gtz

Tilahun Zerihun Gutema

AAIT/AAU
December 02/2010

Chapter one
Introduction

The subject field of civics originates from the nature of human being itself that is from
the natural behavior and level of interaction of human beings itself. One basic nature of
human beings related with this statement is the fact that „man is a social animal‟ whose
life is closely related to each other.

Almost all instincts, demands and progresses of human beings are fulfilled in society.
The superiority that human beings try to achieve over nature and other living things is the
result of the social bond among human beings.

If such bond is a requirement for the survival of human beings, then what should be the
patterns of social interaction that exist among human beings is closely related with the
subject matter of civics.

In this regard civics is considered as a subject field which is mainly concerned with
teaching citizens as to how they can live harmonious and peaceful life with other citizens
and as to how they can resolve conflicts peacefully among themselves.

The other basic nature of human beings is the political view of philosophy by Plato that
“man is a political animal”, which means no human being can escape from the deeds of
politics and his/her day to day life is either directly or indirectly affected by it. For this

1
reason, human beings have to know the workings of politics, institutions that affect their
day to day life, norms, principles and laws which are set in motion by politicians to
govern their societies and above all the duties and rights that they have in the political
community in which they are leading their life. So civics tries to make them familiar with
such and other concepts that make them active and responsible citizens.

The term civics is derived from the Latin words „civics‟ which means a citizen and
„civitas‟ which means „city state‟. The two Latin words gave birth to the branch of social
science known as „Civics‟. Civics, as a branch of the social sciences, deals with the rights
and responsibilities of citizens. Citizens are legal members of a politically organized
community- called state. Civics deals with the various aspects of social life of a citizen.
Civics study every thing about citizens. The great political thinker Aristotle defined:
“Man is a social animal” Aristotle further goes to say that man as a social being interacts
with other members of the society. But in his interaction with other members of the
society, there may be cooperation and/or conflict. What matters most is not why conflicts
arise among human beings rather the question should be how to solve differences and live
in harmony with each other. Therefore civics as a discipline is concerned with the
understanding and the relationship between man and his society.

F.J.Gould defined civics as “the study of institutions, habits and spirits by means of
which a man or women (citizens may fulfill the duties and receive the benefits of
membership in a political community).”

Civics is also concerned with the intensive study and understanding of political
institutions such as law–making institutions or legislatives, executive and judiciary
organs as well as political institutions of various types or kinds existing in a country. The
purpose of government, the nature of law, and the way private behavior affects the public
order and the political system are also the concerns of civics.

Civics is an old subject and previously it was taught along with history and political
science. It was introduced as a separate subject only in the 19th century.

2
 The Nation of Ethics
Webster‟s New World Dictionary defines “ethics” as “the study of standards of conduct
and moral judgment: the system of morals of a particular person, religion, group, etc”.
The origin of ethics is traced back to ancient Greece during the 5th century B.C. in times
of Socrates. Socrates who was one of the great philosophers of ancient Greece, in his
dialogue to his student, Plato initiated the question of ethics.

During the medieval period of western Europeans, ethics was highly associated with
Christianity and blind obedience to the Christian church. Similarly in other parts of the
world ethics was kinked with the religious beliefs of Buddhism, Confucianism, Hinduism
and Islam. It is also a fact that even presently ethics is usually considered as part of
religion, sanctioned by religious authority in some traditional societies.

Through course of time many scholars like Thomas Hobbes and John Locke based their
ethical theory not on religious belief but on empirical observation. According to Thomas
Hobbes when he enunciated about Ethics, he underscored that nothing is good in itself;
rather a thing only becomes good or evil when it is desired or shun (rejected), by some-
one. John Locke, on the other hand, associated good with pleasure and evil with pain.
The explanations of modern scholars and thinkers were attempts to establish ethical code
on the basis of rationalism and intellect that is based on human reasoning rather than on
religion and faith.
Civic and Ethical Education
Civics and Ethical Education is an education for the citizens of a country. The intention
behind this subject is to create active, competent and responsible citizens in the country.
Citizenship education was started by the Greeks and Romans.

During the medieval period in Europe it was given along with religious education. As the
church started to loose its former absolute dominance over the state during the
Renaissance period, the impact of religion in public education also declined in many
countries. The impacts of the English Revolution of the 17 th century, the American war of
Independence and the French Revolution of the 18 th century for the growth of the subject

3
matter of civics and Ethical Education at the international level was of paramount
significance.

When we come to Ethiopia, civic Education was introduced into the school curriculum
during the reign of Emperor Haile Selassie I. during that time, the subject gave more
emphasis to the glory of the emperor, sacredness of the Emperor, his unquestioned
power, his hereditary rights, we may infer that there was no separation between he
subject civics and Ethical Education and religion.

The Dergue regime had also introduced its own political education into the school
curriculum. The Marxist-Leninist ideology was highly preached in that political
education for the sole reason that Ethiopia was by then a socialist oriented country.
In order to produce a competent, active, informed and responsible citizens the current
government in Ethiopia has introduced civic and ethical education into the Ethiopia
school curriculum including in tertiary level schools. In a country where there is
prevalence of democracy, schools are free to teach students and students have the right to
criticize, or not to accept any ideology, which they did not favor. Students as part of a
community are expected to exercise plural and contradictory issues. To ignore
controversial issues is to give students an incomplete education that is to let them not to
think carefully and critically about their concern. Civic education presently aims at
developing the capacity to make judgments from convictions and to act bodily on values.
Civic and Ethical Education helps students to develop responsible way of thinking
believing and acting. It is based on thinking, choosing and making decisions to act. In a
nutshell it helps students to connect what they learn with how they live since learning is
for living.

Apart from empowering citizens with the knowledge of identifying the borderline
between rights and duties, civic and ethical education also acquaints citizens with the
sense of responsibility, being ethical and reasonable, developing the sense of civility
(politeness) and promoting the social welfare and make citizens as much as they can
contribute to their society.

4
It also helps them to identify the existing objective social, political and economic reality
of the society in which they are living. So the core matter of the subject civics and Ethical
Education is to create well aware (informed), conscious, responsible, active participant
and diligent citizens equipped with the necessary skill and knowledge to contribute in
their societal endeavors for social, political and economic development.
Civic and Ethical Education also deals with self government that is participation and
managing one‟s own affairs.

Goals of Civics and Ethical Education

The goals of civic education can be realized by the active participation of citizens in a
society. The extent and intensity of citizen‟s active participation reflects the realization of
the goals. Civic education has the following basic goals.

 Ideal citizenship – The most crucial aim of teaching civic and Ethical Education
is to create an ideal citizen, that is to acquaint students with all the qualities of all
ideal citizens. An ideal citizen has the following characteristics
a. Believes in equality of opportunity for all people
b. Values, respects and defends basic human rights and privileges
guaranteed by the country‟s constitution
c. Respects and upholds the law and its various agencies
d. Understands and accepts the principles of democracy
e. Puts the general welfare above his own welfare
f. Exercises his right of vote freely
g. Accepts his civic responsibilities and discharges them to the best of his
capability.
h. Assumes a personal responsibility for the wise use of natural resources
i. Understands cultures and ways of life other than his own
j. Supports all efforts to prevent war, but is always ready to defend his
country against tyranny and aggression.

5
 k. Cultivates qualities of character and personality that have a high value in
his culture
l. Realizes the necessary connection of education with democracy and so
forth.
 National Character and Patriotism – For a country to progress effectively its
citizens must be soaked in the spirit of patriotism. Citizens should be always
willing and ready to sacrifice everything for their country. They should also be
proud of their country. They should also be proud of their identify, cultural
heritage and uphold the values of the society. These things can be implanted into
the minds of students at their impressionable age, in a psychological and scientific
manner. The teacher should try to develop national character in them and base it
on the virtues of co- operation, love sympathy etc.
 Development of Democratic Outlook and Strengthening Democracy
Democratic outlooks should be inculcated into the minds of the young generation.
This can be realized by teaching students democratic values, principles and
cultivate them in such a way that they could be able to shoulder the responsibility
of their country
 Providing citizens with the knowledge and intellectual skills – which are very
important to monitor and influence government rules, decisions and actions that
greatly affect individual rights and without which the good of the society do not
materialize
 Strengthening National and International Integration
In vast and multi-national countries like Ethiopia there could be a number of
tendencies that may threaten the unity of the country. This is a serious problem. A
proper teaching of civic and ethical education can help to create a sound base for
the continued oneness and unity of the country. Nowadays, the world is becoming
a village as a result a man can be a real citizen of his country only when he
possesses international outlook. This outlook greatly helps to have the attitude of
cooperation and peaceful co – existence.

 Promoting scientific and Rational outlooks

6
 The Interdisciplinary nature of civic and ethical education
Civics and Ethical Education is an interdisciplinary subject. Therefore, it borrows its
contents and methods from different fields of studies. Accordingly civic and Ethical
Education is based up on the principles, findings and theories of various disciplines some
of these disciplines are philosophy including Epistemology (theory of knowledge) and
Ethics, political science, sociology, Economics, law, history, and geography. When one
learns civics and Ethical Education he learns and gains knowledge from different areas.
For better understanding of civic and Ethical Education students should apply what they
have learned in other subjects as well.

Sources of Civic and Ethical Education

It is possible to categorize sources to learn civic and ethical education into;
1. Theoretical sources: A theory is a statement of leading ideas for explaining
reality. Theory is a systematic presentation of facts. These facts may serve as
guide to make observation and discovery in order to arrive at a general
explanation and a viable prediction.

2. Documentary sources – Civic and Ethical Education has diverse documentary

sources. Constitution, international human right charters; and the characters of
global and regional organizations, decisions and enactments of legal bodies,
historical sources, films, and photographs and so on are some of the documentary
sources of the subject under discussion.

The international instruments as one documentary sources of civic and Ethical Education
include among other things, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) of
1948; The convention on the Right of the Child (1989); The Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (1979) are some examples of
such sources.

7
 Community Participation
Civic participation is important for the growth of a country‟s economy and for the
promotion of the exercise of democracy.
A. Civic Societies: Civic societies are voluntary organizations that are set up for
humanitarian and other social activities; other than profit making ones.
B. Participation in political activities. Political parties operate in a country to seize
political power and lead the country. Citizens could join such political parties and
actively participate in the politics of their country.
C. Voting during elections. This type of participation is believed to be fundamental
because every other thing the country attempts to do is dictated by the
participation of its citizens in the elections
D. The participation of citizens in protests is considered as another vital type of
participation. Citizen could challenge or protest decisions, policies etc passed by
their government‟s peacefully through writing petitions, boycotting,
demonstrations etc.
E. Bobbing is another form of community participation. This is attempting to make
the government change its decision by discussing their cause with government
officials. Besides, protesting publicly, citizens could try to influence the
government about a decision made or a case that is forgotten.

Differences between political parties and pressure groups

A. A political party could have thousands or millions of people as members or
followers but a pressure group has very few members.
B. A pressure group is interested in specific areas where as a political party bears the
aggregate of all interests
C. A political party functions openly but a pressure group functions in “hide and
seek”

Chapter Two

8
 State and Government

The modern state and its elements

The term state was not widely used until the 16th century. Its first use in scientific
discussion is attributed to Niccolo Machiavelli (1469 – 1527). To the Greeks the term
„state‟ was not known. They used „polis‟ which is equivalent to „city state‟. The emphasis
in the remarkably close and small communities of ancient Greece was up on the
enjoyment of rights and community, not upon supremacy and obedience. Polis – could be
described as the „city community‟ rather than modern state.

The Roman „civitas‟ also stood for the community of those who enjoyed full civic rights
and duties. Civic rights refer to political rights and freedoms you are entitled to enjoy as a
citizen of a country.

During the later middle ages, the concept of the state began to emerge, but it was not well
articulated. It came into use when the state was not of the people, and when sovereignty
belonged to the kings. At that time the state was equated with supreme authority; but
sometimes it „denoted simply social institutions. In course of time, it acquired the neutral
sense of authority pure and simple, or constitution, whatever its principles and direction.

The nature of the state

There is no agreement among political thinkers and writers regarding the definition of the
state. This difference is due to divergence in their views regarding the nature of the state.
Some regard the state as essentially a class structure, others think that it transcends
classes and represents the whole community. Whereas some conceive of it as a power
system, others regard it a welfare system. Some claim that state is merely a mutual
insurance society while others think it to be an ethical institution indispensable for the
moral well being of man. Some view it strictly from a legal point of view as a community
organized for law, while others identify it with either nation or society itself.

9
The differences of opinion regarding the nature of civil society go back to the very
beginning of political speculation. For example, the sophists of ancient Greece, with
whom political philosophizing started in Western Europe, regarded the civil society to be
conventional. Believed by them to be based on utility and convenience, it could be
disregarded by the influential. The later thinkers like Socrates (470 – 399 BC). Plato (428
– 347 BC) and Aristotle (384 – 322 BC) did not agree with this view. Aristotle for
instance regarded the polis to be natural as well as necessary. It arises out of the natural
instincts of man; it is an outcome as also indispensable for his growth in various aspects.
For Aristotle a person living outside the polis is either a beast or god; he is not a normal
human being. The modern idealists like Rousseau (1712 – 1778), Immanuel Kant (1724 –
1804), Hegel (1770 – 1831). T.H. Green (1836 – 1882), Bradley (1842 – 1924) and
Bernard Bosanquet (1848 – 1924) more or less agree with the view of Aristotle. They
regarded the state to be an ethical institution which is indispensable for the full moral
development of man. Athusius (1557 – 1638) and Hugo Grotius (1583 – 1645) hold
analogous views and considered the state to be a general public association for the
promotion of human welfare.

On the other hand there are individualist who hold that the state limits the natural
freedom of the individual and is, at best, a necessary evil. One of the prominent thinkers
holding such view was Herbert Spencer (1820 – 1903) according to him the state is a
mere “joint stock Company for mutual assurance” whose membership should be
voluntary and optional. On the extreme end are the philosophical anarchists like
Proudhon (1809 – 1865) and Kroptkin (1842 – 1921) who think the state to be an
unmitigated evil. They are opposed to the state as an embodiment of force. Therefore they
claimed that the sooner the coercive state comes to an end, the better it shall be for the
suffering of humanity. It may be mentioned here that Machavelli and Treitscrike have
also, on other grounds, interpreted the state as a power system. Likewise, Oppenheimer
and Karl Marx (1818 – 1883) share the view that the state is the organization of a group
or class to dominate and exploit the rest. To Marx, the state is simply the “executive
committee of the exploiting classes.”

10
Definitions of the state
The state is defined by many scholars differently. Burgess, Bluntshli and Woodrow
Wilson have advanced definitions which are objective but not complete in all respects.
According to John W. Burgess the state is a “particular portion of mankind viewed as an
organized unit.” To Bluntschli state is simply “politically organized people of a definite
territory.” Woodrow Wilson defined the state as “a people organized for law within a
definite territory. The three scholars appear to forget that all politically organized units of
mankind, even if they occupy well defined territories, need not be states. They are states
only if such people also enjoy independence. India for example, fulfilled all other
qualifications before she gained independence on 15 August 1947; but India was not a
state before that date.

The definition of Garner does not suffer from this short coming. According to Garner the
state is “a community of persons, more or less numerous, permanently occupying a
definite portion of territory, independence, or nearly so, of external control and
possessing an organized government to which the greater body inhabitants render
habitual obedience.”
Another suitable definition is that of R.M. Maclver. According to Maclver the state is “an
association which, acting through law as promulgated by a government endowed to this
end with coercive power, maintains within a community territorial demarcated the
universal external conditions of social order.”

Harold J. Laski also defined the state as “a territorial society, divided into government
and subjects, whether individuals or association of individuals, whose relationships are
determined by the exercise of this supreme coercive power.”

Theories of the Origin of the state

It is difficult to point out any exact period of history when the state might be said to have
come into existence.

11
Due to the absence of adequate historical evidence regarding the origin of the state,
different scholars and writers had forwarded their own ideas and speculations on the
issue. As a consequence, various theories have appeared so as to explain the origin of the
state. In this course we will see five theories.

I. The Theory of Divine origin

The theory of divine origin is one of the earliest theories regarding the origin of the state.
According to this theory, the state is the creation of God. The king is deputy or
representative of God, and must as such be obeyed and reserved by the people. There is
no one on earth above the ruler. His command is law, and all his actions are justified. To
disobey the ruler is to defy the divine will. It is not merely a crime: it is sinful.

James I of England has given a clear exposition to the Divine rights of kings in his book
entitled The Law of Free Monarchies. He claims that the king derives his authority from
God, and is not responsible to the people on earth. He is above law, and is subject to God
alone. He has authority over every person and enjoys the power of life and death. Even if
the king is wicked, the people have no right to rebel against him. To disobey the king is
to rebel against God himself. According to James I, kings are justly called Gods, for they
exercise a manner of resemblance of divine power on earth.
The salient features of the doctrine of the divine right of kings may be summed up as
follows:

a. The king derives his authority from God and that monarchy a divinely ordained
b. Hereditary right is indefeasible (incapable of being voided)
c. Kings are not answerable to their subjects. They are accountable to God alone.
d. Resistance to the authority of the king is sinful
Nowadays the theory of divine origin of states is being discredited. According to
Gilchrist, there are three causes responsible for the decline of this theory; First the
emergence of social contract theory which laid emphasis on the popular will; the
separation of church and state which diminished the importance of religion in secular

12
matters and third the rise of democracy which made people conscious of their rights.
According to J.N.Figgis, the reason for the decline of the theory lies in the fact that today
there is a general belief in the supreme role of reason, and faith has its proper place only
in matters spiritual.

The theory justifies and favors only the monarchial form of government. It also
undervalues the role of man in the emergence of the state and is also opposed to the
principle of democracy. Lastly the theory is reactionary and politically dangerous.

II The Force Theory

The Force Theory holds that the state is outcome of naked force applied by the strong
over the weak ones, and their consequent subjugation. The primitive society was marked
by conflicts and wars between different classes and tribes. The successful clan or tribe
established its authority over the defeated ones. According to this theory, the state has
come into being through physical coercion or compulsion. War beget the state. According
to Leacock, “government is the outcome of human aggression, that the beginnings of the
state are to be sought in the capture and enslavement of man by man, in the conquest and
subjugation of feebler tribes, and generally speaking, in the self–seeking domination
acquired by superior physical force. The progressive growth from tribe to kingdom and
from kingdom to empire is but a continuation of the same progress.”

In its recent version, the theory has been expounded by Gumplowicz, Oppenheimer and
Edward Jenks. Small and Ward are its American exponents. Oppenheimer outlines six
states in the emergence of the state. The first state is marked by continuous fights and
endless combats. Killing and plunder prevail. The conquerors kill the vanquished males
and take away the women and children as booty. In the second state, the peasants make
unsuccessful attempts to throw off the Yoke of alien hunters and herdsmen. Finding it
hopeless, they cease resistance. The victors in turn give up killing the vanquished, and
enslave them. Thus begins the exploitation of man by man. In the third state, there is
mutual realization of the benefits of co – operation between the conquerors and the
conquered, and it eventually leads to peaceful integration and assimilation. In the Fourth

13
stage, they learn to get along together and to fight against common external foes. This
develops a feeling of oneness among them. In the Fifth stage, the need to devise some
machinery to settle internal disputes and quarrels by arbitration is felt. It marks the
beginning of the government. In the sixth and final stage, military leaders become kings
and their deputies become councilors. The king decides cases, gives orders and punishes
offenders. Law and order are fully established and the habit of obedience is formed. The
state has come in to being.

Once the state was established, it was still necessary to use force for its maintenance. The
continued existence of the state demands the employment of force for maintaining
internal order and external security.

During the recent times the theory of force found prominence in the writings of some
German thinkers like Bernhardt, Sorel, Nietzsche and Treitschke.

According to Bernhardt, might is “the supreme right and the dispute as to what is right is
decided by the arbitrament of war.” Treitschke says “The States a public power of
offence and defense, the first task of which is the making of war and the administration of
justice.” According to Treitschke, “war consolidated a people, reveals to each individual
his relative unimportance, causes factional hostilities to disappear and intensifies
patriotism and national idealism.”

Nietzsche and Sorel enunciated the doctrine of the revolutionary right of the strong and
rare great minds, who alone are fit to direct the destiny of the people Hitler and Mussolini
tried to put the views of these writers into practice.

The force theory is mistaken in regarding force to be the sole controlling factor in the
creation of the state. All the states of the world have not come into being through the use
of force. Any attempt to glorify force and to use it, unsanctioned by the general will, will
shake the foundation of the state. Even great empires, as history tells us, do not last for
ever. Again the theory is wrong in glorifying war.

14
III Genetic Theory(Patriarchal and Matriarchal Theories)
The generic theory holds that the state is the product of natural expansion of the family.
In course of time, by a natural process of expansion, one family gave rise to several.
Several families or kinship groups united to form a village. Through time one village
expanded into several settlements, which in turn united to form the state. As Aristotle
observes, “The first form of association naturally instituted for the satisfaction of the
daily recurrent needs is thus the family…The next form of association… is the village…
When we come to the final and perfect association, formed from a number of villages, we
have already reached the Polis.” There are two versions of this theory that is, the
patriarchal theory and the matriarchal theory.

The Patriarchal Theory

Sir Henry Maine is the chief exponent of the patriarchal theory. According to this theory,
the state is the natural expansion of the original family unit in which descent was traced
through males, and the eldest living male parent ruled absolutely.

In his famous book, the Ancient Law Henry Maine wrote that “Over the members of his
household, the eldest male parent possessed despotic authority. He was not only absolute
owner of property, including even what his children had acquired but he could chastise
and even kill, could sell or transfer by adoption, could marry or divorce any of his
children at will.” When the children married, there was a natural expansion of family.
However, the authority of the head of the first family was acknowledged by all his
descendants. On his death, authority passed to the eldest male descendant. The
multiplication of families, living under the control of one head, led to the emergence of
tribe. In course of time, many members of the tribute withdrew from the parent tribe and
settled in new territories. This resulted in the founding of many new tribes and sub tribes.
The tribes united by ties of blood acted together for common purposes, particularly in
defending themselves against external foes. This involved a recognition of some common
authority who would weld them together and protect them. The members belonging to the

15
tribe rallied around such a common authority and the state potentially came into
existence.

The Matriarchal Theory

The exponents of the matriarchal theory of the state are Mclenan, Morgan and Jenks.
They argue that the earliest unit was not the patriarchal but matriarchal family. According
to them the existence of monogamy or polygamy alone could ensure descent from the
male ancestor. But in primitive societies, polyandry that is, one woman having several
husbands, was current. When the institution of polyandry prevails, the usual husband –
wife relations are non existent. Instead of a family, there were in those days loosely
connected groups or hordes, within which promiscuous (not restricted to one sexual
partner) sexual relations prevailed. Under such a system, kinship was traced through the
clan of the mother. According to Jenks, the earliest group was the tribe which broke into
clans and later into households and families. With the advent of pastoral life and gradual
prevalence of monogamous or polygamous marriages, the patriarchal family came into
existence.

In brief the main features of matriarchal system are:

i. Transient marriage relations (group marriage)
ii. Female kinship
iii. Maternal authority
iv. Succession of only females to family property.

The conclusion to which we are led with regard to both the patriarchal and matriarchal
theories is that none of them help us in understanding the true genesis of the state. Their
merit consists in emphasizing the role and significance of kinship in creating and
cementing social bonds without which the state could never have arisen.

IV The Natural Theory

A part from the speculative theories discussed above, there is also the view of Aristotle
which is sometimes referred to as the Natural Theory of the origin of the state. According

16
to Aristotle, human nature lies at the basis of the state. It is human needs which bring the
state into existence.

The first of these are physiological which give rise to some kind of family. But man also
needs food to eat, something to put on, and some kind of a shelter to live in. he finds that
he and his family members cannot meet all these economic requirements in a satisfactory
manner. As new wants are felt and there is an increase in material refinement,
specialization and division of labor became very necessary. They gave rise to bartu and
exchange. Under the pressure of these factors, there is more diversification.

By a natural process of expansion, the family broadens into the house. A collection of
households creates a village and the union of several villages gives rise to the state. The
state is thus a culmination of the natural process which starts with the instinctive
association of men and women. The lesser associations are, however, unable to satisfy all
the social and cultural needs of a man. They are not in a position to provide the
conditions necessary for good life. The state alone is in a position to ensure it.

Given this psychological explanation of the origin of the state, Aristotle points out how
society is indispensable to man. Man differs from other living beings in as much as he is
endowed with speech and reason. This enables man to exchange views and to participate
in a common life. In fact, it is the common ideas of law and justice which, according to
Aristotle, serve as a cement to bind the people together in a state. This then is the rational
and philosophical foundation of the state.

It is obvious that this natural theory of the origin of the state merely hints at the factors
and forces which played an important part in the making of the state. It does not discuss
in any detail how and to what extent these and other factors actually influenced the
emergence of the state.

1. Contract Theory Social

17
According to the social contract theory, the state is the creation of deliberate human
efforts. It derives its authority from the consent of the people who, through the
instrumentality of a covenant or agreement, organized themselves into a body politic at
some remote period of history. As to the terms of this agreement, individual writers have
held different views. According to some thinkers, the contract was responsible for the
institution of civil society alone, while others look upon it as a governmental contract
made between the rulers and the ruled. Some hold that the parties to the contract were
individuals emerging from the state of nature. Others maintain that the parties to the
contract were the people in their corporate capacity on the one hand and the ruler on the
other.

The idea of basing the authority of the ruler up on an agreement or contract with their
subjects was first forwarded by the sophists who lived before Plato. The sophists
regarded the state to be an artificial creation built for the benefit of its members. Plato
and Aristotle dealt with this theory only to repudiate it. The Epicurean philosophers, who
followed Plato and Aristotle, subscribed to this theory. They held that justice exists only
as a result of contract.

The social contract theory had little vogue as a political instrument in the early Christian
era. However in the Bible there are some instances of covenants between the people and
the king. Roma Law also kept the contract theory alive. Under the Roman Law, the
people were regarded as the source of political authority. From Cicero onwards the idea
tat the people are the source of political authority constantly recurs. The Teutonicidea of
government also exerted some influence up on the development of this theory. In the
Teutonic theory, political authority was derived from and continued under, the people.

The feudal society, as it was based on contractual relationship between the lord and the
vassal, was quite friendly with the idea of contract. In the political discussions of the
middle ages also, the idea of contract found a significant place. Manegold was the first
ecclesiast to give a definite statement of the contract theory.

18
The contract theory, which began to grow in influence, since the eleventh century,
received widespread acceptance from the 16th century onwards. Hooker was the first
English writer to give definite statement of this theory. The central question which
Hooker set out to consider in his book, Laws of Ecclesiastical Policy is whether subjects
must obey an authority whether they themselves have not set up. His answer is that the
original contract obliges the people to obedience and that the contract can not be revoked,
except by a general agreement. Yet, Hooker did not regard the state as completely
artificial and contractual. As different from Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau, he held that the
people concluded the contract as a result of their instincts and not because of any
compulsion due to circumstances. After Rousseau, the theory of social contract began to
decline, though Kant and Fichte made use of the theory to some extent.

Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1679)

Thomas Hobbes expounded the theory of social contract in his book Leviathan published
in 1651. He had witnessed the English civil war of 1642. He felt that England could be
saved from disintegration by a strong monarchy. It is thus significant that Hobbes used
the idea of the contract for just the opposite purpose for which it had hither to stood, viz,
in defense of the authoritarian powers of the monarch. However, Hobbes couches his
theory in general terms so as to support any strong government. According to Hobbe‟s
view, carving for a life of security, men agreed to come out of this sordid (Vulgar,
degrading, or corrupt) state of nature. Each individual agreed, along with his fellows, to
set up the civil society and give up his natural right and the power to exercise individual
authority.

In this way all individuals surrendered their natural rights to a person or body of persons
who became the sovereign thereafter. The sovereign, not being a party to the agreement,
did not subject itself to any conditions. The sovereign derived complete authority as a
result of the contract which could not be revoked. Once powers are conferred by the
people up on the sovereign, these powers can not be withdrawn.

19
The people have no right to protest against, or to question, the authority of the sovereign,
since it is the author of their own actions. The authority of the sovereign is thus unlimited
and all – embracing. However arbitrarily exercised, the people must render unquestioned
obedience.

John Locke (1632 – 1704)

John Locke is a great figure in the history of English political thought. John Locke
espoused the cause of constitutional monarchy in England and upheld the right of people
to dispose a monarch if he behaved in a despotic manner. His book, Two Treatises of
Government was published an onymously in 1690.

The state of nature of Locke is different from that of Hobbes. Man in the state of nature
did not live in a state of war or in constant fear. According to Locke it was a state in
which men were equal and free to act as they thought fit within the bounds of the law of
nature. They enjoyed liberty and were equal and free to act as they thought fit within the
bounds of the law of nature. They enjoyed liberty and were endowed with natural rights.
Locke‟s state of nature was not pre – social or lawless. It was not a state in which men
lived in reciprocal hostility, but one in which place and reason prevailed. There was the
law of nature to govern man‟s conduct in society. Natural law not only conferred rights
but also imposed duties on man. Thus, Locke‟s state of nature was a state in which man
had rights and also acknowledged some duties.

According to Locke if men are to live amicably together, there must be an arbitrator,
judging by an agreed law with the capacity to enforce his decisions. In the absence of
such an arbitrator, men in the state of nature were in an “ill condition”.

The Nature of contract to get out of this „ill condition‟, men in the state of nature agreed
to establish a civil society for the mutual preservation of their lives, liberties and estates

20
which Locke called by the general name, the right to property. There was an agreement
of all with all persons excluding none.

This was a social contract or covenant, since it was entered into by the people among
themselves. Under the term of this compact, the individual agreed to give up this power
of punishing in favor of an authority to be instituted here in after, in accordance with such
rules as the community or those authorized by them for that propose, shall agree upon.
Hence there was no surrender of the natural rights possessed by men in the state of
nature. Only one aspect of their rights was surrendered that is, the right of interpreting
and enforcing the law of nature. This limited right was surrendered in order to protect
their rights in a more effective manner. In this respect Locke differ sharply from Hobbes.
Firstly, Hobbes contract was general but Locke‟s was specific and limited. Secondly,
Hobbes made his individual surrender all his rights but Locke‟s surrender was confined
to surrendering rights of interpreting and enforcing the law of nature.

Thirdly, in Locke this right is given to the community as a whole and not to a man or
assembly of men as in Hobbes. Fourthly, the compact in Locke does not put an end to the
law of nature or to natural rights.

According to Locke the government is a trustee, and if it fails to protect the rights of the
people and act for „common good‟, the people are justified in overthrowing it and setting
up a new government.

- The authority of the sovereign is limited

- The government is an agency of the state to carry out the will of the
community. It has three organs
- The legislative, executive and federative.
- The state exists for the people who form it the government should not
merely keep order but govern the people for their welfare.
- The state is based on the consent of the people. The state should be a
constitutional one, in which men acknowledge the rule of law.

21
 - If the state does not serve people‟s good, if it does not rest on their
consent, if it is not constitutional, if it exceeds its authority, or if it fails to
serve its purpose, it can legitimately be overthrown.

Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712 – 1778)

Rousseau elaborated his theory of social contract in his famous work entitled Social
contract in 1762. Rousseau was vitally interested merely in pointing how the state could
be reconstructed upon moral foundations and how a legitimate system of administration
could be provided. He writes, „Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains: Many a
one believes himself the master of others; and yet he is a greater slave than they. How has
this change come about? I do not know what can render it legitimate? I believe that I can
settle this question.

According to Rousseau there are two original instincts that make up man‟s nature. These
are self love or the instincts of self preservation and sympathy or the gregarious instinct.
On the whole these instincts are more beneficial than harmful to society. Therefore, man
is essentially good and sympathetic man is also possessed of what may be called
„conscience‟ which makes him do the right. To Rousseau, while the primitive instincts
unite men “it is reason that divides.” Thus conscience and reason, which are present in
man, working together may restrain the desires in him.

Rousseau is not very clear and consistent about the state of nature. It appears that the
natural state of man was preferable to him than the civil society. The primitive man lived
in a state of idyllic felicity (happiness). It was an ideal state of nature. Man knew neither
right nor wrong and had no notion of virtue and vice. Man enjoyed perfect liberty and
equality and led an unsophisticated and innocent life. Nevertheless, this primitive
condition of idyllic happiness could not last long.

22
When the idyllic happiness of the state nature disappeared and man degenerated into a
cunning brute, the need for self preservation impelled people to come together and having
recourse to contract, form an association “which may defend and protect, with the whole
force of community, the person and property of every associate, and by means of which
each, coalescing with all may nevertheless obey only himself, and remain as free as
before.

This contract, at once social and political, is made by individuals of the community in
such a way that every individual puts “his person and all his power in common under the
supreme direction of the general will and in our corporate capacity, we receive each
member as an indivisible part of the whole.” The individual gave himself up to the
control of all but not to a particular person. The sovereignty passed on to the community
of which the individual is an integral part. According to Rousseau, in making surrender of
all his powers the individual was not a loser in any sense. As a member of the political
community, each individual retains an equal and inalienable portion of the sovereignty of
the whole and remains as free as before. The state, in Rousseau‟s view, is composed of
equal individuals, none having authority over others and all participate in the general
will, which is the sole fountain of legitimate authority.

The concept of general will is the Crux of Rousseau‟s political system and is his
distinctive contribution to political thought.

In brief we may sum up the characteristics of the general will as follows.

- The General will does not represent the particular will of man that is, the
will of a man who is considering only his won interest. The general will is
not the will of all, nor is it will of the majority. It represents the common
consciousness of common good.
- The general will is sovereign. Every individual is obliged to follow it. If
one does not obey it voluntarily, he shall be compelled to do so.
- The general will alone is the judge of what constitute public interest.

23
 - The general will is in alienable and indivisible
- The general will must be general in objects as well as its essence.
- The general will is not an executive will. The people entrust the executive
power to its agent, the government.
- The form of government is a matter of secondary importance. What is of
primary significance is that sovereignty should reside in general will
- The general will is in fallible. It is always right and tends to the public
good. “The general will is always in the right, but the judgment which
guides it is not always enlightened.”
- The true freedom of an individual consists in acting in conformity with the
general will.

Essential Elements of the State

A careful consideration of the above mentioned definitions of the state will clearly reveal
that there are some elements considered essential for the very existence and maintenance
of the state. No state can exist in the absence of any one of them.

These essential elements of the state:

1. People or population
2. territory
3. government or organization
4. sovereignty

I People or population

The basic requirement for the existence of the state is people. The state cannot be
conceived of without people. As Leacock has pointed out, “It goes without saying that an
un inhabited portion of the earth, taken in itself, can not form the state.” There have to be
more or less numerous people; enough at any rate to divide them into the rulers and the
ruled, to constitute a state. The question of the number of people necessary or desirable
for the state cannot be answered in abstract. Plato felt that an effective number of 5040

24
citizens should be sufficient. His disciple, Aristotle claimed that the Polis should neither
be too small to be self sufficient nor too large to be well governed. Likewise, Rousseau,
himself a great admirer of small republics and direct democracy, though that ten thousand
may be an ideal number.

Nowadays we have some large states like china and India having populations of nearly
one billion. There are also tiny states like San Marino whose population does not got
beyond 5 figures.

II Territory

That a state should have a definite territory is now generally agreed. There is now
consensus that nomadic peoples do not form a state though they may not be deficient in
political organization.

The modern state is essentially territorial in character. No hard and fast rule can,
however, be laid down regarding the size of the state. The modern states vary greatly in
size.

There were times when political thinkers believed that smaller states are better. This view
prevailed in ancient Greece. Aristotle for instance excluded from his study larger political
groupings, including the empire of his student, Alexander the Great. Rousseau also held
this opinion. This was perhaps an inevitable stand when the means of transport and
communications were still underdeveloped, when representative institutions had not yet
been organized and their efficiency not tested, when modern local self governing
institutions had not evolved, when federalism had not shown the walf of establishing
union without uniformity, and when active and direct participation of citizens in public
affairs was sought and admired. But it has now become possible for us to live in larger

25
states without a loss of individual liberty. Even otherwise the economic and other
advantages of larger states have become overwhelming.

A large state is likely to have greater natural resources and economic potential. This
implies a greater capacity of the state to maintain its independence and its ability to
provide essential prerequisites of material prosperity to its citizens.

The extent of territory that a state should have depends upon the size of the population it
has to support.

The territory of a state includes land, water, and air space. Traditionally, the territorial
limits of the state extend up to a distance of three miles from sea coast. The territorial
limits of the state also extend to the air space above the territory of the state but in the
absence of a common consensus, its extent remains undefined.
There is a certain advantage in the states having compact and contiguous areas under its
control. But a state may also have disconnected territories example, the United kingdom,
Pakistan etc.

III Government

The state is a politically organized society. Political organization is essential for the
existence of the state. In deed there can be no state without government, though
government has been in existence in the absence of the state.

Government is the agency through which the will of the state is formulated, expressed
and realized. Government is in the administrative wing of the state.

The form and structure of the government are varied. The government is regarded as
indispensable because there can be no civilized existence without it. Even anarchists, who
advocate the destruction of coercive state, realize the need for some kind of government.
They would however like the government to be organized by the people themselves on

26
voluntary and non coercive basis. Communists, who envisage the ultimate withering
away of the state after the establishment of communist society on a world scale, admit
that authority shall still be required.

Nowadays it is generally accepted that as long as there are diverse interests in society,
some mechanism will be needed to bring about and maintain a workable arrangement to
keep the people together. If there are none who possess authority and none who obey,
remarks there is anarchy and the state is at an end.

IV Sovereignty

Sovereignty is regarded as the most important element of the modern state. It is what
distinguishes the state from other groups and associations of human beings. By
sovereignty, Leacock stated that “the territory and population in question must form no
part of a wider political unit; nor must the territory contain any portion or portions which,
while forming geographically a part of it, are not a part of it politically.” In short the
people should be enjoying independence. Internally, there must not be any rival or
parallel authority. Externally, the country should be free from foreign control or dictation.
It may, however, be subject to such agreements and obligations as it has voluntarily
accepted and continues to accept.

The state and Government

Government is often confused with the term „state‟. Government is an essential element
of the state. It is an instrument to serve the purposes of its members. Government is an
agency of the state through which the will of the state is formulated, expressed and
executed. There can be no state without government.

27
 The distinction between the state and government may be presented in a tabular form as
follows:
State Government
1. It is the whole 1. It is only a part of the state that is its
2. It is abstract working machinery
3. Its membership comprises all the 2. It is concrete
nationals 3. Only a small part of the total population
4. It is more or less permanent participates in the various organs of
5. The state needs some form of government
government. A state without 4. Governments come and go
government is inconceivable 5. Government in the widest sense has existed
6. Sovereignty is an attribute of the state before the state as well as a part from the
7. In some countries, the nationals are not state.
supposed to have any grievances or 6. In practice all governments are subject to
rights against the state. various limitations, legal and actual
7. Individuals may have grievances as well as
claims against some organs of government
or against a public functionary. There are
also redresses available against any
encroachment or arbitrary exercise of
discretionary power

The State and Society

Society is a very general term, and stands for the web of social relationships. Society is
not limited to human beings but it is found among other creatures as well. Society is the
changing pattern of social relationships. Man is dependent on society for protection,
comfort, nature, education, equipment, opportunity, and the multitude of definite services
society provides.

In point of time society is prior to the state. Society precedes the state as it precedes the
family, the church, the corporation; political party etc. society unites all of these as the

28
tree unites its branches. Historically the state came in to existence much later than
society.

Functionally also state and society are different. One of the main purposes of the state is
to organize “a system of order and control” within a definite territory. And for that
purpose the state enforces obedience through its laws.

Structurally too society and state are different. The state does not and cannot encompass
the entire associated life and the whole range of human relations as the society does. “The
state exists within the society but it is not even the form of society … It supports or
exploits, curbs or liberates, fulfils or even destroys, the social life over which it is
invested with control – but the instrument is not the life”.

Their modes of operation are also different. The state may and does coerce and compel
where as on the whole, the society function through persuasion and through customs and
traditions.

In short, the state is expected to maintain conditions and environment which enable
women/ man to improve her/himself. The function of the social groups within the state,
on the other hand, is to help man to attain his best. Thus the sum total of what society
may achieve through its numerous associations is often greater than what the state itself
does directly. But the state functions have also been increasing rapidly and the state now
claims its competence to undertake every thing that can be done through its organization
and process to achieve human welfare.
The main points of distinction are presented in a tabular form as follows

Society
1 It is a web of social relationships
2. It is historically as well as logically
prior to the state.
3. It has no reference to any particular
State
1. Is an instrument to serve the purpose
of its members
2. It came into existence at a certain
stage of human development

29
 territory
4. Society is natural to human beings.
Man can not live outside it.
5. The social organization acts for a
variety of purposes
6. It does not ordinarily use compulsion. It
uses the method of persuasion and the
influence of social opinion
7. It need not be highly organized
8. It operates on the basis of customs and
conventions.
3. It always possesses a definite territory
4. There have been times when man has
lived without the state. However, in
the present context of things the state
is necessary
5. The state has only a single great
purpose that is the enforcement of its
system of law and order.
6. It employs the method of coercion or
compulsion.
7. It is always organized without an
adequate organization, no state can
exit
8. It exercises authority with the help of
laws which are enforced

State and Community

Whenever any group of people live together and share basic conditions of a common life,
we have a community. Community is an area of social living marked by some degree of
social coherence. There should be an awareness of sharing a way of life as well as
common earth. The mark of a community, according Maclver, is that one‟s life may be
lived wholly within it, and that all one‟s social relationships may be found with it. He
points out, however that the civilized communities are much less self contained. They do
not have walls around themselves to cut them off from others.

What distinguishes a community is the fact that it is always a territorial group. One basis
of its coherence is locality. Even a nomad community has a local, though changing, and
habitation. In the modern world the local bonds are being weakened by the extending

30
facilities of communication. Hence, physical neighborhood has lost much of its
significance.

As G.D.H. Cole points out, men do not make communities, they are born and bred into
them. But it does not necessarily involve any particular form of social organization and
indeed any social organization at all. Cole regards community “essentially a subjective
term whose reality consists in the consciousness of it among its members.” To be a
community a group must exist for good life, and not merely for specific purposes.

State and Association

Association is “a group organized for the pursuit of an interest or a group of interests in

common.” According to Maclver and page defined it. According to these two writers the
family and the state lie on the border line between associations and communities.

For quite sometime, political thinkers believed that associations and groups exist by the
courtesy of the state. Ihering stated that, through the process of evolution, associations
would lose their functions to the state. Maclver, however, holds that even after the
transfer of some functions of associations to the state, all associations will not become
absorbed by the state.

The importance of these voluntary groups (associations) which often arise spontaneously
to serve some specific purpose or purposes is now better reorganized, due to the efforts of
the pluralists.

An individual can become the member of as many associations as he desires (but not of
opposing association). Associations come into existence and disappear after having
served their purpose or when they are no longer needed. Realizing that associations are
voluntary in character and spontaneous in origin, the democratic state should encourage

31
and assist them. Nevertheless, associations can not be permitted to behave as they
pleased.

The main points of distinction between the state and associations are presented in a
tabular form as follows.

State
1 Has a fixed territory
2. It is a stable organization
3. A citizen can be member of only
one state.
4. membership is compulsory for
citizens
5. it has legal power of coercion and
even inflicting a death penalty
6. It is a Sovereign association
exercising authority through laws
7. It has one great purpose that is
enforcement of its law and order
8. it has many associations
Association
1. Its area of activity may be local,
regional, national or international
2. It may be transient or short lived
3. A person can be member of
many associations.
4. Usually membership is voluntary
and optional
5. Try to persuade. Default may
mean a fine or expulsion.
6. It has rules and regulations which
may be binding and may also be
strictly enforced.
7. it exists to serve some specific
and limited interest or interests
8. at times, members have given
more support and loyalty to
association than to the state.

Bureaucracies

To many people bureaucracy suggests in efficiency and pointless and time consuming
formalities. In short „red tape‟ that is, complex obstructive official routine. The term
bureaucracy has been used in a number of ways. Originally it meant rule by officials as

32
opposed to elected politicians. In the social science, bureaucracy is usually understood as
a mode of organization. Modern political analysts, however, use the term bureaucracy to
mean administrative machinery of the state, bureaucrats being non elected state officials
or civil servants who may or may not be subject to political control.

Theories

Three major theories of bureaucracy have been advanced

1. The Weberian mode, which is developed by Max Weber, suggests that

bureaucracy is a rational – administrative machine, the characteristic form of
organization in modern society.
2. the conservative power – bloc model – this theory emphasizes the degree to which
the bureaucracy reflects broader class interests and can resist political control
3. the bureaucratic over supply model – emphasizes a tendency towards „big‟
government caused by the pursuit of career self interest on the part of civil
servants.

Functions of Bureaucracy

The core function of the bureaucracy is to implement or execute law and policy through
the administration of government. However, civil servants also play a significant role in
offering policy advice to ministers in articulating and aggregating interests (especially
through links to client groups) and in maintaining political stability and continuity when
there is a change of government or administration.

Organization of Bureaucracies

33
Bureaucracies have traditionally been organized on the basis of purpose or function:
hence their division into departments, ministers and agencies. The degree of
centralization or decentralization within them varies considerably. Modern trends
however, are towards the divorce of policy making from policy implementation and the
incorporation of private sector management techniques, if not out right privatization.

Power

There is concern about bureaucratic power because of the threat it poses to democratic
accountability. The principal source of bureaucratic power include the ability of civil
servants to control the flow of information and thus determine what their political masters
know, the logistical advantage that they enjoy as permanent and full time public officials
and their status as experts and custodians of the national interest.

Control

Control is exerted over bureaucracies in a number of ways. Mechanisms of public

accountability to ministers, assemblies, the courts etc could be established. The civil
service can be politicized so that it shares ideological enthusiasm of the government in
power. Counter – bureaucracies can be constructed to provide an alternative source of
advice and to strengthen the hands of elected politicians

Types of Government

Most political scientists relate types of government with the ideology of the government.

1. Totalitarian government – such type of governments have appeared in Fascist

systems. Beyond controlling politics, economy and social activities, such types of
governments attempt to control the conscience (mind) of the people.
2. Anarchist government – Anarchism is commonly defined as the belief in the
abolishment of all forms of organized government laws, machinery of law

34
 enforcement. Anarchist government has never occurred in the history of human
society. The basic features of anarchist governments is non – intervention role of
the government in the political, economic and social life of the society.
3. Individualist government – It is a type of government that attempts to secure
individuals‟ rights and liberties and to maintain law and order.
4. Collectivist government – Such type of government has greater concern for the
provision of public welfare, rendering and monitoring of public services.
Collectivist governments were believed to have appeared in the period before the
demise of the socialist system in Eastern Europe and the U.S.S.R. therefore also
some states, which are recognized for their welfare services like the Scandinavian
countries. It is possible to classify the governments of the Scandinavian countries
as collectivist.

Classifications of Governments

I. Aristotelian classification of government. In his writing, politics, Aristotle classified

governments into five.

1. Monarchy – a rule by one person based on hereditary line.

2. Aristocracy – rule by few enlightened and organized groups.
3. oligarchy – rule by few wealthy people
4. democracy – a government where the people are vested with supreme power
5. republic – a government in which power is seized through election

II. Montesquieu’s Classification

Montesquei‟s classification left us his famous work, Esprit des Lois (spirit of the laws)
published in 1748 Montesquieu was the first scholar to deal with the issue of separation
of powers of governments as executive, legislative and judiciary.

Montesquieu classified governments into three:

1. Republican

35
 2. Monarchical
3. Despotic – a government type in which a ruler exercises personal power
over the people usually in cruel and un acceptable way.
III. Rousseau‟s classification. Rousseau classified governments into three as
follows.
1. Autocratic – a government in which a ruler exercises un restricted power.
2. aristocratic
3. Democratic
IV. Contemporary classifications of Government
1. Monarchy – Monarchies could be traditional or constitutional.
a. Traditional monarchy – Here the king or the Queen maintain his/her
position by the claim of legitimate blood descent rather than their
appeal as popular leader. Such monarchs have unlimited power.
b. Constitutional monarchy. Here the king (Queen) is ceremonial head of
state, an indispensable figure in all great official occasion and the
symbol of national unity and authority of the state but lacking real
power.
2. Dictatorship.
3. Oligarchy (Aristocracy)
4. Constitutional – It is defined by the existence of a constitutional government
systems are the presidential and parliamentary systems
a. The Presidential system – It is based on the doctrine of separation of
powers which is practiced in the U.S.A., Argentina, Brazil…
The principal features of a presidential and parliamentary systems are the
following
 the executive and legislature are separately elected, and each is invested with
a range of independent constitutional power
 the roles of head of state and head of government (the chief executive) are
combined in the office of the presidency
 executive authority is concentrated in the hands of the president, the cabinet
and ministers being merely advisers responsible to the president

36
  there is formal separation of the personnel of the legislative and the executive
branches (except in semi presidential systems)
 Electoral terms are fixed. The president can neither „dissolve‟ the legislature
nor be dismissed by it (except possibly through impeachment (charge of all
official with misconduct)
b. Parliamentary system – It is based on the fusion of powers which is
practiced in western European nations, Scandinavian countries, Japan,
India etc.
France follows a mixture of parliamentary and presidential system of
government
Forms (structure of states)

Forms of states could be unitary, Federal or confederal.

A. Unitary state. It is a form of state that is characterized by centralization of power
and indivisible sovereignty. In such states the central government is legally
supreme over local or regional units.
 Here the central government is the only source of authority. Whatever local
territorial units exist, they are merely agencies of the central government
established for its convenience in local administration
 There is only one kind of legislative body which is always absolutely supreme

The majority of states in the world are unitary

Example Britain, Japan, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Romania etc.

Advantages of Unitary State Structure

 It is advantageous to a country with relatively small sized states and for those
having homogenous population
 The organization is relatively simple
 It avoids conflict of jurisdiction
 Duplication of civil servants and services are comparatively rare.

37
  Uniformity of law, policy and administration can be maintained throughout
the whole state.

Disadvantages of Unitary State Structure

 Overburdens the national legislature with numerous local matters
 Leaves distant authorities and may lack adequate knowledge of local
conditions to the determination of policies and the regulation of matters,
which may concern only the localities affected
 Tends to repress local initiatives and interests in public affairs and impairs the
vitality of local government.
 It facilitates the development of central bureaucracy.

B. Federal State Structure

Under federalism power is formally divided between the central government and local
regional governments. In Federal State there are two layers of government that is the
central government and regional governments. It is a direct opposite of unitary state.

Examples of Federal States are – U.S.A, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India,
Nigeria, Ethiopia etc.
Federal states may be created by the voluntary agreement of independent states.

Features of Federal States

 existence of dual polities that is, Federal and regional
 Supremacy of the Federal constitution. Federal state and regional states have
constitutions of their own. But the local constitutions should be accountable to
the federal constitution
 supremacy of the Federal authority – in most states the Federal authority has
power and right to interpret the constitution

38
  the power of Federal units (regional, local states). In matters that created
differences, the Federal government can not impose its will on regional
governments unless they compromise over the issue.
 There is divisible sovereignty and more than one legislative bodies
 Equal power shared by the Federal authorities and regional authorities. This
does not mean they have equal power in one affair, rather the reserve powers
(powers applied when required but reserved until then) and federal powers are
seen equally.
 Exclusive powers – are powers which are not shared and are only exercised by
the Federal government or regional governments.
Example Exclusive powers exercised by the Federal government

 To enact laws and constitutional laws and follow their applications.

 Foreign affairs, defense, printing and circulating money
 Concurrent powers – power exercised commonly by both the Federal and
regional governments.
 Example, Social sector like education, health, labor.
 Social affairs like culture, information etc.
 Planning, transport and communication, internal security, agriculture,
industry, trade, tourism, finance, justice etc.

Advantages of Federalism

 It is essential to large states

 Combines national unity, local autonomy and the right of self government
 Maintains balance between centrifugal (unifying) and centripetal (integrating)
forces in a state
 It stimulates in government by leaving the determination of local policy in the
hands of local officers and assemblies that are responsible to local electorate

39
  It relieves the central legislature and authorities from the necessity of devoting
time and energy to the solution of local problems

Disadvantages of Federalism

 There is duplication of activities and services which requires additional

expense. It is not always easy to deal with a specific situation
 The division of power between the central and regional states may lead to
conflicts of jurisdiction between the national and local officials or sort of “no
man‟s land” in which neither authority takes decisive actions.

c. Confederations

Confederations are voluntary association of free and independent states without affecting
their internal freedom, structure, law making and enforcing process, external relations of
the states confederating for common advantage.

Historically confederations often proved to be first or second step towards the

establishment of a national state usually as federal union. The Federal states in
Switzerland, Germany and the U.S.A. were preceded by confederations.

 The common wealth of Nations which was formed in 1972 is an example of

confederation born as a result of the decentralization and eventual
disintegration of the Empire UK and former British colonies
N.A.T.O= North Atlantic Treaty organization
There are also modern co federal arrangements which are established around common
defense

Example, N.A.T.O; economic alliance example common market of Western African

States (ECOWAS); neighborhood alliance. Example Organization for African Unity
(AU), Association of South East Asian states (ASEAS), organization of American States

40
(OAS); Politico – religious alliances example the Arab League; Community of Nations
example United Nations Organization (UNO)

Major Functions of Government

1. self preservation – keeping the state from domestic and external threats
2. supervision and Resolution of conflicts through negotiations, mediation and
arbitration
3. regulation of the economy
4. protection of political and social rights
5. provision of goods and services example provision of health care, education;
development of public works; conservation of natural resources, developing
infrastructure like road, water supply system etc

The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

Until the down fall of the Derg regime in 1991 Ethiopia was a unitary state. After May
1991 both in principle and practice Ethiopia gradually shifted its state into Federal one.
The charter of the transitional government that replaced the military regime laid the basis
for the present day federal government in Ethiopia.

Nowadays the Ethiopian state is a Federal state and Ethiopia follows the parliamentarian
system. The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia has nine regional states. Southern-
nation nationalities of peoples of Ethiopia, Gambela and Harari. Addis Ababa is the
capital of the Federal government and is a chartered city like Dire Dawa.

The constitution of the Federal Republic of Ethiopia states that there shall be two federal
houses that is, the House of Peoples Representatives and the House of Federation.

41
The House of Peoples Representatives is the highest authority of the Federal
Government. The House is responsible to the people. Its members are elected by the
people for the term of five years. The political party that has the greatest number of seats
in the House forms the executive body and leads it that is; the party with a majority of
members in the house is the one that organizes and run the government during its term of
the specified period of time. The House has its own speaker and deputy speaker.

The House of Federation – It is the other legislative body in the Federal government. Its
members are representatives of the nations, nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia. Each
nation or nationality is represented by one member in the house and for every one million
population each will have one more representatives.

Powers and functions of the House of Federation

 Interpreting the constitution

 Making decisions on the rights of nations, nationalities and peoples to self
determination
 Promoting the equality of peoples of while strengthening their unity
 Resolving disputes and misunderstandings that may occur between regional
states

The House of Federation too has its speaker and deputy speaker President of the
Republic.
The president is the head of state. The House of people‟s representatives nominates the
president. The nominee is elected when the joint session of the Federal Houses approve
the nomination by 2/3 majority vote. The term of office of the president is six years. No
person can be elected more than twice to be president.

The Executive

42
The executive is the daily operational part of the federal government. The responsibilities
of this operation are mainly vested in the prime minister and the council of ministers. The
executive body is responsible to the House of peoples representatives. The prime minister
is elected from among the members of the House of People‟s representatives. He is
elected from the party having majority seat in the parliament. The prime minister is the
chief executive and chairperson of the council of ministers. He/ she is also commander in
chief of the national armed forces. Therefore, the prime minister has a number of powers
and responsibilities some of which are the following.
 Submits nominees for ministerial posts
 Follow up the implementation of laws, policies and decisions adopted by the
House of peoples Representatives and by the council of ministers.
 Supervises the federal administration
 Submits periodic reports and plans to the House of Peoples Representatives
 Respects and enforces the constitution

The Judiciary

The constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia establishes the principle
of an independent judiciary. Judicial powers are exercised at both the Federal and
regional levels. Courts are found at various levels.

Chapter Three
Citizen and Citizenship

A citizen is a person who has rights and privileges in a country and who is also expected
to render services and overcome duties expected from him/her. The person could be a

43
native of a certain country or a person who was born elsewhere but naturalized to a
certain country.

A citizen is an individual who is a legally recognized member of a state. Citizenship is

the relationship that is legally established between the state and an individual. It is the
totality of rulers that could help a citizen get or loss citizenship of a state.

Citizenship creates bond between the individual and the state of a certain country. This
by implication makes the individuals identified as a member of a state. This could then
allow the member citizens to claim for protection against any form of attack from internal
and external forces. Finally, citizenship makes individuals subordinate to the state.

Nationals and citizens have slight difference in that a national is a person who is citizen
by birth in the country referred. But citizen could be a person who is either naturalized or
born in the country referred. Thus we can say a national is a citizen born in a specific
country but a citizen may not be a national. On the other hand, there is also a difference
between citizen and nationality. Nationality is commonly referred to a person‟s ethnic
origin. But citizenship denotes the tie or relation of individuality and is used to show how
membership in a certain nation is established.

The Origin of the Concept

In ancient Greece citizen means a person who lives in a town or city. This suggests
having the freedom and membership in political administration. In ancient states people
and state had a weak relationship. The people needed little protection from the state and
the state gained little from the people. But as society developed and the population
increased people needed more protection from the state and this consolidated the relation
between the state and people. This link between the people and the state is called
citizenship.

Ways of acquiring citizenship

44
A person acquires citizenship of a state in different ways. Citizenship could be acquired
by birth or through naturalization. To get citizenship by naturalization, the person is
expected to fulfill the social, political and legal requirements of the country. With respect
to the rights and duties of citizens both citizens by birth and naturalized citizens have the
same status. However, in some instances there may be slight differences example the
right to elect and be elected.
1.Citizenship by birth
A. Jus Soli (the law (right) of the soil): According to this law all persons that are born
with in the territory of that state is granted the right to get citizenship. However, this rule
does not include children born to foreign diplomats who represent the country they cam
from. Thus this rule does not consider the origin of the parents of the child. If a child is
born within the soil of that state he/she will be granted citizenship. Most of the developed
states accept Jus Soli.
B.Jus Sanguinis (law (right) of the blood: Jus Sanguinis can be divided into Jus
Sanguinis paterni (father) and Jus Sanguinis Materni (mother). This mode of acquiring
citizenship is very common in the developing countries. Here a child can claim
citizenship of his/her parents.
2. Citizenship by Naturalization
Naturalization is a process of obtaining citizenship if the person fulfils the political, legal
and social matters which the host country expects to be accomplished. Naturalization is a
process by which a state confers its citizenship on an individual who is originally not its
citizen as a result of some voluntary acts and intentions of the individual.

There are certain factors that compel a person to change his/her citizenship.
1.When a person living in a certain territory becomes transferred into a territory of
another country. This imply that if the territory in which a person lives is taken by
another country, the people living in the old territory will be forced to change their
citizenship to the state which has newly taken up the territory. This could happen through
 annexation by force – merger of one state with another state
 cessation
 purchase arrangements made by two countries

45
2. Marriage to a foreigner. Until 1930, a woman who married a foreigner was forced to
loose her own citizenship and get citizenship of her husband‟s country.
3. When the government of a country freely grants citizenship to foreigners living in the
country or abroad example DV that is Diversified Immigrant Visa given by the U.S.A to
the nationals of other countries across the world.
4.Emigration – when a person emigrates due to political, social or economic reason,
he/she asks for citizenship of the country where he/she were emigrated citizenship may
also be obtained in the following ways as well.
 Legitimation: this is citizenship by recognition. An illegitimate child has the
right to get citizenship of his biological or care taker father after legitimation.
Such process is usually attributed to a citizen of multiple citizenship.
 Option – a person of multiple citizenships has a possibility to choose his/her
citizenship
 Acquisition of Domicile – This is a way of getting citizenship status when the
person is able to get permanent residence.
 Appointment as government official :this is citizenship by job. Some countries
grant citizenship to a person (s) who is/are assigned to work with in their
country.
The following are requirements to get Ethiopian citizenship by naturalization according
to the Ethiopian law of citizenship of 1930
 One who reaches the age of maturity (legal age)
 One who stayed in Ethiopia at least for five years
 One who is not dependent
 One who speaks and writes the Amharic language
 One who is not accused of crime or other related illegal maters and who
presents human witnesses

Dual citizenship (mixed system)

A person sometimes may have double citizenship due to the existence of different laws of
citizenship. A person may have one citizenship because of his birth place (Jus Soli) and
another citizenship because of his/her parents citizenship by blood (Jus Sanguinis) some

46
people have dual citizenship as a result of naturalization in foreign state and if the state of
the individual refuse to allow the individual to go abroad the situation is called indelible
which means that can not be removed. This is to show that the first citizenship can not be
lost due to the absence of consent on the part of the applicant‟s country.

But this situation could result in some problems like – tax payment, military national
service. Citizenship to children, to get protection from the government of the two
countries because none of the states.

Statelessness
Statelessness is a condition in which a person fails to have nationality or citizenship.
There are two types of statelessness
a. defacto statelessness
b. dejure statelessness
 Defacto statelessness: refers to persons who have nationality but do not get
protection from their state when they are out of their country. These are
people who are displaced from their home country for political, economic or
social reasons and sheltered in another country.
 Dejure statelessness: Such kind of statelessness is caused when people are
made to loose their citizenship by their own government for different reasons.
Example Russia from those who were against the revolution of 1917 and
Hitler from the Jews

Modes of loosing citizenship

1. Renunciation (Expatriation). The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights of
1948 which has a preamble and 30 articles provides in its article 15 sub article
citizenship the right to the individual to renounce his/her citizenship and seek
citizenship of some other state according to his/her choice
2. Deprivation – a person who is found guilty of committing serious crimes against
the state may be deprived of his/her citizenship. Some of the crimes could be
 to make access national secrets to alien country

47
  to collaborate with the enemy force in time of war
 to carry out diplomatic, economic, political and military intelligence to
another state within his/her state.
3. Substitution – citizenship may be lost when a person‟s original citizenship is
substituted by another state, which he acquires through naturalization on the other
side, this may also happen when a particular territory is annexed by another state.
In such cases the citizenship of the conquered people will be replaced by the
citizenship of the subjugator.
4. Lapse – citizenship may be lost if the person stays outside of his/her country for a
long and continues period – example, if an Indian citizen stays out of India
continuously for more than seven years, the person will loose his/her Indian
citizenship by the principle of lapse.

Rights and Responsibilities of Citizens

i. Rights
 Getting protection that is to get his/her life and property protected by the state
 Getting the necessary social services that is having access to health, education,
water, electricity, housing and other facilities
 Right to work in his/her own country (facilitate the working situations)
 Right to elect and be elected
ii. Responsibilities
 Take part in the political, economic and social activities
 Respect the rights of other people
 Protect the country from any kind of threat or attack
 Bear duties in times of advertise
 Respect the laws and rules that govern the country
 Preserve historic and cultural heritages of the country
 Pay taxes
 Accept and appreciate the views, beliefs and arguments of other people (open
mindedness)
 Be good citizen free from addition of any kind

48
  Follow up what the government is doing or intends to do

Citizenship and Civic knowledge

Civic dispositions and civic commitments are two important characteristics required from
citizens in a democratic society.

1. Civic dispositions – refers to habits or characters of citizens that are conducive or

helpful to the healthy functioning and common good of a democratic system.
Civic disposition includes all the behaviors and actions that are good, desirable
and acceptable. Such behaviors and habits are expected from responsible citizens.
Some of the elements of civic dispositions are the following.
 Civility: is a polite way of acting or behaving towards others. It is the need to
respect others. Civility includes respect and politeness to those with whom
one may disagree. Civility requires you to respect the rights of those who are
in dispute with you. Civility is a way of peaceful living and co – existence
with others.
 Self Discipline – acting and behaving according to some acceptable standards
without external controls and impositions
 Individual responsibility – fulfilling duties or obligations of citizenship. As
we would like to demand and enjoy our rights and benefits, we should also be
ready to discharge the responsibility that is expected from US.
 Civic mindedness – It is citizens‟ readiness and desire to give concern to
public interest. Civic mindedness is a commitment to give priority to the
common good than to our private interest. It is unselfish behavior that enables
us to do good and make sacrifice ourselves to the society and to our nation
 Open mindedness – It refers to our willingness to listen to the ideas, views
and arguments of others. It is the tolerance we show to carefully examine what
others say or suggest. It is also our ability to express what we feel what is in
our mind.
 Compromise – It is one form of behavior that should be observed in settling
conflicts peacefully. It involves the readiness and willingness to spare

49
 something on both sides of the conflict in favor of the peaceful resolution of
the problem and its outcome. Compromise requires giving up some of our
positions or interests. However, compromise never allows abandoning basic
principles and interests.

 Tolerance – it is the ability and willingness to accommodate differences in ideas,

out looks, views etc. tolerance is the heart of peaceful co – existence in diversity.
The first important step in tolerance is to positively accept diversity itself as it is.
Tolerance involves recognizing, appreciating, and being patient with, others
views, ideas, languages, beliefs etc.

 Honesty – It is the behavior and attitude of not telling and not accepting lies. It is
a habit of not cheating or stealing. Honesty is being free from corruption and
dishonesty.

 Patriotism – Patriotism is one of the most valuable responsibilities expected from

competent and responsible citizens.
o Attributes of patriotism
o Constitutional patriotism
o Tolerance and the culture of peace
o Respect for national symbols and a search for true history
o Safeguarding the country‟s security
o Conscientious objector – this refers to persons who refuses to participate
in active military activities for reasons of morality, region and other forms
of personal beliefs and opinions
o Keeping state‟s secrets
o The case of whistle Blowers – Whistle blowers are people who expose
wrong doings, unethical activities or criminal acts happenings in their
companies, government, neighborhoods and other forms of organizations
without identifying themselves as a source

50
 2. Civic commitment is an active participation of citizens for their personal as well
as the common good in a democracy. It is the expressed devotion of citizens for
the implementation of the fundamental principles of democracy. In a democracy
the political authority resides in the people that is democracy is the self
governance of people. This it requires an active participation of citizens in their
own affairs.

Ethics of Citizens
Morality is a system of principle and standards of right and wrong in human behavior.
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that deals with what is good or bad, and with moral
duties and obligations. Ethics is also concerned with the clarification of fundamental
moral and ethical concepts, principles, and the critical discussion of positions and
perspectives. It attempts to raise fundamental moral questions and to provide logical and
meaningful answers to them. The various ethical theories and explanations are based on
social facts, that is describing what is; and then further go on to embrace normative
values of determining behavior, that is prescribing what ought to be.

Ethics is derived from the Greek word for „character‟ and it focuses on what is right or
wrong; good or bad. Ethics is treating of moral feelings, duties or conduct. It is also
related to conforming to professional standards of conduct. For instance, helping a person
in need of assistance, helping the weak, the elders, persons with disabilities etc.

In most cases, ethical values are related to professional obligations. As the custodians of
special knowledge which bear on the well being of mankind professionals like
physicians, engineers, etc, are governed by special ethical responsibilities. These ethical
responsibilities emanate from ethical values developed in various professions.

Ethical values are requirements for professionals to apply their knowledge in ways that
benefit the rest of the society. Ethics is a normative study and deals with standards of
value.

51
Good citizens maintain the moral and ethical values of their society. The obligations of
members of a society that emanate from these values are mainly moral obligations. Moral
obligations are requirements that specify what acts are permitted or forbidden without
references to the consequences of performing or omitting the act. Moral obligations rest
mainly on ethical considerations.

Professional Ethics

As we have seen already, professionals need to have work ethics so as to execute their
duties effectively and responsibly. Professional ethics would help them establish certain
rules and procedures. Work ethics also help professionals to have desirable relations with
their fellow workers or with other people working in the same career in other places. It
also creates conducive environment for work.

Nevertheless, all professions do not have the same set of values and standards in absolute
terms. But there are common standards that could be followed by all people irrespective
of professions. The following are some of the common standards.
 Punctuality: punctuality is an important value to all workers. Every worker
should get to work on time. Workers (professionals) are also expected not to
waste their work time by postponing works or things for tomorrow
(procrastination) that could and should be done by them today.
 Respecting one’s job and work industriously
 Properly utilizing equipment and resources
 Established harmonious relation and work cooperatively with fellow
workers
 Developing one’s skill to do work effectively
 Voluntary absenteeism (absence without reporting and having permission) in
contrast with involuntary absenteeism is unethical. It is not acceptable by all
profession.

52
In addition to general ethical standards, professions have their own ethics peculiar to
them. An employee is expected to observe both the universal and professional standards
to acceptably do his work. Health professionals take an oath at times of graduation
swearing not to violate their professional ethics. Like property and patiently treat their
patients, strive their label best to get their patients recovered from their disease. Not to
use their knowledge to cause harm on people or patients. Keeping the secretes of their
patients etc. legal professionals also have their own professional ethics like abiding by the
law only, free from bias, prejudice and partiality, serving the public honestly being
hostile to any manifestations of corruption.

Morality – is a system of principles and standards of right and wrong in human behavior

As we have discussed already Ethics is concerned about what is good and bad and also
deals with moral duty and obligation. Ethics attempts to raise fundamental moral
questions and to provide logical and meaningful answers to them.

Morality on the other hand, refers to a system of principles and standards of right and
wrong in human behavior.

Morality – emphasizes on conforming to a standard of right behavior. Moral values and

standards define personal decisions and actions as good or evil, moral or immoral. Thus,
morality involves a normative judgment that is, it indicates what we ought to do and
should not do. What we should do is said to be moral and what we should not do is
referred to as immoral.

The operation of moral values can be explained in two important levels that is personal
(individual) and the social (group level). The distinction into the individual and social
levels is crucial, because morality consists of judgments, beliefs and values that may have
a degree of variation from person to person as well as from group to group. The
individuals‟ conscience and decisions of what is a good or bad action determine the

53
individual or personal level of conformity to moral standards. No external authority is
directly involved in these senses of moral conformity.

The common sense judgment of the individual is influenced by the social interactions
starting from the family, village, and schools to the wider members of the society. That
is, the individual judgments are not completely detached from the social thinking and
values of the right and wrong actions and behaviors. At the social level of sanctioning
moral principles and standards, out of customary and conventional practices a specific
society determines certain acts as good and right and others as evil and wrong. The
members of the society usually conform to these standards because the standards are
rightful in the eyes of the whole society. Therefore, the society imposes, some moral
duties and obligations on its members. The members are familiarized and educated about
what is good and what is evil (bad) in that society. Such an in-depth teaching and
questioning of moral principles and thinking is referred to as Ethics.

Besides cultural and traditional values, other factors like religious beliefs and thoughts
also influence moral principles. Many people in different places may form general
agreement about certain basic behaviors and actions. This does not however mean that
there is similarity of moral standards for all. Thus, individual or specific group positions
are also important in this regard. As a result, morality is a relative and culture – specific
phenomenon. This is because what is good in one society may be considered bad and
improper in another society.

Patriotism:- Patriotism is a republican ideas which refers to citizens‟ ideal and

commitment to live in peace, freedom and dignity
Traditionally the word patriotism was strongly attached to physical features of the land.
Within the context of this approach, the distinction and differences between nationalism
and patriotism is often difficult to understand. Gradually however, new perspectives
emerged which gave patriotism a new meaning and formulation.

54
  Nationalism is traditionally based on an alignment of certain groups to primordial
features such as kinship, family, territory and others. This drives comparisons of
one‟s country or even oneself, often in a manner that does not encourage co –
existence, with other nations or groups. It could therefore be said that nationalism
is often grounded on resentment and rivalry. It emphasizes the cultural, ethnic,
religious, economic or even technological superiority of a certain group or
country over others.
 Patriotism on the other hand is a republican ideal, which refers to citizen‟s ideal
and commitment to live in peace, freedom and dignity. As such it demands
citizens to show commitment and solidarity with democracy human rights and
freedom. This is because of the fact that unlike nationalism, which is essentially
outward looking, patriotism is inward looking comparing one‟s identity with the
other.
Globalization
Globalization is increasing interconnectedness among individuals across nations and their
people.

Globalization refers to the increasing interconnectedness among individuals across

nations and their people. It refers to a remarkable exchange and sharing of information,
culture, economic resource, and technology etc which leads to fight interdependence
among people.

Institutions that promote and are themselves reflections of globalization are:

the International Monitory Fund (IMF)
the World Bank. IMF and World Bank
They facilitate the development of common economic policies among many countries in
the world.
The World Intellectual Property Right Organization (WIPO), which is based in Geneva
works to promote communality in intellectual property rights. Forging a common
intellectual property rights is one of the important tools of entrenching globalization.

55
The cultural dimension of globalization is seen almost ubiquitous (ever present) presence
of Western entertainment and mass media. Some are of the view that this „cultural
invasion‟ dimensions in space available for people to develop and promote their local
identities. The implications of policies promoted by these institutions are very significant
for poorer countries. As their economies and cultural industries are relatively
undeveloped, they are vulnerable to be overwhelmed by developed countries‟ products
and cultural materials.

Global citizenship
In many respects, global citizenship is different from your being a citizen to a certain
country. Firstly you do not have to be born to a country. There is no physical or political
boundary to it. Secondly your responsibilities and duties as a global citizen are quite
flexible and fluid. For example as a global citizen:
 You do not pay tax
 You do not have military obligation
 You are not required to acquire nationality to enjoy benefits and assume
responsibility
 There is no unified political space, symbol and interest that you are associated
with
 There is a remarkable diversity and multiplicity of citizenship

A Global citizen is:

 Aware of the wider world and has a sense of his/her own role,
 Respects and values diversity. He/she should have a deeper understanding of
different cultures and peoples
 Is willing to act to make the world a more equitable and sustainable place
 Takes responsibility for his or her actions

Key elements for responsible Global citizenship

The following are what could be considered as the three most important elements of
Global citizenship

56
 A. Knowledge and understanding
As a global citizen, you need to develop an adequate understanding of
 Social justice and equity
 Globalization and interdependence
 Diversity
 Peace and conflict
 Sustainable development
B. Skills
The following personal and social skills are also important if one has to live up to his or
her responsibilities as a global citizen;
 Critical thinking
 Ability to challenge injustice and inequalities
 Respect for people and things
 Co-operation and conflict resolution
C. Values and Attitudes
Knowledge and skills alone will not be the answer unless one develops the value and
attitudes that motivate his or her actions. As such your sense of belongingness with others
need to be based on:
 Sense of identity and self esteem
 Empathy
 Commitment to social justice and equity
 Value and respect for diversity
 Concern for the environment and commitment to sustainable development.
 Belief that people can make a difference

Chapter four
Constitutions and constitutionalism

What is constitution?

57
A constitution is a fundamental or supreme law of a given country. Constitution includes
the basic principles, values beliefs and traditions that direct the internal (domestic) and
external (foreign) affairs of a country. Constitution contains the basic principles on the
structure and distribution of governmental or state power. It establishes the relationships
between citizens and the state. Constitution is a legal instrument to form government by
the people. The powers people give to governments are limited by constitution.
Constitution prohibits a government from exercising its power arbitrarily violating the
law set forth in their constitution. Constitution – limit the powers and authorities of a
government and ensure and safeguard the rights of citizens. Constitutions are frame work
or blueprint for governments. Constitutions determine a country‟s system of government
to be parliamentary or presidential, republican or monarchy. Determine the form
(structure) of the state to be unitary or federal.

The origin of constitution is linked with the need to limit the political authority and
power of governments. There were various attempts to check the powers of rulers at
different times in History.

In its modern sense constitution emerged during the 17th century in England. But the
concepts and practices of constitution as political phenomena extend further into previous
historical periods. Some of the cultures that contributed for the development of
constitutional practices belong to ancient Babylonia (law of Hammurabi) Hebrews
(Theocratic constitutionalism), Greeks, Romans and recent historical developments such
as the English Revolution, the French Revolution and the American war of independence.

 the Law of Hammurabi was one of the earliest codified law in history. King
Hammurabi of ancient Babylonia introduced a power legal order to govern his
subjects. Hammurabi ordered his subjects to strictly obey the law and those
who refused to do so were seriously punished. Any criticism or challenge
against the law was unacceptable. In Hammurabi‟s legal tradition, the
relationship between the government and the people was not based on
equality. The authority of the government was not limited. The ideas of

58
 freedom and rights of people were ignored. The law of Hammurabi is
historically significant because it introduced a legal system of governance, but
not the idea of constitution and democratic practices.
 The Hebrews were the first to practice constitutionalism. However, religious
thinking and the idea of divine power influenced the constitutional tradition of
the Hebrews. This is called Theocracy. Accordingly, the Hebrews political
system the subjects claimed that they live under the rule and guidance of
divine authority. Thus, the rulers on earth were considered as the agents and
representatives of the divine authority. The Hebrews constitutionalism
emphasized on limiting the absolute power of rulers by the law of divine
power. Thus rules were expected to exercise justice and to have moral
obligation to their subjects. Accordingly when rulers become injustice and
unwise, prophets claiming spiritual authority arise to resist them. This is
considered as the first legitimate apposition against established authority. In
other words the Hebrews contributed for the idea of limiting the absolute
power of rulers.

The Greeks were the first to exercise democracy as a form and method of governance. In
this process, the Greeks developed a constitutional political tradition that marked the
emergence of constitutional democracy.

The constitutional ideal of the Greeks includes popular participation of citizens through
direct democracy. It also involved shaping of power and state functions. Moreover, that
system also included mechanisms of limiting the powers of the office holders.

The political system provided the opportunity of participation for all citizens in decision
making. This is referred to as direct democracy. Thus, there was no possibility for
political power to be concentrated in the hands of the few. All active citizens had access
to the public offices. When public officials tend to abuse power, condemnation and
exclusion from social acceptance was exercised. The office terms were also short.
Therefore, political power was rationally shared. Officials and citizens also made

59
observance to the rule of law. Nevertheless, the Assembly of Citizens was without any
constitutional limitations. That is the kind of democracy exercised was excessive. As a
result of this, the Greek political system was unstable and full of internal disharmony.

 The Romans introduced a republican system of governance. The republican

constitutionalism was not completely left at the mercy of all citizens as in the
case the Greece. Neither was it completely controlled by an absolute monarch
until the later part of the Roman Empire. The Romans founded a system of
civil and criminal law, which is the source of the legal codes and practices of
many modern nations. The Romans exercised separation and distribution of
powers among different assemblies and offices. These various assemblies and
offices were meant to check on each other. Officials were elected by
assemblies of citizens, and for a year at a time.
 The origin of constitution is also related to a document known as Magna
Carta. King John of England was using his governmental power unfairly for
selfish purposes. The forms of abuses of his power were asking unusual tax
rates and depriving of the established rights and privileges. As a result, those
who suffered revolted and decided for an armed confrontation with King John.
However, King John did not fight. Instead, he agreed to sign a charter called
Magna Carta in 1215 AD. The document is also known as Charter of Liberties
since it provided rights and privileges to those who were ruled and restriction
upon the king‟s power.

Constitutionalism – is a political governance based on a given constitution where state

power is exercised according to established rules contained in that constitution.

Constitutionalism is also related with the prevalence of the rule of law where the
government and public officials shall be held accountable to people and are responsible
for their actions.

60
For constitutionalism to prevail, having a constitution alone is not a guarantee. Moreover,
that constitution must be observed by both the rulers and the ruled and must be enforced

A modern constitution has the following characteristics and contents

- It lays down the form of the state
- It may be written or unwritten
- It may be a deliberate creation or may have been gradually evolved
- It may be embodied in one document or several
- It prescribes the structure and organization of the government and also determines the
relation of different organs of the government
- It may also lay down the rights of the governed
- It often also lays down the procedure of its own change

Forms of Constitution

Constitutions could be written or unwritten. Sometimes written constitutions are known

as „documentary‟ constitution while the unwritten ones are known as „non documentary‟
constitution.

Written constitution – is a constitution that exists in documents containing the basic

principles and rules specifying the rights and duties of citizens and, the composition and
respecting powers of institutions of government. The majority of constitutions in the
world are written in form.

Unwritten constitution- In such kind of constitutions the fundamental principles and

powers of government are not written down in any single legal document. They also lack
a single document that specifies the rights and duties of citizens and the composition and
respective powers of institutions of government. Unwritten constitutions are largely
based on customs or usages. They are products of history, tradition and a result of
evolution. Unwritten constitution is in general a constitution which has grown up on the

61
basis of custom rather than written law. Israel and Great Britain are countries with
unwritten constitutions

Advantages of written constitution Disadvantage of written constitution

- It is clear and definite
- It helps to secure rights and
liberties of the people
- It is more stable
- Growth of country retarded. It is often
rigid, and unable to keep pace with the
times
- Transient contemporarily
- Not less controversial
- provides no better government

Advantages of unwritten constitution Disadvantage of unwritten constitution

- Elasticity and adaptability. They can
Pace with the changing times
Prevents revolutions. They are capable
of being twisted to meet a baffling
crisis anytime
- Recover from shocks without injury
- Unstable – They are unstable and
without any guarantee of solidity and
permanence
- Playthings of judicial tribunals
- Unsuitable to democracies

Flexible and Rigid Constitutions

As we have discussed already, constitution is the highest or supreme law of a country,

therefore, considered as a relatively permanent legal instrument. Nevertheless, it needs to
be changed or modified in order to coup up with changing internal and external
circumstances of a country. The process of modification is called amendment.

A constitution may be regarded as flexible or rigid depending on the complexity of the

requirements stated in the provision for amendment procedures.

62
 a) Flexible constitution – is one which can be easily changed by ordinary process
legislative action. Flexible constitutions have simpler requirements or procedures
for amendment
b) Rigid constitutions rigid constitutions provide a series of procedural requirements
for amendment. In the case of rigid constitutions, special procedures should be
followed to amend the constitution. In short such constitutions are some what
difficult to amend.

The followings are some amendment procedures

1. absolute majority (2/3 vote) in parliament
2. absolute majority in parliament + 2/3 support of regional legislatures for
Federal States
3. National referendum – direct voting by citizens to support or reject a
constitutional amendment or major national issues.

The making of constitutions

Constitutions could be made in a number of ways. One of the ways is through a body
called constituent Assembly or a constitutional convention, whose members are
representatives delegated by the people, that may draft, discuss, improve and adopt a
constitution as the supreme law of the land.

In a democratic country the process of making constitution involves

 drafting – discussion – improving – ratification (adoption)
 in Autocrats, monarchs and dictatorial rulers unilaterally draft and introduce
constitution without involving the republic.

Chapter Five
Democracy

63
Democracy is a term derived from two Greek words “Decos‟ which means people and
„Kratia‟ which refers to authority or government. Thus, the Greek word „democratia‟
means government of the people. Democracy can be defined in various ways. Giddings
regards democracy as not merely a form of government, but also as a f form of stat.
F.G.Wilson refers to it also as a social philosophy.

According to Hearnshaw, a democratic state is a state in which the community as a whole

possesses supreme authority and maintains ultimate control over affairs. „Democracy as a
form of state is merely a mode of appointing, controlling and dismissing a government‟.

Dicey defined democracy as a form of government “in which the governing body is
comparatively a large fraction of the entire nation.”

For Abraham Lincoln democracy is “a government of the people, by the people for the
people, by all, for all.” According to Bryce democracy denotes “that form of government
in which the ruling power of a state is legally vested, not in any particular class or
classes, but in the members of the community as a whole. This means, in communities
which act by voting, that rule belongs to the majority, as no other method has been found
for determining peaceably and legally what is to be deemed the will of a community
which is not unanimous.”

However, as F.G.Wilson points out, democracy is not the same in any two countries.
“Different and widely varying governmental institutions have been used in national
development to assist in realizing the democratic form of government. True there are
many agreements of a fundamental character, but there are also fundamental difference.”

Democracy is also defined as a system of government in which the supreme political

power resides in the people and power is exercised directly by the people or by their
elected representatives who are elected in a free electoral system.

64
Democracy is also the institutionalization of freedom. In other words democracy can be
said a set of ideas and principles and a set of procedures and practices about rights and
freedoms.

Democracy can also mean living and working together.

Democracy is management of conflict as it is composed of values of tolerance,
cooperation, compromise, consensus, pragmatism (treating things in a sensible and
realistic way to produce results) compassion (pilty for the sufferings of others) civility
(polite behavior) etc. these values are instruments to resolve differences peacefully.
Therefore democracy can be defined as peaceful resolution of differences.

Democracy is a form of government organized according to principles of

 popular sovereignty (ultimate decision making power of the people)

 the rule of law
 separation of powers
 rights and freedoms of the individual as well as the group
 majority rule and minority rights
 multi party system
 free, fair and periodic elections.

Essentials of Democratic Government

Written constitution This is not to deny that under certain historical conditions, even an
unwritten constitution may serve the ends of democracy as it did in the united kingdom.
 Constitutionalism, which implies a government of laws and not of men.
 Declaration of rights for the protection of personal liberties
 Democratic governmental structure

Aspects of Democracy

65
Democracy has three aspects: Social, economic and political. Democracy remains
incomplete unless all these three aspects are present in a society
Social aspect – this refers to removal of discrimination on the basis of class, caste, creed,
color and sex. All men and women, rich or poor, regardless of any class or caste
prejudices are socially equal, and should be treated as such
 Economic aspect- this refers to the equitable distribution of wealth in society and
abolition of glorying disparities on the basis of wealth. Economic democracy
recognizes the right to work, leisure, and fair wages and unrestricted right to the
enjoyment of life.
 Political aspects – this refers to the provision of political rights namely, the right
to vote, the right to contest elections and the right to hold public offices.

In order to enable him to exercise these rights effectively, an individual has to be assured
freedom of speech, publication and association.

Types of Democracy

Historically, democracies have been Direct as well as Indirect (representative)

Direct Democracy – this type of democracy existed in the Greek and Roman city states in
the ancient world. Now it has become a thing of the past. Direct democracy can exist only
in petty states inhabited by a few thousand people who can easily meet at a place,
deliberate and formulate policies on the spot. In the modern age direct democracy
survives in the institutions of Referendum and Initiative.

Indirect (Representative) Democracy – Modern states are huge in size and population.
Direct Democracy is therefore inconceivable. Instead, the people govern these states in
directly, through the popularly elected representatives. The will of states is formulated
and expressed not though the people directly but though their representatives in whom
they repose confidence. Such type of a democracy rests on the principle that though
sovereignty belongs to the people, it is their representatives who exercise it. The
representatives are elected periodically and are responsible to the people who can oust

66
them at periodical elections if they do not come up to their expectations. Hence,
representatives govern the people as their trustees. They have to be responsive to public
opinion for the fear that they may otherwise be deprived of a place in the legislature when
next elections take place.

Representative (Indirect) Democracy is associated with two basic systems of government:

parliamentary and presidential democracy.

 Parliamentary democracy: In this form of government the parliament has a central

role: the executive is headed by a prime minister or a cabinet leader and is
dependent on the confidence of the parliament; the head of state usually has little
or no executive powers but only a representative function.

Presidential democracy – the executive is headed by the head of state him/herself, who
is directly elected by the people and does not depend on the parliament‟s confidence.

Hobbes, Locke, Jaferson, Tocqueville are some scholars who helped to crystallize the
concept of representative democracy or indirect democracy.
Tory democracy – This philosophy, largely associated with Disraeli and Randolph
Churchill was principally concerned with balancing the interests of the different social
classes which had grown up as a result of the Industrial revolution. Full – scale popular
democracy, white desirable in principle, would lead to social conflict, argued the tories.

Democratic elitism – the advocates of this philosophy like Schumpeter claim that the
role of the people in political decision making is very limited. It is because the majority
are with relatively little knowledge or understanding to become continuously involved in
complex political argument. Rather he observed, the role is reduced to being able to
choose freely between different groups of politicians each representing competing sets of
policies.

67
Pluralist Democracy – It refers to any scenario where a variety of beliefs, demands and
interests are permitted to flourish together.

Liberal Democracy – All contemporary political systems which can be described as

„popular government‟ are to a greater or lesser extent, pluralist or elitist as described
above. Yet these definitions are not precise enough for the purpose of categorizing
regimes into more specific types. Perhaps a better description is „liberal democrary‟, the
common title given those states which broadly follow a liberal tradition.

There are two essential prerequisites for maintaining that a system is liberal in nature.
These are that
 Government is based on the free consent of the people
 Government is responsible to the people

Merits and Demerits of Democracy

Merits
- It is an efficient form of government
- It upholds individual liberties
- It assures equality
- It educate the masses
- It promotes patriotism
- It ensures a stable form of government
- Order and progress go together
- It is a government by specialists and
Peoples representatives
- It serves as a school for citizenship
Demerits
- Rule of ignorance (a sort of mob rule)
- It favors the rich
- Impedes scientific, artistic and literary
progress.
- It‟s ethical value questioned
- It is opposed to individuality and liberty
- Local interest obscure national interest
- an expensive form of government
- Democracy has ceased to be a government
by majority
- representative principle in democracy
Questioned
- the principle of equality abused

68
 - Democracy is becoming a process of false
education
- It amounts to mob rule
- encouragement of class struggle
- Evils of party politics ingrained in
Democracy.

Historical Development of Democracy

Democracy appeared and came to be practiced first in the Greek city state of Athens in
the 6th and 5th centuries B.C. During the democratic period of Athens major decision were
made by simple majority of thousands of free male citizens. The Athenian democracy
was direct or pure democracy. The basis of Athenian democracy was that all free adult
male citizens were granted the right to attend a regular assembly where laws were
enacted, executive decisions made and general policy formulated. There was also the
opportunity to scrutinize and criticize those city officials who had also been elected by
the popular assembly. In order for this to take place the citizens had to be granted
political equality, which included the rich and the relatively poor together. Nevertheless,
this political equality or democracy did not include women, slaves children and metics
(foreigners).

The Athenian democracy contained several elements to which we can still relate today:
 popular participation in politics
 political equality (at least for free male adults)
 the notion that government should be responsible to the people

69
These three principles are all ones which we in liberal democracies find both familiar and
desirable, but all Athens‟ citizens were not happy of the system. Plato was one of these
Athenians who sharply condemned the democratic system. Plato began his criticism by
making clear that he did not believe that the mass of the people were wise or
knowledgeable enough to make important decisions. Plato preferred rule by a small
group of “Oligarchy‟ of wise, responsible (by implication also wealthy) rulers. His pupil,
Aristotle, took a similar view, but he was more particularly. Concerned that the people
might not respect the laws which, they themselves had made. The fear was that, feeling
free and self responsible, the people could make and unmake laws to suit themselves.

Following the decline of Greek classical civilization, democracy, in a limited form made
a brief reappearance in ancient Rome, but then largely disappeared to be replaced by
absolute monarchies.

The English civil war of the 1640s raised questions about what forms of political
authority could replace the rational or decline rule of the Stuart monarchy. The Levelers
party produced a document in 1647 entitled the „Agreement of the People‟ which
contained a radical program for a representative democracy with most, though not all
adults having voting rights. But the Levelers were quickly defeated.

Following the Glorious Revolution in England of 1688, and the advent of truly
parliamentary government in England, the ground was more fertile for the seeds of
democracy to be sown again. The Whig philosopher John Locke expounded his theories
of representative rule in his work, „Two Treatises of Government‟ in 1689. The first
principle for Locke was the government must be based on the consent of the people.
Therefore, government must be set up by the people, by a free agreement among them.
Secondly, Locke insisted that, once set up, government should be continuously
responsible to the people. Indeed he upheld the right of people to depose a monarch if he
behaved in a despotic manner. Thirdly, Locke envisaged a representative assembly whose
role would be to maintain control, on behalf of the people. Nevertheless Locke was not
that much different from Plato and Aristotle as he did not believe that the un educated, un

70
propertied mass of the people should be included in the government he was dreaming. He
believed that the interests of the masses could best be understood by the more responsible
middle classes.

Jean Jacques Rousseau the great philophe of the 18th century France introduced serious
reservations over the growing enthusiasm for Locke‟s style of democracy. Rousseau
wrote against a background of French political philosophy which much admired the
English system of parliamentary government. For him, though the English were only free
at election time, between elections there was no guarantee that government would act in
the interests of the people Rousseau‟s starting point is that man has a right to freedom,
but as soon as government is set up over him he looses his freedom, hence his famous
maxim, “man is born free but is everywhere in chains.” To solve the problem government
must be set up by the people and come broadly under their control. However Rousseau
recognized the dangers of majority rule if decisions were to be based on popular vote. He
argued that the will of the majority is bound to conflict with the interest of the minority.
Of course Rousseau pointed out, if all men were truly enlightened and understood the
interests of the whole community as well as their own, the problem would not exist.
Rousseau discusses the concept of „general will‟ which seems to refer than simply the
will of the majority based on a collection of self interest. For Rousseau the „general will
could be achieved by appointing only a single individual who is enlightened, perfectly
moral. Rousseau has been seen as both a democrat and supporter of so called benevolent
despotism or enlightened dictatorship. Social contract and Emile were Rousseau‟s
famous works.

Thomas Paine and James Madison

These two men were the ones who inspired the Americans in their war of independence
and to form a democratic government in the post independence period. Their conceptions
of democratic principles were to be discovered in the American Declaration of
independence of 1776 and the constitution which was written in 1787.

71
Tom Paine‟s famous work is entitled „The Right of Man‟ Tom Paine had almost socialist
views like those of the English Levelers. Tom Paine insisted that any government must
be based on the principle that all men are free and have rights which are inalienable, that
is incapable of being removed by government, however fairly elected it may be. Such
ideas were added to the American constitution of 1787 and form the first ten amendments
known as the Bill of Rights

James Madison was less radical but made an equally important contribution to the
development of democratic theory. His best known writings are contained in the
„Federalist Papers‟, a serious of articles written at the time of the American revolution
Madison‟s concern‟s centered on two main problems.
1. How to stop an elected government becoming too dictatorial
2. He did not trust the judgment of the mass of the people like Plato. He believed
that they might elect leaders for the wrong reasons and having elected them,
might support them in oppressing minority interest. To do away with these
problems he proposed that government should contain, with in itself, checked and
balances or internal limitations to its own powers. He hoped to see a democracy
work without political parties at all, but this very soon proved to be impractical.
Madison introduced the notion of indirect democracy and self limiting
government.

Human Rights

Though there is widespread acceptance of the principles of Human rights, there is no

complete agreement on the nature of these rights and their substantive scope Human
rights are understood to represent individual and group demands for shaping and sharing
of power, wealth, enlightenment and other values (like – respect and its constituent
elements of reciprocal tolerance, mutual clemency). Human rights include variety of legal
and moral values. Human rights are universal or general characters equally possessed by
all human beings.

72
Rights must be distinguished from powers. Nature has endowed every man with a certain
amount of power to satisfy his needs. Power in simply the physical force at the disposal
of a person. But on the basis of force, no system of rights can be established. Rights
belong to man as a social being. Rights are then the powers recognized as being socially
necessary for the individual. Some thinkers have talked of rights as being inherent.
According to Locke, natural rights existed in pre political stage of human existence. In
fact, according to him, the civil society was created partly to safeguard and preserve these
rights.

Rights are something more than mere power or claim on the part of the individual. Not all
claims can be accepted by the society. Society is likely to recognize only such claims as it
considers necessary and reasonable. The individual enjoying rights must be willing to
respect similar rights of others. In short, rights and duties are correlated, or they are two
sides of the same coin. The state does not create rights. It only maintains them. Rights are
definite. Rights are secured to us by law, and vested in us by law. Rights have a tendency
to grow.

Classification of Human Rights

The following reflects the ways of attaining rights.

 Legal rights – These are rights written down in codes of law. They are legally
permitted right; exercised by all. When these rights are violated the body whose
right (s) are violated is able to bring the case to court to safeguard his right (s).
 Moral rights – These are rights that emanate from the consensus of two or more
bodies. The basic principles of moral rights are justice and impartiality. Such
rights are related with religion and precepts. „What is moral rights‟ is still
controversial. The question of universalization and comprehensiveness of moral
rights can not be assented (approved) by all.
 Human rights – These are natural rights. They do not emanate from government
will or from individual conventions. The following examples illustrate how
human rights are natural rights

73
  The right to Education emanates from man‟s desire to know himself and the
environment.
 The right to live emanates from the instinctive desire of man to live in life. To
exist man must get something to eat, get shelter and clothing, to get these
necessities we have to work, move from place to place; then comes the right to
work, the right to free movement etc. human rights are protections to which all
human beings are entitled because of their humanity and not because of their
social status or individual merits. Some of these rights are claimed and enjoyed
without regard to political order. The types of human rights which are closely
related with the actions of government‟s are civic liberties and civic rights.

Civic Liberties – are constitutional protections of persons, opinions and property against
arbitrary interference by governments. Civic liberties include such protections as freedom
of speech, freedom of press, religious beliefs and freedom from arbitrary arrest and
punishment.
Civil Rights are legally guaranteed benefits provided by positive actions of governments.
Civil rights include such guarantees as education, protection against illness and starvation
and financial support at times of unemployment and old age.

Basic features of Human Rights

 Human rights are based on equality because human rights are interconnected
and based on human nature.
 Human rights are unassailable. They can not be attacked during promotion
and protection
 Human rights are eternal that is without beginning or end
 Human rights are irreducible
 Human rights are indisputable that is can not be challenged
 Human rights are not given by governments and are not also inherited.

74
Historical Back ground of Human Rights

Human rights emerged to replace the phrase „natural rights‟ which was intimately linked
with natural law. The concept human rights are modern arrival and are now used as an
everyday language.

The history of human rights is traced back to the classical civilization of the Greeks and
Romans. It was closely tied to the pre modern natural law doctrines of the Greeks like
stoicism.
Stoicism advocates that human conduct should be judged according to and brought into
harmony with the law of nature.
Like wise, the Roman law allowed the existence of natural law and law of nations.
According to the Romans it was natural law not the state that assures Roman citizenship.
 During the middle ages, natural law doctrines were related to various political
theories about natural rights. Natural law mainly teaches about the “duties of
man” as distinct from the „rights of man‟. The focus on duties rather than rights
resulted in the legality of slavery and serfdom, which excludes the important part
of human rights that is the ideas of liberty and equality.
 In modern times there were factors that were responsible for the gradual shift
from natural laws as duties to natural laws as rights. These factors were:
a. Failure of rulers to meet their natural laws obligations. They teach the
people not to steal but they themselves steal public property.
b. The unprecedented commitment to individual expressions. The individual
was taken as precious value. The individual with all its duties and rights
began to be respected.
c. Some intellectual movements like the Renaissance which was revival of
interest and study about ancient ideas, thoughts, art etc and the 18th
century intellectual movement in France called the Enlightenment also
contributed to the development of human rights.

75
Some other evidences of change in the transition towards maintaining natural law rights
were
 Teachings of Thomas Aquinas (1224 – 1274)
 “ “ “ Hugo Groitus (1583 – 1645)
 The signing of Magna Carta in 1215
 The English petition of Rights of 1628
 The English Bill of Rights of 1689
 The writings of the 17th century English philosopher John Locke and the
works of the 18th century philosophers like Montesquieu, Voltaire and
Rousseau.

Significant achievements in the development of human rights

In the history of human society, there were significant land marks in the evolutionary
development of human rights which were also very important to the development of
democracy
1. The 1215 Magna Carta
The Magna Carta guaranteed some rights and liberties to the English people as it
 Opposed taxation without representation
 Forbade unlawful arrest
 Called for trial by jury
2. The 1628 petitition of Rights … The English parliament adopted the petition of
Rights in 1628. some of the contents of which were:-
 the king may not levy taxes
 the king may not imprison any person without charges or law
3. The 1688 “Glorious Revolution” in England resulted in the 1689 English Bill of
rights. The Bill of Rights prohibited the king from suspending laws, levy
taxes,…etc. the parliament was granted freedom of speech, assembly etc. This
revolutionary agitation swept the west most notably North America and France.
4. The Virginia Bill of Rights of 1776. This Bill of rights contains the plain truth
“…men are created equal that they are endowed by their creator with certain

76
 inalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.”
Further the Virginia Bill of Rights contains the following.
 Protection of the people from possible tyranny of government
 Freedom of speech, press, peaceful assembly, to petition government and
imperial jury trial
 Prohibition of excessive fines, cruel punishment, the forcing of persons to
witness against him/herself.

5. The 1789 French „Declaration of the Rights of man and the citizen‟. The
declaration embodies the living principle “men are born free and equal in
rights…” The declaration proclaims, “The end of all political association is the
preservation of the natural; and non regulated rights of man.” It identifies these
rights as “liberty, property, security and resistance of oppression.”
6. The establishment of the United Nations (UN) in 1945. in the treaty establishing
the UN, all member states pledged themselves to take joint and separate action for
the achievement of „universal respect for and observance of human rights and
fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex or religion
7. Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948. The development
of UDHR followed the end of the Second World War. The destruction and painful
consequences of the war contributed for the conception of UDHR. Nazy Germany
practiced genocide against the Jews. As a result 6 million Jews were killed for the
sole reason that they were Jews. Genocide is a planned killing people for what
they are.

Not only the Jews, but also many other peoples were also massacred including Ethiopians
by the Italian fascist.

A part from genocide and destruction of resources and wealth there were serious human
rights abuses during the Second World War (1939 – 1945). Many people were denied of
their fundamental rights including the right to life.

77
As response to what happened during the war, the nations and peoples of the world wrote
the universal Declaration of Human Rights. That was down with the hope that the human
Rights. That was done with the hope that the human right abuses that took place during
the Second World War would never happen again to human kind.

UDHR contained the basic hopes and wishes common to human beings. It was believed
to be a common standard to be achieved by all nations and peoples of the world. The
UDHR contains a preamble and 30 articles, which includes different types of rights that
is civil, political, social and cultural rights.

The general assembly of the United Nations adopted the UDHR on 10 December 1948.
By then the UN had 56 members. Among these, 48 nations including Ethiopia voted in
favor while 8 countries among them namely Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Poland,
Belarus and Ukraine obtained.

Under UN chapter member states are expected to promote respect for human rights. The
UDHR has been important in that it has influenced the constitutions, laws, and court
decisions of many countries and international organizations since its development.

The General Assembly of the UN also adopted additional documents in 1966. This was
done to further strengthen the UDHR. These two international covenants were the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International
Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

The conventions address different types of issues like genocide, racial discrimination, and
discrimination against woman, torture and the rights of the child.

Many regional organizations and human rights institutions were also formed following
the war.
Europe – The Council of Europe adopted the European convention on Human Rights in
1950. The European convention created two organs

78
 i. The European Commission on Human Rights
ii. European court of Human Rights

America – The North, South and Central American countries also formed the second
regional organization for the protection of human rights. This organization was the
Organization of American states (OAS). The OAS was set up in 1948. The OAS adopted
the American Convention on Human Rights in 1969. This convention provides for two
organs.
1. Inter – American Commission on Human Right
2. Inter – American court of Human Rights

Africa – The organization of African Unity (OAU) was set up in 1963. in 1981 the OAU
adopted the African charter on human and peoples‟ rights

Arab Countries - The League of the Arab states was founded in 1945 and has concern
about human right matters. It established an Arab commission on Human Rights. Another
related organization called the organization of the Islamic conference was also
established in 1971. The Organization of the Islamic Conference adopted the Cairo
Declaration on Human Rights in Islam in 1990.

Scope and content of Human Rights

Human rights are classified into three generations:

1. First Generation Rights include civil and political rights… liberty rights
2. second Generation rights – are economic, social and cultural rights … equality
rights
3. third Generation rights – Solidarity rights … Fraternity Rights

Ethiopia has fully accepted the human rights provision of the UDHR of the 1948. the
present day constitution of Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia has incorporated the
fundamental and basic freedoms and rights that are found in the UDHR. Based on the

79
fundamental principle of the UDHR Ethiopia‟s new constitution is made to suit the socio
– economic, political and cultural realities of the Ethiopian societies. However, much
should be done for the effective application of these rights that are enshrined in our
constitution. In other words, even though human and democratic rights are provided in
the constitution, there are possibilities for the violation of these rights. Therefore, there
must be a mechanism of checking, monitoring and protecting the rights of citizens against
abuses and violations. That is, whenever abuses of rights of citizens happen, there is a
need for an institution or responsible body to detect the violations and work help maintain
rights of citizens. Citizens need to have institutions that they should appeal. Human
Rights Commission and the Ombudsman are such institutions that operate for the
protection of citizens against abuses and violations of their rights and for redressing
wrong doings. Article 55 sub Articles 14 and 15 of the constitution dictate the
responsibility of the House of Peoples‟ Representatives called an International
Conference that was held in Addis Ababa from May 14 to 22 in 1998. the conference was
very important in relation to getting experience from other countries in terms of the
Ethiopian realities.

The major objectives of these institutions are

 To serving as public guardian for the growth of democracy and proper
application of rights, and standing for the fulfillment of human and
democratic rights in Ethiopia
 To protect Ethiopian citizens democratic and human rights as enshrined in the
constitution form any violations by societal forces including government
authorities, administrative personnel and community
 To assist avoid injustice, misuse of governmental powers, embezzlement and
corrupt behaviors of some governmental officials.

After examining the cases, the Human rights commission and the Ombudsman may take
the cases to the concerned authorities. It is however, very important to note that neither
Human Rights Commission nor the Ombudsman can replace the Judiciary – they serve as

80
bridges between the system of courts and the complaints of citizens to facilitate the
observance of citizens‟ human and democratic rights.

The Rule of Law

The rule of law is a situation in which people including the government authorities
are bound by the law of a country. No one including rulers and top officials of
government can be above the law. All citizens respect the law and are governed by it.
Democracy can not be imagined in the absence of the rule of law. The rule of law is
important in many ways.
1. It provides security: when there is the rule of law, the rights of individuals and
groups will be respected. No body has the right to go against the well being on
individuals and group of people. Besides their property will be protected.
2. It provides governing conducts: Where thee is the rule of law, individuals and
groups of people would behave in accordance to the law.
3. it helps for the existence and protection of democratic and human rights. Where
there is the rule of law, democracy could be properly exercised.

On the other contrary, the absence of the rule of law would result in some problems.
a. The relation between the people and the government would be unhealthy. A
government that ignores the rule of law would be unpopular
b. Where there is no the rule of law there is no justice. The absence of justice would
in turn result in instability
c. The people would not feel secure. This would inhibit people‟s effort and
commitment in doing their day – to – day work
d. There will be corruption

81
The rule of law comprises political, constitutional, legal and human rights issues. Any
democratic society which seeks to foster and promote human rights, has to recognized the
rule of law as a fundamental principle. Citizens are protected against arbitrary acts of
public authorities only if their rights are laid down in law. This law has to be publicly
known, equally applied and effectively enforce. It is thus evident that the execution of
state power must be based on laws that were made according to the constitution of the
country, and with the aim of safeguarding freedom, justice and legal certainty.

In 1993 the UN World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna reaffirmed the

inseparable link between the principle of the rule of law and the protection and promotion
of human rights.

The rule of law provides the foundation for the just management of relations between and
among people, thus fostering diversity. It is a pillar of the democratic process. The rule of
law also ensures the accountability of rulers and control by law over them.

Sources of the Rule of Law

There are certain sources of the rule of law
1. Constitution
2. Domestic laws – These are specific laws. These domestic laws have great
value in maintaining the rule of law.
Domestic laws are of two types
i. civil law – these are laws related to administrative
ii. Criminal law – this is a body of law that is related to criminal acts like
theft, corruption, killing etc.
iii. International laws – such laws regulate the relationship that exists between
countries of the world. This law helps countries to coexist peacefully and
cooperate in political and economic activities.

Historical Development of the rule of laws

82
The principle of the rule of law has its roots in medieval England. As early as 1066 a
central administration was established by William the conqueror. Although William
embodied the central governmental, legislative and judicial power, he himself did not
stand above the law – it was the law that had made him king. Out of this understanding,
the common law courts and the parliament, together with the nobility, strengthened their
influences in the national system, building the first parliamentary monarchy in Europe.
The cornerstones in the development of the rule of law were the Magna Carta of 1215
and the Habeas corpus Act of 1679. This act gave people in custody the undeniable right
to be informed why their liberty was restricted. On the continent of Europe, the principle
of the rule of law gained importance against the background of civil revolutions
throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth century. Today the rule of law is a core
principle of national and regional institutions almost world wide.
Fair Trial as a Core Element of the Rule of Law

The rule of law means, in the first place, the existence of publicly known and non
discriminatory laws. Their mere existence however, is nothing without their effective
enforcement. Thus, the state has to establish institutions safeguarding the legal system,
including courts, prosecutors and police. These institutions are themselves bound by
human rights guarantees, as laid down in the Universal and regional treaties for the
protection of human rights. Such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR makes a special reference to juveniles. It provides that in
the case of juveniles, the procedure shall take account of their age and the desirability of
promoting their rehabilitation. This means that states should draft legislation concerning
relevant matters such as the minimum age at which they may be charged with a criminal
offence, the maximum age at which a person is still considered to be a juvenile, the
existence of special courts and procedures, the laws governing procedures against
juveniles and how all these special arrangements for juveniles take account of “the
desirability of promoting their rehabilitation.”

Human security can not be realized without the rule of law and fair trial. The principles
of rule of law and fair trial contribute to one‟s security in personal life as it guarantees

83
that nobody is persecuted and arrested arbitrarily, that every one is entitled to a fair court
hearing and an independent and impartial judge. Fairness in court proceedings shall lead
to justice and the confidence of the citizens in a predictable jurisdiction. Moreover, a
strong judicial system helps to keep crime rates and corruption law, thus contributing to
freedom from fear.

With regard to economic confidence and development, too, investment security strongly
depends on a functioning administrative and judicial system. Hence, economic growth
and social welfare are also dependent on the rule of law and fair trial.

The right to a fair trial relates to the administration of justice both civil and criminal
contexts. The proper administration of justice has two aspects, the institutional (example
independence and impartiality of the tribunal) and the procedural (example fairness of the
hearing). Fair trial upholds a series of individual rights ensuring the proper administration
of justice from the moment of suspection to the execution of the sentence.

Equality Before the Law and Before the Court

The guarantee of equality is one of the general principles of the rule of law. It prohibits
discriminatory laws and includes the right to equal access to the courts and equal
treatment by the courts.

Its most important practical aspect is the equality of arms, comprising the idea that each
party to a proceeding should have an equal opportunity to present its case and that neither
party should enjoy any substantial advantage over its opponents. The other aspect of
equal treatment by the courts is that every accused person is entitled to be treated equally
with similarly placed accused people, without discrimination on any grounds.

Independence and Impartiality

One of the basic elements of a functioning rule of law system is the role of independent
and impartial courts in the legal system. According to the principle of the division of

84
powers, the judicial power has to be completely separate from the legislative and
executive powers.

The independence of judges is one of the pillars of an independent judiciary. If judges

can be removed at any time by government or other authorities, their institutional
independence is not secured. Furthermore, if either the courts or the judges themselves
are under the control or influence of non – judicial entities, no fair trial can be ensured.
Examples of such control are: Conditions of payment of judges, the possibility for other
branches of government to issue instructions to courts, or threats of transfer to judges to
other posts should their decisions not conform to expectations or instructions.

Court decisions may not be changed by a non judicial authority, except in the case of
constitutionally recognized amnesties, usually granted by the Head of state.
Public Hearing
In order to foster confidence in administration of justice and ensure a fair hearing of the
parties, proceedings should be open to the general public. The principle of publicity must
be fully respected, unless there is a reason which allows the exclusion of the public. Even
in cases which required the exclusion of the public from trial, the judgment must be made
public.

Fair trial also includes the following:-

- Right to be presumed innocent – everyone who has been charged with a criminal
offence has the right to be presumed innocent until and unless he/she is proven
guilty according to the law in a fair trial.
- Right to be tried without Undue Delay. The underlying principle of the rule is
well expressed in the phase: “justice delayed is justice denied.”
- Right to defend oneself in person or through legal counsel and the Right to be
tried in one‟s own presence.

The current constitution of Ethiopia which was brought into force on August 21, 1995
and has eleven chapters and 106 articles has given full recognition to human and

85
democratic rights of the Ethiopian citizens. Article 10 of the constitution officially
proclaims that
1. “Human rights and freedoms, emanating from the nature of mankind are
inviolable and inviolable and inalienable.”
2. “Human and democratic rights of citizens and peoples shall be respected.”

These fundamental rights including those of arrested and convicted Ethiopians are
recognized and legally accepted.
The constitution has also paved the ground for the rule of law to prevail in Ethiopia.
The constitution formed a limited government that is a government the power of which is
restricted by a constitution. So as to control the power of the government the principle of
separation of power is given due recognition by sharing power to the legislative,
executive and the judiciary.

The constitution has established the principle of an independent judiciary. That is, the
activities of the courts are made to be free from various forms of interferences or
influences from the executive or legislative bodies or any other institutions. Article 79 of
the constitution proclaims

1. “Judicial Powers, both at Federal and state level, are vested in the courts.”
2. “Courts of any level shall be free from any interferences of any governmental
body, government official or from any other source.”
3. “judges shall exercise their functions in full independence and shall be directed
solely by the law.”
4. “No judge shall be removed from his duties before he reaches the retirement age
determined by law except under the following conditions”
a. When the judicial administration council decides to remove him for
violation of disciplinary rules or on grounds of gross incompetence or
inefficiency; or
b. When the judicial administration council decides that a judge can no
longer carry out his responsibilities on account of illness; and

86
 c. When the House of „peoples‟ representatives or the concerned state
council approves by a majority vote the decision of the judicial
administration council.

Types of pressure groups

There are two main types of pressure groups

1. Horizontal pressure groups – This include peasant associations, religious
associations, labor and business associations, labor and business associations
2. vertical pressure groups – This include local, regional, provincial, national and
international groups

pressure groups play important role in a country‟s political process in legislative,

executive, judiciary and the bureaucracy of that country.
Roles of Political parties

- Stabilizing the political process

- Securing political power
- Establishing link between the people and government
- Source for obtaining leadership and leaders
- Identifying and fulfilling social values and goals
- Instruments for political modernization
- Perform non political activities as well

Pressure Groups – These are a collection of individuals who create some force for the
fulfillment of public interests. Members of pressure groups could simultaneously become
members of other similar groups.

87
Political parties – are bodies of individuals united for promoting the national interest on
some particular principles in which they all have agreed political parties are

- a group of men banded together to pursue certain principles

- a group of men professing the same political doctrines
- a plat form or machinery for taking part in the struggle for power, it is a device for
catching votes, it is an agency to mobilize people‟s support at the time of election,
it is an instrument for the aggregation of interest that demand their vociferous
(noisy and insistent) articulation

The aforementioned differences bear some essential ingredients

1. a group of persons that have commonality on matters pertaining to
public affairs
2. is an organization which struggles for power
3. constitutes members who could make concerted efforts to implement
their objectives

Types of political parties

1. One party system – This type of political party was established in 1917 in Russia
by Lenin. The Fascist party of Mussolini of 1925 and the National Socialist party
of Hitler in Germany are examples of one party system.
2. Bi party system – this is a system where two parties in a country compete for
power. Example the conservative and labor party in England; the Democratic and
Republican party in the U.S.A
3. Multi party system – it is a system in which many parties work together to form a
government.

88
89