such rights as the right to the benefits of
culture, indigenous land, rituals, and shared cultural practices, and speak one's own language and
‘mother tongue’ education. Cultural rights are meant to maintain and promote sub-national
cultural affiliations and collective identities, and protect minority communities against the
incursions of national assimilationist and nation-building projects.

Unlike the civil and political rights, rights in this category are called ‘positive’ rights to indicate
that whose realization is highly subjected to the economic capability of states. One of the strong
counter-arguments to this false dichotomy is to assert that all rights are positive since the full
protection of all categories of human rights ultimately relies on the relative fiscal capacity of
states. For instance, the protection of property rights requires a well-funded judiciary, police
force, and fire service, as well as a well-developed infrastructure that can relay information,
goods, and services in the event that property is under threat in some way. The same is true for
the rights to vote. Besides to avoiding segregation and discrimination at the polls, running a free
and fair election requires a tremendous amount of financial support, technology, and
infrastructure. However, by claiming that all rights are positive, it is not to undermine the
negative characteristics or dimensions of human rights. Comprehensive understanding of human
rights requires the recognition of both positive and negative dimensions. Thus, for every rights,
we need to ask what the positive (those actions that states can take to provide resources and
policies for improving the protection of human rights) and negative (those actions that states do
(or not do) that deliberately violate (or protect) human rights) dimensions are, instead of trying to
classify whether a given category of rights are positive or negative.

Second generation rights are considered as “less fundamental” or unrealistic rights because of the
issues of justicialibility. Justiciability is not obviously the quality of economic, social and
cultural rights. For this category of rights there is a room for the state to justify duty failure
referring to lack of capacity, resources or finance. For instance, suppose you are living in
Ethiopia and you are still unemployed for some years after finishing college. You may argue that
“I have the right to work and fair remuneration, and should be taken as a violation of my human
right at the time the state fails fulfill or provide it to me”. This will be considered as human rights
violation only if the state is economically capable (in the condition to fulfil that right for every

26
citizen with the resources at hand). If the state able to justify that the needed resources and
finance to fulfil or provide that particular rights are not adequately available – then that will be
the end of the story. That means, the state’s duty failure and the violation of your right can be
justified. This makes many authors in the field to question the justiciability of most of the
economic, social and cultural rights.

Peace, Development and Environmental Rights

Generation First generation Second generation Third generation

rights rights rights

Category of rights Civil and political Socio-economic Solidarity rights

rights rights

State obligation Promoting and Providing and ?

protecting fulfilling

What is expected Non-interference Positive interference Positive involvement

from the State

Realization Immediate Progressive Progressive

Right holders Individuals (mostly) Groups (mostly) ?

Third generation (solidarity) rights are aimed to guarantee that all individuals and groups have
the right to share in the benefits of the earth's natural resources, as well as those goods and
products that are made through processes of economic growth, expansion, and innovation. Many
of these rights are transnational in nature. They requires redistribution of wealth, resources from
developed to developing nations. Solidarity rights also require global cooperation and shared
responsibility to world peace, development and the environment. Third Generation (solidarity)
rights include rights to public goods such as the right to development, the environment and
peace. The third generation rights are still considered as an emerging rights, where the rights
holders and duty bearers of the rights included under this category are yet to be identified clearly.
Think, for instance, about the right to peace or right to clean and protected environment. Whose
right are these? And whose responsibility? At this stage it is difficult to determine answer these
key questions, unfortunately. The following table provides the summary of the classification of
rights.

5.7.6. Derogations and Limitations on Human Rights

There are two conditions under which human rights can be restricted: limitation and derogation.
Limitations are lawful infringements of rights. Limitations are deviations from the standard

27
manner of dealing with rights imposed primarily to facilitate optimal use or exercise of rights in
a context of scarce public resources, space and time. Limitations can take the form of restrictions
and/or derogation. Restrictions are acceptable or justifiable limits of human rights during the
normal times. Restrictions circumscribed the manner, or place, and the extent to which rights can
be enjoyed or exercised in a particular set of circumstances, often in normal times. Derogation
means a temporary non-application and suspension of rights by the state in abnormal or
emergency (natural/artificial) situations.

Enjoyment of human rights is subject to limitations and these limitations are normally found in
constitutional human rights and international human rights treaties. But that limitation should not
be arbitrary, it should be based on legality, necessity, rationality and proportionality supposed to
be determined by the human rights law. Limitations may be made on the enjoyment of human
rights for the sake of: safeguarding of national security or public peace; the prevention of crimes;
the protection of health, public morality; the protection of the rights and freedom of others; and
safeguarding democratic institutions

In Ethiopia, for example, both federal and regional governments have constitutional powers to
limit exercising human rights since they have the power to declare state of emergency is their
respective domains. Regional states can declare in two conditions: natural disaster and
epidemics. Besides, the FDRE Constitution (art. 93) clearly specifies four conditions for such
declaration by the Federal Government. The Council of Ministers can declare a State of
Emergency in the following situations: 1) External Invasion, 2) Breakdown of law and order
when it: (i) endangers the constitutional order, (ii) cannot be controlled by regular law
enforcement, 3) Natural disaster, and 4) Epidemic.

5.7.7. Non-derogability of Human Rights

The concept of non-derogability has been one of the important aspects of the international human
rights laws and treaties. Some of the important treaties concerning human rights, including the
ICCPR have special provisions explaining whether its member states can derogate from certain
rights during some exceptional situations. States believe that some provisions of derogability are
necessary to allow them exercise their sovereign power during exceptional circumstances for the
greater good of their people. However, this kind of derogation is not unconditional and it has its
own limits.

There are also certain unique and inherent human rights, which can never be suspended under
any circumstances. For instance, the ICCPR, which also allows states to suspend some of the
rights under specific conditions, clearly mentions that some of the articles are non-derogable.
They are: right against arbitrary deprivation of life (art. 6); freedom from torture or cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment; and freedom from medical or scientific
experimentation without consent (art. 7); freedom from slavery and servitude (art. 8); freedom
from imprisonment for inability to fulfill a contractual obligation (art. 11); prohibition against the

28
retrospective operation of criminal laws (art. 15); right to recognition before the law (art. 16);
and freedom of thought, conscience and religion (art. 18).

The FDRE Constitution (art. 93(3[c])) states that rights under Articles 1, 18, 25, and sub-Articles
1 and 2 of Article 39 of the Constitution are non-derogable rights. However, it is good to
mention here that this is not to mean that all other rights are suspend-able anytime at the will of
the state. In this regard, Article 4 of ICCPR clearly established the specific conditions could be
used as a ground for derogation. Conditions like the existence of real emergency, threat to life of
a nation, official proclamation of emergency, and guarantee of non-discrimination are justifiable
grounds to suspend some of or all the derogable rights.

5.7.8. Implementation and Enforcement of Human Rights

[Link]. International Mechanisms and the International Bill of Human Rights

The very reason behind the establishment of the international law is ensuring global peace and
security, and help men to lead a worth-living life; a life with liberty, equality, and freedom from
violence. Hence, the main objectives of the international law and its institutions is in one way or
another related with the protection of human rights. The issues of human rights come into picture
in the international law starting from the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations on
October 24, 1945. The charter make protection of human rights one of the three main objectives
of the UN, in addition to preserving global peace and stimulating comprehensive development.
The United Nations has six prime organs, namely; the General Assembly, Security Council,
Economic & Social Council (ECOSOC), International Criminal Court (ICC), Office of the
Secretariat and the Trusteeship Council (Suspended operations-1994 with the independence of
Palau). The General Assembly, Security Council and ICC are functioning as the legislative (law
making), executive (law enforcing) and judiciary (law interpreting) organs of the UN
respectively. The Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) is established
under the ECOSOC, and is an organ particularly dedicated to the promotion, observance and
monitoring of human rights worldwide. The international bill of human rights is made up of
various treaty and charter based human rights instruments; treaties, covenants, charters and
declarations.

The UN Charter clearly stated that the organization is dedicated to help men live a life free from
fear of war, the promotion of human rights and the worth of human person and dignity of
mankind. It also seeks to establish justice, and promotes corporation between the States to
discharge their duties to create a just economic, social and cultural order wherein mankind can
realize the fundamental human rights in accordance with the principles of international law.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a human rights instruments considered
as the groundwork of most of the post-1945 codification of human rights. It is the basis for
human rights protection and promotion around the world and has been endorsed by all countries.
Many countries have included its provisions in their basic laws or constitutions (Used 2). Most of

29
the modern national, regional and international human rights regimes are established based on
this declaration. Many of the UN human rights instruments are drafted under the shadow of the
UDHR. Actually, almost all international human rights instruments comprises at least a
preambular reference to the Universal Declaration, as do many declarations adopted
unanimously or by consensus by the UN General Assembly. It has served as a model for most of
the laws, constitutional provisions and rules aimed at protecting citizen’s rights and freedoms.

The UDHR is not a binding instrument, but claimed to have great moral weight and popularity. It
is a declaration adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1948. Thus, no
obligation can be drawn from that instrument, since it is not a treaty based document. However,
its wider global acceptance is enabling it to be seen as a customary law. The UN claims that the
Declaration is the most translated document in the world to show its inclusive nature and spread
(UN, 2015: iii). Hence, beyond doubt the UDHR is most widely accepted declaration of its kind
(Walter, 2014: 121). The preamble of the UDHR states that “the General Assembly proclaims
this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all
peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this
Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for
these rights and freedoms […]” (UN, 1948: 1).

The first two provisions of the UDHR deals with its two core principles; equality and non-
discrimination.1 The following 21 articles (Articles 3 to 21) postulate civil and political rights. In
these articles, rights set forth include the right to life, liberty, a fair trial, free speech, privacy, of
personal security, and of movement, as well as freedom from slavery, torture, and arbitrary
arrest. The subsequent five articles (Articles 22 through 27) articulates economic, social and
cultural rights recognized in the Declaration. These rights include entitlements such as the right
to social security, right to work, reasonable payment and leisure, the right to an adequate
standard of health, well-being1 Article 1 stipulates that "All human beings are born equal in
dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one
another in a spirit of brotherhood". Article 2 reads "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and
freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind such as race, color, sex,
language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other
status." and education, the right to partake in cultural life. To end with, Articles 28 through 30
provides the general frameworks needed for the enjoyment of the above mentioned rights.

Besides to the UN Charter and the UDHR, the UN presently has more than ten core human rights
treaty based human rights instruments. These includes, but not limited to, the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948), the Convention Relating to the
Status of Refugees (1951), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the
Slavery Convention (1926, but amended by Protocol in 1953), the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (1966), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights (1966), the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (CAT), the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms

30
of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC),
and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and
Members of their [Link] of the above human rights treaty instruments has an autonomous
monitoring body, composed of independent experts who examine the reports that signatory
nations submit under the treaty. These committees are also in charge of issuing "concluding
observations/comments", where they summarize their concerns about certain states and also give
recommendations for the future. Ethiopia is a signatory member to all of the aforementioned core
international human rights instruments. Besides, Ethiopia has also endorsed other area-specific
treaties such as those enacted under the auspices of International Labor Organization (ILO). All
of the provisions in all of the treaty-based human rights instruments are expected to fully apply
here in Ethiopia. Thus, beyond its constitutional mandate, the state of Ethiopia has a treaty
obligation emanated from those international instruments to realize human rights at domestic
level. As a final point, it is good to mention here that Ethiopia is one of the countries of the world
that have ratified many of the most important international human rights instruments.

[Link]. Regional Mechanisms

In addition to the international human rights regime functioned under the UN umbrella, there are
regional human rights systems which cover three parts of the world; Africa, the Americas and
Europe. These two (international and regional) systems are aimed to make sure state actors are
fulfilling their obligation in promoting, protecting, providing and fulfilling their citizen’s rights.
Hence, if an individual or groups feel that his/her/their rights are not protected on the domestic
level, “the international system comes into play, and protection can be provided by the global or
the regional system”. Actually, this works only for the countries found in regions of the world
where such systems are in place. As mentioned before, regional human rights systems are
currently established only in Europe, Africa and American regions. The alternative for citizens
live in the other regions is to take their complaints to the UN human rights system, which is
barely functional. However, beyond their existence, the functionality of these systems is highly
questionable.

These human rights systems are established independent, but as part of regional integration
arrangements. This is the case in all the three regions have human rights institutions. In African,
this system is established under the African Union (AU) structure; in the Americas it is part of
the Organization of American States (OAS); and in Europe it is embedded in the European
Union’s (EU) organizational structure. The other regional integration agreements we found in
various places in the world does not have such human rights mandate. This includes, for
instance, North American Free Trade Area (NAFTA), ASEAN, and OPEC. Such arrangements
are established for economic or political purposes other than human rights.

Many authors in the field agreed on the importance of regional systems referring into the
opportunity they offer for regional values to be taken into consideration when human rights

31
norms are defined and framed. However, it should be also recognized that if this goes too far, of
compromising the idea of the universality of human rights. Regional human rights systems are
also recognized for providing a better systems of enforcement than the global system. It allows
regions to apply the relevant enforcement mechanism that fits to their context. For example, the
EU founds judicial approaches more appropriate and the AU inclined to non-judicial mechanism.
The global human rights system lacks such flexibility.

The African human rights system is operative under the organizational structure of the AU since
in July 2002. Currently, 53 African countries are signatory members to the AU and the African
Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (1981/86). Besides, a protocol to the African Charter on
Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of the African Court on Human and Peoples'
Rights (1998/2004) is adopted in 2004 and ratified by 21 member states. This Protocol entered
into force in January 2004 and the process is underway to establish the Court. The AU Summit
has started this endeavor by taking a decision to merge the African Human Rights Court with the
African Court of Justice in July 2004. Ethiopia is a signatory party to the Banjul Charter since
1991 and to the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child in 2001.

5.7.9. The Ethiopian Human Rights System

The foundation of the observance of the human rights in Ethiopia is the FDRE Constitution,
which was ratified in 1994. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and the source and
basis of legality of all other laws. The FDRE Constitution classifies human rights as one of its
five fundamental principles and declares that human rights and freedoms, emanating from the
nature of mankind, are inviolable and inalienable and that the human rights of citizens and
peoples are respected. The Constitution further empowers all Federal and State legislative,
executive and judicial organs at all levels with the responsibility and duty to respect and enforce
the Constitutional provisions of human rights.

The FDRE Constitution has established a national human rights regime by recognizing most of
the human rights entitlements acknowledged by the core international and regional human rights
instruments. These rights cover civil and political rights (arts. 14 to 38), socio-economic rights
(arts. 41 to 42) and group rights (arts. 39, 43 and 44). About one-third of the Constitution is
devoted to enshrining fundamental rights and freedoms. Accordingly, most civil and political
rights and economic, social and cultural rights as well as environmental rights and the right to
development are stipulated in detail. Further Article 9/4/ and Article 13 of the Constitution state
that international agreements ratified by Ethiopia are an integral part of the law of the land and
the fundamental rights and freedoms specified in the Constitution are to be interpreted in a
manner conforming to the principles of the UDHR, International Covenants on Human Rights
and international instruments adopted by Ethiopia.

Moreover, the Constitution gives outstanding emphasis to the rights of women, children, persons
with disability, and of nation, nationalities, and peoples. Besides including a vast of human rights

32
provisions, the Constitution has required the establishment of human rights and democratic
institutions; including the national human rights commission, general attorney office and office
of ombudsmen, with an independent judiciary or courts equipped with the needed resources.

To end with, there have been established institutions with the specific and prominent mandate of
respect and promotions of human rights and the main organizations in this respect are: the
Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and the Ethiopian Institution of the Ombudsman
(EIO). Additionally, the Federal and Regional Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commissions and the
Chief Auditor’s Office are agencies that consolidate transparency and accountability. The
National Election Board was established on the basis of the Constitution’s dictum that state
power can be assumed only through representatives elected by universal and equal suffrage held
by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors. The above structured
nexus is designed to ensure respect, protection and promotion of human rights.

33