Federalism and Minorities Protection: Theoretical Concepts

CEU eTD Collection Comparative Constitutional Law in LL.M. the forrequirements the of fulfillment partial In SubmittedCentral to: European Constitutional Principles and their Practical

Implications: US, India and Ethiopia) Protection: (A Comparative Study on Federalism for Unity and Minorities’

Supervisor:Professor Patrick Macklem DepartmentS of Legal By LegesseBy Mengie

Budapest, Hungary,Budapest, University

tudies

November

2010

CEU eTD Collection precious mystudy. JournalsArticles.and proceed have would thesis beenfruitful.not this which without advices and comments important and tangible his for Macklem whichandlife socialimpossible.of without wouldthis accomplishment havebeen task

I am also grateful to my colleague Aytenew for his moral and material support throughout throughout support material and moral his for Aytenew colleague my to grateful also am I I also would lik would also I Books, relevant the finding in me helping for Staff library CEU the to grateful am I and start to how mehelpingadvisingforon Professor Renata and Uitz verygratefulto am I thanks happily and heartily my express to like would I Firstly, I thank God and his Mom St. Virgin Mary for guiding me throughout my academic myacademic throughout meguiding for VirginMary St. Momhis and God thank I Firstly,

withmy thesis. contributions during mycontributions during study. Acknowledgements

e to express my heartily thanks to my parents, brothers and sisters for their their for sisters and brothers myparents, to thanks heartily myexpress to e

to my supervisor Professor Patrick Professor supervisor my to

CEU eTD Collection References Six: Chapter Conclusion Five: Chapter Constitutionalunity minorities‟ protection review, and Four:Dangers unityChapter into federal a system Asymmetry andthree: Chapter impactitsof power balancing on unitydiversity and Representativenesstwo: federalChapter institutionsofshared One:Federalism Chapter Minoritiesand Introduction Executivesummary AbbreviationsTerminologiesand TableofContents Acknowledgements Table Contents of constitutionalreview? What bestjudicial5.2 typeserves of minorities protection setup of unity and through Constitutional 5.1 it?canforWho review: request Introduction Failure diversityrepresent4.5 to adequately Arranging 4.4 federalfederalism)boundariesbasedethnicity on (Ethnic Absence 4.3 ofsupremacy clause Constitutional 4.2 clausesecession Excessive 4.1 ofasymmetrypower Introduction Cooperative 3.4 federalcompetitiveandsystems Intergovernmental 3.3 relations Political 3.2 ofasymmetrypower Constitutional 3.1 ofasymmetrypower Introduction Electoral minorities‟2.5 impactits protection onsystem and Difference inmanner2.4 the ofmembe selection of Therole 2.3 house upper ofthe Representativeness 2.2 federallegislaturesminorities‟andofthe protection Theandforneed 2.1 representativeness federalinstitutionsofshared Introduction Minorities 1.2 protection Federalism 1.1 Introduction 1.2.3 What participatoryWhat1.2.3 shouldrights byclaimed be minorities? Recognitionminorities1.2.2 ofofrights and rights participatory minorities?are Who 1.2.1 Federalism,1.1.3 unitydiversity and Salient1.1.2 offeaturesfederalism federalismEthnic1.1.1 nationand state

......

II ......

Protection: Theoretical Protection: concepts

......

...... rs of the upper house upper ofthers ......

......

110 104

97 94 93 93 90 84 80 76 72 71 71 65 60 58 56 55 55 52 48 42 37 32 32 32 30 27 22 20 17 13 10 III

II 3 3 3 1 I

CEU eTD Collection United US States United UN Nat Universal UDHR DeclarationofHuman Rights TPLF Tigraya party LiberationFront, peoples which EPRDF thecontrols IndianRajya house upper Sabha The Land name units ofconstituent (regio ISC Interstat International ICCPR Civilon Political Covenant and rights The HOPRs lower house ofPeoples Ethiopia: House RepresentativesThe The FDRE constitutional nameEthiopia:Federal of DemocraticRepublicofEthiopia The rulingEPRDF partyEthiopianof Ethiopia:The Derg TheEthiopianfrom iswhichpow regime removed legal CCI The house:Council Ethiopianof advisor upper the Constitutional of TheCanton designation constituent ofthe Bundesrat Abbreviations and Terminologies HOF house The upper of Federationof Ethiopia:House policybetweenandcoordinationand statesunion the the among states the

Inquiry Ethiopia)(of The upper houseThe upper ofGermany DemocraticFront eCouncil,institution inIndiaanfacilitatescooperation which and ions

III

units (regional states) inunits (regionalSwitzerlandstates) nal states) in nalGermanystates)

„ Peoples er in er 1991

‟

Revolutionary

CEU eTD Collection extremely is diversity and unity between tension the as systems Indian and Ethiopian isfederif beconsideringethnicisone peculiar This union wouldsettled well. the while groups diverse or minorities the protects it how determine to explored be to needs andIndia. Ethiopian to identical almost Ethiopia both forlessons important relevant has some it isfew anddifferences federation except power of distribution constitutional its as study the for relevant US of arrangements federa in integrityunion a of preservationthe and of groups diverse protection solutions of regarding feasible demonstrating and problems identifying at aims study this Therefore, efficiently? accommodat sufficiently be conflictsdiversity andleads forbecomesto this danger aunion. the units the hold to mechanism effective provide federal to failure shared means differences the of accommodation in genuine of absence represented Secondly, institutions. adequately not are differences because sufficiently Firstly, together. units the hold to mechanism effective o civ te upss f hs td, he jrsitos il e osdrd Federal considered: be will jurisdictions three study, this of purposes the achieve To could diversity How study: this under addressed be will questions basic two following The an provide to fail they and sufficiently diversity accommodate don‟t systems federal Most Feder l systems. alism as a tool to strike the balance between unity and diversity is an area which which area an is diversity and unity between balance the strike to tool a as alism for the study as they are multi are they as study the for

Executive summary

, India and Ethiopia. Indian and Ethiopian federal systems are directly directly are systems federal Ethiopian and Indian Ethiopia. and India ed? What mechanisms should be used to hold the units together together units the hold to used be should mechanisms What ed? - ethnic federal countr federal ethnic IV

together because insufficient representation of of representation insufficient because together

they fail to accommodate diversity diversity accommodate to fail they ies and the US system is relevant relevant is system US the iesand

al structures like structures al

CEU eTD Collection framed. sho to reached be will unions federal potential to dangers other and federation Ethiopian of features unique the of one is which secession of right constitutional the more, is What constitution. the under power legislative denied is represe which house upper the as problematic is legislator unicameral aforresolve federal beconstitutionaldisputes efficientsystem and to stable. umpirin an of type what and instability or disintegration to leadmay factors what balanced, be could unity and diversity of forces the how interests, diverse protect could in groups a which function, systems federal based identity Indian and Ethiopian the and system federal federalism.aspectsof systems. federal ethnic in employed be could US like systems federal (territorial) state nation the whether test to interesting also is It challenging. This comparative study will explore on the issues how the US nation state or territorial or state nation US the how issues the on explore will study comparative This hl rvlig rud h aoe sus te rtr il r t so hw Ethiopian how show to try will writer the issues, above the around revolving While

federal system need to be considered as minorities, how shared federal institutionfederalshared minorities,how be considered as to needsystem federal

w how a stable federal system should be be should system federal stable a how w This paper will be addressing such such addressing be will paper This nts the minority groups groups minority the nts

g organ is best to best is organ g s

CEU eTD Collection the and federations respective the of integrity preserving and autonomy, regional ensuring minorities, includingof questionsprotection basic inthe federaladdressing institutionsshared I the with problems main The jurisdictions. compared the of more or one federal system US. ofthe in problems these for solutions viable and problems such identify to to committed is study This unity. endanger leadswhich conflicts ultimately that and differences exaggerates turn in which diversity for emphasis for room limited only providing or aside setting by buildfederations unity someWhile so. do to tried they federalismthough of such purposes of both or one incorporate to o failed have systems federal Most interests vulnerable. be will otherwise the protecting and autonomy regional granting while e government of autonomyconfederalaand facebuildingwillproblemoneain unity. sustainablea form unitary A simultaneously. unity lasting a building and diversity accommodating in effective be Neither,can government of forms subjects. confedral nor suchunitary address can which structure government of form the a around is countries Federalism many in issues political current important most the among are community democratic and civilized a of establishment and society a of sections different The study will also demonstrate worthy federal experiences which have to be adopted in adopted be to have which experiences federal worthy demonstrate also will study The unity ensure to means a as government of forms federal on be will study this of focus The Unity, regional autonomy, protection of minorities, minimization of conflicts among among conflicts of minimization minorities, of protection autonomy, regional Unity,

Introduction

ethnic federal systems of Ethiopia and India and the territorial territorial the and India and Ethiopia of systems federal ethnic 1

diverse interests, others give excessive excessive give others interests, diverse dvre rus who groups diverse f ndian and Ethiopian Ethiopian and ndian oe regional rodes

world. world. CEU eTD Collection sixchapter will provide conclusion. protec ensure to feasible is crucialare issueschapter.this under genuinely diversity accommodate to failure and secession constitutional a clause, supremacy absence federal includingfactors asymmetryfederal system.undesired Hence,ofanpower, of whichenda India, and Ethiopia in especially three power, of the asymmetries Undesired jurisdictions. in compared federalism competitive versus cooperative and relations intergovernmental this chapter. their and under systems addressed be will electoral India, and Ethiopia US, and jurisdictions: compared the composition in implications their and chambers such of members of legislatures, federal of Representativeness will groups beinanalyzed chapter. this amo features salient systems, federal state nation and Ethnic rights. minority and diversity unity, instudy. this protection minorities‟ inconsistent and limited Chapter five will explore on the issue which type of constitutional adjudicating institution institution adjudicating constitutional of type which issue the on explore will five Chapter t Chapter federalism, of aspects theoretical on focus will one Chapter chapters. six has thesis This Chapter four is devoted to address the main factors which may lead to disintegration of a a of disintegration to lead may which factors main the address to devoted is four Chapter institution. federal shared of representativeness on focus will two Chapter

ng federations, the question who are minority groups and the rights to be claimed by such such byclaimed be to and rights the groups minorityare who question federations,the ng nger the integrityngerthe federations, willexamined.respectiveofbe the

hree will present constitutional and political asymmetries of power, power, of asymmetries political and constitutional present will hree

tion of rights of minorities and preservation of unity. Lastly, Lastly, unity. of preservation and minorities of rights of tion

the roles of second chambers, manner of selection selection of manner chambers, second of roles the

system in the US federation will be examined examined be will federation US the in system

CEU eTD Collection MichiganPress, 2008 p.7In thisbook, MalcolmM. Feeley Edward and Rubin explainedhave federalism and 1 wi start to better is it countries, different in systems federal of aspects pragmatic and theoretical of analysis proper couldrights beminorities byclaimedwilladdressed. be participatory what and universal rights minority a of have recognition of don‟t importance still the we Lastly, definition. which for minorities are who issue the on explore also chapte The chapter. this in emphasis given be also will diversity in unity for solution a isfederalism how federalism ofand features Common addressed. be willhomogenous society in implemented multie is which federalism ethnic generally, Federalism protection. minority‟s Protection: Theoretical concepts ChapterFederalism One: Minorities and

MalcolmM.Feeley

There is no a universally accepted definition for the term federalism. However, to make a a make to However, federalism. term the for definition accepted universally a no is There and federalism regarding concepts on analysis theoretical be will there chapter, this Under t hnic 1.1 Federalism 1.1

Introduction countries and nation state federalism which is introduced in countries with with countries in introduced is which federalism state nation and countries

and Edward and Rubin, Federalism, political identity tragic and compromise, Universitythe of

th the question what is federalism. is what question the th

As federalism is basically about a about basically is federalism As

r will r CEU eTD Collection ComparativeStudy, revised edition, 1999,Press, 943 4 3 2 fromfederalism. conceptsdecentralizedlike forms of government, consociation and democracywhich toneedbe distinguished conceptsrelated politicallike identitychapter under one. T the of subject the not is one thus and power autonomous guaranteed constitutionally have system federal under units constituent and central the Both between. in somewhere is system th subordinate and units the for sovereignty total give arrangement of forms such as confederations like association entity. central the of subjects and by centr bythe away takenbe can and givenis any, if theirpower, that mean would entity.This political central the of subjects are units whilethe government of form decentralized a simply is it rather federal, system the make cannot units decisions other controlthe political under separate entities.”ofthe e term.” the the abandoning without entity federal as described be cannot decisions entity political “a it, explained Feeley M. Malcolm as definitions, different to susceptible and complex is term single a finding Thus, def factors. economic and social political, historical, long by shaped is which nature unique own its has system federal each country, a of arrangement political Ibid ntities that have entered into an alliance that precludes conflict precludes that alliance an into entered have that ntities Ibid RonaldWatts, If all basic decisions are made by the central political entity, then existence then entity, political central the by made are decisions basic all If all. manyThoughthis ifnot scholarsmay definition a one canpersuade which propose Yet, initionthisfor term impossible. seems

Malcolm M. Feeley added that “the same is true for a group of separate political separate of group a for true is same “the that added Feeley M. Malcolm - Comparing

945in ht s oend y snl cnrl oenet aig all making government central single a by governed is that Assefa,Fiseha (2007) Federalism andAccommodationthe of Diversity Ethiopia: in

FederalSystems, e central political entity to the constituent units. Therefore, a federal federal a Therefore, units. constituent the to entity political central e

AddisAbaba: Artistic Printing EnterpriseP.134 4

2 A federal system is also different from other forms of of forms other from different also is system federal A nd 4

ed..,Montreal and

al government at any time as they are formed formed are they as any time al at government heyalsohavegone through butrelated different

Kingston:McGill

3 among them but leaves all all leaves but them among

Queen‟sUniversity ordinary meaning of of meaning ordinary

of constituent constituent of

significant significant A

CEU eTD Collection 9 8 QueensUniversity, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada, 1998,p.119 7 6 Addisedition, Ababa: Artistic Printing Enterprise Fiseha(2007) Federalism and Accommodationthe of Diversity Ethiopia: in ComparativeA Study, revised 5 particularisa descriptivetermareferring type to of institutional relationship.” princ federal of advocacy the involving concept, philosophical and Watts As subject. “ that position the take King as such the scholars book, his in explained regarding scholars by made been have developments significant federalism. understand better meaningfederalism.understandof the feder between distinction a make to sufficient is not It federalismis federationdubious. and concepts betweenthe issue.Evendistinctionthe simple a being than perplexing more getting is federalism of concept the days These itself. difficult is it center, the to entities regional subject which government of forms decentralizedand states regional handsof inthe center the puts which confederation r is it though federalism.Even of scope the under are units separate thefor making powers decision significant all grant which confederations nor government central the of subjects are units actenables people onthem directly.to which power legitimate independent have both and entities political constituent nor central o

Ibid I ther. Ibid RonaldWatts,L. Elazar, bid Making a distinction between federalism and other related concepts like federation helps to to helpsfederation like concepts related other federalismand between distinctiona Making neithemean would This that

elatively an easy task to differentiate federalism from other forms of government like government of forms other from federalism differentiate to task easy an elatively 5

Both are established by a constitution which is neither under the monopoly of the the of monopoly the under neither is which constitution a by established are Both Daniel , ExploringFederalism

Federalism,

Federalpolitical systems and Federations

r decentralized formsindecentralized r government which of regional political 7

huh hr i cnuin eadn sc dis such regarding confusion is there Though

,Tuscaloosa,AL: University of AlabamaPress, 1987, 2 6

,p.135 al systems and other forms of government to government of forms other and systems al

, Instituteof Intergovernmental Relations, iples, whereas federation federation whereas iples, federalism is a normative normative a is federalism odfn federalism define to 9

- 7in Assefa tinction,

CEU eTD Collection 13 12 11 10 Accordi Watts. by employed terms three (1982) King by used been have as terms two issue, the regarding clarification better for that suggest I yet, subject, the over clarification significant provided federat and systems political federal federalism, distinguished: federalis part up of set established. of constitut the in normssystems federal or principles are there that shows states federal of practice The descriptive. are andconsideredas part parcelfederalism of though example, For federalism. be by not should ideologies these embracedon based institutions political and confederation being of ideologies them of all as considered and confused feder with features common have may federalism of species be unions, leagues,andstatehoods, footnote 10) condominiums” (see whichothers claimedare to condominiums, one leagues, unions, rule.” home constitutional and statehoods, regionalization, constitutional associated confederacies, federations, political of genus a to refers

Ibid Ibid PrestonKing Ibid This claim seems weak. Political organizations including “confederations, associated associated “confederations, including organizations Political weak. seems claim This that stating descriptive are federation and federalism both that argue Others What is more, this claim is untenable in its argument that both federalism and federation and federalism both that argument its in untenable is claim this more, is What Watts in 1994 proposed that “for the sake of clarity three terms should be clearly clearly be should terms three clarity of sake the “for that proposed 1994 in Watts “ species” of feder species”of

, Federalism andfederation alism.

ions or legal tradition based on which descriptive or empirical or descriptive which on based tradition legal or ions raiain nopsig vrey f pce, including species, of variety a encompassing organization

, JohnsHopkins University 1982Press, 6

ng to Preston King, before we talk about empirical about talk we before King, Preston to ng

they maytheyfeatures.sharesomecommon 10

ions.” They claim that federation is federation that claim They alism but they should not be not should they but alism 13

in Watts in supra 9note p.119. 12 should be used than the than used be should

Watts‟ distinction has distinction Watts‟ “ Federalism Federalism

CEU eTD Collection 14 a among responsibilities policy public of division the for rules of system a is “federalism that Anto J. Thomas all, to acceptable singlea draw definition to difficultyConsideringthe federalestablished. is system awhich on meanwhich would the that established not are institutions though even constitution a in exist can it thus and ideology an is federalism that argue I Rather, institutions. and norms both incorporates norm) or ideology t be not could principles federal on based institutions are there that fact The institutions. functional and principles i.e. empirical and theoretical system federal that up: set federal a in basic elements two have argue we precisely that means then It basis. ideological can scholar No norms. such on based institutions implement andon to suchnorms. the of part fundamentalconstitutionare princ forming rules conventional other and rules of set such Thus constitution. the accordingexercises power intoo to government autonomous central the andconstitution out a a power autonomous exercising units separate more or in havefederalsystemThen,rule.two we a sharedsettlementbetweenand theofself disputes self and shared provides document a Such federalism. of principles covenant or constitution a have we firstly system, federal a take we When into inquiry for basis the are which comparativefederalism.understandings of ideologies federal with start to have we aspects,

Thus, as many scholars agree, I share the approach that federalism is an ideology or a norm norm a or ideology federalismanis that approach sharethe I scholarsmany agree, as Thus, and norms have we systems federal in that mean would this obviously Therefore, Ibid,also see http://www.amazon.com/Federalism

ideology is realized. not

iples, norms or ideologies.iples, Institutionsnorms based established or are n has rightly proposed an uncomplicated definition stating stating definition uncomplicated an proposed rightly has n

Federation

- Preston aken to mean that federalism (federal (federal federalism that mean to aken ccording to the norms of self of norms the to ccording - King/dp/0801829232 - rule and it sets rules for for rules sets it and rule which sets the the sets which

hv no have s - rule set set rule CEU eTD Collection 19 QueensUniversity, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada, 1998, p. 119 18 theon other hand. drawsdistinction between federalism as an ideologyon onethe handand as institutionor pattern of institutions 17 16 15 princ such on based established are institutions umpiring and Political federalism. hav we hand, at issue the is which federalism understand to But them. of each within (species) furthermake classifications Theninstitutionscan federalwe norms. ofbased whole on pattern gene a make to have we Rather, system. federal a in species specific other to reference make to terms other using by systandsuperfluous confusing. political federal the of genus the within species specific “a describe self and shared of combination a by marked organization political King, by class explained as system federal a in patterns institutional with end will we then confusi forms, political of category broad include to or term descriptive institutions.” common and units member between powers dividing l same the followed agencies.” governmental autonomous of number

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/federalism/ Ibid PrestonKing ThomasJ.Anton, American Federalism andPublic policy, George Washington University, 1989 P.3 RonaldWatts,L. If we start drawing such specific species, then we still can continue further classifications classifications further continue can still we then species, specific such drawing start we If We have shared rule, self havesharedrule, We about all is "federation” If federalism. of norms on based established institutions have We e to make generalmorethe to or than ethree terms.rather employing distinction ification by using other terms like “federal political systems” political “federal like terms other using by ification

on and we can‟t clearlycan‟t weitand what clearly demarcate on constitutes. ,Federalism andfederation,

Federalism, ine: ral distinction between federalism as a norm and federation as the the as federation and norm a as federalism between distinction ral

“federalism is the theory or advocacy of federal principles for for principles federal of advocacy or theory the is “federalism

Federalpolitical systems and Federations

- rule and umpiring system principles or norms under the notion of of notion normsthe under or principles system umpiring and rule

JohnsHopkins U

niversity1982Press, 15

The Stanford Encyclopedia has also also has Encyclopedia Stanford The , Instituteof Intergovernmental Relations, 18 16

in Watts in Thisbook generally to describethe to - 17 If we interpret it to be a a be to it interpret we If rule” and federation to to federation and rule”

hn aig further making then em”

19 iples. Then, Then, iples.

ol be would “ genus of of genus

CEU eTD Collection theon other hand. drawsdistinction between federalism as an ideologyon onethe handand as institutionor pattern of institutions 20 umpiringinstitutionstheirand relationships. institutions of pattern as federation un principles system umpiring theirsubnormideologyownfederalism or elements: providingan self as inresult confusion. speciesfurther itlead drawingOtherwise,thethat would ofand to other. of the species the onemean to interchangeablythan systems federalpolitical or federations term the r systemfederal a of element empirical an as federation and hand one on ideology an as federalism between institutionsbetweenfederalin up. given set a relationship the on exploring are we thus andunits other or entity central the for left are what with dealing also are weunit, constituent a institutionsof political consideringand are powers mak we elements, empirical such with dealing While entities. political autonomous constitutionally between conflict of case self and shared between relationship the about dealing is shar about talking not is systems federal about Talking system. federal a of elements empirical and ideological between distinctions precise making are we then relationships, their and institutions these about all mean to federation take we if

PrestonKing It precisely means that we have two basic elements in any federal system generally having generally system federal any in elements basic two have we that means precisely It make to distinction abetter is itunderstandfederalism properly, suggest to that I Therefore, ,Federalism andfederation epresenting institutions and their relationships on the other hand. We may use use mayWe hand. other the on relationships their institutionsand epresenting

e te osiuin cneto o ohr ouet and document other or convention constitution, the der e reference to principles set in the constitutions. When we we When constitutions. the in set principles to reference e , John 20

ocre wt isiuin o self of institutions with concerned 9 sHopkins University 1982,Press, p.21.This book generally

ed or self or ed - rule and settlement mechanisms in mechanisms settlement and rule - rule independently; rather it it rather independently; rule - rule, shared rule, ruleand - ue sae rule, shared rule, ultimately will CEU eTD Collection ContemporaryDevelopment Issues in Ethiopia,July 11 College/CUNY,Flushing,NY 11367 23 Westport, Connecticut,London, 2004, P.203 22 21 soc other or economic geographical, aside setting arrangement federal ethnic extreme nor ethnicity aside sets which federalism state nation purely Neither later. detail in explain will I as challenges many faces claim this But multicultural in diversity in unity for way feasible best the that pro are who Those conflicts. ethnic solve to out c whichbeliberal couldn‟t solvedby agovernance.system of groups religious of discrimination spread wide is there and groups among tensions to led has consciousness religious high especially India, in facts the But, principle. liberal the on based system.federal the functioningof the for basis tha and governance of principle liberal is US inthe followed doctrinethe religion. Thus, languageor basedethnicity, onnot is units constituent the of organization political and determination territorialthus andfederalism different in societies similar have which US like federations state Nation diversities. religious and linguistic cultural, high constitute Ethiopia and India like 1.1.1 onstituent states and that is based on the assumption that ethnic federalism is the best way way best the is federalism ethnic that assumption the on based is that and states onstituent

http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Liberal AlemHabtu, G.Alan Tarr,Robert F.Williams andJosef Federalism, Marko, Sub national constitutions andminority rights, While some countries like the United States have a relatively homogeneous society, others others society, homogeneous relatively ahave States United the like countries some While In Ethiopia, ethnic identity is the basis for political and territorial organization of the the of organization territorial and political for basis the is identity ethnic Ethiopia, In Ethnic and nation state federalism Ethnicnation state and

EthnicFederalism in Ethiopia:Background, Present Conditions andFuture Prospects,

,a Submitted paper toSecondthe InternationalEAF Symposium on t means an individual, not linguistic or religious group is the the is group religious or linguistic not individual, an means t - Principles - 2 10. 10

ial and historical relations between the people is a a is people the between relations historical and ial

- Evident - 12,2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia,P.28. 21

The Indian federal system is also established also is systemfederal Indian The ethnic federal arrangements, therefore, insist therefore, arrangements, federal ethnic - American 22 -

Constitution

states is ethnic federalism. ethnic is states

regions follow nation state state nation follow regions - Governmental/58375

Queens

CEU eTD Collection 29 September2009,p.i 28 27 26 25 Accommodationof Identity, 2005,p.5 24 ethnic for secession to right the incorporates also it that in powers) executive and legislative allocating by groups ethnic recognize (which Switzerland like countries Federal other and the by (administered ethno on government. based organized federal the by administered Dawa) Dire and Ababa (Addis politically being Tigray group ethnic populous third dominant. the and population total the of 62% about constituting Amhara and Oromo groups: ethnic main two the which from groups 1, ishas632 andextremely India India complex. about ethno The identity. ethnic on based organized states regional introduced which constitution present the of adoption upon 1995 in Ethiopia in introduced ethno on based not were administration religion. Britain or language ethnicity, on under based established created provinces Indian rule. colonial British and religiousgroups. cultural linguistic, ethnic, diverse with India and Ethiopia like countries for solution

Supra 23note Supra 18.note p.4 International CrisisGroup onreport Ibid Ibid o, tipa a nn regiona nine has Ethiopia Now, non only the is which Ethiopia Unlike HariharBhattacharyya,

p.7 - religious identity took place in 1966. in place took identity religious

eea government). federal Federalism andRegionalism inIndia, Institutional Strategies andPoli

- religious identity into 28 constituent units and 7 union territories territories union 7 and units constituent 28 into identity religious

Ethiopia:Ethnic federalism anditsdiscontents, Africa Report N°153

l states organized based on ethnicity and two city states states city two and ethnicity on based organized states l 11 -

colonized country in Africa, India had been under been had India Africa, in country colonized 29

Ethiopian ethnic federalism differs from India India from differs federalism ethnic Ethiopian 24 25

languages

But later, reorganization of territories territories of reorganization later, But The system of ethn of system The - religious diversity in Ethiopia Ethiopia in diversity religious 26

and Ethiopia has 84 ethnichasand 84 Ethiopia ic federalism was was federalism ic 28

tical India is also also is India –

CEU eTD Collection 31 30 coulddefinitionsatisfyofthe nationalities exercise and under constitution thepeoples to those 84 of out groups ethnic few a only example for Ethiopia In constitution. the under invoke self to right like rights political exercise to territory defined a constitute don‟t which and nation whole the over dispersed clearly This ethnicity. is participation underminesnotionthe ofin citizenshipultimately thus and results disintegration. political for basis the as ethnicity that to belong the to belong don‟t they which for district or zone region, a in life for even living individuals system, federal ethnic ethnicityhaswhichexaggerated on based territories of organization the and of clause threat secession the serious of because a disintegration faces federalism ethnic Ethiopian groups. /ethnic or linguistic along constitution a by positions executive legislativeand inthe representationprovide appropriate to isitpossible the group, ethnic each size of population have we Once groups. ethnic of interest the address to way only the not is federalism irrespectiveIndiafact the that regionalof the large.state will betoo or Ethiopia in happened have would which state) (regional canton one form don‟t they but offic same the have 26 among cantons 17 Switzerland, In cantons. the basis the not is language which inlike Switzerland others from differ territories, groups.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Cantons_of_Switzerland Supra 24.note Eth federalism,mean principalwouldoneofrisk. goal UnderThis that isEthiopian the at unity, hn e osdr l fdrl ytm i te ol, e a understa can we world, the in systems federal all consider we When nic federalism followed by Ethiopia and India also undermines those Ethnic groups groups Ethnic those undermines also India and Ethiopia by followed federalism nic 30

What is more, Ethiopia and India, by using language as the main basis to organize to basis main the as language using by India, and Ethiopia more, is What

ethnic group have no the same political rights granted to those who who those to granted rights political same the no have group ethnic

differencesbetween groups. ethnic determination and secession (in Ethiopia) which Ethiopia) (in secession and determination 12

without a need to divide the whole nation whole dividethe to need a without

ial language (German) (German) language ial d ht ethnic that nd 31

others may others to organize to CEU eTD Collection transportationsystem governorsthat at remoteprovinces were exercising highestlevel of au governments, rather isit because weaknessof ofcentral the governmenttogether withpoor communication and It becauseis not wasthere some supreme l government,practically regionalgovernors in remote areas wereexercising autonomouspower overthe subjects. 33 Addisedition, Abab 32 problems. communication Em until federal of reign the facto state de a example, for was, Ethiopia provinces. to autonomy of level some give to government central the force may reasons pragmatic entities, local for power reserved constitutionally be can power that as federation a not is it entity, central betweenisunits. and If center constituent the the power theby power will the of decentralized and federations all by absencemean formmayaofthethem that isof federationgovernment not shared are federalism of features some Thus federations. among features common general some are there that fact undisputed is it Yet, features. shared broad f to difficult it making thus and system federal every for features unique some in resulted which differences cultural and social historical, are there systems, federal of nature dynamic difficul federalismSalientof features 1.1.2 inleftinwillit between assections.I subsequent the explain wo This groups. nationalities/ethnic for granted rights

Ibidp.21.During the ofreign Emperor Menilik, though the policywascommitted tocentralized formof Assefa,Fiseha , One of those basic features is that there is constitutionally defined vertical division of of division vertical defined constitutionally is there that is features basic those of One eeain hv gn ad r gig hog a og rcs o cag ad hs t is it thus and change of process long a through going are and gone have Federations t provide to t

Federalismand Accommodationthe of Diversity in Ethiopia: A a: Artistic Printinga: Enterprise, 2007, p. l sae features shared all

But this couldn‟t in strict sense be a form of federalism as the the as federalism of form a be sense strict in couldn‟t this But

egaldocument which grantssuch autonomy the for local peror Menilik due to geographical, and political, social Menilik to due peror 13

eea sses precisely systems federal 112

uld mean that there are ethnic groups groups ethnic are there that mean uld taken away. Even in the absence of of absence the in Even away. taken

ComparativeStudy, revised . 32

. n diin o the to addition In

tonomy.

ind ind CEU eTD Collection 36 35 Addisedition, Ababa: Artistic Printing Enterprise. 34 unitary, of one is system the thus and other the to subject is government of level one that e make principles which incorporated work, this ofconcerns the are which US, and India Ethiopia, of constitution.ofsubjectsthe levelshaveboth Infederalaof system, government bycenter. the constituentunits‟isin autonomy exercised modificationcase only thisconstitution untilthe of exa for is, entity political central the If government. of levels both bind to has it and supreme be bybe shouldnot created other. the docume constitutional a from derived be to has power Their power. their of denial the against guarantee no have powerful, are sates regional when government federal writte a in provided expressly be should units regional and center the to allotted powers the Firstly federaleveryitfromforms.makingunique system other pil the is them to allotted powers those over autonomous are units regional and entity central the both that fact the and units regional and government central the between power constitut on not and center the of power the of strength the on based simply is authorities local of autonomy

Ibidp. 136 Ibid,p.135 Assefa,Fi Such supremacy of the constitution is introduced in most federal systems. The constitutions constitutions federalThe systems. in most introduced is constitutionthe supremacy of Such to also has constitution The sufficient. not is written is constitution the that fact mere The witn n spee osiuin s h scn cmo faue f eea systems. federal of feature common second the is constitution supreme and written A mple, above the constitution then there is no supreme constitution in the first place. The The place. first the in constitution supreme no is there then constitution the above mple, n constitution. Otherwise, regional states in case the federal government is strong, or the isor the strong, federalin government thestates case regionalnOtherwise, constitution. ach of these constitutions a supreme law of the land. Absence of this principle means means principle this of Absence land. the of law supreme a constitutions these of ach seha,

Federalism andAccommodationthe of Diversity Ethiopia: in o. hrfr, osiuinl iiin f eiltv, xctv ad judicial and executive legislative, of division constitutional Therefore, ion.

2007,

p. 113

to be byestablishedare and to A ComparativeStudy, revised nt and thus one one thus and nt lar of of lar 35

CEU eTD Collection 38 37 approval on up only amended be can constitution the of three chapter under provisions rights rigidSuchinconstitutionalsystem isamendment as stated V of amendment. validArt only: requirem rigid are thereamendment constitution.ofthe when only constitution the under power their exercise be. to it want const the nor entity central the neither means that and government; of levels both above is system in federal months. constitution a daysThefor or problems may whicheventemporary address are Constitutions durable. are nature by their Written constitutions formulas. amendment their of rigidity the dependson federation. isAndnot thus confederation autonomy), guaranteed (without government of form decentralized

ArtofV US Supra 32note p 141. Most federal systems have such rigid requirements. Art V of the US constitution provides a a provides constitution US ofthe V Art requirements. havesuchrigid federal systems Most be amongdurable.This feature thatis federationshasconstitution common to the other The Art 105 of the constitution of Ethiopia of constitution the of 105 Art the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be be shall Consent, its equalits SuffrageinSenate. without deprived the of State, no that and Article; first the of Section Ninth the hundreeight thousand One Year the to prior made be may which Amendment no that Provided Congress; the by proposed be may Ratification of Mode other the or one the as thereof, fourths three in When ratified by the Legisla the by ratified When ituent units could have unilateral power to alter the terms of the constitutions as they they as constitutions the of terms the alter to power unilateral have could units ituent

constitution 37

hrfr, oh h cne ad osiun uis a hv a urne to guarantee a have can units constituent and center the both Therefore,

d and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses and the in fourth Manner first any in affect shall eight and d

not formulated to serve only the existing society unlike statutes statutes unlike society existing the only serve to formulated not

tures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions Conventions by or States, severalthe of fourths three of tures 15

a iia rcdrslk S h fundamental The US. like procedures similar has 38

or other. other. or ents for for ents

CEU eTD Collection 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 as institution, political a Federation, of House the has Ethiopia institutions. judicial umpiring ultimate the are India and US of courts supreme The purpose. this for court constitutional governments Federati state review. and constitutional through central the both by rights individual fundamental the for respect featuresfederalism meaningless.umpiringinstitution,anyofensures other are Thisalso organ amo feature common important an is units constituent the among features common federations. the of one is differ, may degree its though one rigidity, Generally, than less not of legislatures the by “ratification governments. state and federal the between relationship the and powers rigidare there to constitution ofthe provisions amendthe power independent and full has parliament the cases, most In procedures. amendment jointhousesmajorityvotesession is of atwo ofrequired. the third two a and states member of councils the of vote majority thirds two cases, other For Repre Peoples of House councils states‟ constituent all by 105Art (2) of constitutionthe of Ethiopia. 105Art (1) of constitutionthe of Ethiopia. Supra 32note p.144 Ibid Art352 (a Art350 (1) of constitutionIndian oprd ote constitution the to Compared Statecouncils under Ethiopian federalism legislaturesare of constituent regions. settle and Lastly,to center ofconstitutionalbetween atheexistence disputes the adjudicator

- e)of I

procedures to some extent under Art 352 (a 352 Art under some extent to procedures ndian constitution.ndian

sentatives (here in under HOPRs) and House of Federation (HOF). Federation of House and HOPRs) under in (here sentatives

s of US and Ethiopia, the Indian constitution has less rigid rigid less has constitution Indian the Ethiopia, and US of s 39

by majority vote and by two third majority vote of the the of vote majority third two by and vote majority by

16 ons like Germany, South Africa and Russia have a a have Russia and Africa South Germany, like ons 42

which is totally impossible in US and Ethiopia. Yet Yet Ethiopia.and inUS impossible is totally which - af f h sae” s required.” is states” the of half - e) when it comes to the division of of divisionthe to comesitwhen e) ng federations. ng 41

43 Without such an an such Without

In such cases cases such In 44 40

CEU eTD Collection Ottawa,Ontario, Canada, 1994 ( 46 libera individual in or communalism rejecting bethan rather between to have we that argue I scholars, many other like Here, identity. that for value give change night to wholethe soc voluntary gradual over it do cannot we be But Europe. of countries maysome in happening is which There like assimilation rights. human individual violating without enforced sc high Attempting well. function cannot liberalism individual and state nation then exist, society cultural and linguistic ethnic, adhereprinciplearelatively indto to easy of be may it thus and process assimilation long the of because society homogenousless or more havea maylikeis FranceCountries dangerous. other theby settingaside option an asofthem mod the In communalism. and liberalismindividualbetween debate hot societies.” human sustain to required are that energy constructive and productive and unity of qualities the than rather destruction and disunity, 1.1.3 inwillit two. chapter explain organ. umpiringan

UnityDiversity in Acceptance andIntegration inan ofEra Intolerance andFragmentation, Carleton University Individuals from some ethnic, linguistic or cultural groups are shaped by that society and and society that by shaped are groups cultural or linguistic ethnic, some from Individuals multi a and failed has process assimilation attempted historically the where countries In “ The political and social climate that prevails in the world today emphasizes difference, difference, emphasizes today world the in prevails that climate social and political The Federalism, unity and diversity diversity Federalism,unity and

Having a political institution as a judicial organ is indeed problematic as I I asproblematicindeed is judicial organ a as institution political a Having

http://bahai

iety.

l asmlto i te otmoay ol cno be cannot world contemporary the in assimilation ale - library.com/theses/unity.diversity.html 17

ividualinliberalismFrance.

Here I am not trying to go through the through go to trying not am I Here lism automatically. For unity, For automatically. lism

)

ern world, taking one one taking world, ern

CEU eTD Collection 47 avoidto with associated problems weakcentral a poli instance for was US in government of system federal to confederation from shift The risk. at I system. defense countries the iscontrolgovernmentthe both under thencountriesunitydefense theofsystem andstates, are for necessary compulsive also is entity slightly be to has together. units constituent the hold government to required extent the federal to influential the accommodated, properly be to has Wh tensions. identity these between balance proper a provide to has federation framed wisely a Therefore, unity. to threat a becomes thus and easily federation the leave to sates regional hand other the On unity. for danger a becomes turn in and conflict to lead will this then identity, swallows and diverseinterests. k to is systems federal all in goal basic the But, factors. economic and social historical, political, previous on based differ will system federal any in Specifics identitybewillproblems addressedI detailsincanchapters. provide as subsequent the which through ways other are there Rather, conflict. to lead and differences the exaggerate Eth like federalism among choose values. to free individual the leave time same the at and identitiesall promote and recognize can we

Supra 32note p.120 By doing so, we can avoid conflict and retain unity. Here, I am not saying that ethnic ethnic that saying not am I Here, unity. retain and conflict avoid can we so, doing By Federal idea is all about balancing forces of unity and identity. If the center is too strong too is center the If identity. and unity of forces balancing about all is idea Federal Fe deralism (not pure ethnic federalism), is one solution for unity while preserving identity. identity. preserving while unity for solution one is federalism),ethnic pure (not deralism

high domination by constituent entities against the state may also allow the the allowmay also state the entitiesagainst constituent byhigh domination

iopia is a feasible way to preserve unity in diversity as this would would this as diversity in unity preserve to way feasible a is iopia

tical entity. tical

eep unity while addressing addressing while unity eep 47

A well A f the central central the f - built central central built

ile ile CEU eTD Collection 49 48 levelsinfederationgovernment legitimateof actinga power. are within their two lawswhilesolve ofthe playarise which conflict to comes to The rather supremacy clause the voislaw happens,thenthe make law. into this If to a other ofthe power encroaches government of level one where cases about not is it laws, of conflict laws. state and federal the between laws of conflict is there if government federal government. central strong a by addressed is it unless integrity threatening conflicts continuous to lead th and mind doubt. of areas of case in government federal the for supremacy slight give to interpreted be may basi the Considering prevail. will who determines which provision constitutional no is there future, the in power of areas blurred co are government federal the and part dominant one through is it far So system). (party means pragmatic through reflected is supremacy federal Ethiopian the government, federal the of

http://www.legalservicesindia.com/articles/c1onst.htm ArtVI,clause of2 US constitution. The Indian federation on the other hand is designed with a strong central government in government central strong a with designed is hand other the on federation Indian The While some federalWhilesystemshaveconstitutional mechanismssomeforsome providingsupremacy

is is because of high economic and industrial disparities between regions which which regions between disparities industrial and economic high of because is is 48

In US the supremacy clause under Art VI clause 2 shows supremacy of t of supremacy shows 2 clause VI Art under clause supremacy the US In

- prtn.I sae eoesrn n ofitaie in arises conflict and strong become states If operating. c goals and principles of federalism the constitution constitution the federalism of principles and goals c 19

y loyalty system that the regions regions the that system loyaltyy id and there is no conflict.no isid there and

Here, by Here, he CEU eTD Collection 31 55 this provisiontoinc WorkFrame Convention doesn‟t use the term "national” and UNthe Human Rights Committee interpretedhas Frame this WorkConvention is limitedinscope excludesitsince non minoritiesthough doesn‟tit define who the national minorities are. The minorityrightsprot 54 53 52 51 group tomanifest anduse culture,their religionand language. minoritiesexist,every onebe 50 nature. legal than political more of was document thethus and disagreementsbreaking enablebytheir agreement leadersanreach ambiguityto was used (1998) states. independent minorities. addressedcurrentminoritythe even schemes.under protection minority.” the of rights the away win take to then power and its elections, use simply will majority the that is danger The threatening. extremely not. or state given a in minorities are determinethere whether to basis a as terms three these hasemployed ICCPR 1.2

PerryKeller,Re “TheFrame Work Convention for the protection of national minorities” providedhas for rights national Ibid MarkMazower, Dark continent: Europe Art27 ofICCPR. the Thisprovision provides that incountries whereethnic, linguistic and religious http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/treatment/minority.htm - 33. Basically, Attempts to build a nation state in most European countries had undermined the rights of of rights the undermined had countries European most in state nation a build to Attempts

Minorities protection

a itoue t sle uoen ioiy sus fetvl. u intentional But effectively. issues minority European solve to introduced was 52

In some countries the tension had led to disintegration and thus formation of newdisintegration formationledhad to of thusand Intension somecountriesthe there are three types of minorities: ethnic, linguistic and religious. Art 27 of the the of 27 Art religious. and linguistic ethnic, minorities: of types three are there - thinkingEthnic andCultural rightsinEurope, 18 Oxford Journal of Legalstudies, 1998. P. ludeany oneeven migrant workers as the term usedinthe provision"persons”is 53 50

The Frame work Convention for the Protection of of Protection the for Convention work Frame The

“ longingtosuch minoritygroup should notbe deprived of his togetherright with the Minorities frequently find democratic majority rule pr rule majority democratic find frequently Minorities

, twentieth , Century, Penguin Books, 1999,p 44

- 55 nationals.Art 27 ofICCPR the unlike the

For example the basic term in the inthe basic term examplethe For 51

ioiy ihs r nt well not are rights Minority National Minorities Minorities National ection regime under

ocesses to be to ocesses

CEU eTD Collection 60 59 58 57 56 process politicalin the rights participatorywith bemaysimilarlymayaffected representative. abring action andthrough together the or group minority the to belonging individuals of group right, group (minority others” with language.” use and religion profess community enjoy culture, “to members) in “right the has belongingness such having group. thus minorityand group minority the the to belonging persons to for given is belong right individual who those for granted rights individual are rights will inI group. thissubsequent the point elaborate sections. rights human other and equality to addition in right a is rather It majority. the and minority the participati to belonging persons politicalbetween equal about not is protection rights minority that noted be to has it Here, protected. and properlyrecognized are minority rights mean that doesn‟t systemfederal there atmosphere political stated.not Convention

LubiconLake BandV Canada, Communication No. 167/1984,(March 1990),Pa.32.1 p. 23 Ibid.pa, p. 1 1 IbidPa. 3.1p. 1 HumanRights Committee,General Comment 23,Art Ibid Minority rights protection cannot be realized easily unless the minority group is provided provided is group minority the unless easily realized be cannot protection rights Minority the in minorities accommodate to suitable more is system federal a of existence The ht s oe i hs o e oe ht huh e r peevn gop dniy minority identity, group preserving are we though that noted be to has it more, is What

“

national minority” is not defined; what measures states are expected to take is take to expected are states measures what defined; not is minority” national

by to ensure respect for identities. But the mere fact that there is a a is there that fact mere the But identities. for respect ensure to by

57 ad t s bu peevto o iett o te minority the of identity of preservation about is it and , 21

27, 1994,U.N.HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1 pa.1 p.1 . Thus accommodation of such minority group group minority such of accommodationThus .

Even though it is not group not is it Eventhough minority group as a whole a as group minority

every person person every 60

An on on CEU eTD Collection 64 63 62 WestConnecticut,port, London, 2004, p.42 61 communi in right, the denied be not shall minorities such to belonging persons exist, minorities linguistic or religious ethnic, which in states those “In that states clearly It are. minorities definingwho without minorities general perplexingminoritiesinproblemisquestionasregarding the different countries.different on this to solution” uniform a based adopt to “difficult is it that view rights the took time that at Assembly human individual for emphasis givingnondiscrimination minorityprincipleforspecial without account andrights Genthe gives too UDHR The II, WW of result a as again once vanished which crisis I WW after system Nations of League E on. years long from precisedefinition a put to scholars by attempts many so of spite in minorities to belong ofminorities.protection of aspect important anis rights) minority of granting to addition (in rights participatory through

Supra 57.note Ibid StevenWheatley RobertF.William 62 The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ( Rights Political and Civil on Covenant International The minorities. or rights minority to refer doesn‟t Charter UN the II, War World after Even who people of group the on definition accepted universally no is there Unfortunately,

there was no attempt atdefineattemptwas minorities.no there timetermthat to the

1.2.1 Whominorities?1.2.1 are

, Democracy, , minorities andinternational law, Cambridge University 2005, press, p. 10 s,Josef andAllanMarko Tarr,Federalism, sub nationalconstituti ven though there was protection of minorities to some extent under the the under extent some to minorities of protection was there though ven

ty with the other members of the group, to enjoy their own own their enjoy to group, the of members other the with ty

ICCPR) provides protection for protection provides ICCPR)

ons,and minorityrights, 64 eral

CEU eTD Collection 69 68 67 66 65 minorities. providedoesn‟t Conventiondefini Work anyThis Framealso general comment. minorities”“national term the employingby Europe Conventionof becau distinction make doesn‟t ICCPR betweennationalsforeigners. and the as minorities migrant also but minorities national mi by that clear it makes Comment General minorities. term the of scope the completely not if extent greater a to know to least at significant wasminority rights on determinationits But minoritiesdirectly. are who questions doesn‟t it minorities of rights on clarification make to tried ICCPR, minorities?are answer doesn‟t and definition a provide to fails still it determining But religion. inand language, helpfulethnicity, i.e. minorities are which factors some provides it as definition accepted totally minorityonly protection ICCPR.about theprovision rights under language.” own theiruse to or religion own their practice professand to culture,

Ibid FrameThe Work Conventionfor protectionthe of national minorities,Strasbourg, 1.II.1995 Ibid HumanRights Committee,General Comment 23,Art 27, 1994,U.N.HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1, pa5.2 p 2 Art27 of ICCPR. The General Comment of the Human Rights Committee, however, is not much helpful helpful much not is however, Committee, Rights Human the of Comment General The inArticleitsthe on 23 CommentGeneralHuman of Committee, the 27 though Rights Even paves ICCPR the course, Of binding isinternational Work itnot firstly,Frame the communityseon secondly and the

the question: which ethnic, linguistic, and religious groups within the states states the within groups religious and linguistic, ethnic, which question: the

the way to give the term minority some common but not not but common some minority term the give to way the 67

norities the ICCPR is not talking only about about only talking not is ICCPR the norities 68

clearly stand against the against standclearly attempt to approach the approach to attempt

tion regarding regarding tion 65

This is the is This

The CEU eTD Collection 74 73 72 71 1977,Para. 568 70 from free be cannot they still groups, religious and linguistic ethnic, to reference making as considered be minorities and thereby. willprotected groups all definition, first the and ICCPR of 27 Art of application maj the is which group religious minority.a becannot group that the are definitions The minorities. following respectively. about questions all answer don‟t they not are as still but sufficient known most the are Jules and Capotorti Francesco by made Definitions

Ibid Ibid StevenWheatley JulesDeschens, “Proposal concerning definition a of termthe minority”1985,Para. 181. Francesco“StudyCaptors, the on rights of person If there is one majority group over the rest of the population (50%+1 of the whole), then then whole), the of (50%+1 population the of rest the over group majority one is there If impli onlyand show,population the the if those of rest of from characteristics linguistic differing members whose position, s numerically group A and whosewithand achieveequally to the aim survive to will collective a but implicitly, only if motivated another, one with solidarity of whichthoseofhavingcharacteristicsmajoritypopulation,senselinguistic the a from differ position non a in and minority numerical a constituting state, a of citizens of group A orlanguage. religion vn huh h aoe w dfntos r vr iprat n determ in important very are definitions two above the though Even

citly, a sense of solidarity, directed towards preserving their culture, tradition, tradition, culture, their preserving towards directed solidarity, of sense a citly, –

hs mmes big ainl o te tt, pos state, the of nationals being members, whose , Democracy, , minorities andinternational law, Cambridge University p 70 maller to the rest of the population of the state, in a non a in state, the of population the of rest the to maller

–

72 en ntoas f h state the of nationals being 74

rt ot f h woe population. whole the of out ority

It may happen however that there is no ethnic, linguistic or or linguistic ethnic, no is there that however happenmay It

s belongings toethnic, linguisticand religious minorities”

majority in fact and inmajorityin law.fact –

possess ethnic, religious or or religious ethnic, possess sess ethnic, religious or or religious ethnic, sess 73

In this case, through through case, this In 71 nn mnrte by minorities ining

ress, 2005, ress, p. 19

- - dominant dominant

CEU eTD Collection 78 77 76 75 identifiable under constituting and religion or requirements language culture, common having two those constitution; satisfy who people of groups those are Ethiopia of peoples peoples” and ethnic 80 than most minorities,groups ofare whichdoesn‟tconstitution the minorities. talktheseabout more constitutes country the though Even (FDRE). Ethiopia of Republic comple is Ethiopia in case minorities. as recognized are groups to religious some India not In identity. diverse but preserve equality real bring to groups) disadvantaged (promoting action affirmative of of preservation equalit general the about is It minimal. talkis diversity to need the and US in society homogenous relatively is there Indeed all. at rightsminority to reference any no is there constitution, US Under constitution. are we if behind following leftabovedefinitions.the systematically be will migrants thus and states of discretion the in linguistic,claimcultural r and to migrants for individuals difficult is it of definitions above rights the to According human nationality. of irrespective the protect to accordingly developing is law international state. of nationals and citizens terms the employing by scope in narrow are definitions The criticism.

http://www.countercurrents.org/commpuniyani101005.htm Art39 (5) ofconstitution the of Ethiopia. PerryKeller,Re Supra 68,noteP. 24 Under the Under protec rights minority clear no have systems federal Most 75

In our global world there is high moveme high is there worldglobal our In

FDRE constitution, rather than minorities proper, only the “nations, nationalities nationalities “nations, onlythe minoritiesproper, than rather constitution, FDRE 78

- of Ethiopia may be determined as minorities. Such nations, nationalities and nationalities nations, Such minorities. as determined be may Ethiopia of thinkingEthnic andCultural rightsinEurope, 18 Oxford Journal of Legalstudies, 1998, P.44

x if we take a look at the constitution of the Federal Democratic Democratic Federal the of constitution the at look a take we if x

eligiousgrantnationality unlessnationality. rights they To get is 76

y clause which is prevalent. There is a modicum a is There prevalent. is which clause y

nt of people from country to country and and country to country from people of nt tion regime under their their under regime tion 77

The The the the

CEU eTD Collection 1977,Para. 568 80 79 ininvolved political the process. and identity their preserve to rights minority with them provide can we then groups, minority determine we Once systematically. citizenship denied are who workers migrant for especially crucial is modification Such group. minority ind all protect can we "nationals”, of instead ICCPR) the of 27 Art (like "persons” term the using by that means It "nationals.” term the employing by nationals su writers most by better are andsystematicallystates states minorities. excluding prote be to minorities of determination the that means it because minorities rights the for helpful human not is international term the defining under without constitutions federal minorities within or conventions of rights the for recognition giving part, my while On are. minorities ICCPR who define to the time same that the at fails problem minorities of this rights recognizing of because was It country. to country from differs of nature the is then difficulty The states. the by minorities against abuse prevent to accepted universally constitutionminority.as territory the over dispersed are theybecause identifiableterritory constitution. FDRE of 39 Art under territory

Francesco“StudyCapotorti, theon of rights belongingpersons toethnic, linguistic and religiousminorities” Ibid bject. The basic problem with Francesco Capotorti‟s definition is that it fails to protect non protect failsitto is that definition Capotorti‟s Francesco Thewith basic problem bject. Some modification on the definition given by Francesco Capotorti, which is considered considered is which Capotorti, Francesco by given definition the on modification Some rm h aoe icsin i flos ht hr i a ed o sm dfnto wih is which definition some for need a is there that follows it discussion, above the From

the problem to be addressed i.e. the issue of diversity, is complex because it it because complex is diversity, of issue the i.e. addressed be to problem the

cud rn poe dfnto ad vi te ofso oe the over confusion the avoid and definition proper bring could ,

tmasta hs mnrte h ae no have who minorities those that means It participatory rights to enable them actively actively enablethem to rights participatory

have no any place under the under place any no have ividuals who belong to a to belong who ividuals cted is left for for left is cted -

CEU eTD Collection

85 84 83 82 81 ethn have we as long as rights minority for need a is there enjoys. majority the what like religion) and culture (language, identity its group. minority the for of rights inherent special as taken be and also not should permanent rights Such identity. their preserve are to minorities rights minority hand other the On temporary. is discrimin providing by special rights. (identities) differences preserve to introduced is protection rights minority minorities, t different i.e. discrimination avoid to specificforofdetermined linguisticpersonsare who group ethnic,minority. religious as or schem protection rights minority Then, uniformly. applicable are and everyone to belong thus and principle equality the on based implemented are rights Human group. majority or minority a to belongs individual an that fact the of irrespective beings

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet18rev.1en.pdf Ibid Supra 81 note Ibid HumanRights Committee,General Comment 23,Art 27, 1994,U.N.H

Such treatment of the minorities should not be confused with positive positive with confused be not should minorities the of treatment Such While nondiscrimination principles in international and national legal documents are there there are documents legal national and international in principles nondiscrimination While The general equality principle is a human rights notion which is applicable for all for applicableis which notion rights human ais principle equality general The 1.2.2 Recognition of rights of minorities and participatory andrights minorities of of Recognitionrights 1.2.2

ation/affirmative action which has the aim of achieving equality. Affirmative action action Affirmative equality. achieving of aim the has which action ation/affirmative

84 83

They rather are inherent rights for that group to preserve and enjoy enjoy and preserve to group that for rights inherent are rather They

reatment which is committed most of the time against against time the of most committed is which reatment 27

ic, linguistic or religious minority minority religious or linguistic ic,

RI/GEN/1/Rev.1,pa1, p.1 p.2

e is an additional right right additional an is e 85

o e precise, be To

benefits benefits human human 82 81

CEU eTD Collection 89 Westrights, port, Connecticut,London, 2004, p.44 88 87 31 86 toward stand normative or general more a then factor, legitimating a as rights participation and value a as "diversity consider Switzerland like countries when hand other the On rights. sp a whether determining in diversity of recognition to case.specific each for baseddiscussionon is participatory whichrights entitled isto group avoid a thenof determination to conflict, met be which fromhavinfluentialgroups potentialthe are valueandthere requests because rather groups.for another to related directly is regard inthis participation rights granted shall be who questionofThe process. politicalin the group recognizeminority need i andto promote rights we why reasonbasic the though bringequality to helps in turn minority rights for respect and recognition,promotion course Of him/her. important to most is which life value of the choose b have will minority group or majority the from one anyThen, planet. our life of ways the among choose to opportunity the increase will that and values linguistic pro ruleschemethe to ofequality. additional an is protection rights minority as necessary not is action affirmative case in even

Ibidp.45 RobertF.Williams, Josef andG.Marko Allan Tarr PerryKeller,Re - In cases where participatory rights are granted not because diversity is considered as a a as considered is diversity because not granted are rights participatory where cases In By values. social of scope the increasing means also rights minority of Recognition HumanRights Committee, General Comment 23,Art 27,1994, U.N.HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1, pa 1,p.1 minority the of accommodation through only possible is rights minority of realization Full 33. viding minority rights, we are preserving ways of life including cultural, religious and and religious cultural, including life of ways preserving are we rights, minority viding

- thinkingEthnic andCultural rightsinEurope, 18 Oxford Journal of Legalstudies, 1998. P.

question: why we need to grant such participatory rights rights participatory such grant to need we why question: 28

89 , Federalism, , sub nationalconstitutions, andminority

To be precise, political negotiation isnegotiation preferred be political precise, To s to preserveidentity. sto ecific group is entitled to participatory to entitledis group ecific 87

road opportunity to opportunityto road

86 e to to e

on CEU eTD Collection Westrights. port, Connecticut,London, 2004, p.16 95 94 mostcases but for allnot situations. 93 92 91 90 are dispersed groups country. throughout the subject. the regarding Belgium t units”, component of territories the in concentrated than country a throughout dispersed are minorities.” constitutional broad spacecan granted are units national sub which in arrangements balance...federal "on that suggested democrat using and 1.2.1 procedures section under proposed by have identified I be that can definition the group following such process, political the in participate to identity distinct in results ultimately individualdevelopingin willin differencesocialthat turn and result anxiety. difference of type any encouraging but treatment, such for entitled be will rights participation he above suggestion doesn‟t work well; and this is based on studies on US, India and and India US, on studies on based is this and well; work doesn‟t suggestion above he

RobertF.Williams, Josef M Ibidp. 16 Ibid.p.16, thissuggestion by Robert.F Ibid Supra 88note and89. Ibid Regarding the way how minority rights could be better protected, Williams and Marko Marko and Williams protected, better be could rights minority how way the Regarding t as Here,

92 93 he main goal of introduction of participatory rights is to enable a group with a a with group a enable to is rights participatory of introduction of goal main he

incaseconfusion. of reasonable

But when it comes to the situation in which "language and religious minorities religious and "language which in situation the to comes it when But

arko andG. Allan arko Tarr

pursued.”

make a significant contributionmake significant aprotectionof the rightsof theto 95

andJosef Marko is,as they clear,it make one whichworks better in h sm i tu i Ehoi a rlgos n linguistic and religious as Ethiopia in true is same The 90

It may also be possible to consider all diversities to be to diversities allconsider to possible be also may It 29

,Federalism, sub national constitutions, and minority

ic 94

CEU eTD Collection 96 constitutional some unless unity ensure to guarantee no made.amendmentsare is there then future, the in fails partysystem suchdominant one If system. isparty becausethe influentialof government federal the of supremacy of reflection in case the see When we somerequired. a extent to government is laws state over laws federal of supremacy too US In together. units the hold to powers constitutional strong has government central the such against demand. stands clearly federalism ethnic commerce, and defense common strong build to integration t fuel adds the in constitution clause secession The life. for there living are they case in even group ethnic the to belong don‟t theywhich to region a inliving are they when process inpolitical the participate citi thus and ethnicity on based is entities political politics.” of ethnification an risking without and system the of paralysis without integration promote stable bring to should and rights "participationit explained Marko Williamsand asThus economicdevelopment. enemies outside against themselves defend to states of interest best 1.2.

Ibidp. 45 In India, though there are some regions which are organized based on religio on based organized are which regions some are there though India, In Organizationregional of requirement. above satisfythe doesn‟t federalismethnic Ethiopian The territorial territorial The 3

What participatory rights s Whatrights participatory 96

integrity of a state is a basic principle of international law and is in the the in is and law international of principle basic a is state a of integrity

o the ethnically organized society. While modern society needs needs society modern While society. organized ethnically the o

hould be claimed by minorities?bybehould claimed 30

zenship doesn‟t help citizens to work and work to citizens help doesn‟t zenship Ethiopia, practically the federal federal the practicallyEthiopia,

n or ethnicity, ethnicity, or n

CEU eTD Collection 102 101 100 99 98 right 97 conflicts. internal avoids and groups diverse the also but majority the regarding only not legitimate to harm no poses them on acting others.” when and fear without them express to differences, expla Coulter Ian.D As differences. religious and cultural ethnic, with countries in development totalitarian. becomes group the that extent autocr avoid should rights linguisticreligiousand groups. prim or exclusively based arguments.” is mobilization political which in situation system.” the paralyze completely can they that strong so be not must groups the process. to given “influence political the in say” effective an “have must groups the hand, one On disintegration. and conflict to leads one of Ignorance rights. participation

Ibid Ibid RobertF.Williams, Josef andG.Marko Allan Tarr

uh qiiru wie comdtn te rus ae te governm the makes groups the accommodating while equilibrium Such participatory through groups the of Accommodation balance. proper be to has there Here, federalany In Supra 88,note 95 and96. IanD Coulter, Ibid s,West port, Connecticut,London, 2004, p.46 ined it, such diversity will not be a problem “ be problem a not suchwill it,diversity ined

101 98 102

Williams and Marko make it clear that "participation rights ought not to lead to a to lead to not ought rights "participation that clear it make Marko and Williams

99 Otherwisec arrangement

Such approach will amplify differences and lead to anarchy between ethnic, ethnic, between anarchy to lead and differences amplify will approach Such Diversityversus unity, commentary, system where diversity exists, two basic interests mustbasicbalancedinterests beregarding two systemexists, diversitywhere

acy by the majority and at the same time it should not be to the the to be not should it time same the at and majority the by acy

ouldn‟tsolve inproblemsmulti 31

100

, Federalism, , sub nationalconstitutions, andminority

JCan Chiropr Assoc. Unity in diversity is the feasible way for stable for way feasible the is diversity in Unity if we have the social space to tolerate these these tolerate spaceto social havethe ifwe 2007, 97

p.77

- n h ohr ad th hand, other the On ethnic states. ethnic

arily on ethnic ethnic on arily n system ent

e CEU eTD Collection and groups clashing reconcile to understanding ofmeans a Practicalsociety.build lasting necessaryofis diversity is unity.Federalismaccommodation to federalinst compared of legislatures federal legitimatejurisdictions(representative)here. willare tested be the Whether explored. be will protection minorities‟ system electoral the and minorities, protecting in house upper the of role minoritiespoliticalmaking,basicallyfederalin ofhouses. The decision representationtwo the domination by central the government. proper addressed self and rule shared of federal institutions shared of Representativeness two: Chapter A mere existence of principles of federalism on paper doesn‟t solve problems of plural plural of problems solve doesn‟t paper on federalism of principles of existence mere A The main focus of this chapter will be on accommodation of minorities in the federal federal the in minorities of accommodation on be will chapter this of focus main The forces countries the aremost indispensableinfederalism basicmakeissues which Thetwo

2.1 The need for and representativeness of shared shared of representativeness and for need The 2.1

ly if all regional states within a federation are to be free from an undesired undesired an from free be to are federation a within states regional all if ly Introduction itutions itutions - rule. Questions for equitable share of power at the center need to be to need center the at power of share equitable for Questions rule.

thus political accommodation and and accommodation political thus

and its impact on impact its and CEU eTD Collection 105 University2 press, 104 103 dominancy executive of problem a is to there helpful making, be decision executive may effective government, establish of head the being minister prime the with government, functioning ministerEthiopiahand other haveIndiathe andheadason prime the the of government. in Ethiopia.headofgovernment US The of legislature federal the of representativeness and legitimacy the to as questions raises this the and legislatures,Ethiopiatwo hasa India While regard. this in consideration special be acceptableinstitutions byto areunits. ofconstituent citizens and federation b shouldmaking” decision government federal in the the effectiveness within diversity internal the of government federal the of institutions the within “representativeness that clear it made has Watts systems. federal of functionality interest. conjoint of areas on together working by institutions federal shared through time same the at unity purposes: basic self ensure two to has namely system federal every book, his in it explained clearly Watts As federation.inevery element essentialan is society diverse the among mutual understanding

Such differences infederalimplicationsininstitutionshaveofdifferences arrangement Such the practical the fo preconditions are institutions federal shared of efficiency and legitimacy Here, http://www.queensu.ca/iigr/conf/Watts/papers/majeed.pdf Ibid Watts,Comparing federal systems, the school of policy Queens studies, University andMcGillthe Representativeness of the federal legislature, executive and other federal institutions needs needs institutionsfederal other executiveand legislature, federal the of Representativeness

of federations. For example, though Ethiopian and Indian parliamentary form of of form parliamentary Indian and Ethiopian though example, For federations. of nd 104

edition, 1999,p.83.

- rule through consti through rule

- house parliament but a houseone parliament but

33 is the president who is directly elected by the people. iswho isby people. thepresident elected the directly uinl iiino oiia oe n o achieve to and power political of division tutional

- house (unicameral) legislatureand house (unicameral) 105 US have bicameral federal federal bicameral have US

e satisfied if shared federal federal ifshared satisfied e - Queens

r the the r 103

CEU eTD Collection of12 them appointed are by presidentthe andthey expertsare inspecific fields. 110 and peopledefinedas underArt 39 of constitution.the upper house,afederal shared institution, which establishedis to representthe interestof nations, nationalities 109 108 107 106 the at control power the to betweengroups diverse scuffle is the leftIt unsettled. stillis center federalproblemislevelin prominent asource ofand conflicts Ethiopia India.and An diversity. high with d societiesinequitable of composed are they as federations two the for work Sabha the in small, or house. upper ofthe and composition wise through is institution conflicts shared federal the in for interests regional accommodate potential high is there as together units the hold to important institutions very is federal unique so is shared diversity where of Ethiopia and role India in especially The nation. the of integrity and commerce defense, com of areas on power exercise institutions Such together. units the hold to andwhen Congressthefrom president arethe parties. different decisiomaking while standoff of risk is a there government, of form presidential US the in balances and checks good are there though even hand, other the On questionable. “thr

In Ethiopia, the question raised by nationalities to get an equitable share of power at t at power of share equitable an get to nationalities by raised question the Ethiopia, In While the US federal system provides two seats uniformly for each state, whether itwhetherlarge is seatseach forstate, uniformly two federalprovides system WhileUS the institutions federal shared are there have, may federation a government of form Whatever Art80 ofconstitution the of Rajya India. Sabhais upper the houseinIndia. It composedis ofmembers. 250 Art61 ofconstitutio the ArtsectionI 3 of USconstitution. Ibid Supra 104note p.85 uh at discipline” party ough 110

don‟t follow such uniform seat allocation. Indeed such uniform allocation doesn‟t allocation uniform such Indeed allocation. seat uniform such follow don‟t srbto o pwr mn te tnc rlgos n lnusi gop a the at groups linguistic and religious ethnic, the among power of istribution Senate,

n ofn Ethiopia. The House of Federationin Ethiopiais second the chamber or the 108

106

h Hue f Federation of House the

n te ersnaiees f h fdrl oenet il be will government federal the of representativeness the and

109

n tipa n te nin Rajya Indian the and Ethiopia in 107

disintegration. One way to to way One disintegration.

mon interest like interest mon ns especially especially ns

he CEU eTD Collection accommodationof identity, May 2005, p.5 114 exterminatesany opposition group. 113 112 OSAAnnualConference „SelfStruggleOromos:for The ofthe Future the State and Ethiopian University,AbabaAddis Relations, International & SciencePolitical Dept. Prof; Associate(PHD), Gudina 111 linguist or ethnic religious, a from influence the is it time, the of most society. Indian of liberation of period the groups among developed fromis consciousness ethnic and religious linguistic, the Starting on, movements groups. linguistic and religious ethnic, among amongremainsgroups ethnic unsettled. atfederal equitablefor na power theamongdistribution level of promises the aside setting by power military its on rely war by power to comes which TPLF regime. Derg the of removal the in resulted which nationalities of question the TPLF/EPRDF. system, party single the of because value paper only has now but constitution current the in incorporated was government transitional the of gover of removal and conflicts successivefor reason the is this and nationalitiesby raised questions be issocietiesaddressed. to scheme must a is nationalities the among power fairly distributed that obvious is it Thus, instabilities. and conflicts continuous to leads which center http://www.google.hu/search?q=www.oromopeoplescongress.org%2Fdocs%2FMerera The same problem is faced by India. As there is high plurality in India, there is highis tension inhigh isthereIndia, Asplurality by faced isIndia. there same problem The the address to failed one, present the including Ethiopia, in systems government past The

The socialistThe Derg regimewas removedabloodyafter becausewar ofthe the Ibid HariharBhattacharyya nment systems by war. systemsby nment

114

, Power sharing and regional autonomy in India is highly asymmetric and asymmetric highly is India in autonomy regional and sharing Power , Minneapolis,USA Fede

ralism andRegionalismralism inIndia

111

The promised power sharing in 1991 during the establishmentthe during in1991 sharing power promisedThe

, 2006, , P.2

- 12

InstitutionalStrategies andPolitical - Rule and Shared and Rule 112

tionalities and thus the tensionthethus tionalitiesand if the tension among plural plural among tension the if

It was the failure the was It n conservativen policy which - Rule‟ - OSA ic groups which which groups ic , paper presentedpaperto - paper 113 to address to .

Yet, the Yet, Merera

The

CEU eTD Collection 118 117 116 Praeger publishers,US, 2004, p. 201 115 setup. federal the under interest their secure to groups these enable which power political for potential high a there unless nothing is federalprinciples to beadhering laws having Here conflicts. always will there equitably, institutions shared federal through federal government. the by them of exclusion systematic is there time the of most and vulnerable most the are minoritygroups beSuch addressed. needscenterto the at whosepolitical participation groups wou that and administrations city two and states 9 only areas different over scattered being territory defined occupya incountriesboth don‟t whichminority groups minorities.Thereare sufficientmere federalinterritorialensure for not is system theserespect countries to de emergency of case in system unitary a into federation the change to government federal the for given power the and system fiscal centralized the scheme, service public centralized the diversity. than unity favors highly it and government central strong a established has constitution the unity, for danger others. for not but states some provisi special are there India, of constitution the In itself. constitution the under India of states between asymmetry political such understand easily center. the at power of sharing and autonomy regional of level the determines

monstrate h monstrate General A here. considered be to needs Ethiopia and India in regime protection minorities‟ The Ibid Ibidp. 202 Ibid RobertF.Williams, G.Alan Tarr andJosef Mark

ly, unless the interests of ethnic, linguistic or religious groups are accommodated accommodated are groups religious or linguistic ethnic, of interests the unless ly,

ow Indiaowis a

federalsystem 117

- The 116 204.

Considering the towering potential for conflicts which is a is which conflicts for potential towering the Considering . For example, in Ethiopia there about 80 ethnic groups but but ethnic 80 groups inabout example, For Ethiopiathere . absence of dual court system (the single judicial system), judicial single (the system court dual of absence

with a veryanda strong with centralized union o,Federalism, sub nationalconstitutions and minorityrights, ld mean that there are many ethnic ethnic many are there that mean ld ons which are applicable for one or or one for applicable are which ons is a share of of share a is 115 . 118

n can One rights of

CEU eTD Collection 119 laws. make can which representatives) Peoples of (House house t lower only is It process. making law the in participate doesn‟t house) upper (the Federation federalismmissing.ofis interestinthefederation. ofall thecitizens houserepresents lower intereststhe and diverse represents chamber second houses. The upper and lower the both include to has it mean I diversity. and unity of elements both constitute fede the diversity, in unity about is federalism as Firstly, things. basic manner.efficient t within groups different legislature federal the as long as Thus, isrealized. interest of areas common regarding system federal the of functioning practicalthe laws through is It system. federal a in satisfied be to has which element basic first the is legislatures federal the of representativeness or Legitimacy minorities’ protection federationbethat stablethecannot union the and establish Failureto federal (allmeanssharedwiselyinclusive) designed institutions, therefore, 2.2 Representativeness of the federal legislatures and and legislatures federal the of Representativeness 2.2

The Ethiopian unicameral legislature fails to include both elements as the House of of House the as elements both include to fails legislature unicameral Ethiopian The For a federal legislature to be legitimate or genuine representative, it has to satisfy two two satisfy to has it representative, genuine or legitimate be to legislature federal a For Art55(1) of constitutionthe of Ethiopia.

fdrto, h fdrl system federal the federation, e

37 lacks legitimacy or legitimacy lacks

If one house is excluded, it meansisIf ithouse excluded,one element one that

isalwaysrisk. at

made by the federal legislature that legislature federal the by made

is not a genuine representative of of representative genuine a not is cannot function in a stable and and stable a in function cannot

119 ral legislature has to to has legislature ral

This means that it that means This he CEU eTD Collection 121 120 The US. of constitution the under rights such have don‟t We country. given a in individuals all to granted rights other all regarding individuals all with equal being their to addition in pe certain for given specialrights about talking are we rights, minority By action. affirmative from different also are rights minority one, chapter in it stated have I As sufficient. not is individuals between nondiscrimination minorities‟regime. protection and diversity for attention the lowered have hand, other the on rights individual protect to individual including well the and hand one on centuries for assimilation of result the is which societyhomogenous relatively a of existence The level.federal the at states other with inth group majority the by dominated be could state regional a within groups Minority diversity particularly. not but generally between states equality only ensure can system a such Yet, ones. small over states populous and large of thi andequally states larger smalland both represents house upper US the Here, XVII). (Amendment people the by directly elected are members the and 3) section diversityrepresentlower house the andun representgenuinelymust must house upper the that mean I Here, representative. genuine a be to has house each that havebicameralinandhousesboth legislatures lower theupper which US the Both legislature. federal legitimacya for of yardstick satisfy the failsto

f cnttto poie a ioiy ihs protection rights minority a provides constitution a If I (Art uniformly state each from members two has Senate) (the house upper the US, In is legitimate be to is legislature federal the if satisfied be to has that element second The Art107 ofconstitution the of ArtsectionI 1 ofconstitution the

liberalism, equality and nondiscrimination which the US gives emphasis emphasis gives US the which nondiscrimination and equality liberalism,

India.

38 rsons because they belong to a certain minority group group minority certain a to belong theybecause rsons

at state though the state is represented equally equally isrepresented state the though state at

regime, then equality and and equality then regime, ity. together maketogether laws. s can avoid domination domination avoid can s - established principles principles established

120

and Indiaand

121

CEU eTD Collection 124 123 122 laws.on vote to power no has it nation. Secondly, like any seat onefor theirrights to addition inpopulation h can they as nationalities larger few by dominated is it compulsive Firstly, house. upper is Ethiopian the with institutions problems prominent two federal are There necessary. shared through diversity such of representation and lawismakinghousemeaninglesshasThererole.no very as com this Ethiopia. of peoples and nationalities nations, of representatives are members as diversity represents Federation population. million one each for seats extra have can right, seat one its to addition in nationality each as ones smalldominate to states largest enables systemallocation allocatedbasedpopulation onunits.) size of constituent are seats (i.e. principle representation proportional on based allocated are seats the as states its to fai addition In proper. diversities not and states represents senate, US the like 80), Art under four.will chapterthis point elaborate a for rights and autonomy same the providing on insists liberalism individual of principle the as society the of sections some for rights) (minority rights provide different to more gives US

h Hou The States, of Representatives of House the or State of Council (the India in house upper The Ibid Art61 sub article 2 ofconstitution the of Ethiopia. Supra 110.note largest the by dominated be also can house upper Indian the diversity, represent to lure

se of Federation (the upper house in Ethiopia) represents diversity though the the though diversity represents Ethiopia) in house upper (the Federation of se

emphasis for the principle of individual liberalism means that there is no need no is there that means liberalism individual of principle the for emphasis

124

u sc dvriy ersnain y h Hue f eeain is Federation of House the by representation diversity such But

ave more seats for every one million extra extra million one everyfor seats more ave 122

plex diversity in diversityplex Ethiopia 123 ll individuals. I I individuals. ll

The

House of House CEU eTD Collection 127 126 897 (Ed.). 125 represents which house upper the as diversity reflect doesn‟t it because legitimacy lacks le federal the before, explained have I As system. has federal a constitution established the while system unitary a in resulted have systems discipline party and undercategorythedemocracy.” ofpseudo falls Ethiopiain systemgovernance party EPRDF/ruling“the that stated speechfamous his in inEthiopia. genuine shar no is there debate, political a inon speechhis stated rightly leader party opposition an (PHD), Merera As mistake. big a is that say to But world. the in anywhere nationalities other than autonomous more are and rights unlimited given in Ethiopi groups ethnic are maynationalitiesis,(whichhe/she say ground realitythe on the consideringwhat without constitutionthe at look a takes ifone Thus,federations. modern secession evento (whicup MelesZenawi.” ethno its and Party Democratic Revolutionary system. political at share of center. power the prese the

Here, the illegitimacy of the federal legislature, a single party system dominated by TPLF TPLF by dominated system party single a legislature, federal the of illegitimacy the Here, self to right their and nationalities of equality recognizes constitution The and war by systems government of removal andconflicts past the behind reason basic The

Ibid Ethiopian Television,Feb, 12,2010, speech y, MeraraDr onfirst the debateround for the May election.2010 - Bookreview, 3.2006,246 pp.)p.305. EthnicFederalism: theEthiopian experience incomparat

nt dissatisfaction of different nationalities (ethnic groups) is absence of a genuine genuine a of absence is groups) (ethnic nationalities different of dissatisfaction nt 126

The democratic system that the government talks about is just on paper. Mererajustis paper. The government ondemocratic the talks about system that J.SHOLA 125

“

Real power is exercised in centralized fashion by the E the by fashion centralized in exercised is power Real

OMOTOLA, OMOTOLA,

h I will elaborate in chapter four) whichinincorporatedfour) will innot h iselaborate I chapter other Claphamhasrightly pragmatic explainedthe centralizationof the

Departmentof Political Science,University of Ilorin 40 127

- ive national satellites, under the tight control of of control tight the under satellites, national perspective. Oxford:James Currey (978 ing of power and democracy democracy and power ing of gislature of Ethiopia Ethiopia of gislature thiopian People‟s People‟s thiopian , (DAVID TURTON - determination determination - 085255 a) are are a) -

CEU eTD Collection 130 provisions.html 129 political 128 The religion. or ethnicity language, on based arranged are boundaries state I federalism. territorial federalparliament diversit over unity favor also India of constitution the of provisions Other force. binding has and amended been not India ofconstitution the under provisiondisputed most theis emergencyclause such emergency) of case (in situations special in unity favor than diversity. India and US both that seems other the on India and US the and hand one on groups different ethnic represents which house upper Ethiopian the between difference such for reason ethnicity.The or languagelike factors to reference byelected not are India and US of houses members addressed. Unlike sufficiently not is legislature the in diversity of representation of question the genuineseta systems legislatur to federal other and India US, from lessons take to has system federal Ethiopian established. is legislature bicameral a unless diversity of problem the resolve adequately cannot system co the in principles federal the that assuming even that means This laws. on vote to power no has Ethiopia of peoples and nationalities nations,

The absence of genuine diversity in the US Senate seems to be the result of a purely purely a of result the be to seems Senate US the in diversity genuine of absence The system unitary a into system federal the change can even India in government federal The As I have explained previously, even though the US and India have bicameral legislatures, legislatures, bicameralhave India and US the though even previously, explained have I As http://www.ra Art350(1) of constitutionthe of India. Art352 ofconstitution the of India.

jputbrotherhood.com/knowledge

of the upper house of Ethiopia, representatives in both upper and lower lower and upper both in representatives Ethiopia, of house upper the of 130

andcentralizedalla shows thisfederation. system of n Ethiopia and India, the federal arrangement is not territorial. Rather, Rather, territorial. not is arrangement federal the India, and Ethiopia n y. Constitutional amendment of most provisions also belongs to the to belongs also provisions most of amendment Constitutional y.

e suitable to addresssuitable e into problemsfederal system. a

41 - hub/political

as provided by the constitution. the by provided as - science/constitution nstitution are being implemented; the the implemented; being are nstitution - of - india

- emergency 128

Even though Even 129

- , it hasit , CEU eTD Collection 132 131 the and Representatives of House the of composed bicameral is Congress the and Congress legislaturewillmonopolizedbe largerstates.by some mean would That process. making law the in interests regional represent joint through resolved deadlock or veto meeting. suspensive veto, absolute an of form the take makin law in role Their process. making law insay significant have they Ethiopia, like innumberhave ofeachforseats equal state Senate. the li federations few a Only units. regional or states larger by house lower the of domination the counterbalance to is house upper the of role basic the federations, the effectivelyminoritiesare protect ofUS by vulnerable other to courts utilized theor groups. constitution the under principles nondiscrimination and citizens of equality liberty, individual d religious or linguistic ethnic, state. of representation no is there each Though by addressed be to left are issues protection minority or ethnic and senate US u trend a such no is There identity. ethnic on based also is Ethiopia in especially organization nder the US federal system. Therefore, states ratherfederalrepresentedstatesby arendersystem. US Therefore, ethnic the than groups the 2.3 The 2.3 role ofupperthe house

In US, Article I section 1 of the constitution has vested all law making powers in the the in powers making law all vested has constitution the of 1 section I Article US, In When we see the role played by second chambers, in almost all federations except a few a except federations all almost in chambers, second by played role the see we When Supra 130note p.93 Watts,Comparing federal systems, 2 Second chambers (upper houses) in different federations have different roles. In most of of most In roles. different have federations different in houses) (upper chambers Second 132

If the law maker is only the lower house like in Ethiopia, then there is no way to way no is there then Ethiopia, in like house lower the only is maker law the If

edition,Queens university, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, 1999, p. 95 42

131

iversity by the US senate, senate, US the by iversity ke US and Australia Australia and US ke

that the federal federal the that g may g

CEU eTD Collection 138 137 136 135 other and questionswhich concurrentneed veto. 134 133 US list the no is there because government federal under the of powers execute congressto necessary is constitution to granted expressly not power some whether to as determining 8. section I Art interpreting by it to granted be may government federal constitution the to given expressly US not power as under list exhaustive have power doesn‟t of separation vertical the that means this and government powe other any or 8 section I Art under powers its execute to laws make necessaryto is it as long as areas all to congress of power the extends constitution states. the leftto are all powers that reserved conclusion the to come may one 10, Amendment reading By matters. diversity such regulate consent, by states autonomous previously by formed federat together” “coming a has US The factors. such on based not is US in power political federal the of share the federations, multicultural in Unlike groups. linguistic or religious ethnic, powers.exercise those can that Senate the and Representatives of House the constitutes which Congress the is it and it, vetoes president the force.binding case in and president is bill that if the necessaryis house by each vote majority third two reconsiderationand to submitted is it before Senate Sen

Ibid,(see IArt section 8 paragraphlast of constitutionthe of US). Ibid,(see Amendment 10 ofconstitution the of US). ThomasJ.Anton, American federalism andpublic policy,George Washington University, 1989,P.9 Artof8 constithe ArticlesectionI 7 ofconstitution the of US. SenateThe alsoplays similar role regardingorders, resolutions ArticlesectionI 1 ofconstitution the of US. Even though the Senate can Senate the though Even ate. ion (see footnote 150 for more on coming together and holding together federations) together holding and together coming on more for 150 footnote (see ion 133

Any bill is required to be passed by both the House of Representatives and the the and Representatives of House the both by passed be to required is bill Any 134

The constitution of US has a list of federal legislative powers under Articlelegislative under 8 federal powers of list hasa TheofconstitutionUS tutionof US. 135

represent the interests of states, its members don‟t represent represent don‟t members its states, of interests the represent

137

But the last phrase under Art I sectionthe I of 8 Art phrase under last the But 138

h U jdcay ly cuil oe in role crucial plays judiciary US The 136

n sae hv bod oe to power broad have states and rs which belong to the federal federal the to belong which rs to have a to

CEU eTD Collection press,2007, p.1. 142 141 140 Constitutionalism:Case andMaterials (2003). 139 haveand seempolitical constitutionalchange replacedthe to norms.” governance of patterns informal “alternativeand book, his init stated rightly Sen Sarbani As con the under set principles thefrom deviation reveals practice political the and time through eroded been has system centralized a such But one. centralized highly is federation di such that argue to difficult is It religion. or ethnicity on based movements, not is liberty chamber second the of in representation years the during consciousness linguistic and religious high was linguistic or ratherrepresents diversity.regional s It religious ethnic, represent doesn‟t Sabha Rajya India, in plurality of degree high Despite diversity. Indian represent doesn‟t it Yet, making. law regarding role crucial all over veto legislationwithfederal associated byadministrationLander. the absolute has which Bundesrat German the like countries federal parliamentary in chambers In powers. additional the making.Yet, law monopoly over hasa houselower the Ethiopia, has house lower the system, parliamentary following in federations hand other the On regions. of interests the represents Senate the and whole a as nation power equal havealmost houses two McCullochMaryland.V see can One powers. necessary such of

In federations that separate power between the executive and the legislature likebetween power federations legislature executivethe separate US, thethe the andIn that ie h U snt, h scn cabr f ni (h cou (the India of chamber second the senate, US the Like SarbaniSen, Popular sovereignty democratic and transformations, constitutionthe of Oxford India, university Ibid,P.96and 97 Watts,Comparing federal systems, 2 SupremeCourt

ofUS, 17the U.S. 316, 1819,Dorsen, in Rosenfeld, Sajo andBaer, Comparative

versity issues are left to be regulated by states given the fact that Indian Indian that fact the given states by regulated be to left are issues versity 139

edition,Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, 1999, P.96. 140 tates as I have asI there Eventhough explainedpreviously. tates

44 in which the lower house represents the intthe houserepresents lower the inwhich

such an important role by the judiciary in the case case the in judiciary the by role important an such

ncil of state or Rajya) plays plays Rajya) or state of ncil re are very strong second second verystrong are re 142

141

erest of the of erest stitution. stitution.

CEU eTD Collection 147 146 145 144 fiscalfederalism. isstates well not representedby federal the shared house. Absence of involvement by Rajyathe regarding moneybillswould mean that the economic interestof such recomme 143 federala constitutional or rule court to constitutionalsupremecourt on disputes. ha federations Other unique. is institution political a by role judicial Such house. this for constitution the interpret to power the grants Ethiopia of constitution the of tha power crucial most havethe doesn‟t it Yet Ethiopia. of constitution the of 62(7) Article under stated as states for supply may government federal the that subsidies and sources tax federal) and the including powers other also has federal the between or states. and government states between disputes resolve to and constitution the interpret house.housecaneasily upper for role adeny members. 250 only has Rajya Rajya; the in members of number session. joint such of vote majority a by approved is it if law a become will bill the and 108 Art under session joint be will there disagrees,then other the but bill apassed has house one If why. explainme 108. Art under session joint for cases special and bills money of case the in except law of force ahave to isbill that beif housespassed constitutionboth bill 107, theUnder house.by Art of India anyto requires See of62 Art c the Surprisingly, the basic role of the House of Federatio of House the of role basic the Surprisingly, bills, money of case in except Sabha, Rajya See80Arts and81 of constitution.Indian See108Art of constitutionthe of India. See107,Arts 108 and109 of constitutionthe of India. Art109 ofconstitution the of caseIndia.In of moneyRajya the bills, only can forward recommendations and t second chambers in other federations have i.e. power to vote on laws. Art 62 (1) (1) 62 Art laws. on vote to power i.e. have federations other in chambers second t ndationsbecan rejectedlower by the house.Therefore, money billsare monopolizedby lower the

onstitutionof Ethiopia. 145

The 147 144

In addition to interpreting the constitution, the House of Federation of House the constitution, interpretingthe to addition In But such law making role role making law such But lower house has 530 members and that is more than double of the the of double than more is that and members 530 has house lower

power to decide on division of revenue from joint (state (state joint from revenue of division on decide to power

institutionsandthat would significanthave impact on Indian

143

has equal law making power wit power making law equal has of the Rajya Sabha seems artificial. Let Let artificial. seems Sabha Rajya the of n (the upper house) in Ethiopia is to to is Ethiopia in house) upper (the n 146

This means that the lower the that means This ve an independent an ve

h the lower the h CEU eTD Collection 151 creates newlyautonomous states from a unitaryformof government. basedstates on their consent. “Holding together” federation theon other hand representsafederal system which “Coming a together” federation andconnotesit afederal system which establishedis by previousl 150 149 148 drafting of process “the this: clarified has Aalen Lovise laws; ordinary other of making the in happening is what like TPLF/EPRDF system, party single a through dominated was process federa together” “coming a is Ethiopia that say may one constitution, the of 8 Art Reading nationalities. the of will free the of expression angenuinelyis constitution 1995 bythe establishedis which federation five. chapter in details provide will I organ. umpiring an as organization political a be to has there issues. political overlook philosoph legal own their to preference give will judges then judiciary, the in vested is power such if that, is reason second The above. explained have I as constitution Ethiopian f together” together” nationalities. s interpret to institution right the nationalities, of sovereignty the of reflection is constitution the as and constitution Federation. constitution of power the grant to justifications as given

h frt ruet em wa. isl, t s v is it Firstly, weak. seems argument first The As it can be observed from the notes of the constitutional assembly, there are two reasons two are there assembly, constitutional the of notes the from observed be can it As

Supra 148note There twoare types of federationsbased onparties the tothe formationof a federation.given The firstone is Ibid Afr (HoF) AssefaFiseha ica

, Nairobi, , April, 2007 p.9 , 150 Draft paper presented at African Network of Constitutional Law conference on Fostering Constitutionalism in Constitutionalism Fostering on conferenceLaw Constitutional of Network African at presented paper Draft 148 drtos. h spotr o ti agmn mk rfrne o r 8 f the of 8 Art to reference make argument this of supporters The ederations). ye se h font blw o mr o “oig oehr ad “holding and together” “coming on more for below footnote the (see type 149

The first is that, as sovereignty is vested in the nationalities under Art 8 of the of 8 Art under nationalities the in vested is sovereignty as that, is first The ,

ConstitutionalAdjudication Ethiopia: in ExploringExperiencethe ofHouse ofthe Federation This argument, therefore, assumes that the Ethiopian federation is a “coming a is federation Ethiopian the that assumes therefore, argument, This uch document has to be the upper house which is representative of the the of representative iswhich house upper the be hasto document uch 151

in Bt ht s ilaig Te hl cntttoa making constitutional whole The misleading. is that But tion.

This argument is sound but it doesn‟t lead to the conclusion that conclusion the to lead doesn‟t it but sound is argument This - 11.

ery difficult to assume that the Ethiopian Ethiopian the that assume to difficult ery

al interpretation for the House of of House the for interpretation al yautonomous y and and y CEU eTD Collection ConstitutionalismAfrica, in Nairobi, April, 2007 (HoF),Draftpaper presented Africanat Network of Constitutional Law conference Fosteringon 154 153 ofAfrican ( 2002,Chr. Michelsen Institute, Development Studies andHuman Rights p.vi.Also see 152 under stated as peoples) and nationalities (nations, diversity represents it though Even house. bydominated partyonet institution political a on confidence better have cannot People persuasive. not is argument constitution. the interpret to federation of house the of power the supports also syste adjudication historical improper an of beon. Thisproperinwayasettlement1991 from mechanism. cannot ofdispute which house the of vote majority by decision political position.ownits hold to free ishouse the limited as Constitutiona is of 84 Art under Councilhouse the to recommendations the submit and disputes constitutional investigate of power the But house. the assist of to composed experts is which Inquiry Constitutional of Council the established has constitution callto federation“comingasaEthiopian together” one. difficult is it Therefore, federation. a the of establishment single the before a Ethiopia in evenstate regional no is there more, is What people. the of will the of reflection legitimacy.” lost project andratifyi Lecturer inDepartmentthe of Political Science, Collegeof SocialSciences, Addis Ababa University), Review See In summary, the basic problem of the Ethiopian federal system revolves around the upper upper the around revolves system federal Ethiopian the of problem basic the summary, In (because Ethiopia in courts the in confidence of absence the that argue also scholars Some The constitution. the interpret to experts legal no has Federation of House the Secondly, AssefaFise Art84(1 and3.b) of constitutionthe of Ethiopia. LoviseAalen Political Economy ng the constitution was totally dominated by the ruling party, and hence, the federal federal the hence, and rulingparty, by the dominated totally was constitutionthe ng ha, Constitutional ha, Adjudication in Ethiopia:Exploring the ExperienceofHouse the of Federation , , EthnicFederalism ina , Volume , han the judicialhan the alternative. 152

hs i i dfiut o osdr h cnttto a a genuine a as constitution the consider to difficult is it Thus,

Issue63 March 1995 pages , 129 DominantParty State: The EthiopianExperience 1991 47

p.10

m due to the absence of judicial independence) independence) judicial of absence the to due m

153

The ultimate result will be passing of a a of passing be will result ultimate The is dominated by a single party system party single a by dominated is

135

Kassahun Berhanu

154 l Inquiry to to Inquiry l - utonomous utonomous 2000Report

But, such But,

CEU eTD Collection 159 158 157 156 155 have to expected are they and India of president the by legislatures. state by elected are Sabha Rajya the of Sabha. Rajya of members legislatures. state by elected were members befederalmayby by through thedirect government, election.or states membe of Selection Ethiopia. in Federation of House the like groups linguistic ethnicmay or it represent federations. Or most in case theis federationwhich ofthe Theu section. this in willexplain I as interests group different or regional of representation regarding haseffects that and selection of ways different offer world the in federations Different thehouseupper interpretjustifyhouse constitution.upper of thethe power to the to the interpret power the with Court Supreme federal or court constitutional a and legislature federal bicameral a Establishing making. law regarding groups of interest the represent to fails thus it constitution, the of 62 Article 2.4 Difference in the manner of selection of members of of members of selection of manner the in Difference 2.4

In the US, members of the senate are elected directly by the people. the by directly elected are senate the of members US, the In of members of selection The Art80 ofconstitution the of India Supra 155.note See1Art section of3 constitutionthe of US. SeeAmendment 17 ofconstitution the of US. Watts, pper house, as I have explained previously, may represent the interests of regional states interestsstates ofregional the mayrepresent have explainedpreviously, ashouse,I pper

Comparingfederal systems, 2 constitution as in other countries is a more feasible solution than attempting to to attempting than solution feasible more a is countries other in as constitution

158

The constitution provides that 238 out of the total 250 members 250 total the of out 238 that provides constitution The

. .

lacks the law making power as I have explained before and and before explained have I as power making law the lacks nd the upper house is an important issue in a federal system. system. federal a in issue important an is house upper the

edition,Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, 1999, p.92 48

157

hs s o te ae in case the now is This 159

The remaining 12 members are elected aremembers 12 remaining The experience in science, art or or art science, in experience

155 rs of second chambers chambers second of rs

156

ni fr h most the for India

Before 1913, the 1913, Before - 97.

CEU eTD Collection 163 162 161 160 Senate the can inminority each state US thegroups largeYet, inbyones. smallstates avoidsdomination of seat equal have states all that fact the more, is What influence. party avoid the of interests of representation ensure established. was it whichfor purpose servethe cannot it mean would This government. ruling the of wing second the make will system, party such through domination political and system discipline party strong is there where Ethiopia like federations parliamentary in especially problem o because a be may there though states of interest general the represent they then indirect, voters. regional the of interests the represent they units, indirect. or direct be may house this of members of election Therefore people. the by directly elected be members that decide may states of council that provides provision same the but legislatures); sub 61 of Art Federati House memberselectthe of to power the Articlegrants 3 under Ethiopia of constitution The house. upper the of members of selection regional by elected members 233 onlymemberslegislaturesand tot of Rajyaarethe Sabha are there currently, but legislatures, states‟ by literature.

In the US, election of members of the Senate directly by the people of constituent states canelectiondirectlystatesmembers by ofpeopleconstituent US, the Senate of the the of In regarding India and US the between position middle a takes constitution Ethiopian The hn h mmes f t of members the When http://finance.indiamart.com/government_india/parliament_india.html Ibid RonaldL. Watts, Federal second chambers compared, Queen‟s University, Canada,2006, p. 6. Ibid

160 f the political party system in some federations. some in system party political the f

Here, the figure 238 is the maximum number of members which can be elected be can which members of number maximum the is 238 figure the Here,

he upper house are elected directly by the people of constituent constituent of people the by directly elected are house upper he

people of constituent states as direct election can can election direct as states constituent of people ally245. 163 162 161

Selection of members indirectly, members of Selection

f lcin f h mmes is members the of election If on to state councils (state councils state (state to on

house one one house CEU eTD Collection ComparativeStudy, revised edition, Addis Ababa: Artistic Printing Enterprise 164 states regional of interests the Thus, process. appointment the through house the dominate par ruling or party political dominant a for way the pave elections indirect states. Moreover, smaller of interests the undermines That house. this in say better a have can states proport of system the on based legislatures state by elected be to are Sabha Rajya of members 250) of out (238 Asmost federation. house of and Ethiopian RajyaninSabha Indian such problem can observe th whichundermines factor important an avoiddecentralization interventionfederalto principles by the government. infederalismbecentralizedwillsystem operat a of there cases, such In interests. regional such representativebeof cannot house second the members, of selection the to control its extends which system discipline party a is there while el are members the or government federal the by controlled is the house second of members the of process appointment whole the If house. lower the in states larger government. f the by intervention possible from constitution federal a under them to granted states generally, properlycannotin but eachstate diversity represent proper. partyasecond representationinterestshousethrough system. This of peoensures theof the this of domination avoid can US in Senate the of members of election direct Thus, Senate. by dominated be Domination of larger states not only in the lower house but also in the upper house is also also is house upper the in also but house lower the in only not states larger of Domination regional the of powers protecting of means are chambers second systems, federal most In

Assefa,Fiseha, 164

hy r as epce t cutraac dmnto o salr tts by states smaller of domination counterbalance to expected also are They Federalism andAccommodationthe of Diversity Eth in the majority through direct election and they are underrepresented in the the in underrepresented are they and election direct through majority the oa rpeetto (.. et alctd ae o pplto sz) larger size), population on based allocated seats (i.e. representation ional

50 e interests of smaller states in many federations. One One federations. manyin states smaller ofinterests e

ion though a constitution may contain rigid ionmayconstitutiona rigid containthough iopia:A , , 2007,P.163

- 167. ected indirectly ected

ederal ederal ty to to ty ple CEU eTD Collection 165 most the is reasons, cumulative of because problematicone. Federation, of House Ethiopian the But cri from free also not are US and India of houses upper the previously, it stated have I As Ethiopia. of house upper the of roles and composition members, of selection regarding interest haveinlowertheyhouse. the say larger the like house this dominate easily can nationalities larger that mean would which ea for seat extra an to entitledis nationality Eachnationalities. larger the by dominated is peoples, and nationalities nations, all of representative is it though par option this used never have they constitution, the under option their using house upper the of members select to electionsdirect conduct to free especially mayundermine which majority house lower the counterbalance to way no is there Thus, laws. on vote to power of lack its is reason first The reasons. basic three for house upper Ethiopian the by experienced Sabha. Rajya the in represented well not are particularly states smaller of interests the and generally

Therefore, this house doesn‟t function properly and is not genuinely representative of of representative genuinely not is and properly function doesn‟t house this Therefore, protectio regarding scenario worst the summary, In NationalElectoral Board of Ethiopia/ ty, EPRDF, to exert influence on this house through its party system. Thirdly, this house, this Thirdly, system. party its through house this on influence exert to EPRDF, ty,

s of the diverse Ethiopian people. There is a need for fundamental reformation reformation fundamental for need a is There people. Ethiopian diverse the of s

the interest of smaller states. Secondly, though the states are states the Secondly,though states. smallerof interest the http://www.electionsethiopia.org/Electoral%20System.html 51

165

and that has allowed the dominant ruling dominant the allowed has that and n of regional or diversity interests is is interests diversity or regional of n ch one million extra population millionextra onech

ticism. ticism. CEU eTD Collection 172 171 170 169 http 168 167 166 low a is there as executive the form to parties political of coalitions be will there time, the Europe. Western in countries 28) of out (21 most by isadopted it now and introduced is system proportionalrepresentation To av system. federal the within diversity of representation on impact an has ultimately and parties minority of underrepresentation of expense the at happens this bodies, legislative electora Ethiopian properly.minority groups of interests the incorporate to help can turn in which parties political minority accommodate r proportional employ Switzerland like including systems federal system.” electoral plurality constituency member “single a on based from elected interests. diverse of protection . Eetrl ytm n is mat n minorities’ on impact its and system Electoral 2.5

i polm o udrersnain rdcd y “plurality by produced underrepresentation of problems oid There are problems with both types of electoral systems. While the US, Indian and and Indian US, the While systems. electoral of types both with problems are There http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/BeginnningReading/PRsystems.htm Ibid Ibid Supra 166 note NationalElectoral Board of Ethiopia/ Jayshree Bajoria Watts,Comparing federal systems, 2 ://www.cfr.org/publication/19105/indias_electoral_politics.html The type of electoral system followed by federal countries has an impact hasan countries federalby followed system electoral Theof type

,India's ElectoralPolitics l system may enable these federations to establish effective and stable stable and effective establish to federations these enable may system l 166

Members of the lower house in Ethiopia, in house lower the of Members 170

172

But, it is difficult to establish a stable legi stable a establish to difficultis it But, http://www.electionsethiopia.org/Electoral%20System%20print.html nd

edition,Que ,April 15,2009/ 5 2

ens University,ens Kingston,Ontario, Canada, 1999,P.90.

epresentation with a view to to view a with epresentation - 167 aoiy oig systems”, voting majority

India slature and most of most and slature 168 on representation representation on

n h S are US the and 169

Other

171

CEU eTD Collection July18(3) 297 1997: University, 173 least secondtheat problemhas innumberequalaseachof state seatshou this fromescapedSenate Theavoid US larger housestates. properly controlby upper of the to and Indi and Ethiopian the But, interests. diverse of representatives genuine be to elements more or one to needs it and states larger upper by dominationfrom free institution federal shared a beshould the house Thus, house. lower the in face they domination the counterbalance to properly during interests their advance to house lower the in incapacity relative their recognizing by that means This party. single dominant a or parties of coalition a by constituted whether house lower the in usua asthey system proportionalelectoral house. lower the in say ahave to groups different enable to system electoral accommodativemore a makingseconditishouse lawrepresents whichhas nopower, diversity the where Ethiopia like federations in Especially, system. electoral majority pluralitymember frequent to leads turn in that and governdisagreements how oncountry. to a house the in majority a form to party one for chance

Yet, the most vulnerable minority groups cannot get appropriate protection through the the through protection appropriate get cannot groups minority vulnerable most the Yet, is It As I explained in previous sections, the upper houses of the US, India and Ethiopia lack Ethiopia and India US, the of houses upper the sections, previous in explained I As ip Norris Pippa haveensurecrucial roleprotectionto ofdiverseminorities.

obvious that the proportional electoral system is fair and more inclusive than the single single theinclusive morethan fairand is system proportionalelectoralthe that obvious an upper houses are more problematic because they fail both to represent diversity represent to both fail they because problematic more are houses upper an For For Contrasting Political InstitutionsPoliticalContrasting ,

hoig lcoa Systems: Electoral Choosing law making, such minorities have to be represented in the upper house house upper the in represented be to have minorities such making, law - 312.edited by

Jean Laponce Jean andBernard Saint 53 special issue of the the of specialissue lly have a low chance to influence the majority vote vote majorityinfluence the lowto chance a have lly

173 rprinl Mjrtra ad ie Syst Mixed and Majoritarian Proportional,

- International Political SciencePoliticalInternationalReview Jacques

, P.4 , - 7

necessary to introducenecessary to se.

ems Harvard ,

Vol. Vol. CEU eTD Collection 175 174 federal the system. of integrity the risk that conflicts potential creates group each of interests the failure and means alternative other through groups interested allsatisfy to difficult is It democratically. and properly function to system federal a for necessary is government maki law the in role crucial a with house upper representative genuine a with together groups marginalized by supported wiselyhouse. upper designed such unless house this in majority the influence to difficult is it and house lower group. b candidates Castes. and Tribes scheduled for seats reserve to states obliged has India of constitution the house, interestseither generallytheof regional indiverse states ofpeoplegroups region. the or of representativesserve real as cannot membersits case, a such In system. party thediscipline par ruling a for opportunity an be will there as system federal the of functioning the in problem additional an creates This states. regional of legislatures

Generally, proportional electoral system or reservation of a significant number of seats for for seats of number significant a of reservation or system electoral proportional Generally, neglecte those that ensure To and of 250) Ethiopiabymembersisout the of(238 secondof theof chamberElection India Ibid Supra 167 note 175

174

But, the reserved seats totally are lower than half of the number of members of the of members of number the of half than lower are totally seats reserved the But, hs s rlvn se t rpeet priua gop n h lwr os as house lower the in group particular a represent to step relevant a is This elonging to that particular Caste or Tribe only can be elected to represent that that represent to elected be can only Tribe or Caste particular that to elonging ng process and in matters regarding relations between states and the federal federal the and states between relations regarding matters in and process ng

d groups in the past are well represented in the federal lower lower federal the in represented well are past the in groups d 54

ty to control this house through through house controlthis to ty

to address to scheme is is scheme

CEU eTD Collection University2nd edpress, 178 177 httpwww.nipfp.org.inworking_paperwp04_nipfp_006.pdf 176 or add to provisions constitutional explicit have which systems federal are there chapter, and executive legislative, judic uniform provide systems federal of constitutions the of Most federations. all of feature common the is asymmetry political states regional the among in manymember states dominate aspects. to and affairs regional the into intrude to center the authorize may constitution, Indian the like state, federal a of constitution the Sometimes, reasons. political and consti practical over dominant always is center the that is federation each in reality spheres. own their within independence and equality on based not is states member and center the between relationship the when vertically exist also can power of Asymmetry political, in federation.” a constituting units relationships the between spheres arrangement fiscal and and administrative powers unequal on based federalism mean to understood impact diversity unity and onbalancing Chapterthree: power its Asymmetryof and

hl ms f most While Watts,Comparing federal systems, the school of policy Queens studies, University andMcGillthe Ibid M.Govinda Rao As Govinda Rao and Nirvikar Singh stated it clearly, “asymmetric federalism is is federalism “asymmetric clearly, it stated Singh Nirvikar and Rao Govinda As ial power among regional units within the federation. Yet, as I will explain in this this in explain will I as Yet, federation. the within units regional among power ial

ederations in the world are constitutionally symmetric in dividing powers powers dividing in symmetric constitutionally are world the in ederations

andNirvikar Singh ition,1999, Introduction

p.63. , Asymmetric , federalism India, in p.2 /

un uis for units tuent

- Queens 177

The 178 176

CEU eTD Collection Ethiopia In others. for not and states the of one for given is which power constitutional a no is uniformly.There member states among distributed areconstitution US clause of and proper fed the within states some whichregionalupset the isfromstate significantly different others. d them treat to indispensible it make will that and units constituent some between differences significant In are there conflicts. federations, potential avoid to symmetry constitutional to preferred be may states Cons Sometimes, dispute. to leadmay that and position disadvantageous A a in placed is it if federation. behind left feel will federation aa in state member within treatment in difference from resulting conflicts possible avoid to in symmetric divis the in is symmetry Such units. constituent the to which power distributing constitution a have to opt systems Federal uniform. less or more which infactors existfederal allsystems. political avoid to impossible pragmatic of result the is asymmetry such is later, details provide will I as It because, asymmetry power. of symmetry (political) practical provide to itis constitution.But becanThus, constitutionalpower symmetryeasily. done of havetherefore, constitutional amongofasymmetrypower regional the states. s federal Such federation. the of members more or one to/from powers some reduce

The constitutions of US and Ethiopia don‟t provide any special privilege or power to or onepower privilegeprovideor special any don‟t and US Ethiopia constitutions of The is powers judicial and executive legislative, of division constitutional federations, most In omly a eea sse cn rvd uiom oe t is ebr tts ne its under states member its to power uniform provide can system federal a Formally, 3.1 Constitutional 3.1 of power asymmetry

eration. All residual powers which don‟t fall under the necessary necessary the under fall don‟t which powers residual All eration. ifferently because absence of such difference in treatment may treatment in difference such of absence because ifferently 56

titutional asymmetry of power among member member among power of asymmetry titutional

ion of power is helpful helpful is power of ion

unthinkable unthinkable ystems, ystems, CEU eTD Collection httpwww.glendon.yorku.caenglishfacultyresearchcentresapidocumentsasymfedm.pdf 183 httpwww.nipfp.org.inworking_paperwp04_nipfp_006.pdf 182 181 University2nd edition,press, 1999, p. 180 179 amongconstitutional members.itsofasymmetrypower explained it: As Edelgard Mahant self aboriginal and Ontario a Alberta, for Senate elected an Quebec, for judges Court Supreme inappointing role a societyand distinct “thelike special provisions deep religious including respect to northforeasterncustomarylawssocialand states.andpractices federation Indian the within states specific concerning provisions special other power. this have don‟t others while constitution a have to (Kashmir) states member the of one only empowers example, for constitution, the of370 Art units.constituent constitu the among differences recognizesubstantial is to that and states/provincesregional the among amonginpower regionaland states US Ethiopia. of Republic andEthiopia havepowers.” shallrights equal Democratic Federal the of States “member that declared expressly Ethiopia to o, states have the same constitutional status and power. Article 47(4) of the constitution of of constitution the of 47(4) Article power. and status constitutional same the have states o,

Some federal systems like India and Canada have constitutional asymmetry of power power of asymmetry constitutional have Canada and India like systems federal Some Like in India, constitutional asymmetry of power among the among power of asymmetry constitutional India, in Like EdelgardMahant Glendon College, York University, p.9 M.Govinda Rao andNirvikar Ibid Watts,Comparing federal systems, the school of policy Queens studies, University andMcGillthe Article47(4) ofconstitution the of Ethiopia e ak bu aymtia fdrls bcue ht atr i nt ht l constituent all that not is matters what because federalism asymmetrical about talk we It is especially important to rememb to important especially is It - otd n aaa Pltcl eoitos n 90 ad 90 rsle i introducing in resulted 1990s and 1980s in negotiations Political Canada. in rooted

ent units. ent 180

The constitution of India has special provisions concerning some of the of some concerning provisions special has India of constitution The

Singh,Asymmetric federalism India in -

oenet o natives.” for government 66

57 er the coexistence of federalism and democracy when when democracy and federalism of coexistence the er

oil hre fr oil democratically social for charter social 179

Therefore, Therefore, isthere constitut

183

,p.10 hs a eeain a have may federation a Thus,

members of the federation is federation the of members - 11 /

ionalsymmetry of 181

Th ere are also are ere 182 - - governed governed Queens

CEU eTD Collection 186 University2nd edition,press, 1999, p 185 184 political Such states. smaller marginalize will that and house lower the like institutions constituentunits.the distribu in asymmetric or symmetric are federations these of constitutions the that fact the irrespectiveof asymmetry (practical) political create will that and federations Orom India in Pradesh Uttar Canada, in Ontario States, United in California Switzerland, in Zurich example, For symmetric. perfectly is constitution a when even asymmetry political territor of size and population resource, indifferencesof terms becausefederationsalways are there of all feature whenconflictssubstantial are there feder membersamongdifferences ofthe avoid to order in diversity address to solution a is power of asymmetry constitutional Thus,

infcn dfeec i pplto sz wl alw agr tts o oiae federal dominate to states larger allow will size population in difference Significant Ibid Watts, Ibid majoritygovernment. politic basic the enjoy federation the of residents the all that but rights, same the have federation a within states Political asymmetry of power among the constituent units of a federation is a common common a is federation a of units constituent the among power of asymmetry Political 3.2 Political 3.2 asymmetry of power ia in Ethiopia are the largest units in terms of population size in the respective respective the in size population of terms in units largest the are Ethiopia in ia

Comparingfederal systems, the school of policy Queens studies, University andMcGillthe aogte ebr fte federation the of members the among y

184 of therefore, and, democracy of hallmark the is which equality al

185

n htwl i unrsl in result turn in will that and ting power among power ting ation. ation.

- Queens 186

and CEU eTD Collection University2nd edition,press, 1999, p 189 http://publius.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/pjl017v1 188 187 reason a become may India, in case the like asymmetry, maydegree differ. com are federation every within asymmetry political and wealthand states resources population, size, territorial of interms different that natural is It it. for responsible are which factors practically is It stability. increasedsize and36.from to that Nigerian3 states such avoid to long years; for inNigeria happened hasconflicts aswhat leadmay to states largersmallerand politically. and constitutionally both asymmetric fe all in exists asymmetry (political federation. a within members the among asymmetry political in results which factor one is federations w and in resources difference a Therefore, so. do to capacityfinancial the have they when only power recognized constitutionally their exercise can States power. dominates state federalthe political atmosphere. conflicts to lead may asymmetry

o d cntttoa aymty f oe wie hr i aray e at (political) facto de already is there while power of asymmetry constitutional add To than conflicts of sources are asymmetries constitutional and political both cases, most In of asymmetry political for reason one also is wealth and resources of terms in Difference While the US and Ethiopia are constitutionally symmetric, and politically asymmetric, asymmetric, politically and symmetric, constitutionally are Ethiopia and US the While Watts,Comparing federal systems, the school of policy Queens studies, University andMcGillthe LouiseTillin Ibid es from such factors. That means there is political asymmetry in all federations though its though federationsin all is asymmetry political means there Thatfactors. from such es

UnitedinDiversity? AsymmetryIndian Federalism in asymmetry, Nigeria has been rearranging states to bring more or less uniform uniform less or more bring to states rearranging been has Nigeria asymmetry,

impossible to avoid political asymmetry because we can‟t evade evade can‟t we because asymmetry political avoid to impossible

.65

in some circumstances especially when a single member member single a when especially circumstances some in eain a I xlie i bfr) Ida fdrto is federation Indian before), it explained I as derations 59

187 188

189

oiia aymty f oes between powers of asymmetry Political

for conflicts because other members other because conflicts for

/ ealth which exists in all inall exists which ealth - Queens CEU eTD Collection 190 two are there Thus functional. be to is federation a if inevitable is actors constitutional these intera other, the on states regional among and hand one on states regional and andbring equalpa power to asymmetry political such minimize to project constitutional term long be also must there and difference irreconcilable is there when cases rare in only option an as used be must this cases, serious in and, anarchy in mayleave marginalized federationstates conflicts. decideto in thistheand will to lead turn result may treatment differential for states member t asymmetry constitutional introduce To units. constituent the among development and participation political equal bring to thereby asymmetry political incommon 20 the of half second the in documented officially are murders motivated ethnically 9000 to close and class dominant politically the by India example,th For minorities. or states smaller of rights of expense the at system political the dominate to ones) strong the time the of (most states privileged allow also will It marginalized. feel will federation the of

Constitutional asymmetry may be employe be may asymmetry Constitutional of degree the reduce to symmetry constitutional use to better is it possible, extent the To Ibid Though constitutions of federal systems divide powers between the federal government government federal the between powers divide systems federal of constitutions Though

3.3 Intergovernmental 3.3 relations India. 190

rticipation among the membersrticipationamong the progressively.

ere is increasing exclusion and discrimination against minorities in minorities against discrimination and increasingexclusion is ere

d to accommodate substantial differences; but but differences; substantial accommodate to d th

century and communal violence is is violence communal and century

o respond to every question by by question every to respond o

ction between between ction

CEU eTD Collection 192 University2nd edition,press, 1999, p most 191 of as constitutions the practice of most in political unregulated left through are issues developed relation intergovernmental are representat relations cantonal and intergovernmental state various by legislators federal of lobbying “extensive involves that and governments different of executives and legislators the between loserswhenbecometheybecauseduring negotiation oftheir weakbargaining power. guarantee formal no have will they as states smaller or weaker for disadvantageous be may inform Such most in governments the cooperation. and consultation continuous including among means informal on based is federations interaction cases, other In issues. settlement dispute on based are relations intergovernmental federations, most in Therefore, interact. to have governments these how to as rules sufficient provide to fail they But other. the of powers the into governments these st regional among and states regional and among moreconstituentunitsconstituent units). or or three two between or (i.e. multilateral units or constituent units), the constituent of one and government federal the between (i.e. bilateral be may therefore, system, federal a in relation Intergovernmental units. constituent an units constituent the and government federal the between relation intergovernmental federation: every in relations intergovernmental of types

Intergovernmental relations in Switzerland and the US encompass a range of linkages linkages of range a encompass US the and Switzerland in relations Intergovernmental government federal the between power divide systems federal of constitutions the of Most Ibidp.58 Watts,Comparing federal syste

al way of interaction may be helpful to meet changing circumstances easily, but itmeet but changing circumstanceseasily,interactionhelpful beto may of way al

informal rules. There are some formal rules regarding financial and and financial regarding rules formal some are There rules. informal

ms, the ms, school of policy Queens studies, University andMcGillthe

.57

61 ewe te eea gvrmn ad w o more or two and government federal the between

ates. They also prohibit encroachment by one of of one by encroachment prohibit also They ates. d intergovernmental relation among among relation intergovernmental d

ives.” - 192 Queens

Such 191

CEU eTD Collection University2nd edition,press, 1999, p. 196 195 194 Association Bar VOL. 19 193 (US) our because dynamic are relations “intergovernmental clearly, it explained Liebschutz F. Sarah As constitution. US under untouched left are aspects many so regarding relations operation. joint and effective for helpful very is that and Congress of consent the upon agreements intergovernmental into enter can also US of states Member Articleregulatedrelat hasthealso State.” other every of Proceedings judicial and Records, Acts, public the to State each in given be shall Credit and Faith “Full that stating relations intergovernmental an Faith Fullits under example, for constitution, US The states. member among or memberfederalandstates government between thebe may relations which intergovernmental few regulating constitutionalrules a findsomeor can onefederation, every the Constitution, relationshipsmanybeenhavenever among completely governments clear.” U.S the in out spelled is government p federal of the and distribution states the the between “although it, explained McDowell D. Bruce As federations.

huh hr ae ay osiuinly neuae itroenetl eain is relation intergovernmental unregulated constitutionally many are there Though Watts,Comparing federal systems, the school of policy Queens studies, University andMcGillthe Ibid,Section 2 ArticleSectionIV 1 ofUS the Constitution BruceD.McDowell the Crime.the whichfle he from State the of Authority executive the of Demand on shall State, another in found be and Justice, from flee shall who Crime, other or Felony, Treason, with State any in charged person A 195

, the Newthe , Federalism: CurrentTrends inIntergovernmental Relations, N O .3

d, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of of Jurisdiction having State the to removed be to up, delivered be d, . P.12 .

60.(See Article SectionI 10 o

ionregarding ofdeclaringstates criminal acts that:

f the US fthe constitution). d Credit clause, has regulated regulated has clause, Credit d 196

Yet, intergover Yet, 194 193

Section 2 of this this of 2 Section

1995American

Queens nmental sues in in sues owers owers CEU eTD Collection 201 200 199 198 AmericanBar Association, VOL. 19 N 197 federalrelationsin the systemandthat: rightlystated Ethiopia, this Representatives” Peoples‟ States” the and sources tax State and states” between disputes “solving including: issues important regarding relations intergovernmental regulate it enable governments.bothexecutivesfederal the of state and and legislators the controls which system party centralized TPLF/EPRDF the by downplayed regulate constitutionEthiopiato of the of 62 Art under powers broad given is Federation of House the Though system. party changing expectations.” ever to respond must governments federal and state, local,

negvrmna rlto i Ehoi i dmntd y snl ad etaie political centralized and single a by dominated is Ethiopia in relation Intergovernmental ril 6 o te osiuin f tipa gra Ethiopia of constitution the of 62 Article Ibid,sub Art 9 Ibid,s Ibid,sub Art 7 Article62(6) ofconstitution the of Ethiopia SarahF.Liebschutz centralized party organization of the Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front Front Democratic Revolutionary People's Ethiopian the of organization party centralized the Through country. the in affairs political on grip firm a holds government ruling the Lovise Aalen, in his Article about TPLF/EPRDF‟s control of the whole intergovernmental intergovernmental whole the of TPLF/EPRDF‟s control about Article his in Aalen, Lovise In spite of the extensive constitutional de constitutional extensive the of spite In Constitution, endangersconstitutionalConstitution,the order.” 199 ubArt 8 , “determining civil matters which require the enactment of laws by the House of House the by laws of enactment the require which matters civil “determining , 197

,Intergovernmental Relations: DynamicThe Reality of AmericanFederalism, 1995

198

200 , “determining the division of revenues derived from joint Federal joint from derived revenues of division the “determining , , and “ordering Federal intervention if any State, in violation of of violation in State, any if intervention Federal “ordering and ,

usde ta te eea Gvrmn my rvd t the to provide may Government Federal the that subsidies O

.3,p. 16 relations between the members of the federation, its role is is itsfederation, role the of membersbetween relationsthe 63

volution of power to ethnic groups in Ethiopia, Ethiopia, in groups ethnic to power of volution nts powers to the House of Federation to to Federation of House the to powers nts 201

circumstances and and circumstances CEU eTD Collection 208 WestConnecticut,port, London, 2004, p 207 206 httpwww.nipfp.org.inworking_paperwp04_nipfp_006.pdf 205 204 development, 203 Caseof Ethiopia, 202 union. the of representatives as work they a union the by appointed are governors state and constitution the of amendment regarding system. service public and judicial single is there theirnames.” change and boundaries their alter ones, existing states.” the from states and new “create to union empowered the between equality of principle the describ Singh Nirvikar and Rao Govinda M. As themselves. between relations intergovernmental crucial perform to enough autonomous and constitution. feder the of members the by not and system party centralized the by determined basically are relations intergovernmental the context, Ethiopian the see we when Therefore, pow TPLF/EPRDF.” mere by rule adictatorial continuing for as subterfuge viewed be justly can constitution “the Haile, Minasse Professor to According M. ProfessorMinasse Haile As I haveexplai AsI powerful not are units constituent the India, in relations intergovernmental see we When Ibid RobertF.Williams, Josef andAllanMarko Tarr Ibid,(see Article3 ofconstitution the of India). Ibid,p.51 LoviseAalen, severelyrestricted. aut local and regional (EPRDF), r i raiy h TL, otos h lgsaue te xctv ad h judiciary.” the and executive the legislature, the controls TPLF, the reality in er, GovindaRao andNirvikar Singh,

SuffolkTransnat‟l L. Rev. 1996 1

206

EthnicFederalism andSelf Int'lJ.on Minority &Rts.Group 244 2006

ned in previous chapters, Indian federalism gives much emphasis for unity; unity; for emphasismuch federalism Indian gives chapters, inprevious ned 202 ,The newEthiopian co

AsymmetricFederalism inIndia . 202. onomy is undermined and opposition party activities are are activities party opposition and undermined is onomy - Determinationfor Nationalities in aSemi 64 - 1997

nstitution nstitution anditsimpact up on unity, human rights and

, 208 Federalism,sub nationalcon , p. , 5

The union‟s power is to the extent that it can it that extent the to is power union‟s The

ed it “the Indian federation is not founded on on founded not is federation Indian “the it ed

, p. , 243. 207

In most cases, states are not consulted not are states cases, most In

, , p.3/ 203 205

eas de tepry in party “the added also He h Ida primn is parliament Indian The stitutions, andminority rights, - AuthoritarianState: the ation or the or ation 204 nd

CEU eTD Collection 210 209 competitive a of properties emergent all are organizations private of as well as governments of activity of spheres and sizes relative “the federalism, competitive in Wagner, E. Richard of According system. federal autonomy the of on effectiveness and stability impact and federation a an of members has competitive or cooperative is system federal a whether negotiation. some be to has there ofinterest the protect to constitutionalguarantee circumstances, changing meet to relations intergovernmental in co minimumindispensible are consultation and negotiation flexibility, While relationships. such governing no are there as long as relations intergovernmental liberalpremisesof democracy citizenship.”common and o rights the union, the of shadow the under exist India in states the “as it, stated rightly Watts As proper. federalism than government interest. national stat the to belong which areas the of any legislationon enact can also legislature union‟s The emergency. of case in one unitary a into system federal the change

eeal, ioiy rus r te oes n ms vleal scin o a oit in society a of sections vulnerable most and losers the are groups minority Generally, Ibid Ibid Cooperative and competitive federalism are forms of intergovernmental relations and and relations intergovernmental of forms are federalism competitive and Cooperative 3.4 Cooperative 3.4 competitiveand federal systems

209

Strictly speaking, the Indian federation is more close to unitary form of of form unitary to close more is federation Indian the speaking, Strictly

f minorities are very much limited within the the within limited much very are minorities f groups who otherwise will be losers in every inevery losers be otherwise will who groups 210

es as long as that serves that as long as es nstitutional guarantees guarantees nstitutional

to to CEU eTD Collection 217 216 215 214 University2nd edition,press, 1999, p.60 213 212 httpmason.gmu.edu~rwagnerFederalism.pdf 211 federalism.” of advantage crucial so service.” better oligopolies, or monopolies to competitio compared benefits superior produces competition executivefederalismvoiced inAustralia.”about Canada and Germany, frequen criticism a electorate, own its to government each of accountability democratic citizens. accounta on impact an has that and governments regional and federal the both of autonomy the limits them. among rivalry minimizes federation the of members federali Cooperative federationexerciseinjustcan‟t mannerpower it. becausebelongs power whatever that to a constitutional or governments other of interest thefor respect and considerationofCooperativefederalism interest. requires ofothers sake thefor power limitsuch may federalismcooperative itmannerwants, in whatever power process.”

There are advantages and disadvantages with both cooperative and competitive feudalism. feudalism. competitive and cooperative both with disadvantages and advantages are There hn e e cmeiie eeaim a Abr Beo caiid t “ut s economic as “just it, clarified Breton Albert as federalism, competitive see we When httpfederalismproject.orgdepositoryGreveBookI3Competition.pdf Ibid Ibid Ibidp. 61 Watts,Comparing federal systems, the school Dorsen,Rosenfeld, Sajo andBaer, Comparative Constitutionalism: Cases andMaterials, 2003 p.364 Richard

214 bility and effectiveness of public officials and that ultimately limits liberty of of liberty limits ultimately that and officials public of effectiveness and bility 211

E. WagnerE. n between governments serving the same citizens is likely to provide citizens with with citizens provide to likely is citizens same the serving governments between n

As Watts explained it, “excessive cooperative federalism may undermine the the undermine may federalism cooperative “excessive it, explained Watts As While competitive federalism allows a government in a f a in government a allows federalism competitive While 216

, Michael S. Greve also argues that “competition among governments is a is governments among “competition that argues also Greve S. Michael CompetitiveFederalism inInstitutional Perspective sm helps to avoid or reduce conflicts because coordination between between coordination because conflicts reduce or avoid to helps sm

217

codn oAbr rtn coeaie federalis “cooperative Breton, Albert to According 66

ofpolicy Queens studies, University andMcGillthe tr wti te federation the within ctors

213 ,p.1/ ,p.1/

Yet it is problematic in that it that in problematic is it Yet 212 ederation to exercise its exercise to ederation 215

n a ebr f a of member a and

- Queens

is m tly tly

CEU eTD Collection 222 221 220 219 University2nd edition,press, 1999, p. 218 itswhileexercisingauthority. governments federated other of interests considerthe to constitutional hasfederation the within government the and members its and members.” whole among relationship a as nation the between relationships pro a in behave to states the and federation the of Court Constitutional con unwritten the “the that decided case, Germany I Television the In cooperate. to states obliges which principle constitutional unwritten is there Germany, In degree. different a with federations Germany in predominant and central is federalism “cooperative While differ. may degree the though federation every in federalism cooperative desirable.” most the be run long the in may competition and cooperation of blend functionalbeto service coordinated a public. provide theforand state welfare a for indispensible is federalism cooperative citizens, of liberty and freedom for competitive While federation. a of disintegration to lead may turn in that and conflict to leadmay competition open an because tricky isfederalism citizens.” competitive of than rather governments of interests the serving at directed collusion

Therefore, as both forms of federalism have the above advantag above the have federalism of forms both as Therefore, WhenfederalismasPhilipsee wein cooperative Weiser US, J. Ibidp. 364 Ibidp. 366 Dorsen,Rosenfeld, Sajo andBaer, Comparative Constitutionalism: Cases andMaterials, 2003 p.364 Ibid Watts,Comparing federal systems, the school of policy ttmns n h cntttoa lw f eeaim ti vso o federal of vision this federalism; of recent law Court's constitutional the Supreme on statements the of many characterizes federalism dual a of rhetoric The

222

221

Thus, the basis for German cooperative federalism is that a that is federalism cooperative German for basis the Thus,

stitutional principle of the reciprocal obligation of of obligation reciprocal the of principle stitutional

studies, Queens studies, University andMcGillthe - federal manner governs all constitutional constitutional all governs manner federal ” 220 , it also exists in US and other other and US in exists also it ,

explainedit: federalism may be helpful helpful be may federalism es and disadvantages, “a “a disadvantages, and es -

state relations relations state 219 -

Queens There is There

218

But CEU eTD Collection 228 (see263 ofArt. the Federation,institute of intergovernmental relations, 227 226 225 224 2000 223 policies. “intergover many are there India, In inEthiopia. governments state federaland the both of executives and legislatures the controls coordination” policy for and relations Inter “an through federations these in cooperation considerable is there Therefore, federations. two these within federalism competitive about thinkto difficult it makeyears in Ethiopia 20 for exists which systemparty federation.the programs” regulatory “federal of result c is there that shows practice programs.” federal implement and administer governments local and state federalism: cooperative administrative “ that clarified also Greve S. Michael

The disproportionate power given for the union of India and the single dominant politic dominant single the and India of union the for given power disproportionate The Ibid RonaldWatts, Constructive andCo Supra 2223.note Supra 220 note MichaelS.Greve PhilipJ. enact "cooperative federalism" regulatory programs that invite state agencies to to agencies state invite that law. federal implement programs regulatory federalism" "cooperative enact to continues Congress however, reality, In other. the with coordinating without authority its in regulates that entity separate a as jurisdiction each views - 2001

,p.665.

Weiser,Towards aConstitutional Architecture for CooperativeFederalism, 79 N.C. L.Rev.663

constitutionof India). , AgainstCooperative , Federalism,

224

hrfr, hl tee s oml opttv fdrls i U, the US, in federalism competitive formal is there while Therefore, 223

State Council (ISC) for harmoniz for (ISC) Council State oeaie eeaim o sbtnil level substantial a to federalism ooperative - operativeFederalism, A Seriesof Commentaries on the Councilof the

227 mna ntoa councils” national nmental 68 226

in India and a single dominant political party which party political dominant single a and India in in practice, American federalism has become an an become has federalism American practice, in

IIGR,Queen‟s n areet bten h gvrmns within governments the between agreements and 70Miss. L.J. 557 2000 UniversityIRPP, and Montreal, 2003, p.6 ing Union ing - 2001 228

,p. 557. o oriae different coordinate to w dsic shr of sphere distinct own - State and interstate interstate and State 225

n ta i the is that and al al CEU eTD Collection revisededition, Addis Ababa: Artistic Printing Enterprise,2007, p.385. 231 2009, p.13 230 229 operates which federalism cooperative present The Ethiopia. in established be to needs run i more mayfederation.federation aitleadcollapse theTherefore, be ofthe to thewill and difficult of members betweencooperation apart, falls party the casein more, isWhat function. to system for Ethiopia in doing what is likeTPLF/EPRDF government centralized a be will there practice, in then strong, be to continues party the If party. political a of integrity on entirely dependent is cooperation such that is channels.” party by facilitated is lawsfederal “implementation of it, stated rightly FisehaAssefa As structure. party political timesat ofparty crisis fail easily can it and structure party the through working is institution this But, states. among and states and government federal betweencooperationthe facilitate to works whichMinister enforce to states withcooperate to government federal self become states or occurs crisis party federal the government.” on strongly are statesdependent expendi their “for it, stated Beker der Van Christophe As easily. states of alliance the get to government ruling the enabled structure party the and government federal the from are revenue of sources main The imperative. federalism cooperative make government federal the on

In Ethiopia, the single dominant political party system and the state‟s financial dependency financialdependency state‟s the and system political party dominant single the Ethiopia, In SeeAssefa, Fiseha, Federalism and Accommodationthe ChristopheVan derBeker See Arts. 96 The problem with the Ethiopian cooperative federalism is that it totally depends on the on depends totally it that is federalism cooperative Ethiopian the with problem The siuinlzdad omlzdcoeaiefdrls hc a prt nte long the in operate can which federalism cooperative formalized and nstitutionalized

under the federal government‟s power of taxation. of power government‟s federal the under - 99ofconstitution the of Ethiopia .

,Federalism andAccommodationthe of EthnicDiversity: caseThe of Ethiopia,

231

The problem is not with th with not is problem The 69 the last 20 years and it will be difficult for a federal a for difficult be will it and years 20 last the

- ufcet iacal, t il e ifcl fr the for difficult be will it financially, sufficient

ofDiversity Ethiopia: in ComparativeA Study, its policies. There is a Federal Affairs Affairs Federal a is There policies. its 230

e cooperation itself. The problem The itself. cooperation e It means that in the long run, ifa inlongrun, means the It that 229

The subsidy the states get states the subsidy The ture, all all ture, CEU eTD Collection minoritywithinthegroups federationfeeldominant andinterests the their that both that so approach mixed a adopt to has system federal a Therefore, conflict. to lead may cooperat requires unity and federalism competitive requires autonomy regional or Diversity unity. and makescompetitivefederalismthe element of zero. a autonomy constitutional state‟s the away takes system party dominant a through For a federation to be effective, it has to consider diversity (local or regional autonomy) autonomy) regional or (local diversity consider to has it effective, be to federation a For ive federalism (uniform implementation of policies) as relying only on competition competition on only relying as policies) of implementation (uniform federalism ive

are protected. are nd that that nd

CEU eTD Collection httpwww.queensu.caiigrconfWattspapersBurgess.pdf 232 the beiftensionbetweenis unityhave diversitydevisedbe andfederation to stable. ato balance to mechanisms that means It unilaterally. federation the from secede and government the than stronger states make may run, long the in It, federation. a of integrity the to dangerous equally also is inresultfederation. disintegration emphasisExcessive of the (regionaldiversityautonomy) on may states member case, this In units. constituent federation.ofthe collapse the in result may alone diversity or unity to development progressive diversity, and of bringboth federationto form sources a federal system a Asto parties disagreement. and conflict potential handle to employed not are mechanisms political and constitutional of problems perpetuates that way peculiar a in institutionalized are cooperation and competition self of coexistence “the it, explained Burgess leadwhich factors potential system federal a in unity to Dangers Four: Chapter

Too much emphasis on unity may gradually and effectively take away the powers of of powers the away take effectively and gradually may unity on emphasis much Too Burgess,Success Failure and Federation: in Comparative Perspectives, p.18/ In every federation, though there may be great difference in terms of degree, there are are there degree, of terms in difference great be may there though federation, every In ra complexity.” great

eea gvrmn ad ht a eal te t inr te federal the ignore to them enable may that and government federal Introduction 232

hr wl b mr dnes o nt i a eea sse if system federal a in unity to dangers more be will There to conflict and, in serious cases, total collapse of a federation. As As federation. a of collapse total cases, serious in conflict and, to

- ue n sae rl mas ht conflict, that means rule shared and rule

decide to leave the federation and that may that and federation leavethe to decide

unity unity CEU eTD Collection httpwww.nipfp.org.inworking_paperwp04_nipfp_006.pdf 233 As excessive. or undesired andGovinda NirvikarRao Singh described this: is it when instability and conflict of source becomes power powe of asymmetry just some not is in problematic is asymmetry what Therefore, constitutional federations. also is There inevitable. is asymmetry political least federalina system. unity to dangers potential such on focus will chapter This federation. a of integrity endanger which conflict of sources potential the among are properly institutions federal in diversity failure and clause secession constitutional federalism), (Ethnic ethnicity on based federation a of boundaries arranging jurisdictions, state and federal between conflicts

As I explained in the previous chapter, there is asymmetry of power in every federation; at at federation; every in power of asymmetry is there chapter, previous the in explained I As

Mo M.GovindaRao andNirvikar Singh, Asymmetric Federalism India, in p.3 interestsof stability federalism. and f policies discriminatorythe building, nation to contribute federation the to gains overall of grounds on justified be can that arrangements asymmetric transparent while However, together’. is systems federal in fac in and unavoidable spheres economic and political administrative, in Asymmetry 4.1 Excessive 4.1 asymmetry of to te ie ecsie smer o pwr asne f urmc cas t settle to clause supremacy of absence power, of asymmetry excessive time, the of st loe prl o sot em oiia gis a b iiia t te og term long the to inimical be can gains political term short on purely ollowed

t, may be necessary not only to ‘come together’ but also to ‘hold to also but together’ ‘come to only not necessary be may t,

233 72

power power

1 /

r. Asymmetry of of Asymmetry r. o represent to CEU eTD Collection 237 236 235 234 more or one for rights special grants federation a When impact. divisive a has it run long inthe But, units. influentialfromconstituent challengesaddress helpfulto be may asymmetry formalsymme other constitutionalneedor we that, do To minimized. “changing by is integrityandthe that to federationdangerof athein long the run. caused is which power regional and coalition of vagaries of structure, power political of configuration asymmetry excessive is the of there functioning smooth federation, for appropriate are India in developed asymmetries political undesired inexcessiveor ofasymmetry power. states.” other to relative resources higher substantially secure to able been parliame(federal parliament the instrength significant with parties regional by ruled states “the problem; this regarding scenario Indian the clarified have Singh Nirvikar and Rao Govinda interest. own their for stand to tend will states stronger the power of asymmetry the worsens that and states remaining the against discrimination for room more much be will there government, federal centralized the than stronger is/are which units.suchIfcentraliz non a than power government. state/s is/are there case in be will scenario

I explained in chapter four that political asymmetry of power is unavoidable. It can only be be onlycan It unavoidable.is power politicalof asymmetry that four inchapter explained I constit some While power. of asymmetry of trend growing a is there India, In Asymmetry of power will be more excessive in more centralized federations and the worst worst the and federationscentralized more in excessive more be will power of Asymmetry Ibid Ibid,p.32 Ibid,p.30 Ibid

234

In a centralized federation, the central government has more discretionary discretionary more has government central the federation, centralized a In - centralized one and that may lead to asymmetrical treatment of constituent constituent of treatment asymmetrical to lead may that and one centralized ed federalis fewis/arebysystemthere controlled ed or a states only state/s

which is/are stronger than the centralized federal federal centralized the than stronger is/are which

nt) have become pivotal and have have and pivotal become have nt) 237 try. Using constitutional constitutional Using try.

235

party politics” party

That will result will That utional and and utional

236 as as

CEU eTD Collection QueensUniversity 2nd press, edition, 1999,p.66 240 239 27/ 238 andhasAlan statingIndian tribes. explainedTarr this that: point non including units indesignedcomponentfor not treatmentsare units US (sta other and Rico Puerto of islands.” status the affected ethnicity in differences and tribes; Indian influen governance of forms traditional and life of style in differences territories; island of case the in mattered position “geographical it, clarified Tarr Alan G. As Amendment, non the untiladoption theSeventeenth the by after respectivepeople thedirectlythestate and 1913 doesn‟tfor work th of power symmetry constitutional thus and states not are units Such asymmetrically. treated are which units state non also are there US, In federations. other all like federations both in asymmetry haverigh equal federationsin these states symmetric. The conflicts; islead mayunity.to that to danger a claim also will others India, in like states

As I explained in chapter three, both the US and Ethiopian federations are constitutionally constitutionally are federations Ethiopian and US the both three, chapter in explained I As See Ibid httpwww.qu G.Alan Tarr diversities. In the United States, in contrast, the asymmetrical arrangements were devised devised were arrangements asymmetrical the contrast, in States, United the In diversities. accommodating and recognizing of means a as arrangements (asymmetrical) distinctive Such Such Typically Watts,Comparing federal systems, schoolthe of policy Queensstudies, University and McGillthe

239 asymmetric treatment of non of treatment asymmetric

hthst entdhr i ht nie nIdaad Canada and India in unlike that, is here noted be to has What eensu.caiigrconfWattspaperstarr.pdf , -- SymmetryAsymmetry and American in Federalism atclry n multi in particularly - state islands, the District of Colombia (where the nation‟s capital exist) exist) capital nation‟s the (where Colombia of District the islands, state - state unitsrepresented not state are in federal institution.this

em. While each state has two representatives em.inWhilehas two elected each state senate the

- tnc federations ethnic - state units is indispensible because of different factors. different of because indispensible is units state 74

o ifrn pca ihsad uh competition such and rights special different for

- - t s h cmoet nt ta seek that units component the is it ,p. ts and powers. But, there is political is political there But, powers. and ts tes). Rather, they apply to non Rather, theytes). apply to

ced the treatment of of treatment the ced 240 238 , asymmetrical ,

- - state CEU eTD Collection 243 242 27/httpwww.queensu.caiigrconfWattspaperstarr.pdf 241 beto officials.senior have members TPLF The struggle. con military through regime Derg the removed it after 6%power millionTigray 80 ofconstitutes over comeswhichofThispeople Ethiopia. to party th controls which TPLF theis it reality,In power. of asymmetry in undesired hasresulted structure party challengingno questi are there homogenous, relativelyissociety US the As Ethiopia. and Indiain seecan one what than less relatively also is inUS states among and states and government federal the between conflictbe lead to federationitdoesn‟t theand territoriesgovernedqualifiedbe could untilgrowth statehood.” populationfor them state a by capital nation‟s the of control avoid to helped US the in arrangements such that added Tarr Alan

Though there is constitutional symmetry of power in Ethiopia like in the US, the political political the US, the in like Ethiopia in power of symmetry constitutional is there Though non of treatment asymmetric Therefore, Asit: Aalen Lovise stated Ibid Ibid G.Alan Tarr,Symmetry Asymmetry and American in Federalis objectives, not the distinctiveneedsthe of componentobjectives,not the units. an government, federal the by imposed and by powerful positions in the country, including the post of Prime Minister. The TPLF, throughPrimeTPLF, The Minister. of postthe including country, the positionsin powerful l TPLF and model, federal ethnic the of architect the (EPRDF)and coalition the of creatorwas the TPLF The trolled all key positions and others have to show alliance to such individuals if they want want they if individuals such to alliance show to have others and positions key all trolled

e military and executive apparatus in Ethiopia. TPLF represents the people of of people the represents TPLF Ethiopia. in apparatus executive and military e 242 ons from states for asymmetricforfrom states ons (different) treatment.

aes ae ic te al f egsu Dr Rgm) a te most the had Regime) (Derg Mengistu of fall the since have eaders n i poie a odry rcdr wher procedure orderly “an provide it and

state units in US is for the healthy functioning of of functioning healthy the for is US in units state tween states. The political asymmetry of power Thepower political of asymmetry states. tween d these steps were taken to serve national national serve to taken were steps these d m, p.m, 241

b sasl inhabited sparsely eby

243

CEU eTD Collection 1995 250 249 248 247 246 httpwww.nipfp.org.inworking_paperwp04_nipfp_006.pdf 245 Caseof Ethiopia, Int'l J.on Minority &Rts.Group 244 2006, p 244 secession” secessio to right the including determination, self to right unconditional an has Ethiopia in People and Nationality Nation, “Every that federation. withindistrictthe or zone or federation the from secede can Ethiopia of peoples and nationalities states.” inde of union “indestructible is federation US The union. destructible a established Ethiopia of afor danger created integrity the o has Ethiopia in asymmetry political undesired this Therefore, regime. the fight to different regions representing fronts military of creation the to led has asymmetry practical Such

AllenBuchanan, Federalism, Secession andMoralitythe inclusion,of Arizona Law review, Ibid See39Art (1) of constitutionthe of Ethiopia Ibid Ibid M. Lovise Aalen, Ethnic Federalism andSelf otherpoli with power share willto genuine a demonstrate to able been not has coalition, EPRDFthe While the US and Indian federations have indestructible union indestructible have federations Indian and US the While ,p.54 tutbe states” structible GovindaRao andNirvikar Singh, Asymmetric federalism India, in p

247 4.2 Constitutional 4.2 clause secession

250 In Ethiopia, both the union and the states are destructible, i.e.in principle, nations, principle, i.e.in destructible, are states the and union the both Ethiopia, In tical forces in a democratica manner.tical in forces

is used in every federation to give autonomy to regional units or to protect rights to regionalgive or to unitsautonomy is infederation everyto used 246

n te nin eeain s idsrcil uin f destructible of union “indestructible is federation Indian the and

f the federation.fthe 248 - Determinationfor Nationalities in aSemi

Article 39 (1) of the constitution of Ethiopia provides Ethiopia of constitution the of (1) 39 Article

n.” 244

249

.250

Rgt o self to “Right

. 4/ .

245 , the present constitution present the , - eemnto sot of short determination

- form their own state, state, own their form AuthoritarianState: the Ariz.Rev.L. 53 - CEU eTD Collection 254 253 252 251 consequently might this and option, the try to groups encourage might itself clause secession c has Nikodimos Abate conflicts. bloody to lead may that and federation the leaving of sense a create may constitution the under presence its Firstly, nation. the of integrity the for dangerous so is it, exercise to environment democratic form to groups militaryeffectfightfronts secession.to present government the to democratic un a until and unconditional the and and genuinely power country share to failure the Such introduced. inclusiveness rule to continues TPLF/EPRDF party dominant inmayThis elsewhere. explained I as power of share genuine no is there and principles constitutional the hasundermined rulinggovernment the inclusive, is Ethiopia ofconstitution present the While inclusi and democratic is government occur. violations rights human massive when or process political democratic a in nation a include to failure of case in only is this self external to right the colon “undernations of right exclusive an is(secession) that is approach accepted widely The secede. includdetermination minorities. of

The secession clause as stated in the present constitution of Ethiopia, assum constitutionEthiopia, of present inthe stated as clausesecession The self to right whether to as unclear is law International ilateral right to secede which is stated under the constitution inspired some opposition opposition some inspired constitution the under stated is which secede to right ilateral Ibidp. 5 Ibid AbateNikodimos Alemayehu, EthnicFederalism inEthiopia: Challenges Opportunities, and Ibid

8 crease the international legitimacy of nations within Ethiopia as long as the single single the long as as Ethiopia nationswithin international of legitimacy the crease

251

But, what is unique in Ethiopia is that there is a constitutional right to self to right constitutional a is there that is Ethiopia in unique is what But, ingsecession.

ve, then the right has less international legitimacy.” international less has right the then ve, 77 253

s bt Nkdms a rgty ttd t “f a “If it, stated rightly has Nikodimos Abate As larified this point. “The inclusion of the the of inclusion “The point. this larified ial rule” ial - determination includes the right to to right the includes determination 252

and its application beyond application itsand ing that there is there that ing - 2004 determination determination

, , p.57

254 -

CEU eTD Collection 257 256 255 and marketsocial andgreater defense, given economicdevelopment are cooperation emphasis unlimited to lead could This unilateral. and unconditional both is Ethiopia of constitution the under secession not Therefore, referendum. through the secede or decide to whether on concerned to concerned.” People or Nationality “LegislativeNation, Councilthe bysecessionfor isof the request approved which the received it after years three within secession for referendum provide to constitution the unconditional.is secede to people and nationalities itfrom stop longmajorityasinseceding Afar as the people of can‟t states other and government federal the both and claim its justify to required not is it a provide secede, ifto exampleformeans people secede.Afar to want It of that, the to it reasonwhywants have doesn‟t secession for requests which nation the the and regarding process all secession at say no have federation the within states other or government federal pe or nationality meanassumingitiswhich is that, democraticwould easy there nation, any forgovernment, so betweenandEritrea Ethiopia country.” the of unity the destabilizes and distrust create

Secondly, when we see the right under the constitution, it is unconditional and unilateral unilateral and unconditional is it constitution, the under right the see we when Secondly, Almost all federations have no secession clause under their constitutions. Unity, common common Unity, constitutions. their under clause secession no have federations all Almost nations, of right the Ethiopia, of constitution the of (1) 39 Art under stated clearly As Ibid,Art.39(4) Art.39 (1) of constitutionthe of Ethiopia Ibid,p.62

fragmentationiswhichinternational evenagainst law.

ople to secede as long as the majority of the people concerned opt for it. The it. for opt concerned people the of majority the as long as secede to ople 257

Then,

justsomeyearssecession the Eritrea. after of

it is up to the people of such Nation, Nationality or People or Nationality Nation, such of people the to up is it

256

The federal government is obliged by obliged is government federal The 255

opt for secession.for opt war bloody the recall can One

CEU eTD Collection 1995,p.54 259 258 conflicts. instability may to continuous leadsecessionand thelong clause to asin resort stability run the is structure federal genuine a with nation great a build to economic development overall bring and governance democratic establish to Thus, autonomy. desired noted be should secession” It of future. short the determination in federation the of integrity the to danger a created has constitution Ethiopian the under inserted clause such constitutions, their in clause constitutional desire.” negotiaterespondthat to changesto to Confederation to parties all on obligation reciprocal a impose would Canada from secede to will their of Quebec of people the by expression clear a unconstitutional, be seces unilateral “while that, stated It secede. to right unconditional and unilateral such rejected Canada of Court Supreme the federation, the of integrity the endangers which co the While different. totally are secession regarding Canada of Court Supreme the by decided is what and Ethiopia of constitution the under incorporated is what But, here. example an as cited co their in clause secession featuresunique federation.ofEthiopian the amongis ofconstitutionEthiopia the under clause secession the Thus, federation. inevery

To su To no have federations though even questions secession of instances are there course, Of AllenBuchanan, Federalism, Secession andMoralitythe inclusion,of Arizona Law review,Ar ReferencereSecession of Quebec, 1998,2S.C.R.217, para.53 mmarize, while the US, Canada, India and other federations don‟t have a secession secession a have don‟t federations other and India Canada, US, the while mmarize,

nstitution of Ethiopia provides unconditional and unilateral right of secession secession of right unilateral and unconditional provides Ethiopia of nstitution

nstitutions. The question of secession raised by Quebec can be be can Quebec by raised secession of question The nstitutions.

259 , if implemented in a democratic way, can bring the the bring can way, democratic a in implemented if , 79

258

the best way for for way best the

iz.Rev.L. 53 sion would would sion ht “self that - CEU eTD Collection 261 260 totallyboundarynot iscanthere andconcurrenceclear be or power. overlap of clause” “commerce the through government federal the of powers the of expansion of trend a is there and clear absolutely not is states and government federal the between powers of division the Amendment, Tenth re the and the listed exclusively of are governments federal powers where US the in Even governments. state and federal the by both claimed integri preservethe to together units constituent the hold it enable to necessary is states regional over prevalence federal of degree some groups, diverse of rights protect to fail may and autonomy regional Wh elsewhere. explained I as be ensured to is autonomy regional and federation the of integrity both if requiredis two the between balance self and rule shared about all is Federalism power. of overlap of cases well no is there as long as federation a of integrity the endanger may that and states or state a and government federal the between conflicts serious to lead may This constitutions. in provided is clause power of separation vertical a though

ti ieial htteeaesm oes n vr fdrto hc a lgtmtl be legitimately can which federation every in powers some are there that inevitable is It Ibid SeeIArt section of8 US constitution 4.3 Absence 4.3 ofsupremacyclause There is overlap of power between the federal and state governments in every federation every in governments state and federal the between power of overlap is There

ty of the federation.ofthe ty

260

and

h “eesr ad rpr clause.” proper and “necessary the ile a centralized federal government undermines undermines federalgovernment centralized a ile served ones are left for states under the the under states for left are ones served

- established principle to settle such such settle to principle - rule. To strike the the strike To rule.

261

hs the Thus,

CEU eTD Collection 267 266 265 264 263 262 A federation. maya so destabilize do to failure as managed carefully be hasto it andconflicts lea That federations. all in inevitable is governments state and federal 256 under constitution.ofArt the in power executive their federal the even exercise and laws federal with to compliance required are states the because probable less also is jurisdictions executive over Conflict federation. Indian the within system court dual no is judicials betweenthe and union jurisdictional over thebe power conflict innational List interest” the g federal the for reserved are ones residual the and both; for powers legislative concurrent and for states powers legislative exclusive government, federal the for powers legislative exclusive between power of overlap be can unlessconflictsis there principle it.a which governs bring econ “uniform to important is power such that determines Federation of House the as long as it to states.for left the of powers concurrent also are

The Indian constitution too contains a list of concurrent legislative powers and thus there there thus and powers legislative concurrent of list a contains too constitution Indian The federalfor thelistpowers government. ofEthiopianhas constitutionexclusive The Art256 ofconstitution the of India Art.249 of constitutionthe of India See246Arts and of248 constitutionthe of India Ibid,Art.55 (6) Ibid,Art.52 Art.51 of Constitutionthe of Ethiopia Though the degree may differ from federation to federation, overlap of power between the betweenthe power of overlapfederation, federationto from differ may degree the Though overnment.

263 omic community.” omic

The federal government can also enact civil laws in areas which don‟t belong in civilareasdon‟t lawswhich canenact federalalso government The

265

“Power of parliament to legislate with respect to a matter in the State the in matter a to respect with legislate to parliament of “Power

266

is also stated under Art 249under Art isnotstated There could constitution. of also the

267 264

the union and states. The constitution of India has a list of of list a has India of constitution The states. and union the federal government and states and the reserved powers are powers reserved the and states and government federal

Therefore, there is overlap of power which may lead to lead may which power of overlap is there Therefore, 81

government has the power to direct them direct to power the has government

tates in asthere India tates s o jurisdictional to ds 262

There CEU eTD Collection 268 federalblurrysupremacyinareas. ensure int to used also broad are clauses the proper and previously, necessary the explained and commerce the I of approaches As land. the of laws supreme the are federalgovernment” bythe made Treaties andLaws Federal Constitution, Federal“the that declared 2 paragraph VI Art. constitution. US the of VI Art to reference making by solved promoting by iteasily becan laws US, in the federal state andbetween isconflict a there Ifvalues. common disintegration of danger the minimizes that and federation the throughout the of integrity Federal federation. the ensure to important much very is judiciary US the by developed and ultimatelyfederation andunity. that erodes uniformity of lack and differences undesired creating with end will we overlap, or conflict of case in states for powers leave we if that is noted be to has what Here, service. and social regarding government a of economic levels two the between power of boundaries clear draw to impossible is It principles. supremacy federal has federation a unless run long the jurisdictions.exclusive their within acting are government of levels two the while laws state conflict and be federal can between There jurisdictions. of conflict no is there where areas in even laws state jurisdic of conflict creates power of overlap While issues. such govern to principles constitutional settled well have to needs federation

el salse fdrl urmc picpe a icroae udr h U constitution US the under incorporated as principles supremacy federal established Well SeeVIArt paragraph of2 USthe constitution spects. Both levels of government exercise power on such areas to render public render to areas such on power exercise government of levels Both spects.

supremacy principles help to bring uniform economic and social policies policies social and economic uniform bring to help principles supremacy

Such conflicts between jurisdictions and laws may undermine unity in unitymay undermine laws jurisdictionsand between conflicts Such

tions, there is also conflict between federal and and federal between conflict also is there tions,

erpretative within the the within 268

CEU eTD Collection 271 270 sta parliamentfor which competentis it toenact andstate lawwhichit has powertoenact or between federal and limititsscope toconflicts case in of concurrence. According to it, conflictthe can be between anybylawmade existinglaw withrespect toone of mattersthe enumerated inConcurrentthe List anyprovisionof law a by made Parliament Literallyprovisionthe declares “Ifthat any prov there is validno groundwhich leads tothis conclusion. The provision rather referstoall types ofconflict. lawsunderArt 2 269 no are there themselves), states the among or government of levels two the between disputes solve to set is which institution (an Federation of House the before brought them between area concurrent or overlapping on question jurisdictional or government of levels constitution.This doesn governments” state and federal the both of decision or practice customary law, “any it, clarified itself provision the as that, la supreme the is constitution “The governments. state and federal the between powers of overlap or laws of conflicts from arising problems solve can‟t it thus and supremacy federal from different is constitution the of Supremacy no are laws federal other But, 9. Art under supremacy its declared federal government. un federation favors Indian The elsewhere. explained I as federations other than India in dominant most the are principles supremacy Federal order. constitutional the ensure to constitution constitution the of In India, supremacy of federal laws over state in case of conflict is declared under Art 254 Art under declared is conflict of case in state over laws federal of supremacy India, In

te lawswhich twothe have competence toenact under concurrentthe list. Therefore, in Ethiopian federation, if a dispute regarding conflict of laws between the two two the between laws of conflict regarding dispute a if federation, Ethiopian in Therefore, constitution The clause. supremacy federal have doesn‟t Ethiopia of constitution The Ibid Artof9 constitutionthe of Ethiopia See254Art Sub Art 1 ofIndian constitution.the There scholarsare who argue that supremacythe offederal

ity and the constitution has so many provisions which ensure supremacy of the the of supremacy ensure which provisions many so has constitution the and ity 54 appliesonly casesfor of concurrentpowers. Butgiven the ofnature Indianthe federation, 269

and ‟t givesupremacy ‟t federal forspecial any or position the government.

l lvl o cut ae bie udr ifrn poiin o the of provisions different under obliged are courts of levels all

271

is invalid as long as it is in contradiction with the federal the with contradiction in is it as long as invalid is whichParliament is competent to enact, toorany provisionofan 83 ision of ision a law bymade Legislature the of State isa repugnantto

w of the land” the of w

270

t supreme over state laws. state over supreme t under Art 9 simply means means simply 9 Art under …”

Thisprovision doesn‟t s of power power of s

CEU eTD Collection definedlines.along ethnic (unless federationfederaloffederationshighlyinisethnicawhich probableethnic Ethiopiaother and basedorganizedethnicity.on eth an in states Thus, group. ethnic each for (autonomy) power give to is aim its and identity on based molded is federalism ethnic convenience, administrative on based organized is thus and democracy and liberty ensure to states regional and federal betwee power divide to isfederalism distributive of purpose the While units. constituent (Ethnic federalism) isbeifprinciplesit stable. to supremacy federal constitutional established well needs federation a that mean would which serveitconsistently can‟t Thus, factors. other systemsand politicalon party highlydependent acc act to helpful thus and flexible practical be may While prevalence federal promptly. risk at be will federation a of integrity the prevalence, federal integrityjeopardizemayfederathe ofthe run long inthe that and units constituent the upset may house the by decisions discriminatory and Partial supremacy. federal practical bring may it though political purely be will house passed. be can decision a which on up principles constitutional Ethnic identity is not used in structuring the US federation. Thus, a danger to the integrity integrity the to danger a Thus, federation. US the structuring in used not is identity Ethnic pragmatic or India and US in like clause supremacy federal constitutional a is there Unless A federation may adopt a form of distributive or ethnic federalism in organizing its its organizing in federalism ethnic or distributive of form a adopt may federation A 4.4 Arranging federal boundaries based on ethnicity ethnicity on based boundaries federal Arranging 4.4 reforms are made) is very less probable in US. In Ethiopia, state boundaries are are boundaries state Ethiopia, In US. in probable less very is made) are reforms

84 tion.

rigt icmtne, t is it circumstances, to ording

Thus, the decision by the the by decision the Thus, nic federal system are are system federal nic n the n CEU eTD Collection http://www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu12ee/uu12ee0j.htm 272 discussionduringthedraftconstitution. the on Ambedkar Dr federation.the of disintegration to potentials the minimize and unity promote together, these all emergency, unitary a into federation the change to power union‟s the and states to belongs which area any on interest national the in laws enact to power legislature‟s federal the system, court centralized the more, is What necessary. deems it manner a in laws execut to states direct can it states, existing more or onefrom states new establish can it itexplainedmergecan moreunion into thestates earlier, canreorganize or states, two the one, continuous to lead may groups ethnic between creates it tension the though federation the of integrity the to threat a not is identities religious and linguistic on based organized is which arrangement federal constituti and strength the Given one. chapter in S.D. Muni S.D. India too has reorganized the states along ethnic and religious lines in 1966 as I explained explained I as 1966 in lines religious and ethnic along states the reorganized has too India Asscholaroneit: rightlystated to secede from it. Though the country and the people may be divided into different states different into divided be may people the and country the Though it. from secede to No federation. a in join to states the by agreement an of result the wasnot federation the federation, a be wasto India Though pressures. disintegrative possible against Union the strengthen to wanted Constitution Indian the of founding independence,the fathers of time the prevailingat partition of context political In view of historical experiences of disruptive and disintegrative sectarian disintegrative and disruptive of experiences historical of view In , Ethnicconflict, federalism, anddemocracy India in 272

one of the Drafters of the constitution had also said the following statement statement following the said also had constitution the of Drafters the of one

conflicts among the tribes, casts, provinces or territories. As I I As territories. or provinces casts, tribes, the among conflicts

t being a result of an agreement, no state has the right right the has state no agreement, an of resulta being t 85

onal powers of the union in India, the ethnic ethnic the India, in union the of powers onal

form of government in case of of case in government of form forces and the the and forces e the the e CEU eTD Collection sovereigntysuch any at timeand secede fromfederation.the vested in the nations, nationalitiesandpeople of Ethiopia. Thus every nation, nationality and people claimcan 276 275 development,Suffolk Transnat‟l L. Rev. 1996 1 274 273 inintroduced constitutionhazardousthebe stabilityfor will so the of arrangement ethnic the of implementation full provisions, constitutional the undermined has government ruling the of nature undemocratic the Though secession. including determination people” and nationality “nation, labeled is which group ethnic every hanis unionenoughstrong to Ethiopia.in lacking are conditions those and federation the of superficial.” similar the constitution, Ethiopian the of the drafters by emulated model a as served have to thought been has 1950 of Constitution Indian the “although it, indicated MinasseHaile Professor As federation. the of existence continuing constitution the in proclaimed as federalism ethnic Ethiopian The India. constitutiona many whichfactorspractical federation. continuing canensure theof the existence are there India, in federalism ethnic is there though Therefore,

The form of ethnic federalism introduced in Ethiopia is different from what is adopted in adopted is what from different is Ethiopia in introduced federalism ethnic of form The When we see the constitution of Ethiopia, it has used ethnicity in organizing the states and states the organizing in ethnicity used has it Ethiopia, of constitution the see we When See39Art (1) of constitutionthe of Ethiopia. Art of8 constitutionthe also Ibid See Ibid speculation... to it leave than rather outset the at clear [this] make to better was it thought Committee under living people single a people its whole, integral one is country the administration, of convenience for ProfessorMinasse Haile, The newEthiopian constitution and its impactup on unity,human rightsand

274

According to him, there are conditions in India which can ensure the integrity the ensure can which India in conditions are there him, to According 273

snl ipru drvd rm snl suc.. h Drafting The source... single a from derived imperium single a

dle activitiesmaywhichintegritydlefederation. destabilize ofthe

86 - 1997

, p. , 17

t bten h to osiuin is constitutions two the between ity 275

declared that sovereigntythe is As I clarified previously, the previously, clarified AsI federation. 276

is a big danger to the the to danger big a is has the right to self to right the has

l and and l

- CEU eTD Collection 281 Ethiopia. development,Suffolk Transnat‟l L. Rev. 1996 1 280 279 278 277 fields. battle other and Adwa at invasions foreign against people and nationalities nations, all of victory the including Ethiopia in nationalities all of values social and religious millennia.” historical, “a for have Ethiopians destiny common the haseroded This groups. ethnic the of one to themselves attribute ifthey only process political ascribe to groups dangerous. ethnic to refers it rather whole; a as Ethiopia of people the Ethiopia.” nationalitiespeop “nations,and definition of of people and nationalities “nations, the in vested is sovereignty that declared 8 Art whole. a as Ethiopia of people the in vested sovereignty maydisintegration. andleadthat to other fighteach to groups tribal inspire which structures damaging and perplexing introduced arrange federal ethnic the him, 51).” page on Constitution Ethiopian new the on Article Haile‟s Minasse see power, separationof of absence (because of powers of unlimited government a of creation the sub tribal the to allocated powers disproportionate the in regions, tribal to center the from sovereignty of transfer total near the in mainly found

Careful reading of Arts 8 and 39(5) of the constitution of constitution the of 39(5) and 8 Arts of reading Careful Any individual, even those who have mixed ethnicity or those who are pan Ethiopian have have Ethiopian pan are who those or ethnicity mixed have who those even individual, Any is federation Ethiopian ofthe nature dangerous “The indicated, MinasseHaile AsProfessor Ibidp. 23 SeeProfessor Minasse Haile, The newEthiopian constitution and its impactup on unity,human rightsand Artof8 constitutionthe of Ethiopia Ibidp. 19 Ibidp. 20

themselves to one of ethnic groups in Ethiopia. They can be participants in the the in participants be can They Ethiopia. in groups ethnic of one to themselves

ment established by the present constitution of Ethiopia has has Ethiopia of constitution present the by established ment

278

87 - 1997,p

le of Ethiopia” under Art 39(1), itreferto doesn‟t 39(1), Art Ethiopia”le under of .20 and 21. Also see 39Art (5) ofconstitution the o nt olcieyad niiulyad in and individually and collectively units 281 Ethiopia reveals that there is no is there that reveals Ethiopia

t nemns h common the undermines It 279

n we w se the see we when And 280 Ti i extremely is This . 277 According to According f

CEU eTD Collection 284 2002:2 Chr.Michelsen Institute Development Studies andHuman Rights, p.44 283 presentedto Shared 282 samethe enjoy theirautonomygroup ethnic as the iton territorydominates. thus and regions other in minorities be may groups such to belong who people Even self groups. ethnic to dominant only benefit right may arrangement their federal ethnic exercise the Therefore, to enough influential be can‟t groups some groups. ethnic all for states establish to impossible be will it Economically, state. own their have don‟t which groups ethnic many so also have We states. other and Oromia in wil Oromos the states. Southern and Oromia in population group‟s ethnic other and Amhara of number considerable is there and numbeisThere considerable ethnic among fear groups. of climate creating and values those eroding is system federal ethnic values common have people Ethiopian Thus, culture. and blood by people Ethiopian the linked which events historical significant the among were century 19 the in Amhara of movement ward South the and century 16 the in Gondar and Orom the of domination political and movement ward North The

The purely ethnic federal setup in Ethiopia can‟t even solve the problem of ethnic groups. groups. ethnic of problem the solve even can‟t Ethiopia in setup federal ethnic purely The Ibid LoviseEthnicAalen Federalism Dominant in a Party State: EthiopianThe Exper MereraGudina (Ph.D), - Rule‟Associate Prof; Dept. Political Science &International Relations, Addis Ababa University paperA

OSAAnnual Conference July 29 l be minorities in Amhara and other states and the Amharas will be minorities be Amharas will the and states other and Amhara in minorities be l 283 The EthiopianState and Futurethe ofOromos: the StruggleThe for „Self

There are above 50 ethnic groups in the Southern state. It means that that means It state. Southern the in groups ethnic 50 above are There

r of Oromo population in Amhara and Benishangul Gumuz states states GumuzBenishangul Amharain and population ofOromo r

– 88

30,2006, Minneapolis, USA, p.3

in many aspects though the present present the though aspects many in o on areas including Wello Wello including areas on o

ience1991 - - 2000Report R determination. may not have not may

- Rule and 284

T hus, 282

CEU eTD Collection 288 revisede 287 September2009,p. ii 286 285 minimizewhichtensionbetweenthe has fromgroups ethnic purely resulted federalism. ethnic “pr basis” federal a on them organizing provincesandhistoric Ethiopia‟sof “restorationit, stated Fiseha mean a as language only using Thus, groups. ethnic different from people Ethiopian between interactions were There before. explained I as languages different speak they though share people Ethiopian b organized not were provinces Such Ethiopia. in provinces were there power, to comes TPLF/EPRDF the Before federation. federation.federalismitsto existenceit the creates stated Inofreport the2009, that: federalism.

Hence, the ethnic federal system Ethiopia follows is a threat to the integrity of the the of integrity the to threat a is follows Ethiopia system federal ethnic the Hence, As many opposition politicians argue federalism is indispensible for Ethiopia but not ethnic not but indispensibleisEthiopiafor federalism many politiciansoppositionargue As Ibid SeeAssefa, Fiseha, International CrisisGroup onreport Ethiopia: Ethnic federalism anditsdiscontents ,AfricaReport N°153 Ibid important than democracy in Ethiopia, but they neglect the increased ethnic awareness awareness ethnic increased the neglect they but more Ethiopia, in security democracy than food important consider to appear donors Some problems. these all downplayed self promoted ethnic powerfully has it grievances, accommodate to failed has concept the While n tnin cetd y h rgoaiain policy consequences. regionalization the by created tensions and ovincialism is one element of diversity that defines Ethiopian society.” Ethiopian defines that diversity of element one is ovincialism 287

dition,Addis Ababa: Artistic Printing Enterprise, can bring administrative convenience and it will be more accommodative as as accommodative more be will it and convenience administrative bring can 285

- The International Crisis Group has also warned also has Group Crisis International The wrns aog l gop. h i The groups. all among awareness 286

Federalismand Accommodationthe of Diversity Ethiopia: in ComparativeA Study,

s of political organization will ignore other important factors. As Assefa Assefa As factors. important other ignore will organization political of s

ased on language. There are other common values which the the which values common other are There language. on ased 89

2007, trainl omnt hs goe or ignored has community nternational

p. 248

n ter oetal explosive potentially their and the danger the Ethiopian ethnic Ethiopian the danger the 288

This also can also This

–

CEU eTD Collection t leave to opt will power of share appropriate get don‟t which groups or behind multi a within participation non diversity.accommodates a be can there mean, I precondition. a as arrangement repre or accommodation that 4.4 section in indicated also have I Ethiopia. and India like system federal multicultural in federalism of Failure 4.5 to represe somefederalgenuineandis democraticestablished. structure government unless risk at is values common shared who people Ethiopian great the of fate the and groups ethnicity on based structured basedorganized ethnicity. on is itin whichboundary the within only autonomy unlimited livinggetting than are wherethey sizeiflanguage,and religiousirrespective culturalof membersand its rights recognized are population its on based institutions federal in power of share genuine has it if more benefit territory which on that fact irrespective the group of that forrecognized rights other languageand theinstitutions and federal shared in has group ethnic the power of share the is matters what Rather, ethnicity. rsnl, h udmcai ntr o te uig oenet n te at ht tts are states that fact the and government ruling the of nature undemocratic the Presently, doe Ethiopia in federalism genuine Establishing comdto o dvriy n etbihet f dmcai evrnet for environment democratic a of establishment and diversity of Accommodation As I explained in the first two chapters, accommodation of diversity is one of the purposes purposes the of one is accommodationchapters,diversity of two first inthe Asexplained I

of diverse groups is a crucial means to avoid marginalization of some groups groups some of marginalization avoid to means crucial a is groups diverse of - cultural federation. If these conditions are lacking in practice, those groups left groups those practice, in lacking are conditions these Iffederation. cultural

the members of such group live. For example, the Oromo people will will people Oromo the example, For live. group such of members the

have resulted in creating military groups organized along ethnic ethnic along organized groups military creating in resulted have

nt diversity adequately ntdiversity 90

etto o dvriy os‟ ne ehi federal ethnic need doesn‟t diversity of sentation sn‟t need organization of states based on on based states of organization need sn‟t - ethnic federal system which which system federal ethnic

he federation he

of of CEU eTD Collection 292 Connecticut,London, 2004,p 291 of absence 290 is India) and 289 (Ethiopia federations both in problem The groups. diverse playing areminority inimportant roles protecting rights. those beyond rights constitution.” federal for the by afforded protections granting rulings with responded have courts this, “state stated rightly Tarr Alan As systems. protection rights minority own their developed states the states, different in majorities the by minorities the against discriminations and of exclusions wide the of Because all. at rights no have groups diverse that mean doesn‟t workwell. liberal to democracy principle the helps turn in that and identity ethnic of questions minimized have chapter, first the in explained I as has, US societyhomogenous relatively the centuriesand for US by usedpolicy assimilat The federation. the within group identified one as power share to group ethnic within powers federation.meanbe questionaThisthat willthe would therenot by particular a not is identity ethnic liberty” “individual federation. crea will institutions federal shared through adequately diversity represent to failure Thus, currently. Ethiopia of government ruling the against fight groups ethnic different from groups military different what as can they means any through

Unlike the US, the Ethiopian and Indian constitutions are committed to accommodation of accommodationof to committed are constitutions Indian and Ethiopian the US, the Unlike has what But democracy.” “liberal is based system federal US the which on principle The http://www.wisegeek.com/what Ibid,p.89 Federalism,sub nationalconstitutions, and minorityrights, F.RobertWilliams Josef and WestMarko port, Ibid

to be noted here is that the US federalism is based on liberal democracy democracy liberal on based is federalism US the that is here noted be to 290

used as a basis in determining boundaries of the states and in sharing sharing in and states the of boundaries determining in basis a as used is what the federation stands for. Thus, as I clarified it in chapter one, chapter in it clarified I as Thus, for. stands federation the what is .90

- is

- a - liberal 291 - democracy.htm 91

According to him, the state courts state the him, to According

292 te real threats to the integrity of a a of integrity the to threats real te

and constitutions constitutions and 289

Thus, have ion CEU eTD Collection 293 likefederationsEthiopia India.and function healthy the for indispensible is implementation democratic multi in instability and inindicatedgovernment earlier.Ethiopia asI India in conflicts communal s in resulted has This environment. accommodative of absence pragmatic in resulted which factors responsible among are India of union the for given power disproportionate a ccommodation in practice. The undemocratic nature of the ruling party in Ethiopia and and Ethiopia in party ruling the of nature undemocratic The practice. in ccommodation

Generally, failure to accommodate diversity adequately is one potential source of conflict conflict of source potential one is adequately diversity accommodate to failure Generally, Ibidp. 203 - 211

- cultural federal systems. Genuine accommodation of diversity and its its and diversity of accommodation Genuine systems. federal cultural

293

n cetd tnc iiay rus ihig gis the against fighting groups military ethnic created and

n o multicultural of ing o many o CEU eTD Collection thischapter. in explain will I as institutions different set have federations different purpose, this achieve final the have should institution judicial this dispute of incase and constitution the to subordinate bemust government levels of Both constitution. finalsayconston a has alone government of level one once federation a be more no will system the and other the to subordinate be will government of level One one. chapter in point this clarified have I shouldh government level of neither federal, remain systemto a for guaranteed be to has power of division such and government of levels two the between power divide constitutions federal As actors. constitutional among disputes umpi to institutions judicial organized well and strong have to need disputes federalfederationsThisthemmean exposed to and that wouldconflicts. governments within actors constitutional the among resources and power for competition The government. minorities’and protection unity review, Constitutional Five: Chapter hrfr, hr ms b a idpnet miig nttto t itrrt federal a interpret to institution umpiring independent an be must there Therefore,

eea o qai eea frs f oenet r mr cmlx hn ntr forms unitary than complex more are government of forms federal quasi or Federal

itutionalterms. Introduction

ave unilateral power to interpret the constitution. constitution. interpretthe to power unilateralave say on the terms of the constitution. To To constitution. the of terms the on say

re horizontal and vertical and horizontal re

of of CEU eTD Collection 295 294 state as Here, states. inthese claims minorityrights be may there thus andfour are inchapter indicated there course, Of ha identity. which his courts on and based constitutions right special a get to courts federal other or Supreme US the before review constitutional for request to standing no has group constitution.meansunderThisrelevantUS the g a democracy. and liberty enjoyment, individual achieve to meant are powers of divisions horizontal and vertical the democracy, liberal of principle the on based example, For follows. system federal a purpose or spirit particular essential also inschemes. unitaryconstitutionalreview governments‟ horizontalseprotection supervisionindividualandof rights ofto addition in federalism ofspirit the keep can institutionswhich have umpiring to needsystems m institutions. the of composition the and complaints constitutional bring can who persons or organizations the adopt, they institution judicial of type the of terms in difference great a is there constitutionality, their for executive the or parliament bymadelaws evaluatethe to institutionjudicial other or court 5.1 Constitutional 5.1 Who can review: requestit? for inorities and preservation of the integrity of a federal system. This would mean that federal federal that mean would This system.federal a of integrity the of preservation and inorities

The answer to the question who can request for constitutional review depends on the the on depends review constitutional for request can who question the to answer The SeeNew UnitedVYork States,505 U.S. 144, 112 S.Ct. 2408, 120.L.Ed.2d. 120, 1 Ginsburg,Tom While most countries in the world have a have world the in countries most While 294

Such structural and substantive differences have an impact on protection of of protection on impact an have differences substantive and structural Such

omparativeconstitutional review,University ofChicago Law School July 2008, 30, p.1 type of claim which can be made before these institutions, the sort of of sort the institutions, these before made be can which claim of type

ve developed minority rights protection systems as I I as systems protection rights minority developed ve 94

system of constitutional review: a power by a a by power a review: constitutional of system roup of people or a persona belongingthis roup to ofor people paration of powers which are are which ofpowers paration 295

as the US federalism is is federalism US the as

992,Para. 16 ru dniy s not is identity Group

CEU eTD Collection 299 298 297 296 review. concrete and abstract both of power have the Court and Constitutionalthe Court beforeConstitutionalthe constitutionalcomplaint individ any and Laender of courts constitutionalLaender, courts, ordinary levels, all of bodies “State Germany. is review fundamental protect individualto rights. increasingisthereindividual constitutionaltrend foris of allowing complaints that and review 1920‟s. the in Austria in governments state and federal the by only review as constitutionalreview, access.” wide very to access limited very from spectrum a on court the it, to access array can one „standing‟; as stated known concept a claim, Ginsburg Tom As achieve. wid differ systems to review “Constitutional wishes federation that purposes particular the on depends federation given a in standing has who issue the Thus identity. such on based for request may group this to belonging individual an or group religious or linguistic ethnic, an Hence, federations. Ethiopian and Indian the in from different is action affirmative that noted identity/minority be to has it one, chapter in explained I

Ethnic, religious and linguistic groups unlike in the US federation are the central elements elements central the are federation US the in unlike groups linguistic and religious Ethnic, A federation which can be an example for providing a wider access for constitutional constitutional for access wider a providing for example an be can which federation A Ibid See Ibid Supra 294note http://www.concourts.net/lecture/lecture4.html

rights. rights. Tom Ginsburg indicated, is the right to bring cases for constitutional for bring cases to right theis indicated, Ginsburg Tom

ual (alleging violation of his/her fundamental rights) can bring bring can rights) fundamental his/her of violation (alleging ual

95 298 296

ely on the question of who is allowed to bring a a bring to allowed is who of question the on ely

, , An example of very narrow access to courts for courts to access narrow very of example An 299

n S tog tee s o btat review, abstract no is there though US, In constitutional review to secure a right right a secure to review constitutional 297

hs days, These

CEU eTD Collection Constitutional Inquiry tosendhas only advisory opinion. Constitutional inquiry.finalThe decisionwill be passed by House the of Federationas Councilthe of organizationor associationwhich is aninterested party institutecan aconstitutiona EthiopianWomen Lawyers Association on behalf of Kedija Beshircase and thisshows that an individual, 305 304 15%20judicial%20review%20and%20protection.pdf 303 302 301 300 ofisFederation,whichwillsection.dormant as proved I inexplainnext the House the institution, political a is constitutional the of interpreter the that is problem big the be “fundamentalamended.”cannot rights statingthat case Golaknath inthe decision famous a passing by parliament thefrom influence Court‟s the with satisfied not is parliament the case in amendment constitutional through parliament the by reversed be can constitutionality on decision Court‟s Supreme the example, For review. constitutional the that is problem the But, India. of Court Supreme the to compliant constitutional bring may group minority a to belonging individual rights. these enforce to review constitutional 12 Art from rights inissue court.” “anyone

In Ethiopia, any interested party has the right to insti to right the has party interested any Ethiopia, In minority and rights individual fundamental provides constitution the of III part India, In Art37 ofconstitution the of Ethiopia Supra 303,note p.193 Judicial reviewprotection and of fundam See32Art of constitutionthe of India See ofPart III constitutionthe of India Supra 294note who satisfies general „standing‟ requirements for litigation can raise a constitutional constitutional a raise can litigation for requirements „standing‟ general satisfies who 300

- 31.

301

decision.

r 3 poie ta te Supre the that provides 32 Art

.The House of Federation alsohas entertained acase submitted by

303 ental rights/

rm 97 n te urm Cut a rdcd such reduced has Court Supreme the on, 1967 From 96 304

p.190 302 Supreme Court itself has very limited power of of power limited very has itself Court Supreme

http://nos.org/317courseE/L

Therefore, individuals, minority groups or an or groups minority individuals, Therefore,

tute a constitutional complaint. constitutional a tute e or hs h pwr of power the has Court me lcomplaint tothe Council of -

305

But CEU eTD Collection 308 307 Universityof Chicago Law School July 30, 2008,p. 1 QueensUniversity 2nd press, edition, 1999,p 306 isnationalities proper interpretorganthepeople to and constitution. the natio the represents which Federation of House the people, and nationalities nations, of sovereignty the of reflection a is constitution the as and 8 Art under people and nationalities leadingonesare: the reasons the among two, chapter in explained have I As Ethiopia. in institution political inEthiopiavestedisnon a and Africa South Hungary. Herzegovina, and Bosnia Spain, Comoros, Belgium, including states by followed being currently is which Court Constitutional German regarding review. constitutional say final the have like the and constitutiona India Australia, of Canada, US, in power courts Supreme the with vested institutions different of establishment minoritiesthrough unity and review? constitutional s judicial of type What 5.2

1) The argument that argument The 1) a with review constitutional of power the vesting for forwarded reasons different are There SeeArticle62 ofconstitution the of Ethiopia Ibid See Historical, political, cultural and social differences among federations have led to the the to led have federations among differences social and cultural political, Historical, Watts,Comparing federal systems, schoolthe of policy s

307

tipa a floe a nqe oe. h pwr f osiuinl eiw in review constitutional of power The model. unique a followed has Ethiopia

306

sovereignty under the Ethiopian constitution is vested in the nations, nations, the in vested is constitution Ethiopian the under sovereignty We can also find specialized courts vested with this power, like the like power, this with vested courts specialized find also can We

- judicialpolitical organization,

.100. See 97

etup best serves protection of of protection serves best etup Alsosee Tom Ginsburg,Tom Comparative constitutional review, http://www.concourts.net/lecture/lecture4.html tudies, Queens tudies, University and McGillthe House House ofFederation.

many federal and unitary unitary and federal many

308

l review. review. l - ns,

CEU eTD Collection ConstitutionalismAfrica, in Nairobi, Ap (HoF),Draftpaper presented Africanat Network of Constitutional Law conference Fosteringon 311 R Chr.2002: 2 Michelsen Institute Development Studies andHuman Rig 310 309 diversity the Given cases. constitutional adjudicate to alternative best a is institution political disputes. political disregard and values legal to priority give will judges as inappropriate is judiciary the on review constitutional of power vesting that argument the impartialand better singlepartyapolitical thandominated institution. ex I as courts ordinary on citizens by confidence of absence argue, scholars some is, Federation justifiespower the firstreasonwhich Thus,the one. together coming federationassumeasa Ethiopian cannot the legitimacy.” lost project federal the hence, and party, ruling rat and drafting of process “The again. once Aalen Lovise of words the use me Let people. and nationalities nations, of will the of reflection genuine a as seen be cannot constitution the thus and party ruling dominated TPLF was process making constitution the 2.3, section in explained I As time. the at federation jointhe to not power havethe would people or nationality nation, nations,freeformed basedthe anationalitiesonof mean consent wouldwhichpeople and that

plained in chapter two. This argument is also very weak as reform can make courts much courts make can reform as weak very also is argument This two. chapter in plained 3) The third argument that I indicated in chapter two and which I provide in detail here is here detail in provide I which and two chapter in indicated I that argument third The 3) of House the on review constitutional of power vesting for justification second The 2) bigitisassumesfallacythis federationBut, becauseathe is that “coming a together” AssefaConstitutionalFiseha, Adjudication in Ethiopia:Exploring the ExperienceofHouse the of Federation SeeLovise Ethnic Aalen, Federalism in aDominant Party State: The EthiopianExperience 1991 Seesupra 150 note 311

hs ruet a b prusv bt t os‟ la t te neec ta a that inference the to lead doesn‟t it but persuasive be may argument This

ofconstitutional by House reviewnot istheof tenable.Federation

ril, ril, 2007p.9 98 ifying the constitution was totally dominated by the the by dominated totally was constitution the ifying

- 11.

hts p.vi. hts 310

under the total control of the the of control total the under

hs ol ma ta one that mean would This elements in constitutional constitutional in elements

- 2000Report

309

one CEU eTD Collection state and federal as states of that federation governmentsthemselvesconstitution.ofthe Thesubject to House are Ethiopi of nor government federal the of part neither is which matters.regarding other court specialized a and issues rights individual fundamental regarding disputes constitutional on decide to power have courts ordinary that way a such in disputes constitutional determine cou specializeda and ordinarycourts both Thus, constitutionalcases. such address to judges and court specialized also need we that mean would which non factors of consideration need which disputes constitutional other are there But, rights. indi fundamental concerning disputes constitutional determining in involvement have to need courts ordinary Thus, determination. for court such to directly logged be to are cases Thi citizens. of questions day every are non they many as too also are cases rights individual Fundamental than issues. legal more involve cases such as rights individual fundamental regarding modifications. some with Ethiopia in adopted be can Court Constitutional German the Thus, factors. legal non and legal both consider can who judges specialized with court specialized a establish to a Fe of by House Ethiopian the like independence lacks and controlled party dominant is institution political such when especially institution, political judicial o non power a by review their constitutional of power exercising the justify doesn‟t in this But review. identities constitutional other and linguistic religious, ethnic, cultural, constitutional matters. t be not may courts ordinary Ethiopia, in The constit The consider to fail and viewpoint legal to preference give may courts ordinary the in Judges riay ors a b prope be may courts Ordinary ution is supreme means that there should be an independent adjudicatory organ organ adjudicatory independent an be should there that means supreme is ution

s would mean that a specialized court will be so busy and ineffective if such such if ineffective and busy so be will court specialized a that mean would s

r judicial institutions to determine constitutional cases cases constitutional determine to institutions judicial r 99

he right institutions to adjudicate all types of of types all adjudicate to institutions right he rt need to have power to to power have to need rt deration. It is possible possible is It deration. vidual vidual - - legal legal a is a - - f CEU eTD Collection 315 314 313 ComparativeStudy, revised edition, Addis Ababa: Artistic Printing Enterprise, 2007,P.416 312 whichconstraintin existedtimes. earlier decided be can case the applyingt whether is matters what rather not or issue political a involves case a whether not ismatters what that reveals now applicable is which precedent established constitut a when power courts the limits which approach constraining the consistently, upheld is unconstitutionality their for actions executive and laws invalidate to power the While issue. political a involves con time same the at but unconstitutionality their for actions executive and laws the invalidate to judiciary the of power the established void. action executive or law a declare to power has it politi involves this that indicating departments political the against mandamus issue to refused had Court Supreme US the Madison, V Marbury in decision cases. such adjudicating in problem cases. such adjudicate to competence lack may courts thus and elements political and legal both involve Fe inpartiesisthe federaldispute the the government. of if one cases decidingimpartial bein cannot thus institutionsand federalpolitical ofonethe

The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 and the judicial precedent have removed the the removed have precedent judicial the and 1946 of Act Procedure Administrative The times often powers of separation horizontal regarding issues that argument the is deration of House the by review constitutional for justification a as mentioned reason other The 4) http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m079.htm MarburyM V Ibid Assefa,Fiseha, Federalism andAccommodationthe of Diversity Ethiopia: in A

helaws constitution inor country. the 312

adison, 5adison, U.S. 137,1803. Assefa Fiseha has mentioned the US judiciary as one example one as judiciary US the mentioned has Fiseha Assefa oa cs ivle a oiia ise s rnfre. h well The transformed. is issue political a involves case ional

313

100

But this argument seems very feeble. In its earlier earlier its In feeble. very seems argument this But

strained the power of the courts when a case case a when courts the of power the strained

315

The Marbury V Madison case thus thus case Madison V Marbury The cal issue while stating that that stating while issue cal

- 418 facing with a with facing

314 -

CEU eTD Collection 319 318 317 316 constitutiontheanrender decisiona isto interference not politicala with department. or law a using and constitutionthe or law on based decided be can case the as long as review is there question, political a involves case a that fact the of irrespective words, other In court. a by decided be can which issue legal involvinga without political purely is it when interference no is there then constitution, the or law a using case a decide can court the If constitution. the applying case the decide can court the i.e. justiciable is issue the because review judicial from court political legislature's the with interfering judgments.” without decisions apportionment State's a of constitutionality the determine could court A review. judicial prevented that question‟ equal the under case clause. a protection brought and represented under were on 1901 from dramatically was law 1901 the by ch determined is which districts different for legislature Tennessee the in representatives of apportionment the case, this In way. wrong the in interpreted be not Cour Supreme The

legd o is constitutionality. its for allenged This decision reveals that there is a political issue political a is there that reveals decision This http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Mandamus Ibid Ibid BakerCarr,1962V is authorized by the AdministrativeProcedureauthorizedisthe by Act. discretion. discretion of abuse for government of federal States United the of agencies of reviewJudicial abuse for review judicial to subject now are agencies administrative of stat U.S the of most in mandamus writof the of expansion judicial by or statute By

319

318 t‟s decision in Baker V Carr can make this precise. This decision should should decision This precise. this make can Carr V Baker in decision t‟s http://www.infoplease.com/us/supreme

The Supreme Court declared that “the case did not involve a „politi a involve not did case “the that declared Court Supreme The with the political departments. The case is thus non thus is case The departments. political the with

317

101 ra aes hs pplto sz hs increased has size population whose areas Urban

- court/cases/ar02.html#axzz0z9EhKipA 316 in the case but that didn‟t prevent the the prevent didn‟t that but case the in

- justiciable only only justiciable

judicial es, acts es, cal CEU eTD Collection 259L.J. 2008 Silencing Ethiopianthe courts: Non 320 groups. ethnic larger by dominated is it because so do to failed has it Ethiopia, in minorities meant was HOF the Though stated this: rightly study recent a As disputes. constitutional handle to organ independent and impartial be isHOF political. thecannot The that mean decision would which HOFof majoritythevote constitutionaldecision onultimate the Therefore, mererole. advisory hasa CCI as HOF on binding not are constitution the of interpretation its and case the of investigation legal a has house This inefficient. proved is house the and problems many so created has organ political non a to role judicial crucial such Vesting constitution. the interpreting by disputes national nations, of representative disputingbe legalasorganssolvedpurelybycannot political cases rules. using Federation House ofofEthiopia can the like institutions political even cases, such In passed. be can decision a which on based rule legal no is there as agreement and consultation negotiation, through only solved be can Chi Mgbako, Chi SarahBraasch, Aron Degol, Melisa Morgan, Felice If a case is purely political, then it doesn‟t involve a l a involve doesn‟t it then political, purely is case a If s idctd lehr, h Hue f eeain HF o Ehoi wih is which Ethiopia of (HOF) Federation of House the elsewhere, indicated I As branch of government. branchof executive the and EPRDF the from independence complete lacks HOF The government. of branches all in power of excess an has which EPRDF, the party, ruling a by dominated wit operating organ political a is HOF The

- advisory body, i.e. the Council of Constitutional Inquiry (CCI). But, the CCI‟s CCI‟s the But, (CCI). Inquiry Constitutional of Council the i.e. body, advisory 2009 ,p.285.

320

judicialconstitutional reviewits and impacton human rights, are which of most people and nationalities nations, protect to not play binding mediatingbeyondnot aadjudicatory the role ities and people is assigned to resolve constitutional constitutional resolve to assigned is people and ities 102

hin the context of a federal government government federal a of context the hin

Segura, andTeramed Tezera,Report: egal question and thus the problem problem the thus and question egal

disputes is by by is disputes FordhamInt'l - judicial CEU eTD Collection 323 322 321 umpiringofinstitutioninternalthe institution.the and suchcapacity of impartiality and independence power, of scope the power, this with vested institution of type Thestudyinterpreter. describes that: constitutional a as HOF the with problems basic clarified hasabove to referred I study recent theydecide want. what 112 total the of out seats mil 1 extra each for seats additional and house this in representative one has group ethnic Each

To sum up, effectiveness of a constitutional review system in a federation depe federation a in system review constitutional a of effectiveness up, sum To constituti as long as problems of full is HOF the Hence, Ibid Supra 320note See61(2)Art of constitutionthe of Ethiopia citizens. In its entireits citizens.yearIn HOFfifteenhistory,the decisions. hasissuedfour only ineffic lion population. lion Non

- judicial constitutional review in Ethiopia has created an overly bureaucratic, bureaucratic, overly an created has Ethiopia in review constitutional judicial ient system of justice that has negatively impacted access to justice for Ethiopia's Ethiopia's for justice to access impacted negatively has that justice of system ient

321

Thus, Oromo and Amhara alone have controlled more than half of the of half than more controlled have alone Amhara and Oromo Thus,

322

hc wud en ht hs to tnc rus oehr can together groups ethnic two these that mean would which

103

onal review is concerned. The The concerned. is review onal

nds on the the on nds 323

CEU eTD Collection individual purely neither short, In conflicts. and tensions to lead Ethiopia would this like as problematic diversity for emphasis excessive giving and system federal ethnic purely a Establishing levels. regional at regimes protection groups‟ minority no are there individua of principle the on based is which system federal territorial US the Even diversity. on restriction undesired impose not should unity of forces The properly. balanced be also should diversity differe magnifies organizing entities in political factors social and economic historical, ignores which arrangement federal ethnic purely a and federalism territorial follow to society homogenous a no have countries multi for solution a is Ethiopia federalfollowed by federalpurelynor territorialtheethnic neither arrangement US the system federalcore the ofa sys autonomyeachhaving significant implementationispractical and ofsuch of division power at units constituent the and center the between power of division guaranteed constitutionally of level one as long as system federal a is no there hasthat indicated federalism,writer theis term universalthefor no there definition Though minorities. of protection and federalism territorial and ethnic federalism, including and unity analyzedhasthesis the ofchapter first The on minority groups. protection of implications their and Ethiopia and India of systems federal based identity Chapter Conclusion Six: While clarifying the concepts ethnic and territorial federations, the writer has showed that that showed has writer the federations, territorial and ethnic concepts the clarifying While This thesis has explored the territorial or nation state federal system of US and ethnic or or ethnic and US of system federal state nation or territorial the explored has thesis This l liberalism, though it helps to sustain unity, is a prison for minorities as long as as long as minorities for prison a is unity, sustain to helps it though liberalism, l tem.

- cultural states like Indi like states cultural nces and leads to instability. The forces of unity and and unity of forces The instability. to leads and nces 104

oenet s h sbet f h ohr Thus, other. the of subject the is government

a and Ethiopia. This is because the two two the because is This Ethiopia. and a

theoretical concepts concepts theoretical

is also also is CEU eTD Collection WestConnecticut,port, London, 2004, p.46 324 ofgenuinelya house. upper representative to way One federation. a in shared through interests diverse regionalor accommodate groups diverse accommodate to have they effective, and legitimate be institutionsto federalshared For federation. a integrityof keep helpsto that and mannerandmembersofselectionEthiopiahouses the upper of theUS, of of India. and insti beminorityacanshouldnot to degreethe that group destabilize political the system. enab should them to given rights the identified, are groups minority Once groups. minority of categories all protect helpfulto bescholars, by couldmost better consideredis which definition Capotorti,a terminological some that indicated has writer the contested, highly is minorities are who issue the Though one. chapter under organ umpiring independent constitutional disputes. an of existence the and federation, a within governments among power of division guaranteed constitutionally constitution, rigid and besections addressed.societyofstabilitythe and to are all of rights the if world the in countries most for solution a is communalism nor liberalism The questions who are minorities and what rights they have to claim are also addressed addressed also are claim to have they rights what and minorities are who questions The

hpe to f h tei hs drse te su rpeettvns o sae federal shared of representativeness issue the addressed has thesis the of two Chapter includingexplainedfeaturesfederalism supreme, hasonesalient also of written the Chapter RobertF.Williams, Josef andAllanMarko Tarr Shared federal institutions are indispensible to work together on areas of areas on together work to indispensible are institutions federal Shared tutions. The writer hasindicatedsome The writer tutions. also problemswith electoral the associated systems le them to avoid despotism by the dominant group. But minority rights rights minority But group. dominant the by despotism avoid to them le

modifications on the definition given by Francesco Francesco by given definition the on modifications 105

Federalism,sub nationalconstitutions

federal institutions is establishment establishment is institutionsfederal

, , andminority rights,

common interest interest common

to decide on on decide to 324

CEU eTD Collection 325 groups ethnic larger that mean would which population million one each for seat extra one on based apportioned are seats the size. becausepopulation states larger by dominated another is also it has problem; Sabha Rajya federalism. based ethnic has India though groups diverse legitimate. be to is it if reform needs legislature Ethiopian the Thus, house. upper the through diversity to legislature, federal A groups. ethnic few only by dominated is which house lower the of policy making law the through paralyzed easily is Ethiopia in groups diverse of protection constitutional whichdoesn‟ diversity represents house) (upper HOF the because legitimacy lacks legislature Ethiopian the houses, upper and inprotection systemswhich started aresom rights minority regional Therefore, minorities. dominate can state each in groups majority reg as state each of within groups diverse of protection protection equal mean doesn‟t states of representation ensure can institution federal shared a is which Senate US the Thus, size. population on based composed is it because states larger for favor may house lower the as majority house lower the counterbalance to and ones large the smal of domination avoid to help can states larger and small both of representation

The Indian upper house (Rajya Sabha) is also tricky in that it r it that in tricky also is Sabha) (Rajya house upper Indian The equal such and house) (upper Senate the in representatives two has US the in state Each While both the US and Indian federal legislatures are bicameral composed of both lower both of composed bicameral are legislatures federal Indian and US the both While SeeArticle107 of constitutionthe of India

e eiiae hs o noprt bt uiy truh h lwr os) and house) lower the (through unity both incorporate to has legitimate, be 325

Same problem is faced by the HOF of Et of HOF the by faced is problem Same

t have any involvement in the law making process. Thus, the Thus,the makingin law process. involvement have the any t

106 e states have to be havestatesdeveloped e to well.

hiopia as each ethnic group has group ethnic each as hiopia oa itrss Bt equal But, interests. ional epresents the states and not and states the epresents

l states by states l CEU eTD Collection 326 ifminimizesymmetry degree to the and ofpossible asymmetry. political an problem the aggravate will asymmetry constitutional adding federations,in conflict of source one is itself asymmetry political excessive As examples. be can India and Canada power; of federa the within states the among powers distributing in symmetric constitutionally are US the and Ethiopia While differences. significant address to circumstances exceptional in only introduced is asymmetry i differences like factors of because unavoidable inevitable always is asymmetry political While diversity. and unity of forces to solutions feasibleminimize withcomplex associated problems Indian the are party political dominant a by chambers second of control avoid to US inlike people the by directly chambers members second electof andstates to or groups hous such of domination avoid to Ethiopia and India of chambers second in have can groups ethnic or states seats of number maximum the on limit a set to process, legislatures state bynot and p the by elected are members as system party political through controlled also are Ethiopia and India of houses Second nationalities. few by house lower the of domination balance counter whi process making law the in involvement any house. this dominate can

d may lead to disintegration. Thus, the long run project should be to avoid constitutional constitutional avoid to be should project run long the Thus, disintegration. to lead may d Chapter three has explored on asymmetry of power and its implications on balancing the the balancing on implications its and power of asymmetry on explored has three Chapter making law the in itself involve to chamber second Ethiopian the to power Granting SeeArticle61(2) of constitutionthe of Ethiopia tion, there some federal systems which have constitutional asymmetry asymmetry constitutional have which systems federalsome there tion, 326

The biggest problem with the HOF in Ethiopia is that it has no has it that is Ethiopia in HOF the with problem biggest The

eople. eople.

107 n resources and population size, constitutional constitutional size, population and resources n

ch would mean that there is no means to to means no is there that mean would ch and Ethiopian andsecond chambers.

es by larger ethnic ethnic larger by es

CEU eTD Collection fut to danger serious so created has Ethiopian that and between people differences exaggerated has ethnicity on based states of organization lastingbetheyto are fe effectiveand if above, indicated I as reforms, significant need federations Indian and Ethiopian the Hence, federation. the integrityof the to danger serious hascreated system government undemocratic of result the is which asymmetry excessive an too, Ethiopia In run. long intheintegration to danger serious a becomemay someand conflicts ledto has that and asymmetry such of trend increasing an is there and states for given is India in treatment asymmetri four, chapter in explained as federation the of functioning healthy for helped non of treatment asymmetrical While federation. a of integrity the to and federalism clause,ethnic secession accommodatediversity, constitutional failure to power, asymmetryof environment. dominant a and Ethiopia in system party single a through cooperation excessive an two, the of combination the need we that mean would which disadvantages and advantages have systems federal competitive and cooperative both have cannot federations write The both spheres. own their within independence of guarantee in states regional Otherwise, changed. be in to government has ruling Ethiopia the of nature undemocratic the and amendment some needs India reg this In groups. minority are game this in losers the and relations intergovernmental unwarranted and asymmetries political undesired in resulted have Ethiopia in system party dominant single a and union the by states Indian of domination excessive The constitutional secession clause which is unique feature of Ethiopian federation and the the and federation Ethiopian of feature unique is which clause secession constitutional The Excessive systems. federal in unity to dangers potential some identified has four Chapter inclu Factors intergovernmental relations. issue of the addressed hasalso three Chapter

absence of federal supremacy clause are among the primary potential dangers dangers potential primary the among are clause supremacy federal of absence deral systems. systems. deral 108

union in India has created undemocratic undemocratic created has India in union ure Ethiopia. Unlike the US and India, India, and US the Unlike Ethiopia. ure

r has also indicated that, while that, indicated also has r a single dominant party and and party dominant single a ard, the constitution of of constitution the ard, - state units in US has has US in units state ding ding cal cal CEU eTD Collection institutions. associated risks the and house upper Ethiopian the with associated problems also incompetence and hasimpartiality revealed writer The effectively. disputes constitutional address to way feasible a is cases a rights individual fundamental regarding cases constitutionalin determining ordinary court ofinvolvement that indicated haswriter the Thus, multicultural. is system federal a when especially disputes constitutional determine to institutpoliticalnor courts neitherordinary that hasdepicted chapter This federation. a of integrity and minorities of protection and for respect ensure to feasible and exclusion systematic is ground on discriminationin andhassource ofbecomea serious trend federations. thisconflicts both reality the groups, diverse accommodated integrity the for indispensible is diversity of accommodation genuine Ethiopia, and India like federations multi in But, level. federal the at diversity of accommodation claim to group serious and territorial is federation US the constitutionaddressneedsto ofEthiopia amendment these problems. and laws ma of this conflict cases, resolve serious to In difficult jurisdictions. be will it government, federal the challenge to enough strong become states that assuming and clause supremacy federal no has Ethiopia C Failure to accommodate diversity properly is another potential factor for disintegration. As As disintegration. for factor potential another is properly diversityaccommodate to Failure atr ie a adesd h ise ht ye f osiuinl miig nttto is institution umpiring constitutional of type what issue the addressed has five hapter

of these federations. Though the constitutions of both Ethiopia and India have have India and Ethiopia both of constitutions the Though federations. these of

with using ordinary courts only as constitutional umpiring umpiring constitutional as only courts ordinary using with u t is eaiey ooeos oit, hr i no is there society, homogenous relatively its to due 109 y lead to disintegration. It is obvious that the the that obvious is It disintegration. to lead y nd establishment of a specialized court for other other for court specialized a of establishment nd

ions are adequate enough adequate areions

- cultural cultural

CEU eTD Collection

References Poli Harihar, constitutionsminorityand rights, 1987 Tusc Federalism, Exploring Daniel, Elazar, 2003 Constitutionalism: Comparative Baer, and Sajo Rosenfeld, Dorsen, studies 2009 Ethiopia, of case Accommodation the and Federalism Beker, der Van Christophe humanon impact rights, Non courts: Ethiopian the Silencing Report: Tezera, Aron Braasch, Sarah Mgbako, Chi 1995 Ethiopia in inFederalism: TrendsMcDowell, Current NewBruceD. Intergovernmentalthe Relations, Diversity of Accommodation the ComparativeStudy, and Federalism Fiseha, Assefa, . reviewRev L. Ariz. Allen ContemporaryDevelopment Prospects, Future and Conditions Present Background, Ethiopia: in Federalism Ethnic Habtu, Alem Opportun Alemayehu Nikodimos Abate Ian D Coulter, Diversity IanCoulter, D versusunity, . ln ar Rbr F Wlim ad oe Mro Fdrls, u national Sub Federalism, Marko, Josef and Williams F. Robert Tarr, Alan G. Books and Articles BooksArticles and tical Accommodation ofAccommodation Identity, tical . . , American Bar Association VOL. 19 NO.AmericanBar 19 3 AssociationVOL.

. uhnn Fdrls, eeso ad h Mrlt o inclusi of Morality the and Secession Federalism, Buchanan,

Bhattacharyya ities, ae Sbitd o h Scn EF nentoa Smoim on Symposium International EAF Second the to Submitted Paper Lund University,Law, FacultyLund of Master’s2004 Thesis, 531995 revised edition, Addis Ababa: revisededition, PrintingArtistic Enterprise, 2007 : a ae peetd t h 3 the at presented paper a ,

Fordham Int'l L.J. 259 2008Fordham 259 L.J. Int'l

Federalism . Issues in Ethiopia, July Ethiopia, 11 in Issues

, Ethnic Federalism in Ethiopia: Challenges and and Challenges Ethiopia: in Federalism Ethnic , Westport,2004 London,Connecticut,

110 Degol, Melisa Morgan, Felice Segura, and Teramed Teramed and Segura, Felice Morgan, Melisa Degol, and Regionalism inRegionalismand 2005 commentary, J Can ChiroprCanJ 2007 Assoc. commentary,

loa AL: aloosa,

- - judicial constitutional review and its and review constitutionaljudicial rd 2009 -

12, Addis Ethiopia Ababa, uoen ofrne f African of Conference European India . nvriy f lbm Press, Alabama of University

, Institutional Strategies and Institutional ,

of Ethnic Diversity: The The Diversity: Ethnic of Cases and Materials, Materials, and Cases . .

on, on,

Arizona Law Law Arizona .

A :

CEU eTD Collection

Ronald L. Watts, FederalWatts,Ronald L.second cha UniversityMcGill the and systems, federal Comparing Watts, L. Ronald minorityand rights, constit national sub Federalism, Tarr, Allan and Marko Josef Williams, F. Robert unity, on up impact human andrights development, its and constitution Ethiopian new The Haile, Minasse Professor King:Preston BernardSaint and Laponce V Review Science Political International Systems Norris: Pippa L. Rev.663 2000 N.C. Federalism, Cooperative for Architecture Constitutional a Towards Weiser, J. Philip studies,1998 Legal Keller: Perry MichaelGreve,Against Cooperative Federalism, S. 2006 USA, Minneapolis, „Self for Strug The Oromos: the of Future the and State Ethiopian The (PHD), Gudina Merera Dark Mazower, Mark compromise, Fe M. Malcolm Rights 1991 Experience Ethiopian The State: Party Dominant a in Federalism Ethnic Aalen, Lovise Authoritarian Casethe State: ofEthiopia, Self and Federalism Ethnic Aalen, Lovise 1995 Berhanu: Kassahun N°153Report its Ethiopia:federalismInternationalreport on discontents, andEthnic Crisis Group - . 2000

, Harvard , - ue n Shared and Rule Report R 2002: 2 Chr. Michelsen Institute Development Studies and Human Human and Studies Development Institute Michelsen Chr. 2 2002: R Report the University of Michigan Press, University the Michigan 2008 of

Federalism and federation,Federalismand – Re

4September 2009 Choosing Electoral Systems: Proportional, Majoritarian and Mixed Mixed and Majoritarian Proportional, Systems: Electoral Choosing - ly n Ewr Rubin: Edward and eley thinking Ethnic and Cultural rights in Europe, Europe, in rights Cultural and Ethnic thinking University, For Contrasting Political Institutions special issue of the of issue special Institutions Political Contrasting For University, .

West port, Connecticut, London, 2004 WestLondon,Connecticut, port,

eiw f fia Pltcl Economy, Political African of Review

- Continent 2001

- QueensUniv

- . Jacques -

Rule‟, : Europe, : twentieth Century, Suffolk1Transnat’l 1996 Rev. L. .

111 . mbers compared, mberscompared,

ppr rsne t OA nul Conference, Annual OSA to presented paper a

edition,ersity1999.2nd press,

JohnsHopkinsUniv In l 1() uy 97 297 1997: July 18(3) ol. t'l J. on Minority &J.on 2006 Minorityt'l 244 GroupRts. -

eemnto fr ainlte i a Semi a in Nationalities for Determination F ederalism, political identity and tragic tragic and identity political ederalism, the school of policy studies, Queens Queens studies, policy of school the 70L.J.2000 Miss. 557 .

Queen’s2006 University, Canada,

Penguin Books, 1999 Penguin Books, ersity1982 Press, Volume 22 Issue 63 March March 63 Issue 22 Volume - 1997 18 - 312, .

Oxford Journal of of Journal Oxford

Edited - 2001 . .

. y Jean by

utions, utions,

Afr .

gle ica 79 79 . -

CEU eTD Collection

h Fae ok ovnin o te rtcin f ainl minorities, national of protection 1.II.1995 the for Convention Work Frame The TheConstitutionofUS TheConstitutionof TheConstitutionofFEDRE(Federal Republic Ethiopia) Democraticof V United York the New States LubiconLakeCanada, BandV International Civilon Covenant Political and Rights HumanRights BakerVCarr: 2008 30, July review, constitutional Comparative Ginsburg, Tom University,1989 Anton: J. Thomas 2005 press, law, international and minorities Democracy, Wheatley, Steven of constitution theIndia, transformations, democratic and sovereignty Popular Sen, Sarbani Federalism,1995 Relation Intergovernmental Liebschutz, F. Sarah Queen’s 2003 Montreal, University IIGR, IRPP, and relations, intergovernmental of institute Federation, the of Council the Co and Constructive Watts, Ronald 1998 Canada, 3N6, K7L Ontario Kingston, Federations, University, Queens and Relations, Intergovernmental systems political Federal Federalism, Watts, L. Ronald

Legal documents Legal

Oxford University Oxford press, 2007

Committee GeneralCommittee 23, Comment

369 U.S. 186 1962 U.S. 369 .

AmericanBar VOL.NO. Association, 19 3

India

American Federalism and Public policy, policy, Public and Federalism American

505144,112U.S. S.Ct.2408, 120,120. L.Ed.2d. 1992 Communication No. 167/1984,(March CommunicationNo. 1990) .

112 . -

operative Federalism, operative .

Art 27, 1994,U.N.HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1Art 27, : h Dnmc elt o American of Reality Dynamic The s:

nvriy f Ch of University

A Series of Commentaries on on Commentaries of Series A .

Cambridge University University Cambridge ere Washington George icago Law School School Law icago

Strasbourg, Strasbourg, Institute of of Institute