BY ABEBE WOLDEGIORGIS
Studies indicate that about 40 percent of the world’s countries pursue and implement a federal form of government. They preferred to establish the system for two main purposes. One is the distribution or decentralization of power from the center to the regions and the other is for purpose of integration, particularly in geographically vast countries.
In countries where democracy is well developed, federal form of government is established to attain two objectives, self-rule and shared rule. That means citizens in their regions govern themselves by electing their representatives while at the same time participating in the affairs of federal government particularly in its legislative part. Based on merit, people from the federal regions also serve in the central government as technocrats in the executive body.
Regions also have their own legislative, executive and judiciary organs with defined roles to facilitate self- rule. Both shared and self-rule are characterized by periodical election, rule of law and freedom of expression depending on the society’s level of education, their culture and level of democratic experience.
Ethiopia historically experienced traditional self-rule approaches to governance. There were kings in their respective regions and the king of kings at the center. The kings had the supreme power in their respective regions while paying tax to the central government.
In modern history of Ethiopia, the coronation of Tefferi Mekonnen as Emperor Haile Selassie I in 1931 gave way for establishing a highly central government by overriding the regional autonomous traditional rights. Until the downfall of the Derg regime three decades ago, governing from the center was the norm.
Similar to the situation during the previous regimes, the current constitution which is mainly crafted by the TPLF led EPRDF was imposed via a top-down approach without the participation and consultation of the general public. There were also little efforts in trying to take into consideration specific local contexts. The minute which has all the discussants ideas documented in the parliament gives testimony to the top-down approach followed in crafting the constitution. In the same way, the constitution allowed the introduction ethic based regional system.
Article 8, sub-article 1 of the constitution explains that the Ethiopian Nations, Nationalities and Peoples are the owners of the country’s sovereignty. This statement totally denies citizens’ rights to be sovereign. Here, Ethiopians who considered themselves as citizens were not consulted when such an idea was inserted in the constitution.
As mentioned above, the motive of establishing a federal system of governance by the EPRDF government was not meant to divulge or decentralize power. Rather, its integration was an outcome of the constitution only recognizing groups as if nation and nationalities as if they were the only ones having sovereignty. It totally disregarded citizens who do not consider themselves to belong to specific ethnic group due to various factors including being of a mixed ethnic origin. Paradoxically, EPRDF accused the past regimes of being centralized and authoritarian and claimed as if it is a champion of self-rule and equality.
To the EPRDF, in the history of the country, there was oppression and exploitation of nation and nationalities not of citizens and denied the fact that the country experienced class struggle. Yet, the fact of the matter is the 1974 popular uprising which ended the reign of the imperial regime was the outcome of class struggle in which all citizens aspired for a better future.
With the absence of democracy which is characterized by periodical election and freedom of expression, attaining a functioning federal system is unthinkable. Rather, it might drag the nation into instability, conflicts and displacement. The experiences of the last three decades are proof of this claim.
No person was held accountable for the displacement of people and loss of life due to the ethnic conflicts that are outcomes of the ethnic federal structure. The absence of rule of law and independent institutions allowed culprits to continue their criminal act with impunity.
With the exception of the one held in 2005, the five elections conducted during this time were not even close to be called elections let alone free and fair. Even, the relatively better contested 2005 elections ended up in the death of innocent civilians due to the post-election violence. Hence while citizens, nation and nationalities are being governed by unelected officials, how could they exercise their rights to self and shared rule?
The engineers of the constitution claim that the insertion of article 39 in the constitution which allows nation and nationalities to secede from the federal unit brought guarantee to them to live together. However, the constitution does not tell how their territory is demarcated in case they opt to exercise their rights.
Article 46 also indicates that nation and nationalities have the right to establish their own regions but does not indicates their responsibilities and duties. This again left Ethiopia to be the most politically volatile country.
The mapping of ethnic-based territories also lacks transparency. Proponents of group rights said that the regional map crafted based on the language, culture and psychological makeup of the people. But practically it is not. Only regions like Afar and Somali fulfil these criteria.
Language groups such as Tigray, Amhara, Oromia, Afar, Somali and recently Sidama have their own regions but the remaining 74 ethnic groups do not have. The crafting of the map also does not consider the number of population in terms of ethnic composition; it rather imposed the territorial demarcation arbitrarily. According to the CSA report, there are 40 ethnic groups which are more populous than Harari ethnic group but they don’t have their own region. Harari with 25 thousand people has its own region.
In addition, even though the Wolayta and the Guragehs have more than one million populations, they are not allowed to have their own regional states.
Various ethnic groups also reside in Benishangule-Gumuz regional state but the constitution gives specific autonomy only to those it claimed to be ‘indigenous’. The annexation of Wolkait Tsegede and Raya Azebo from the Gonder and Wollo regions respectively to Tigray indicate the intention of crafting of the map was simply to amass resources and perpetuate power grip for few groups.
Both places neither by the imperial era nor by the Derg times were under the rule of Tigray region. The issue remains to be controversial. Evidence also showed that the vastness of some regions also created administrative inconvenience.
For example, Minjar woreda of the Amhara regional state is found near Oromia’s Adama and Mojo towns. The people of Minjar have strong cultural and economic ties with these towns. But a resident in Minjar town has to go to Bahir Dar Town to appeal for his/her administrative grievances and this is economically expensive.
Similarly, a resident in Babile woreda of eastern Harerge has to come to the capital instead of going to Jigjiga or Harar towns. This is also the same for instance in the case of Dembidollo town of western Oromia. We can mention several other cases in this regard.
Moreover, the fundamental weakness of the federal system comes from the ideology pursued by the former ruling party EPRDF which is dubbed “revolutionary democracy.” It was an ideology of the now-defunct socialist countries.
It does not believe that power comes from the will of the people manifested by periodical election. According to the ideology, there is one vanguard party which decides the future of the people and the duty of the people is only to follow the instruction of the party.
The ideology also goes against the principles of the constitution itself. But it served the top party officials to perpetuate their power.
The past experience showed the regions were nominally autonomous because they were controlled by the party line.
Regional leaders were appointed by the top ruling party officials rather than by their constituency.
After the split of the TPLF in 2001 because of idea differences, dissidents were expelled from the party and Gebru Asrat was one of the dissidents who lost his regional presidency as a result. The fate of Abate Kisho, the former President of SNNPR was similar to that of Gebru Asrat.
Currently, the ruling party led by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed is reforming the nation’s political landscape for the better and encouraging results have been witnessed. Following the completion of the coming election, the government’s priority agenda need to be amending the constitution to give equal rights to all citizens of the country. It is only then that we would be able to deal with the decades of turmoil and ethnic division that is threatening the unity of the country.
Editor’s Note: The views entertained in this article do not necessarily reflect the stance of The Ethiopian Herald
The Ethiopian Herald 16 January 2021
