1

Civic and ethical education

Chapter One:
Understanding Civics and Ethics
“A Seed will only become a flower if it gets sun and water” Louis Gottschalk.
Introduction
Since human being is a social animal and couldn’t live alone, he/she has to respect certain
fundamental principles and values to live together with his/her fellow beings and consequently
build peaceful society and lead prosperous life.
As Johan Stuart Mill (1972) described it, progressive and peaceful setting subsists/the state of
having what you need/ in a given society as far as that society develops the qualities of its
members and generates good citizens to suit the constitution of a State. Accordingly, creating a
good citizen has been the prior concern of many States, including Ethiopia. This is because good
citizens are made not born.
Over the years, different terms have been used in an attempt to capture and describe the
educational experiences/citizenship education that deal with the task of developing democratic
minded citizens. The subject assumed different names and purposes depending on countries’
ideologies and thus the definition of the discipline varies across States. Terms such as Right
Education (in South Africa), Citizenship Education (in United States of America and Germany),
Citizenship and Character Education (in Singapore), Civics and Ethical Education (in Ethiopia)
are just a few examples that can be found in the literature.
What is civics/citizenship education?
Different writers define it in many ways.
The most cited definition of civic education is an education that studies about the rights and
responsibilities of citizens of a politically organized group of people.
 Patrick (1986) defines civic education as the knowledge of the constitutions, the
principles, values, history and application to contemporary life.
 Citizenship education can be understood as the knowledge, means, and activities
designed to encourage students to participate actively in democratic life, accepting
and exercising their rights and responsibilities.
 United Nations Development Program (UNDP, 2004) defines civic education as a way
of learning for effective participation in a democratic and development process.
 2

 Aggarwal (1982) linked civic education to the development of ideas, habits, behaviors
and useful attitudes in the individual which enables him to be a useful member of
the society.
 Still the subject matter can be also defined as the process of helping young people
acquire and learn to use the skills, knowledge, and attitudes that will prepare them
to be competent and responsible citizens throughout their lives.
Actually, these different concepts and meanings were used to differentiate between a maximal
and a minimal civic education.
What is minimal concept of civic education?
It is content-led, teacher-based, whole-class teaching and examination-based assessment.
What is maximal concept of civic education?
The minimal concept of civic education is comprised of knowledge, values and skills, and aims
to prepare students for active, responsible participation.
Unlike narrow minimalist civic education, it extends learning beyond the curriculum and
classroom to all activities inside and outside school.
What is ethics?
 Ethics is a branch of philosophy that attempts to understand people’s moral beliefs and
actions.
 Ethics is the study of what is morally right and not.
 Ethics, or moral philosophy, considers theories about what human beings are capable of
doing, alongside accounts of what they ought to do if they are to live an ethically good
life.
 Ethics also explores the meaning and the ranking of different ethical values, such as
honesty, autonomy, equality and justice, and it considers ethical quandaries/dilemma that
human beings face in the course of living their own independent but, also, socially
interdependent lives.
 Ethics may share common ground with the law, religious belief, popular opinion,
professional codes and the dictates of authority figures, but it is also broader than all of
these and offers a set of tools and values against which their appropriateness can be
evaluated.
 3

Occasionally the term ethics is used interchangeably with morals. Business or medical ethics,
for example, is generally synonymous with morals. Although this is acceptable, a precise usage
would apply the term’s morals and moral to the conduct itself, while the terms ethics and
ethical would refer to the study of moral conduct or to the code that one follows.
Ethicists often disagree about the nature of those standards and desirable qualities and follow
different paths in establishing standards and discovering which qualities are desirable. For
purposes of understanding, though, we can view ethics as divided into two fields; normative
ethics and non-normative ethics
Generally, Ethics is:
1. The critical examination and evaluation of what is good, evil, right and wrong in human
conduct (Guy, 2001).
2. A specific set of principles, values and guidelines for a particular group or organization (Guy,
2001).
3. Ethics is the study of goodness, right action and moral responsibility, it asks what choices and
ends we ought to pursue and what moral principles should govern our pursuits and choices
(Madden, 2000).
What is Morality?
Of course, morality is a complex concept. Though it is one of most frequently used terms, it can
mean different things to different people. Morality is a commonly used word in most cultures.
 Morality can be viewed from different perspectives and let us start with the simple
definition of the word itself.
 Morality from a dictionary definition (from Latin moralitas ―manner, character, proper
behavior) refers to the concept of human action which pertains to matters of right and
wrong also referred to as good and evil.
 It can be used to mean the generally accepted code of conduct in a society, or within a
subgroup of society.
 Lord St John of said that “the life of a great society depends on a common possession
of moral principles. If those principles disappear the society disappears.
That is why people are so concerned about this at a time of very great moral change, that one of
the fundamental pillars of our society is being shaken.
Specific relationship between law and morality
 4

Law is essentially a set of rules and principles created and enforced by the state whereas morals
are a set of beliefs, values and principles and behavior standards which are enforced and created
by society.
Law and morality are intimately related to each other. Laws are generally based on the moral
principles of society. Both regulate the conduct of the individual in society. They influence each
other to a great extent. Laws, to be effective, must represent the moral ideas of the people. But
good laws sometimes serve to rouse the moral conscience of the people and create and maintain
such conditions as may encourage the growth of morality.
The precise areas of relationship between law and morality can be stated in the following
manner:
1) Law is related to morality in the setting forth of those virtues that are related to the common
good. This does not mean that positive human law should prohibit all vices nor command all
virtues: rather it prohibits only the grosser failings of mankind which threaten the very survival
of society and commands those virtues which can be ordained by human means to the common
good.
2) Law is related to morality by the moral obligation imposed, i.e., by the necessity of an act in
relation to a necessary end-since law as the command of practical reason necessarily implies an
obligation. Thus obligation flows from the essential notion of law as an effective dictate/order of
practical reason, i.e., a connection of some necessity between the act commanded and the end for
which that act is commanded. However, positive human laws' obligation is not in that same
manner as morality's obligation.
3) Law is related to morality in as much as law is subject to and cannot contradict moral
principles, i.e., natural moral law.
4) Law is related to morality in as much as both stem and are directed by the same source:
practical reason or prudence. A keener insight into this particular relationship can be ascertained
by determining the nature of politics; politics is a human work of art, i.e., a work of experience
and prudence-and as prudence, politics is intrinsically related to ethics.
5) Law is related to morality in as much as justice is a moral concept which is meaningless
outside the area of morality.
 5

The Importance/Goal of Moral and Civic education

The need to instill citizens about their rights and duties: The two phrases rights and duties co-
exist with each other (they are termed as the two sides of the same coin) that regulate the values
and behavioral patterns of an individual.
The Need for Participant Political Culture: political culture is the set of attitudes, beliefs, and
sentiments which give order and meaning to a political process and which provide the underlying
assumptions and rules that govern behavior in the political system. Political culture as the norms
of conduct both of and between the various political actors operating in society, together with the
concomitant expectations and understandings of the rights and responsibilities of citizens,
representatives, public servants and so on.
Political culture shapes what people expect of their political system, what they see as
possibilities for their own action, and what rights and responsibilities the various actors are
perceived to have. Generally, political culture defines the roles which an individual may
play in the political process.
Almond and Verba (1963) construct three political cultures: parochial cultures, subject
cultures, and participant cultures.
In parochial cultures citizens have low cognitive, affective, and evaluative orientation
regarding the political systems, government powers and functions and even their privileges and
duties. In such political culture, the role of citizens in the political sphere of their countries is
insignificant since individuals thinks of their families’ advantage as the only goal to pursue. In
subject cultures, there is high cognitive, affective, and evaluative orientation towards the political
system and policy outputs, but orientations towards input objects (like political parties) and the
self as active participants are minimal. Thus, orientation towards the system and its outputs is
channeled via a relatively detached, passive relationship on the part of the citizen.
Subject cultures are most compatible with centralized, authoritarian political structures.
In participant cultures, members of society have high cognitive, affective, and evaluative
orientation to the political system, the input objects, the policy outputs, and recognize the self as
an active participant in the polity/state. Largely, participant cultures are most compatible with
democratic political structures because the qualities and attitudes of citizens determine the health
and stability of a country’s democracy. Democracy can only thrives/increase when citizens
 6

understand and participate actively in civic and political life from the perspective that
participation is important, but informed and educated participation is more important.
The Need for Relevant Knowledge, Skills and Positive Attitudes: Relevant knowledge is a
type of knowledge which is useful in dealing with a particular problem at a period of time.
However, knowledge would remain inert knowledge unless it is functional or put into practice to
achieve a certain goal. Still knowledge would remain infirm/weak if the person is not equipped
with right attitudes and requisite skills which are basic to enable him/her perform his/her role as
a credible member of a society.
The issue of fostering intercultural societies. The recognition of cultural diversity is certainly
meritorious, but civics and ethics education could move a step forward by appealing to the notion
of inter-culturalism, which explicitly asserts the need for relationship, dialogue, reciprocity and
interdependence.
The issue of inclusiveness. Civics and ethics as a subject is thought to nurture new and inclusive
relations and practices in both public and private spaces that recognize gender differences while
ensuring inclusiveness and equity.
It should also go beyond the idea of quotas for women in formal politics, or strategies to
empower women to play male politics. Hence, promoting democracy and inclusiveness in public
spaces as well as in families, workplaces, unions, and other institutions become the area of focus
of civics and ethics.
Moral and Civics Education is based on and seeks to promote in students’ core moral, ethical,
democratic, and educational values, such as:
 Respect for life
 Respect for reasoning
 Fairness
 Concern for the welfare of others
 Respect for diversity
 Peaceful resolution of conflict
 7

Chapter Two: Approaches to Ethics

Normative Ethics
1.What is normative ethics?
Normative ethics;
 Offers theories or accounts of the best way to live. These theories evaluate actions in a
systematic way, i.e., they may focus on outcomes or duties or motivation as a means of
justifying human conduct.
 Includes ethical theories or approaches such as utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics,
principlism, narrative ethics and feminist ethics.
Normative ethics poses questions of the following kind:
 Are there general principles or rules that we could follow which distinguish between
right and wrong? Or:
 Are there virtues and/or relationships that we can nurture, in order to behave well?
Teleological Ethics (Consequentialist)
What is teleological/Consequentialist ethics?
It is referred as the end justifies the means. It believes in purpose, ends or goals of an action, it
stresses that the consequences of an action determine the morality or immorality of a given
action. Which means an action is judged as right or wrong, moral or immoral depending on what
happens because of it. One may have the best intention or follow the highest moral principles but
if the result, moral act is harmful, or bad it must be judged as morally or ethically wrong act.
It should also be noticed, however, that teleologists may hold various views about what is good
in the non-moral sense. Teleologists have often been hedonists, identifying the good with
pleasure and evil with pain, and concluding that the right course or rule of action is that which
produces at least as great a balance of pleasure over pain as any alternative would.
But they may be and have sometimes been non-hedonists, identifying the good with power,
knowledge, self-realization, perfection etc. This fact must not be forgotten when we are
evaluating the teleological theory of obligation.
It would also be possible, of course, to adopt teleological theories intermediate between ethical
egoism and utilitarianism, for example, theories that say the right act or rule is one conducive to
the greatest balance of good over evil for a certain group one's nation, class, family, or race. A
pure ethical altruist might even contend that the right act or rule is the one that most promotes
 8

the good of other people. We shall, however, limit our coming discussion to egoism and
universalism.
Ethical Egoism
Since very early in western intellectual history, the view point that humans are not built to look
out for other people’s interests has surfaced regularly. Some scholars even hold that proper moral
conduct consist of looking out for number one, ‖ period. These viewpoints are known as ethical
egoism respectively.
This theory is called ethical egoism simply because it is an ethical theory, a normative theory
about how we ought to behave. The theory implies that we ought to be selfish. Or, to put it more
gently, we ought to be self-interested. Calling the theory ethical‖ does not suggest that there
might be a decent way to be selfish; it just means that ethical egoism is a theory that advocates
egoism as a moral rule.
You should look after yourself
Ethical egoist insisted that if you don ‘t take advantage of a situation, you are foolish. The claim
that it makes good sense to look after yourself, and morality is a result of that self –interest.
More formally the argument is this:
(1) We all always seek to maximize our own self-interest.
(2) If one cannot do an act, one has no obligation to do that act (ought to imply can).
(3) Altruistic acts involve putting other peoples’ interests ahead of our own (definition of
altruism).
(4) But, altruism contradicts psychological egoism and so is impossible.
(5) Therefore, altruistic acts are never morally obligatory.
Utilitarianism: Producing the best consequences
We have already examined one type of teleological ethics: ethical egoism, the view that the act
that produces the most amount of good for the agent is the right act. Egoism is teleological ethics
narrowed to the agent himself or herself. Unlike ethical egoism, utilitarianism is a universal
teleological system. It calls for the maximization of goodness in society that is, the greatest
goodness for the greatest number and not merely the good of the agent.
Classic Utilitarianism
The classical expressions of utilitarianism, though, appear in the writings of two English
philosophers and social reformers Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806–
 9

1873). They were the nonreligious ancestors of the twentieth-century secular humanists,
optimistic about human nature and our ability to solve our problems without recourse to God.
Engaged in a struggle for legal as well as moral reform, they were impatient with the rule-bound
character of law and morality in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Great Britain and tried to
make the law serve human needs and interests.
Jeremy Bentham: Quantity over Quality
There are two main features of utilitarianism, both of which Bentham articulated:
 The consequentialist principle (or its teleological aspect): states that the rightness or
wrongness of an act is determined by the goodness or badness of the results that flow
from it. It is the end, not the means that counts; the end justifies the means. and
 The utility principle (or its hedonic aspect): states that the only thing that is good in
itself is some specific type of state (for example, pleasure, happiness, welfare).
Hedonistic utilitarianism views pleasure as the sole good and pain as the only evil. An act is right
if it either brings about more pleasure than pain or prevents pain, and an act is wrong if it either
brings about more pain than pleasure or prevents pleasure from occurring. Bentham invented a
scheme for measuring pleasure and pain that he called the hedonic calculus: The quantitative
score for any pleasure or pain experience is obtained by summing the seven aspects of a
pleasurable or painful experience: its intensity, duration, certainty, nearness, fruitfulness, purity,
and extent.
John Stuart Mill: Quality over Quantity
Mill argued that the higher, or more refined, pleasures are superior to the lower ones: It is better
to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool
satisfied. Humans are the kind of creatures who require more to be truly happy. They want the
lower pleasures, but they also want deep friendship, intellectual ability, culture, the ability to
create and appreciate art, knowledge, and wisdom.
Mill is clearly pushing the boundaries of the concept of pleasure‖ by emphasizing higher qualities
such as knowledge, intelligence, freedom, friendship, love, and health. In fact, one might even
say that his litmus test for happiness really has little to do with actual pleasure and more to do
with a non-hedonic cultivated state of mind.
Act- And Rule-Utilitarianism
 10

There are two classical types of utilitarianism: act- and rule-utilitarianism. In applying the
principle of utility, act-utilitarians, such as Bentham, say that ideally we ought to apply the
principle to all of the alternatives open to us at any given moment. We may define act-
utilitarianism in this way:
Act-utilitarianism argues that an act is right if and only if it results in as much good as any
available alternative. One practical problem with act-utilitarianism is that we cannot do the
necessary calculations to determine which act is the correct one in each case, for often we must
act spontaneously and quickly. So rules of thumb are of practical importance for example, in
general, don’t lie, keep your promises etc.
Rule-utilitarianism: An act is right if and only if it is required by a rule that is itself a member
of a set of rules whose acceptance would lead to greater utility for society than any available
alternative. Human beings are rule-following creatures. We learn by adhering to the rules of a
given subject, whether it is speaking a language, driving a car, dancing, writing an essay, rock
climbing, or cooking. We want to have a set of action guiding rules by which to live.
Criticism of the Ends Justifying Immoral Means
Chief among the criticisms of utilitarianism is that utilitarian ends might justify immoral means.
There are many dastardly things that we can do in the name of maximizing general happiness:
deceit, torture, slavery, even killing off ethnic minorities. As long as the larger populace benefits,
these actions might be justified. The general problem can be laid out in this argument:
(1) If a moral theory justifies actions that we universally deem impermissible, then that moral
theory must be rejected.
(2) Utilitarianism justifies actions that we universally deem impermissible.
(3) Therefore, utilitarianism must be rejected.
Generally, utilitarianism is a moral theory which takes into account how the consequences of an
act will affect all the parties involved. Moral rightness depends on the consequences for all
affected people or sentient beings. The fundamental principle of utilitarianism is the principle of
utility:
The principle of utility
 The morally right action is the one that produces the best overall consequences with
regard to the utility or welfare of all the affected parties.
 11

 Jeremy Bentham ‘s slogan: The right act or policy is the one that causes the greatest
happiness of the greatest number– that is, maximize the total utility or welfare of the
majority of all the affected parties.
Altruism
In altruism an action is right if the consequences of that action are favorable to all except the
actor. Butler argued that we have an inherent psychological capacity to show benevolence to
others. This view is called psychological altruism and maintains that at least some of our
actions are motivated by instinctive benevolence.
Psychological altruism holds that all human action is necessarily other centered and other
motivated. A parallel analysis of psychological altruism results in opposing conclusions to
psychological egoism, and again arguably the theory is just as closed as psychological egoism.
Deontological Ethics (Non- Consequentialist)
Deontology: What duty asks of us?
What makes a right act right? The utilitarian or consequentialist answer to this question is that
it is the good outcome of an act which makes it right. Moral rightness or wrongness is calculated
by determining the extent to which the action promotes values such as pleasure, well-being,
happiness, etc. To this extent, the end justifies the means. In many respects, deontological moral
theory is diametrically the opposite of utilitarianism
It is referred as the means justifies the end‖. It is coined as deontic. This is a theory that the
rightness or wrongness of moral action is determined, at least partly with reference to formal
rules of conduct rather than consequences or result of an action
The first advocator of deontological theory was Immanuel Kant,an influential German
philosopher in the age of Enlightenment.
Kant believes that human beings are endowed with the mental faculty to reason out. Reason
help them to distinguish moral acts from the immoral ones. The problem comes doing what is
right.
He also believes that moral duties and rights are inherent to human nature regardless of
particular culture.
It is an emphasis on the intentions, motives, moral principles or performance of duty rather than
results, as the sign of right action/morality and immorality. It is a duty based and according to
 12

this theory, the consequences or results of our action have nothing to do with their rightness or
wrongness.
Performance of One’s Own Duty
The 17th century German philosopher Samuel Pufendorf, who classified dozens of duties under
three headings: duties to God, duties to oneself and duties to others.
Concerning our duties towards God, he argued that there are two kinds: (1) a theoretical duty
to know the existence and nature of God, and (2) a practical duty to both inwardly and outwardly
worship God.
Concerning our duties towards oneself; these are also of two sorts: (1) duties of the soul,
which involve developing one's skills and talents, and (2) duties of the body, which involve not
harming our bodies, as we might through gluttony or drunkenness, and not killing oneself.
Concerning our duties towards others; Pufendorf divides these between absolute duties, which
are universally binding on people, and conditional duties, which are the result of contracts
between people.
Absolute duties are of three sorts: (1) avoid wronging others; (2) treat people as equals, and (3)
promote the good of others.
Conditional duties involve various types of agreements, the principal one of which is the duty is
to keep one's promises
The Divine Command Theory
According to this view, called the divine command theory (DCT), ethical principles are simply
the commands of God. They derive their validity from God ‘s commanding them, and they mean
commanded by God. ‖ Without God, there would be no universally valid morality. We can
analyze the DCT into three separate theses:
1. Morality (that is, rightness and wrongness) originates with God.
2.Moral rightness simply means willed by God, ‖ and moral wrongness means ―being against
the will of God.
3. Because morality essentially is based on divine will, not on independently existing reasons for
action, no further reasons for action are necessary.
Rights Theory
A second duty-based approach to ethics is rights theory
 13

Most generally, a "right" is a justified claim against another person's behavior - such as my right
to not be harmed by you. Rights and duties are related in such a way that the rights of one person
imply the duties of another person. John Locke the most influential early account of rights theory
is that of 17th century British philosopher argued that the laws of nature mandate that we should
not harm anyone's life, health, liberty or possessions.
Natural rights are given to us by God.
Following John Locke, the United States Declaration of Independence authored by Thomas
Jefferson recognizes three foundational rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Other specific rights are deduced from these rights including the rights of property, movement,
speech, and religious expression.
There are four features traditionally associated with moral rights.
 First, rights are natural insofar as they are not invented or created by governments.
 Second, they are universal insofar as they do not change from country to country.
 Third, they are equal in the sense that rights are the same for all people, irrespective of
gender, race, or handicap.
 Fourth, they are inalienable which means that I cannot hand over my rights to another
person, such as by selling myself into slavery
Kant goes on identifying categorical/ absolute/ moral rules that guides human beings as: Not
Killing, not stealing, not harming Human beings, respecting and treating human beings with
dignity, not lying and the like.
Kant believes that moral duties and rights are inherent to human nature regardless of particular
culture. For him, the fact that human beings are endowed with the mental faculty to think and
reason out things as opposed to other animals which have only instincts.
Kant’s formulation of the categorical imperative:
A. The Principle of Universality
"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it
should become a universal law without contradiction."
The first maxim states that we should choose our 'codes of conduct' only if they serve
perfect / imperfect duty and are good for all
 14

Perfect duties are blameworthy if not met and are the basic requirements for a human
being. According to his reasoning, we first have a perfect duty not to act by maxims that
result in logical contradictions when we attempt to universalize them.
Example Not Killing, not stealing, not harming Human beings, respecting and
treating human beings with dignity, not lying and the like. Imperfect duties are those
that do not achieve blame, rather they receive praise if completed; they are
circumstantial duties such as cultivating talent. It is the subjective preferences of
humankind, this duty is not as strong as a perfect duty, but it is still morally binding.
Unlike perfect duties, you do not attract blame when you fail to complete an imperfect
duty but you shall receive praise when you complete. It is beyond the basic duty.
B, The Principle of Humanity as an End, Never as Merely a Means
The second maxim states that we should not use humanity of ourselves or others as a
means to an end.
“Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person
of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.’’
Every rational action must set before itself not only a principle, but also an end.
Most ends are of a subjective kind, because they need only be pursued if they are in line
with some particular hypothetical imperative that a person may choose to adopt.
C. The Principle of Autonomy
The third maxim states that we should consider ourselves to be members in the universal
realm of ends. Therefore, every rational being must so act as if he were through his
maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends.
Everything we do should not only be of benefit to ourselves, but benefit each other
universally.
"Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of
another, always at the same time as an end and never merely as a means. “The main
problem with the categorical imperative is its rigidity.
The famous example that illustrates this is that of a crazed axe-murderer coming to your front
door and asking you where your children are. You could lie – many would say you should lie –
but imagine if everyone in the entire world lied all the time. That would not be a nice place to
 15

live in, so the categorical imperative says you can ‘t lies. You have to tell the axe-murderer the
truth, so he can go and kill your children.
Ross’s Prima Facie Duties or Moral Guidelines
A fourth and more recent duty-based theory is that by British philosopher W.D. Ross,
which emphasizes prima facie duties.
The term prima facie means at a first sight‖ or on the surface. ‖ By prima facie duties,
Ross means duties that dictate what we should do when other moral factors are not
considered. Stated another way, prima facie duties are duties that generally obligate us;
that is, they ordinarily impose a moral obligation but may not in a particular case because
of circumstances. An actual duty is the action that one ought to perform after
considering and weighing all the prima facie duties involved.
An example of a prima facie duty is the duty to keep promises. Unless stronger moral
considerations override, one ought to keep a promise made.
We might, sometimes, be forced to violate some moral principles for the sake of the good
of the whole.
However, Ross ‘s lists the following categories of prima facie duties is much shorter,
which he believes reflects our actual moral convictions:
Duties of Fidelity: the duty to keep promises and the obligation not to lie.
Duties of Reparation: This is a duty to make up for the injuries one has done to others.
Duties of Gratitude: the duty to thank those who help us.
Duties of Justice: The duty of justice requires that one act in such a way that one
distributes benefits and burdens fairly.
Duties of Beneficence: the duty to improve the conditions of others.
Duties of Self-improvement: The duty of self-improvement is to act so as to promote
one ‘s own good.
Duties of Non-maleficence: The duty of non-injury (also known as non-maleficence) is
the duty not to harm others physically or psychologically.
Virtue Ethics
 16

What is Virtue Ethics?

Western analytical moral philosophy, used to distinguish a normative ethical theory focused on
the virtues, or moral character, from others such as deontology (or contractarianism) and
consequentialism.
Virtue ethics is currently one of three major approaches in normative ethics.
A virtue is an excellent trait of character.
It may, initially, be identified as the one that emphasizes the virtues, or moral character, in
contrast to the approach that emphasizes duties or rules (deontology) or that emphasizes the
consequences of actions (consequentialism).
It may, initially, be identified as the one that emphasizes the virtues, or moral character, in
contrast to the approach that emphasizes duties or rules (deontology) or that emphasizes the
consequences of actions (consequentialism).
To possess a virtue is to be a certain sort of person with a certain complex mindset.
A significant aspect of this mindset is the wholehearted acceptance of a distinctive range of
considerations as reasons for action.
Imagine a case in which it is agreed by every sort of theorist that I should, say, help someone
in need. A deontologist will emphasize the fact that in offering help, I will be acting in
accordance with a moral rule or principle such as Do unto others as you would be done by‖; a
consequentiality will point out that the consequences of helping will maximize well-being; and
a virtue ethicist will emphasize the fact that providing help would be charitable or benevolent –
charity and benevolence being virtues.
The concept of a virtue is the concept of something that makes its possessor good: a virtuous
person is a morally good, excellent or admirable person who acts and feels, as she should.
The ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle, (384-322 B.C.) first wrote a detailed discussion of
virtue morality in the Nichomachean Ethics.
Since 1958 philosophers such as Philippa Foot, Alasdair MacIntyre and Elizabeth
Anscombe,They and many others became disillusioned with the promises of mainstream
theories. They argue that how we ought to live could be much more adequately answered by a
virtue-based theory than in terms of calculating consequences or obeying rules
The standard of excellence was determined from within the particular society and accountability
was determined by one’s role within society.
 17

Examples of virtue ethics

Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence
are all examples of virtues.
The difference between virtue ethics and deontological ethics
In other words, deontology falls within the domain of moral theories that guide and assess our
choices of what we ought to do (deontic theories), in contrast to those that guide and assess what
kind of person we are and should be.
Non-Normative Ethics/Meta-ethics
What is Meta-ethics?
Metaethics is not about what people ought to do. It is about what they are doing when they talk
about what they ought to do.
In metaethics, we are concerned not with questions which are the province of normative ethics
like 'Should I give to famine relief?' or 'Should I return the wallet I found in the street?' but with
questions about questions like these.
Generally, Meta-ethics:
• Examines the meaning of moral terms and concepts and the relationships between these
concepts.
• Explores where moral values, such as personhood and autonomy come from.
• Considers the difference between moral values and other kinds of values.
• Examines the way in which moral claims are justified.
 18

Chapter Three:
Ethical Decision Making and Moral Judgments
3.1. How Can We Make Ethical Decisions and Actions?
The ethical nature of our action and decision, however, is very much
dependent upon our notion of ``Good’ and ``Bad, `` Right and`` wrong``.
There are two Goods: - Instrumental & intrinsic good. We consider good or
desirable for their result-for what they lead to- is Instrumental. The latter
one is which we consider good not because of what they lead to but because
of what they are in themselves because we value these things for what they
are. Also there are things which are instrumentally bad and intrinsically bad.
Some things can fulfill both qualities. Genital mutilations, Murder … are bad
practice.

The 1st key task of ethical reasoning is to: - analyze and critically consider the values we hold and the
claims we make in relation to the perceived obligations that we might have towards one another
(please refer the module for further understanding). The 2nd key task of is to evaluate the
adequacy of reasons that we give for our actions. The aim of ethics is to offer tools for thinking
about difficult problems instead to take the high moral ground and tell people what to do, but,
rather, to offer tools for thinking about difficult problems.
Good ethical thinking purposefully seeks out the grey in questions and concerns in order to
acknowledge the diversity and complexity of roles, situations and circumstances that arise in
human life and relationships. As complex as ethical situations may be, however, there is still an
obligation on everyone involved in ethically-challenging situations to resolve any problems that
arise in the sincerest, reasonable and collaborative way possible.
3.1.1. Ethical Principles and Values of Moral Judgments
The branch of philosophical study that focuses on ‘ethics’ is concerned with studying and/or
building up a coherent set of ‘rules’ or principles by which people ought to live. The theoretical
study of ethics is not normally something that many people would regard as being necessary in
order for them to conduct their everyday activities. In place of systematically examined ethical
frameworks, most people instead carry around a useful set of day-to-day ‘rules of thumb’ that
influence and govern their behavior; commonly, these include rules such as ‘it is wrong to steal’,
‘it is right to help people in need’, and so on. But sometimes the vicissitudes and complexities of
 19

life mean that these simple rules are sometimes put to the test. Consider the idea that it is wrong
to kill. Does this mean that capital punishment is wrong? Is it wrong to kill animals? Is killing in
self-defense wrong? Is the termination of pregnancy wrong? Is euthanasia wrong?
We need to examine these questions in more detail; and we need theoretical frameworks that can
help us to analyze complex problems and to find rational, coherent solutions to those problems.
3.1.2. Moral intuitions and Critical Reasoning
The study of ethics involves reasoning about our feelings, involves making sense of and rationalizing our
intuitions about what is ‘right’ or ‘good’. Empathy provides us with a sense of what others are feeling and
may thereby allow us to identify with other people. Empathy therefore gives us what Traer (2013)
refers to our moral sentiments; and ethical reasoning about these sentiments gives us our moral
principles. The integration of these moral sentiments and principles is our conscience. Our moral
conscience, then, is based on emotions, but should also be supported by reason. All societies are
characterized by their own ethical ideas (expressed in terms of attitudes and beliefs) and their customs.
Some of those ethics are formalized in the laws and regulations of a society, nation or state. Such customs
and laws can influence the consciences and the moral sentiments of those living in a society , as
individuals acquire ideas and attitudes from their families and from their wider society.
Philosophical ethics, however, asks us to take a step back from these influences and instead to
reflect critically on our sentiments and attitudes.
3.1.2.1 Rationalization
Studying ethics, then, involves attempting to find valid reasons for the moral arguments that we make.
Most people already have general ideas – or what philosophers call ‘intuitions’ or ‘presumptions’ –
about what they think is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. But a philosophical approach to ethics requires people to think
critically about the moral ideas that they hold, to support or refute those ideas with convincing arguments,
and to be able to articulate and explain the reasons and assumptions on which those arguments are based .
In moral philosophy, an argument is about the reasons underlying our beliefs or opinions. The real value
of discussing and debating ethical questions is to provide carefully considered arguments to support our
ideas, and to allow for rational – and deeper – understanding of the reasons underlying our beliefs, ideas
and attitudes. One common fault with many arguments about what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ – and – involves
what is known as a rationalization. A rationalization occurs when we use what at first glance seem to be
rational or credible motives to cover up our true (and perhaps unconscious) motives.

3.1.2.2 Types of reasoning

Three forms of critical reasoning.
 20

 ‘Reasoning by analogy explains one thing by comparing it to something else that is similar, although
also different. In a good analogy, the similarity outweighs the dissimilarity and is clarifying. For
instance, animals are like and unlike humans, as humans are also animals.
 Deductive reasoning applies a principle to a situation.
 ‘Inductive reasoning involves providing evidence to support a hypothesis.
3.1.2.3. Ethics and Religious Faith
For many people, ’morality and religious faith go hand in hand’. Some people view actions as being right
or wrong in terms of divine commandment unlike some moral philosophers (rational reflection). We may
insist that moral principles and decisions should be justified by rational arguments, and thus consideration
of religious arguments should not be excluded from the study of ethics. Whether or not one personally
chooses to accept faith-based arguments as valid within ethical discussions is a decision that requires
careful consideration.
3.1.2.4. Testing moral arguments
There are three main ways of testing a moral argument.
(1) Factual accuracy. We should not derive an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’. Means we cannot say that something
is wrong or right simply based on how things are.
(2) Consistency. One can only argue that it is morally wrong to kill one person and yet morally
acceptable to kill another, if one can demonstrate that there is a morally relevant difference
between the two individuals (Please review example on Module). Otherwise your arguments
are inconsistent.
(3) Good will. This is the most difficult criterion to quantify. This involves resorting to our intuitions and
emotions, which are notoriously difficult to integrate with rigorous theoretical debate
3.2. Thinking Ethically: A framework for Moral Decision Making
The first step in analyzing moral issues is Get the facts and resolving an ethical issue also requires an
appeal to values. Ethics deals with right and wrong, it is not a discipline that always leads everyone to the
same conclusions. Deciding an ethical issue can be equally difficult for conservatives and liberals.
Different approaches to values to deal with moral issues are:
A. Fairness and Justice Approach
“Equals should be treated equally and unequal’s unequally” (Aristotle). Mainly focuses on how fairly or
unfairly our actions distribute benefits and burdens among the members of a group. Both Favoritism and
discrimination are unjust and wrong. The principle states: “Treat people the same unless there are
morally relevant differences between them. Happiness is the Highest Good for Aristotle which is the
ultimate goal. Happiness could not be found only in pleasure or only in fame and honor, but also finds
 21

happiness "by ascertaining the specific function of man". A human's function is to do what makes it
human, to be good at what sets it apart from everything else: the ability to reason or logos. Depending on
how well he did this, Aristotle said humans belonged to one of four categories: the virtuous, the
continent, the incontinent and the vicious.
B. The Common Good Approach
 Suggests that the interlocking relationships of society are the basis of ethical reasoning and that
respect and compassion for all others.
 Calls attention to the common conditions that are important to the welfare of everyone. The social
policies, social systems, institutions, and environments on which we depend are beneficial to all. The
principle states; “What is ethical is what advances the common good.”
C. The Rights Approach:
Focuses on the individual’s right to choose for her or himself. People are not objects to be
manipulated; it is a violation of human dignity to use people in ways they do not freely choose.
Many different but related rights exist besides this basic one. These other rights can be thought
of as different aspects of the basic right to be treated as we choose. Among these rights are:
 The Right to the Truth, The Right of Privacy, the Right not to be injured, The Right to what is agreed
(Please refer the Module for details).
In deciding whether an action is moral or immoral using this approach, we must ask, does the action
respect the moral rights of everyone? Actions are wrong to the extent they violate the rights of
individuals; the more serious the violation, the more wrongful the action.
3.3. To Whom or What Does Morality Apply?
In discussing the application of morality, four aspects may be considered: religious morality,
morality and nature, individual morality, and social morality.
 Religious Morality: It refers to a human being in relationship to a supernatural being or beings .
 Morality and Nature: It refers to a human being in relationship to nature. Some see nature as being
valuable only for the good of humanity, but many others have come to see it as a good in itself,
worthy of moral consideration.
 Individual Morality:
It refers to individuals in relation to themselves and to an individual code of morality that may or
may not be sanctioned by any society or religion. A person may or may not perform some
particular act, because he himself thinks it is right or wrong from within his own conscience.
 22

 Social Morality:
Social morality concerns a human being in relation to other human beings. It is probably the most
important aspect of morality, in that it cuts across all of the other aspects and is found in more ethical
systems than any of the others.
3.4. Who is Morally/Ethically Responsible?
Morality pertains to human beings and only to human beings; all else is speculation. The world‘s
history, only human beings can be moral or immoral, and therefore only human beings should be
held morally responsible for their actions and behavior. We do not hold a wolf morally
responsible for killing a sheep, or an eagle morally responsible for killing a chicken. Therefore,
when we use the terms moral and ethical, we are using them in reference only to human beings.
3.4.1. Moral Judgments
It refers to deciding what is right and what is wrong in human relations. Individuals approve and
condemn of some acts and call them ―right‖ or ―good/ Wrong or evil. Moral judgments always
have to do with the actions of human beings and, in particular, with voluntary actions - those
actions freely chosen. Human beings do not responsible for involuntary actions. Moral
judgments are evaluative because they place value on things or relation or human actions;
determine what is right or wrong, good or bad. They are also normative because they evaluate or
assess the moral worth of something based on some norms or standards. In judging conduct or
action, we have to consider motives, means, and consequences and sometimes the situation.
1. Motives: refers to the intention or why an action is done. In Kantian thinking the seat of
moral worth is the individual’s will, and the good will acts out of a sense of duty.
2. Means: an agency, instrument, or method used to attain an end. There is a danger in
proposing that any means may be used, provided the end is good, or that ―the end justifies
the means. Once chosen, the means become part of the general effect of an act.
3. Consequences: Consequences are the effects or results of a moral decision based on a value.
In general, society judges conduct ―right‖ if it proceeds from a good motive, through the use
of the best available means, to consequences that are good, instead. We rarely approve an
action when the results are evil or wrong.
4. The Moral Situation: A moral situation involves moral agents - human beings who act, are
empowered to make choices, and consciously make decisions. As moral agents, demands are
made on us and place us under obligations: we have both duties and rights. We are faced with
 23

moral alternatives, and we can better weigh those alternatives when we have an
understanding of the ingredients of the moral situation.
3.4.2. What Makes an Action Moral?
Philosophically, it refers to an action which comes within the scope of morality, that is, an
action which is morally significant either in positive or Negative way. The following are
features that make an action moral: A moral act involves an agent, A moral act involves
intention, A moral act affects others.
Generally, a moral action is one which:
 Is performed by agents, creatures that are capable of free choice/ free will
 Is the result of intention; the action was done on purpose with a particular motive
 Has a significant consequence on others in respect of harm or benefits it brings about?
3.5. Why Should Human Beings Be Moral?
There can be no society without moral regulation; man is man only because he lives in a society;
take away from man all that has a social origin and nothing is left but an animal compare with
other animals. We should be moral because being moral is following the rules designed to
overrule self-interest whenever it is in the interest of every one alike that everyone should set
aside his interest. John Hospers
A. Argument from Enlightened Self-Interest
One can certainly argue on a basis of enlightened self-interest that it is, at the very least,
generally better to be good rather than bad and to create a world and society that is good rather
than one that is bad. An individual member of the group could say, ―it‘s in my self-interest to
do good rather than bad because I stand to benefit if I do and also because I could be ostracized
or punished if I don‘t.
B. Argument from Tradition and Law
Traditions and laws, established over a long period of time, govern the behavior of human
beings, and because these traditions and laws urge human beings to be moral rather than
immoral, there are good reasons for being so. Don‘t we all remember being told we should or
should not do something because it was or was not in our own self-interest, because God said it
was right or wrong, or because it was the way we were supposed to act in our family, school,
society, and world?
C. Common Human Needs
 24

In order to satisfy these needs (love, peace, friendship, creativity, etc..) people must establish and
follow moral principles that encourage them to cooperate with one another. Morality is not of
course identical with following self-interest. If it were, there could be no conflict between
morality and self-interest and no point in having rules overriding self-interest. John Hospers.

“Why be moral?” Among the more common answers are these:

 Behaving morally is a matter of self-respect.
 People won’t like us if we behave immorally.
 Society punishes immoral behavior.
 God tells us to be moral.
 Parents need to be moral role models for their children.

There are two distinct components to the question “Why be moral?”

1) Why does society need moral rules?
2) Why should I be moral?

From Hobbes’s perspective, morality consists of a set of rules such that, if nearly everyone
follows them, then nearly everyone will flourish. These rules restrict our freedom but promote
greater freedom and wellbeing. More specifically, the five social benefits of establishing and
following moral rules accomplish the following:
a) Keep society from falling apart.
b) Reduce human suffering.
c) Promote human flourishing.
d) Resolve conflicts of interest in just and orderly ways.
e) Assign praise and blame, reward and punishment, and guilt.
All these benefits have in common the fact that morality is a social activity: It has to do with
society, not the individual in isolation. Morality is thus a set of rules that enable us to reach our
collective goals.
 25

Chapter Four: State, Government and Citizenship

Understanding State
Defining State
 The term ‘state’ has been used to refer to a bewildering range of things: a collection of
institutions, a territorial unit, a philosophical idea, an instrument of coercion or oppression,
and so on.
 The state has been understood in four quite different ways; from an idealist, a functionalist,
an organizational and an international perspective.
 The idealist approach to the state is most clearly reflected in the writings of Hegel. Hegel
identified three moments of social existence: the family, civil society and the state. Within
the family, he argued, children or elderly relatives. In contrast, civil society was seen as a
sphere of ‘universal egoism’ in which individuals place their own interests before those of
others. Hegel conceived of the state as an ethical community underpinned by mutual
sympathy – ‘universal altruism’
 Functionalist approaches to the state focus on the role or purpose of state institutions. The
central function of the state is invariably seen as the maintenance of social
 The organizational view defines the state as the apparatus of government in its broadest
sense. The state comprises the various institutions of government: the bureaucracy, the
military, the police, the courts, and the social security system and so on; it can be identified
with the entire ‘body politic’
 The international approach to the state views it primarily as an actor on the world stage;
indeed, as the basic ‘unit’ of international politics. The classic definition of the state in
international law is found in the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of the
State (1933). According to Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention, the state has four
features: a defined territory, permanent population, an effective government and
sovereignty.
1. Population: Since state is a human association, the first essential element that constitutes
it is the people. How much people constitute state? No exact number for criteria. In short,
it is to be noted that without population there can be no state, ‘it goes without saying that
an uninhabited portion of the earth, take in itself, cannot form a state.
 26

2. Defined Territory: There can be no state without a territory of its own. The territory of a
state includes land, water, and airspace; it has maritime jurisdiction extending up to a
distance of three miles, though some states contend for a distance of up to 20 miles.
3. Government: Government is said to be the soul of the state. It implements the will of the
community. It protects the people against conditions of insecurity. The government is the
machinery that terminates the condition of anarchy. The form of government may be
monarchical, aristocratic, oligarchic, democratic, or dictatorial and the like, what really
needed is that if there is no government, there is anarchy and the state is at an end.
4. Sovereignty: It is the highest power of the state that distinguishes it from all other
associations of human beings. Sovereignty, in its simplest sense, is the principle of
absolute and unlimited power. It has two aspects - Internal and External.
In addition to the essential attributes of the state agreed in the 1933, the contemporary political
theorists and the UN considered recognition as the fifth essential attribute of the state. It is to
mean that, for a state to be legal actor in the international stage; other actors (such as other states,
international intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations… etc.) must recognize it as
a state.
Rival Theories of State
There are various rival theories of the state, each of which offers a different account of its
origins, development and impact on society. Andrew Heywood (2013) classified the rival
theories of state into four: the pluralist state, the capitalist state, the leviathan state and the
patriarchal state.
i. The Pluralist State
 The pluralist theory of the state has a very clear liberal lineage.
 It stems from the belief that the state acts as an ‘umpire’ or ‘referee’ in society
 The origins of this view of the state can be traced back to the social-contract theories of
thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. The principal concern of such thinkers
was to examine the grounds of political obligation, the grounds on which the individual is
obliged to obey and respect the state. They argued that the state had arisen out of a voluntary
agreement, or social contract, made by individuals who recognized that only the
establishment of a sovereign power could safeguard them from the insecurity, disorder and
brutality of the state of nature. Without a state, individuals abuse, exploit and enslave one
 27

another; with a state, order and civilized existence are guaranteed and liberty is protected. As
Locke put it, where there is no law there is no freedom.
 In liberal theory, the state is thus seen as a neutral arbiter amongst the competing groups and
individuals in society; it is an ‘umpire’ or ‘referee’ that is capable of protecting each citizen
from the encroachments of fellow citizens.
 Locke, on the other hand, developed a more typically liberal defense of the limited state. In
his view, the purpose of the state is very specific: it is restricted to the defense of a set of
‘natural’ or God-given individual rights; namely, life, liberty and property.
 As a theory of the state, pluralism holds that the state is neutral. The state is not biased in
favor of any particular interest or group, and it does not have an interest of its own.
 Modern pluralists, however, have often adopted a more critical view of the state, termed the
neo-pluralist theory of the state.
 Robert Dahl and Charles Lindblom (1953) have come to accept that modern industrialized
states are both more complex and less responsive to popular pressures than classical
pluralism suggested.
 Neo-pluralists, for instance, have acknowledged that business enjoys a ‘privileged position’
in relation to government that other groups clearly cannot rival.
ii. The Capitalist State
 Marxists have typically argued that the state cannot be understood separately from the economic
structure of society.
 This view has usually been understood in terms of the classic formulation that the state is nothing
but an instrument of class oppression: the state emerges out of, and in a sense reflects, the class
system.
 Marx did not develop a systematic or coherent theory of the state. In a general sense, he believed
that the state is part of a ‘superstructure’ that is determined or conditioned by the economic
‘base’, which can be seen as the real foundation of social life.
 Two theories of the state can be identified in Marx’s writings.
 The first is expressed in his often-quoted dictum from The Communist Manifesto (1848):
‘The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of
the whole bourgeoisie’
 28

 A second, the autonomy of the state is only relative, in that the state appears to mediate
between conflicting classes, and so maintains the class system itself in existence.
iii. The Leviathan State
 The image of the state as a ‘leviathan’ (in effect, a self-serving monster intent on expansion and
aggrandizement) is one associated in modern politics with the New Right.
 The New Right, or at least its neoliberal wing, is distinguished by a strong antipathy towards
state intervention in economic and social life, born out of the belief that the state is parasitic
growth that threatens both individual liberty and economic security.
 The central feature of this view is that the state pursues interests that are separate from those of
society (setting it apart from Marxism), and that those interests demand an unrelenting growth
in the role or responsibilities of the state itself.
 New Right thinkers therefore argue that towards state intervention reflected not popular pressure
for economic and social security/maxims, rather, the internal dynamics of the state.
 New Right theorists explain the expansionist dynamics of state power by reference to both
demand-side and supply-side pressures.
 While Marxists argue that the state reflects broader class and other social interests, the New
Right portrays the state as an independent or autonomous entity that pursues its own interests.
iv. The Patriarchal/male controlled/ State
 Modern thinking about the state must, finally, take account of the implications of feminist
theory.
 Feminists have usually not regarded the nature of state power as a central political issue,
preferring instead to concentrate on the deeper structure of male power centered on institutions
such as the family and the economic system.
 Liberal feminists believe that all groups (including women) have potentially equal access to
state power, and that this can be used impartially to promote justice and the common good.
 Liberal feminists have therefore usually viewed the state in positive terms, seeing state
intervention as a means of redressing gender inequality and enhancing the role of women. This
can be seen in campaigns for equal-pay legislation, the legalization of abortion, the provision of
child-care facilities, the extension of welfare benefits, and so on.
 29

 A more critical and negative view of the state has been developed by radical feminists, who
argue that state power reflects a deeper structure of oppression in the form of patriarchy.
 There are a number of similarities between Marxist and radical feminist views of state power.
 Both groups, for example, deny that the state is an autonomous entity bent on the pursuit of its
own interests.
 Radical feminists place the state in a context of gender inequality, and insist that it is essentially
an institution of male power.
 Patriarchy is rooted in the division of society into distinct ‘public’ and ‘private’ spheres of life,
men dominating the former while women are confined to the later.
 Quite simply, in this view, the state is run by men, and for men.
The Role of the State
There is profound disagreement about the exact role the state should play, and therefore about
the proper balance between the state and civil society. Among the different state forms that
have developed are the following: Minimal states, Developmental states, Social-democratic
states, Collectivized states, Totalitarian states, and Religious states
i. Minimal States
 The minimal state is the ideal of classical liberals, whose aim is to ensure that individuals
enjoy the widest possible realm of freedom.
 This view is rooted in social-contract theory, but it nevertheless advances an essentially
‘negative’ view of the state.
 From this perspective, the value of the state is that it has the capacity to constrain human
behavior and thus to prevent individuals encroaching on the rights and liberties of others. The
state is merely a protective body, its core function being to provide a framework of peace and
social order within which citizens can conduct their lives as they think best.
 The cause of the minimal state has been taken up in modern political debate by the New
Right.
 From the New Right perspective, the state’s economic role should be confined to two
functions: the maintenance of a stable means of exchange or ‘sound money’ (low or zero
inflation), and the pro motion of competition through controls on monopoly power, price
fixing and so on.
 30

ii. Developmental States

The best historical examples of minimal states were those in countries such as the UK and the
USA during the period of early industrialization in the 19thc.
 As a general rule, however, the later a country industrializes, the more extensive will be its
state’s economic role.
 In Japan and Germany, for instance, the state assumed a more active ‘developmental’ role
from the outset/beginning. A developmental state is one that intervenes in economic life with
the specific purpose of promoting industrial growth and economic development
 The classic example of a developmental state is Japan. During the Meiji Period (1868–
1912), the Japanese state forged a close relationship with the Zaibutsu, the great family-run
business empires that dominated the Japanese economy up until World War II
 Germany, economic development has been achieved through the construction of a
‘partnership state’, in which an emphasis is placed on the maintenance of a close
relationship between the state and major economic interests, notably big business and
organized labor.
More recently, economic globalization has fostered the emergence of ‘competition states’,
examples of which are found amongst the tiger economies of East Asia. Competition states are
distinguished by their recognition of the need to strengthen education and training as the
principal guaranteeing economic success in a context of intensifying transnational competition.
iii. Social Democratic (Welfare) States
 Whereas developmental states practice interventionism in order to stimulate economic
progress, social-democratic states intervene with a view to bringing about broader social
restructuring, usually in accordance with principles such as fairness, equality and social
justice.
 In countries such as Austria and Sweden, state intervention has been guided by both
developmental and social democratic priorities. Nevertheless, develop mentalism and social
democracy do not always go hand-in-hand.
 The social-democratic state is thus the ideal of both modern liberals and democratic
socialists.
 The social-democratic state is an active participant; in particular, helping to correct the
imbalances and injustices of a market economy. It therefore tends to focus less upon the
 31

generation of wealth and more upon what is seen as the equitable or just distribution of
wealth.
 In practice, this boils down to an attempt to eradicate poverty and reduce social inequality.
 The twin features of a social democratic state are therefore Keynesianism and social
welfare. The aim of Keynesian economic policies is to ‘manage’ or ‘regulate’ capitalism
with a view to promoting growth and maintaining full employment.
iv. Collectivized States
 While developmental and social-democratic states intervene in economic life with a view to
guiding or supporting a largely private economy, collectivized states bring the entirety of
economic life under state control.
 The best examples were in orthodox communist countries such as the USSR and throughout
Eastern Europe.
 These sought to abolish private enterprise altogether, and set up centrally planned
economies
 So-called ‘command economies’
 Marx and Engels by no means ruled out nationalization; Engels, in particular, recognized
that, during the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’, state control would be extended to include
factories, the banks, transportation and so on.
v. Totalitarian States
o The most extreme and extensive form of interventionism is found in totalitarian states.
o The essence of totalitarianism is the construction of an all-embracing state, the influence of
which penetrates every aspect of human existence.
o The state brings not only the economy, but also education, culture, religion, family life and
so on under direct state control.
o The best examples of totalitarian states are Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s USSR, although
modern regimes such as Saddam Hussein’s Iraq arguably have similar characteristics.
o The central pillars of such regimes are a comprehensive process of surveillance and
terroristic policing, and a pervasive system of ideological manipulation and control.
o Totalitarian states effectively extinguish civil society and abolish the private sphere of life
altogether.
 32

vi. Religious States

 On the face of it, a religious state is a contradiction in terms.
 The modern state emerged largely through the triumph of civil authority over religious
authority, religion increasingly being confined to the private sphere, through a separation
between church and state.
 The period since the 1980s has witnessed the rise of the religious state, driven by the
tendency within religious fundamentalism to reject the public/private divide and to view
religion as the basis of politics.
 This was evident, for instance, in the process of ‘Islamization’ introduced in Pakistan under
General Zia-ul-Haq after 1978, the establishment of an ‘Islamic state’ in Iran as a result of
the 1979 revolution, and, despite its formal commitment to secularism, the close links
between the Sri Lankan state and Sinhala Buddhism, particularly during the years of violent
struggle against Tamil separatism.
a. Understanding Government
i. What is Government?
 In its broadest sense, to govern means to rule or control others.
 Government can therefore be taken to include any mechanism through which ordered rule is
maintained, its central features being the ability to make collective decisions and the capacity
to enforce them
 . Thus, government is one of the most essential components and also an administrative wing
of the state.
 Government can also refer to political organization comprising individuals and institutions
authorized to formulate public policies and conduct affairs of state.
 Any form of government, to be stable and effective, must possess two essential attributes:
authority and legitimacy.
Authority: implies the ability to compel obedience. It can simply be defined as ‘legitimate
power.’
 While power is the ability to influence the behavior of others, authority is the right to do so
 Thus, authority is the legitimacy, justification and right to exercise that power.
Legitimacy: The term legitimacy (from the Latin word legitimare, meaning ‘to declare lawful’)
broadly means rightfulness.
 33

 Legitimacy is the popular acceptance of a governing regime or law as an authority.

 Legitimacy is considered as a basic condition to rule; without at least a minimal amount of
legitimacy, a government will deadlock or collapse.
 Therefore, legitimacy is gained through the acquisition of power in accordance with
recognized or accepted standards or principles.
Purposes and Functions of Government
The major purposes and functions of government include, among other things, the following:
 Self-Preservation: as their first and primary purpose and function, governments are
responsible to prevail order, predictability, internal security, and external defense.
 Distribution and Regulation of Resources: All governments invariably play the role of
distributing resources in their societies.
 Management of Conflicts: Governments usually develop and consolidate institutions and
procedures for the management of conflicts.
 Fulfillment of Social or Group Aspirations: governments strive to fulfill the goals and
interests of the society as a whole and of various groups within the society. These aspirations
may include the promotion of human rights, common good, and international peace.
 Protection of Rights of Citizens: Constitutional and democratic governments are created to
serve and protect every citizen’s rights /human, democratic, political, social, economic and
cultural rights/ not to dominate them.
 Protection of Property: States or governments provide means such as police and the court
systems that protect private and public property.
 Implementations of Moral Conditions: laws and institutions are designed to shape citizens
character in accordance with some standard of morality.
 Provision of Goods and Services: these may include, provision of healthcare, education,
development of public works, provision of food, shelter, clothing for the public, Developing
social services, etc.
Understanding Citizenship
Defining Citizenship
 Citizen refers to the person who is a legal member of a particular State and one who owes
allegiance to that State.
 34

 The means by which we determine whether a person is legal member of a particular State or
otherwise is called ‘citizenship’.
 Citizenship simply denotes to the network of relationships between the State and the
citizen
 Citizenship refers to the rules regulating the legal/formal relations between the State and the
individual with respect to the acquisition and loss of a given country’s nationality.
i) Citizenship as a Status of Rights: being a citizen makes the person a creditor of a series of
rights.
 Current political discourse often tends to identify citizenship with rights.
 Marshall 1998, distinguishes three types
1. The civil,or the rights necessary for the development of individual liberty;
2. political,i.e. the right to participate in the exercise of political power, as an elected
member or as a voter and
3. socialrights, which are those that guarantee the right to public safety, health, the
right to education, etc.
Hohfeld (1978), for instance, discovered four components of rights known as ‘the Hohfeldian
incidents’ namely, liberty (privilege), claim, power and immunity.
A) Liberty Right: is a freedom given for the right-holder to do something and there are no
obligations on other parties to do or not to do anything to aid the bearer to enjoy such rights.
Example the right to movement, (see also through articles 25 to 34 of the FDRE constitution.
B) Claim Rights: are the inverse of liberty rights since it entails responsibility upon another
person or body. The duty bearer has to accomplish something that is indispensable for right
holders to enjoy the claim rights.
o Claim rights impose a corresponding duty on others to help respect and protect the bearers.
o For instance, social rights such as unemployment and public service benefits are claims that
directly depend on taxes paid by others.
o To mention, a contract between employer and employee confers on the employee a right to
be paid his/her wages.
C) Powers Rights: They are cooperative controls that are imposed on others.
o The holder of a power, be it a government or a citizen, can change or cancel other people and
his/her own entitlements.
 35

o For example, Article 40(1) of the FDRE constitution, the rights to the ownership of private
property and to modify, sale, donate or transfer their property to a third party. Article 33(3)
the FDRE constitution, right to renounce his/her Ethiopian citizenship
d) Immunity Rights: allow bearers escape from controls and thus they are the opposite of power
rights.
o Immunity rights entail the absence of a power in other party to alter the right-holder’s
normative situation in some way.
o For instance, civil servants have a right not to be dismissed from their job after a new
government comes to power.

ii) Membership and Identity: The criteria for membership have been linked to shared territory,
common culture, ethnic characteristics, history, etc. However, nowadays, those who
contribute to the well-being of their community are understood to be the ‘true’ citizens.
iii) Participation: Participation occupies a key position in citizenship. There are two approaches
in this regard; minimalists and maximalists.
 A minimalist approach to citizenship characterized by a kind of basic passive compliance
with the rules of a particular community/State,
 Maximalist approach imply active, broad participation of citizens engagement in the State.
iv) Inclusion and Exclusion: All individuals living in a particular state do not necessary mean
that all are citizens. For instance, there are non-citizens visiting, working and living in Ethiopia
branded as foreigners/aliens.
 Citizenship status, however, is not only restricted to persons. Organizations and [endemic]
animals could also be considered as citizens.
 The term "corporate citizenship" (CC) has been used increasingly by corporations,
consultants and scholars to echo, underscore, extend, or reorient certain aspects of corporate
social responsibility.
ii. Theorizing Citizenship
To realize the notion of citizenship, what it is and what it could become and to understand it,
there are four approaches: liberal, communitarian, republican and multicultural citizenship.
1. Citizenship in Liberal Thought

 Liberal theory of citizenship begins with the individual person (the self).
 36

 The self exists as the true symbol of liberal theory. Accordingly, it gives a strong emphasis to the
individual liberty of the citizen, and rights that adhere to each and every person
 Liberals insist that individuals should be free to decide on their own conception of the good life,
and applaud the liberation of individuals from any ascribed or inherited status.
 John Locke (1960), one among the influential early expositors of liberal theory, viewed
individuals as endowed with reasoning skills, through which they can discern and act upon the
dictates of divinely given natural law.
 Likewise, liberals deem internal factors as the primary reasons that determine personal identity.
 John Stuart Mill, for instance, regarded individuality and self-interest as the source of social,
not just personal, progress and well-being.
 The pursuit of one’s own interests that do not affect others is entirely the province of the
individual, within which one must be free to do as one pleases without the law’s interference.
 There are three fundamental principles which a liberal government must provide and protect:
(1) equality, (2) due process, such that the government is required to treat individuals over
whom it exercises power fairly; and (3) mutual consent between the individual and the state.
Critics of Liberal Theory of Citizenship
1. The most common problems related with advocating individualism are free-raiders problem
and the tragedy of the commons. Tragedy of the commons is a dilemma arises when
individuals act independently and rationally consulting their own self-interest ultimately
deplete shared limited environmental resources.
2. Liberalists affirmatively valorize the privatization of personality, commitment, and activity.
Hence, the problem has to do with is the ways in which individuals and their ideas are
framed.
3. Liberal thought facilitate the pursuit of wealth and the indulgence of material pleasures and
thus, as a matter of fact and preference, liberal societies tend to be less egalitarian.
4. Liberalists justify that inequalities arise out of differences in individual talents, values, and
choices – differences, moreover, that the State cannot seek to efface/abolish without
endangering citizens’ liberties.
5. Finally, liberalism posits a State that maintains substantial normative neutrality. In this
conception, the liberal State should neither choose among competing visions of the good
 37

society nor place its thumb on the scales in other ways, such as redistributive policies, that
favor particular visions.
2. Citizenship in Communitarian Thought
 Communitarianism is as an approach emphasizes on the importance of society in articulating the
good.
 Communitarians often deny that the interests of communities can be reduced to the interests of
their individual members.
 Privileging individual autonomy is seen as destructive of communities.
 As a result, the good of the community is much above individual rights and citizenship comes
from the community identity, enabling people to participate.
 The State must provide a policy for the common good, according to the way of life of the
community.
 Communitarian’s citizenship is rooted and lies with the people who surround the individual.
 Communitarianism claims that an individual’s sense of identity is produced only through
relations with others in the community that nourish him/her.
 All in all, the two defining features of communitarian perspective are: first, no individual is
entirely self-created; instead the citizen and his/her identity is deeply constructed by the society
where he/she is a member. Second, as a consequence of assimilation, a meaningful bond is said
to occur between the individual person and his/her community.
 Communitarian theorists tend to emphasize the communal construction of social individuals and
social formations, and of values and practices.
3. Citizenship in Republican Thought
 Republican citizenship theory put emphasis on both individual and group rights.
 Republican though attempts to incorporate the liberal notion of the self-interested individual
within the communitarian framework of egalitarian and community belonging.
 Communitarian thought, it emphasizes on what bind citizens together in to a particular
community.
 However, republicans don’t pressurize individuals to surrender their particular identities like the
communitarian thought.
 Just like liberal citizenship though, republican school advocate self-government.
 38

 In contrast to liberalism, individuals must overcome their personal inclinations and set aside their
private interests when necessary to do what is best for the public.
 Republicans, thus, acknowledge the value of public life.
 In view of that, there are two essential elements of the republican citizenship: publicity and self-
government.
 Republican citizenship has been criticized by scholars who advocate multicultural and other
approaches of citizenship.
 The first is that the republican conception of citizenship is no longer realistic.
 The second is that the conception poses a threat to an open, egalitarian, and pluralistic
society.
 The third point concerns the claim that citizenship involves a false ideal of impartiality.
4. Multicultural Citizenship
 The increasing diversity in States challenges particularly the liberal conceptions of citizenship.
 These factors include the rise of the ethnic revitalization movements demanding recognition of
group rights as well as individual rights; the structural exclusion of racial, gender, ethnic, and
language groups; and increasing immigration throughout the world that made States multinational
and polytechnic.
 Consequently, the conception of citizenship in a modern State should be expanded to include
cultural rights and group rights within a democratic framework.
 There is a need to move towards a new type of multicultural citizenship appropriate to highly
diverse societies and contemporary economic trends.
 The focus of multicultural citizenship discuss four principles of multicultural citizenship which
are presented here under.
i) Taking equality of citizenship rights as a starting point.
ii) Recognizing that Formal equality of rights does not necessarily lead to equality of respect,
resources, opportunities or welfare.
iii) Establishing mechanisms for group representation and participation.
iv) Differential treatment for people with different characteristics, needs and wants.
 Critics of differentiated citizenship worry that if groups are encouraged by the very terms of
citizenship to turn inward and focus on their 'difference' (whether racial, ethnic, religious,
 39

sexual, and so on), then the hope of a larger fraternity of all Americans will have to be
abandoned.
 Critics also worry that differentiated citizenship would create a "politics of grievance."
iii. Modes/Ways of Acquiring and Loosing Citizenship
1. Ways of Acquiring Citizenship
The common ways of acquiring citizenship can be grouped in to two: citizenship by birth and
citizenship through naturalization/law.
i) Citizenship from birth/of Origin: individuals can get citizenship status of a particular State
either because he/she is born in the territorial administration of that or his/her mother and/or
father are citizens of the State in question.
 There are two principles of citizenship from birth commonly known as Jus Soli (law/right of the
soil) and Jus Sanguinis (law/right of blood).
 Jus Soli is a principle whereby an individual is permitted to obtain citizenship status of a
particular State because he/she was born in the territorial administration of that country.
 Jus Sanguinis is a norm where citizenship acquired claiming one’s parents citizenship status.
However, jus soli could not apply to children born from diplomats and refugees live in a host
State because of two special principles (international diplomatic immunities): extraterritoriality
and inviolability principles.
ii) Citizenship by Naturalization/Law: is the legal process by which foreigners become citizens
of another country. The common sub-principles of acquiring citizenship through naturalization
are the following. Political case (secession, merger and subjugation), grant on application,
marriage, legitimatization/adoption, and reintegration/restoration.
2. The Modes of Acquiring Ethiopian Citizenship
 In 1930 Ethiopia adopted a legal document named as “Ethiopian Nationality Law”. Recently, this
nationality law has replaced by another legal document called “Ethiopian Nationality
Proclamation NO. 378/2003”
 It enacted in accordance to article 6 and 33 of the 1995 FDRE constitution and affirmed that a
person can acquire Ethiopian citizenship either by birth or naturalization.
1) Acquisition by Descent: In its Article 6(1), the 1995 FDRE constitution stated that “any
person of either sex shall be an Ethiopian national where both or either parent is Ethiopian.” In
line with this, two principles under the acquisition of Ethiopian citizenship by decent. One, “Any
 40

person shall be an Ethiopian national by descent where both or either of his/her parent is
Ethiopian;” second, “An infant who is found abandoned in Ethiopia shall, unless proved to have
a foreign nationality, be deemed to have been born to an Ethiopian parent and shall acquire
Ethiopian nationality.” According to the proclamation, any person can’t acquire Ethiopian
citizenship through the principle of Jus Soli (law of soil).
2) Acquisition by Law (Naturalization): Article 6(2) of the 1995 FDRE constitution also avers
that aliens can get Ethiopian citizenship. Under naturalization, there are various ways of
acquiring Ethiopian citizenship. These are:
a) Grant on Application (registration): happens when an alien requests a host state to be granted
citizenship status of the country in question when they fulfill certain requirements. The common
ones are applicant’s age, length of residence in the host country, criminal conviction, income and
moral character.
 An applicant shall get Ethiopian nationality if, and only if, he/she:
1. reach the age of majority, 18 years;
2. lived in Ethiopia for a total of at least four years;
3. has sufficient and lawful source of income (economically self-reliant);
4. is able to communicate in any of the indigenous languages spoken in Ethiopia;
5. has a good character;
6. has not recorded criminal conviction;
7. has been released from his/her previous nationality or the possibility of obtaining such a
release upon the acquisition of Ethiopian nationality or that he/she is a stateless person;
and
8. takes the oath of allegiance indicated in Article 12 of the proclamation: “I-----, solemnly
affirm that I will be a loyal national of the federal democratic republic of Ethiopia and be
faithful to its constitution”.
b) Cases of Marriage: an alien who is married to an Ethiopian citizen have the possibility of
acquiring Ethiopian citizenship.
 One, the marriage shall be thru in accordance with the laws of Ethiopia or the State
where the marriage is contracted;
 second, the marriage shall lapse at least for two years;
 41

 third, the alien married to an Ethiopian citizen have to live in Ethiopian for at least one
year preceding the submission of the application; and
 Fourth, the alien have to reach the age of majority, be a morally good person, and
 lastly take the oath of allegiance stated under Article 12 of the proclamation.
c) Cases of Adoption (Legitimating): this process whereby an illegitimate child get citizenship
status of his/her caretaker’s nationality. But, the child could get Ethiopian citizenship if the
adopted child has not attained the age of majority; lives in Ethiopia together with his/her
adopting parent;
d) Citizenship by Special Cases:an alien who has made an outstanding contribution in the
interest of Ethiopia may be conferred with Ethiopian nationality by law without undergoing the
pre-conditions stated in Article 5 (sub-articles 2 and 3)
e) Re-Admission to Ethiopian Nationality (Reintegration/Restoration): this is a process by
which a person acquires his/her lost citizenship in its Article 22. That is, a person who has lost
Ethiopian citizenship status may get back Ethiopian nationality.
Examining and Deciding upon an Application to acquire Ethiopian Citizenship
An application to obtain Ethiopian nationality by law shall be accompanied with relevant
documents and shall be submitted to the Security, Immigration and Refugee Affairs Authority.
Then, the application shall be examined by the Nationality Affairs Committee. Lastly, the
applicant confers with a certificate of naturalization and become legally an Ethiopian national.
1. Dual Citizenship
Dual citizenshipis the condition of being a citizen of two nations. Of course, a person may
acquire more than two States which is called multiple citizenship. Duality/multiplicity arises
because of the clash among the Jus Soli, Jus Sanguini and naturalization.
 Today just under half of all African countries still prohibit dual citizenship
 Ethiopia prohibits its citizens to have dual citizenship.
ii. Ways of Loosing Citizenship
The commonly discussed ways of losing citizenship are deprivation, renunciation,
lapse/expiration and substitution.
Deprivation is an involuntary loss of citizenship which arises while government authorities or
court take a decision to nullify an individual’s citizenship. It is on the assumption that the burden
of justification for the loss of citizenship of an individual lies on the state.
 42

Lapse/expiration is another way of losing citizenship which is not applicable to Ethiopia. Lapse
is a mode whereby a person loses his/her citizenship because of his/her permanent residence or
long term residence abroad beyond the number of years permitted by the country in question. For
example, if an Indian citizen stays outside his/her country continuously for more than seven
years, he/she automatically loses his/her Indian nationality by the principle of lapse.
Renunciation is the voluntary way of losing citizenship. The UDHR (1948) guarantees the right
of a person to change his/her nationality.
Substitution: citizenship may be lost when the original citizenship is substituted by another
state, where it is acquired through naturalization. On the other side, this may also take place
when a particular territory is annexed by another state; the inhabitants’ citizenship within the
annexed territory will be replaced by the citizenship of the subjugator. Generally, an Ethiopian
citizen can lose his/her Ethiopian nationality through renunciation and upon acquisition of other
country’s nationality stipulated in article 19 and 20 of the 2003 nationality proclamation,
respectively.

Statelessness
Statelessness is the condition of having citizenship of any country and with no government from
which to ask protection. According to the international law, stateless person is a person who is
not considered as a national by any state under the operation of its law.

Chapter Five: Constitution, Democracy and Human Rights

Constitution and Constitutionalism
Conceptualizing Constitution
 Constitution is figuratively defined as the fundamental or basic law of a state which sets out the
structure of the state and also lists the rights of citizens alongside the limits on the power
exercise of a government.
 43

 It is a blue print placed on top the hierarchy of laws on constitutional governments.

 A constitution may be said to be a collection of principles according to which the powers of the
government, the rights of the governed, and the relation between the two are adjusted.
 constitution refers to body of rules and laws, (written or unwritten) that determine the
organization of government and the distribution of powers and functions to various organs of
government
 Constitution is the mothers of all laws; all other ordinary laws are derived from and subjected to
this blue print.
 Constitution is supreme law of a land, any other law contradicted with the provisions of the
constitution becomes void or invalid.
5.1.1. Peculiar Features of Constitution
Constitution has distinctive features that distinguish it from any other laws. The following are
some of the distinctive features of a constitution.
A. Generality: a constitution provides the general principle of a state and carry on foundation
and sets out general framework of the law and the government.
B. Permanency: unlike laws constitution is made for undefined period of time.
C. Supremacy: Constitutions are laws about the political procedures to be followed in making
laws. They are supreme laws, taking precedence over all others, and defining how all the others
should be made.
D. Codified document: Constitutions are written down; often in a single document that presents
the constitution in a systematic manner.
E. Allocation of powers: Constitutions outline the proper relations between institutions and
offices of the state, and between government and citizens.
Major Purposes and Functions of Constitution
1. It serves as a framework for Government: This means that the constitution of state is a
plan for organizing the operation of government. In other words, it is a brief and a general
outline of duties and rights of governments and also that of citizens.
2. It Limits the Powers of Government: In a constitutionally limited government, officials are
always abided by the constitution. i.e. there is no decision or action that will be undertaken
arbitrarily.
3. It protects individual and collective rights of citizens:
 44

4. It serves as the Supreme (Highest) Law of a Country:

5. It provides Government legitimacy/stability: it gives governments a legitimate/legal right
to rule or govern and by doing so it serves as the weapon for legitimizing regimes.
6. Constitution Blue Prints for establishing Values and Goals: In a constitution there is also
an ideological aspect of constitution making where the people truly aspired for it.
Classification of Constitutions
 Constitutions are classified into different categories using different criteria. For instance,
taking the criteria, form, amendment procedure and degree of implementation/practice,
constitutions can be classified into the following categories.
A. Constitution based on form
Based on form/appearance constitutions can be classified as written and unwritten.
1. Written Constitution
A written constitution is one whose provisions are written in detail. A written constitution is one
in which most of the provisions are embodied in a single formal written instrument or
instruments.
For example, India, Kenya, Ethiopia, USA, Germany, Brazil, Indonesia, Jordan, Venezuela and
Nigeria have written form of constitution. Written constitution has certain merits and demerits.
Merits of Written Constitution
 It is easily accessible to citizens that enable them to monitor the behavior of their government
thus preventing the emergency of dictatorship
 Citizens can easily learn about their rights and duties and the basic laws governing the
patterns of political processes of their nation
 It is full of clarity and definiteness because the provisions are written in detail.
 It has the quality of stability, since people know the nature of constitutional provisions, they
feel a sense of satisfaction
Demerits of written constitution
 It creates a situation of rigidity. Since all important rules are on writing, attempts are made to
act according to rules. It leads to the development of a conservative attitude.
 It becomes difficult to change it easily quickly as per the requirements of time. As such the
possibilities of mass upheaval are increased.
 45

 A written constitution becomes a play thing in the hands of the lawyers and the courts.
Different interpretations come up from time to time that unsettle the judicial thought of the
country.
 Written constitution is not easily adapted to a new situation or changing circumstances. It
needs be continuously amended to be adapted to a new situation
2. Unwritten Constitution
Unwritten constitution is basically means that the fundamental principles and powers of the
government are not written down in any single document. It consists of customs, conventions,
traditions, and some written laws bearing different dates. The British constitution is the best
example of unwritten constitution. It is made up, largely of customs and judicial decisions.
Merits of Unwritten Constitution
 It has the quality of elasticity and adaptability. Since, most of the rules are in an unwritten
form, people may adapt them in response to the new constitution.
 It is so dynamic that it prevents the chances of popular uprisings.
 Unwritten constitution can absorb and also recover from shocks that may destroy a written
constitution. It looks like a natural outgrowth of a national life.
Demerits of Unwritten Constitution
 Since it is not compiled in to a single document, it is not easily accessible to the public to
determine which aspects of the constitution are violated and when it is violated
 It is difficult to create awareness through education on the fundamental constitutional rights
and duties of citizens because it is not easily accessible to citizens
 It leads to situations of instability. The provisions of such a constitution may change the spur
of the moment and so they are always in a state of flux as per the emotions, passions and
fancies of the people.
 It leads to the state of confusion. Controversies often arise over different provisions of the
constitution having their place in the usages and customs of the country.
 Unwritten constitution may be suitable to a monarchical or aristocratic system. It certainly
does not suit a democracy where people are always conscious and suspicious of
constitutional provisions
B. Constitution based on complexity of amending process
1. Rigid Constitution
 46

Here, the process of amendment is difficult. A special procedure is followed to make a change in
any rule of the constitution. Rigid constitution is one that does not adapt itself to changing
circumstances immediately and quickly or simply one whose amendment procedures are
relatively complex or difficult. Those countries like USA, Australia, Denmark and Switzerland
are known to have rigid constitutions.
2. Flexible Constitution
Flexible constitution is the constitution which set up simple amendment procedure and there is as
such no special required procedure for amending a constitution. The simplest and commonest
amendment procedure is the one which requires an absolute majority (two thirds support) in the
parliament. United Kingdom and New Zealand, may be altered by a simple majority vote in the
legislature.
C. Constitution based on degree of practice
1. Effective Constitution: Effective constitution denotes to a situation in which
government/citizens practices correspond to the provisions of the constitution.
2. Nominal constitution: the constitution accurately describes government’/citizens’ limits yet
in practice either or both fail to behave accordingly. In short when the constitution only
remains to have paper value or when there is absence of constitutionalism.
D. Based on the kind of state structure
1. Federal Constitution: Federal constitution is one that distributes power among the different
units of a state administration. United States of America, Canada, Australia and Malaysia are
examples
2. Unitary Constitution: unitary constitution state power is concentrated in the hands of the
central government
Constitutionalism
Constitutionalism refers to a doctrine that governments should be faithful to their constitutions. It
is being subject to limitations and that citizens and governments operate in accordance with the
general rules and laws rather than arbitrary. Thus, constitutionalism does not merely require the
existence of constitution. This is because, constitutionalism checks whether the act of
government is legitimate and whether officials conduct their public duties in accordance with
laws pre-determined in advance.
The Constitutional Experience of Ethiopia
 47

Traditional Constitution (Pre- 1931)

Ethiopia has a very little experience with a written constitution in spite of its long history of state
formation. For this reason, the first written form of constitution promulgated in Ethiopia in 1931
Documents like the Kebra Nagast, the Fatha Nagast and serate mengest from the 13th Century
until the early 20th Century were the precursors to the formal written Ethiopian national
constitutions of the modern era.
Fetha Negest
The Fetha Negest (The Law of Kings) was a religious and secular legal provision than being a
definite constitution. It was originally written in Arabic by the Coptic Egyptian writer Abu-l
Fada’il Ibn al-Assal (commonly known as Ibn al-Assal) when Cyril III was the Patriarch of
Alexandria (1235-1243).
 It was used as the sources of constitutional, civil, and criminal laws.
 It was compiled from the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Roman law.
 It serves as both religious laws and legal provisions of state.
 The throne was hereditary, the king was thought to be appointed divinely, that is derives his power
directly from God.
Kibre Negest
 Literally, Kibre Negest means glory of king. The Kebra Nagast was written to document for the
first time the mythical origins of the royal house. This document was written by six Tigrean clerics
and completed in the early 14th Century.
 It determine the succession of the throne in Ethiopia.
 It was the principal sources of legitimacy for the kings. This document takes the Ethiopian history
back to the Solomonic dynasty, where the queen of Sheba made romantic tripe to King Solomon
of Israel and gave birth to the first Ethiopia king Menelik I. Based on this the document
determined that any king in Ethiopia must descend from the Solomonic dynasty or must have such
blood relationship with the dynasty.
Ser’ate Mengist
The ser’ate Mengist was provided certain administrative protocol and directives in the 19 th
century. It is the first document known to have been used for allocating power among the Crown,
its dignitaries and the Church, by means of “... a protocol of ceremonies which had to be
consulted whenever occasions required it…”
 48

The 1931 First Written Constitution

It is often said that the key sources of legitimacy in Ethiopia’s past were force (conquest, military
expansion), religion (i.e. Orthodox Christianity), and tradition (i.e. ‘right’ genealogy). Ethiopian
Emperors which, roughly, are as follows; “Conquering Lion [marking might, or force] of the
Tribe of Judah [marking genealogy and tradition], Elect of God [marking the vital importance of
religious anointing to qualify for the throne], ... [the name], King of Kings, Emperor of
Ethiopia.”
 With promulgation of first written form of constitution on July16, 1931 by Emperor Haile
Selassie, the era of unwritten form of constitution came to an end.
 The constitution reinforced the traditional position of the emperor as ‘Siyume Egziabiher, Niguse
Negast Za Ethiopia’ which literally means:
 It is believed that both internal and external factors forced the development of the 1931
constitution. Externally, particularly the western European countries.
 Haile Selassie was crowned with full support of the pre-war modern elite with a mission of
Japanizing Ethiopia. The Meiji Constitution of Japan was conceived as a benevolent gift of the
Emperor of Japan to his people. The constitution unequivocally declared that the sole basis of
legitimate authority was the emperor, and that all titles and appointments descended from him
 The 1931 constitution was failed to achieve external goals as intended by the emperor.
 Internally, the 1931 constitution was intended to provide a legal framework for the suppression of
the powerful traditional nobilities to the emperor.
 The emperor has a deep interest of centralizing the state power in the internal politics of the
country.
 It was designed to unify and centralize all state power in the hands of the monarch.
5.1.2. The Revised Constitution of 1955
The emperor had been driven into exile when beginning in 1935 the Italian Fascists occupied the
country for just over five years. During this period both the Ethiopian Orthodox Church and the
traditional aristocracy were severely weakened. When the emperor was restored to the throne by
the British in 1941, he used their military and administrative assistance to bolster his own
authority against what was left of the Church leadership and the traditional aristocracy.
 The revision of the 1931 constitution was urged by both internal and external factors.
 The Revised Constitution continued to reinforce the process of centralization.
 49

 The Constitution spent one chapter settling the issue of succession on the rule of male
primogeniture.
 Interestingly enough it also contained an elaborate regime of civil and political rights for the
subjects.
 In theory, the Constitution was the supreme law of the land governing even the Emperor.
 Little change was introduced regarding the position of the Emperor.
 It was revised because of internal and external factors mainly to cope up with the social and
political dynamics of the then period, global politics, and Ethio-Eritrean federation.
 This constitution incorporated the human rights provisions of the universal declaration of human
rights and other progressive concepts.
The 1987 Constitution of People’s Democratic Republic Ethiopia (PDRE)
 Dergue setup the Provisional Military Administrative Council (PMAC) type of temporary
government. The
 The PMAC presented itself for elections through a new party- the Workers’ Party of Ethiopia.
 The party became the vanguard communist party.
 After coming to power the Dergue issued a series of decrees and proclamations nationalization of
rural and urban land, extra urban houses, private schools and factories that was used as legal rules
until the adoption of 1987 constitution.
 The People’s Democratic Republic Ethiopia constitution (1987) was different from the 1931 and
the 1955 imperial constitutions in that constitution:
 State and religion were separated (issue of secularism was included in the constitution) for the first
time;
 State the political power and sovereignty were declared to be the preserve of the working people
of Ethiopia.
 contains provisions on democratic and human rights;
 recognized the different cultural identities and the equality of Nation and Nationalities;
 Introduced a party system by giving recognition to the worker’s party of Ethiopia. Thus, leading to
a transition from a none party system to a single party system;
 aimed at the principles of Marxist and Leninist ideology;
 50

 Aimed at giving power to the peoples so that they exercise through referendum, local and national
assembly.
 Practically, however, the 1987 constitution was not different from the 1931 and 1955
constitutions.
The 1995 (FDRE) Constitution
 It has a wider coverage of both human and democratic rights.
 About one third (approximately 33 articles) is devoted to the discussion of rights.
 The 1995 Constitution has some salient features. “introduction of a federal form of governance
and the assignment of the competence of determining constitutionality to the second chamber of
the parliament”
 FDRE (1995) Constitution embeds many of the core egalitarian principles including the principle
of self-determination of collectivities, rule of law, democracy, development, fundamental
rights and freedoms, equality and non-discrimination, sustainable peace and affirmative
action in its preamble
 The constitution gives recognition to five fundamental principles;
1. the principles of popular sovereignty (art. 8),
2. constitutionalism and constitutional supremacy (art. 9),
3. sanctity of human rights (art. 10),
4. secularism (art. 11) and
5. accountability and transparency of government (Art.12).
5.2. Democracy and Democratization
Defining Democracy
 Democracy literally means the government of the people or government of the majority.
 Etymologically, the word democracy is derived from two Greek words: demos and kratos, which
means common people and rule (legitimate power to rule) respectively.
 The word democracy refers to the idea of rule by the people or government by the people.
 “the government of the people, by the people and for the people”, given by former US President
Abraham Lincoln.
 The lexicon or dictionary definition of the term entails that democracy is a state of government in
which people hold the ruling power either directly or indirectly through their elected
representatives.
 51

 Democracy can also be conceived as the institutionalization of freedom.

 Two broad ways of exercising it can be singled out namely direct and indirect democracy. Direct
democracy implies a form of government in which the right to make political decisions is exercised
directly by the whole body of citizens acting under procedures of majority rule.
 It is also known as pure/classical democracy. These include referendum, recall, initiative and
plebiscite.
 Indirect democracy on the other hand refers to a form of government in which citizens exercise
their rights and freedoms and discharge their obligations not in person but through representatives
chosen by themselves. In representative form of democracy:
o Elected officials are chosen in frequent and fairly conducted elections in which coercion is
comparatively uncommon.
o Practically all adults have the right to vote in the election of officials.
o Practically all adults have the right to run for elective offices.
o Citizens have a right to express themselves without the danger of severe punishment on
political matters broadly defined.
o Citizens have a right to seek out alternative sources of information. Moreover, alternative
sources of information exist and are protected by law.
o Citizens also have the right to form relatively independent associations or organizations,
including independent political parties and interest groups.
Values and Principles of Democracy
o There are three core values that are central in the discussion of the concept of democracy.
These are values of liberty/freedom, justice and equality.
1. Liberty: This value includes personal freedom (free from arbitrary arrest and detention and
free from unreasonable searches and seizures), political freedom (to participate freely in the
political process) and economic freedom (to acquire, use, transfer and dispose of private
property).
2. Justice: These are distributive Justice (the sense of distributing benefits and burdens),
corrective Justice (a proportional response should be in place to correct wrongs and
injuries) and procedural justice (procedures used for gathering information and making
decisions and openness of proceedings).
3. Equality: These are political equality, social equality and economic equality
 52

Fundamental principles of democracy.

Popular Sovereignty
 It is associated with power and legitimacy.
 The citizen as a whole is the sovereign of the state and holds the ultimate authority over public
officials and their policies.
 Popular sovereignty also means that the people have the right to withdraw their consent when the
government fails to fulfill its obligations under the constitution.
Constitutional Supremacy
 This is a principle that puts the constitution at the highest level in the hierarchy of laws.
 Constitutions are laws about the political procedures to be followed in making laws.
 They are supreme laws, taking precedence over all others, and defining how all the others should
be made.
 According to this principle, the constitution is above all laws and organs of a state.
 This principle dictates all laws and governmental or non-governmental acts to be under the
constitution.
Rule of Law
 The rule of law has been reflected either in their constitutions or statutes
 The law should govern the people and the people should obey the law.
 The law must be capable of being obeyed (‘good’ laws). This made the rule of law d/t from ‘rule
of men’
 The rule of law is a key component of a social order grounded in consistency, predictability, and
transparency.
 The principle is intended to be a safeguard against arbitrary rule.
Secularism
 Secularism referred to as an approach that asserts to dismiss or ignores God, the divine, the
supernatural, and other religious viewpoints when discussing or participating in politics.
 Contemporary expressions of secularism occur in the mainstream liberal media, business, public
education, and social organizations. In church and state matters, secularists demand a strict
separation of religion and politics, keeping prayer and religious instruction out of government,
public schools, and other common institutions.
 53

 Secularism is mostly understood to mean separation of state and religion.

Separation of Powers
 The doctrine of separation of powers refers to the idea that political power should be divided
among several bodies or officers of the state as a precaution against too much concentration of
power.
 A federal polity is a constitutional arrangement that creates executive, legislative, and judicial
branches of government in its constituent units.
Free, Fair and Periodic Election
 In order to establish democratic government, first the election should be free means all interested
parties to the election should get the chance to participate in the election. Secondly, fair means
after giving the chance of participation all of them should be treated equally without
discrimination. Finally, the election should be conducted periodically with fixed duration.
Majority Rule Minority Right
The policies, programs and decisions of the majority will govern the country while the right of
the minority respected
Protection and Promotion of Human Rights
Human rights are those naturally given values that reflect respect for human life and dignity
hence their protection and promotion test the legitimacy and constitionality of a democratic
government.
Multiparty System
Democracy also requires having several political parties working together in one political
system. These political parties should get equal constitutional guarantee, support and treatment to
compete for elections and present their offer freely to the voters.
Democratization

 Democracy does not automatically arise out of “primal mud” but needs to be planted and
nourished by years of practice and experience through various levels of democratization process.
 Democratization is the process of transitions from nondemocratic to democratic regimes that
occur within a specified period of time and that significantly outnumber transitions in the
opposite direction during that period.
 54

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

ideals and principles and their effective functioning.
Actors of Democratization

Political Parties
It has been argued that parties are ―endemic to democracy, an unavoidable part of democracy.
In a democratic system, political parties provide the proper mode of functioning for the
government so that the majority party or a combination of parties controls the government, while
other parties serve as the opposition and attempt to check the abuses of power by the ruling
party.

Media
 Mass Media and Democracy are always related to each other.
 Media is a mirror of the society and how democratic a society is, can be represented through
media.
 Opinion leaders influence the public opinion regarding political leaders and political system of
any country.
 Hence, media has an influential role in strengthening democracy.
 Free media serve as watch dogs, monitoring those in power and provide citizens with the
information they need to be free and self-governing and to hold governments accountable for
their actions.

Civic Societies
 Larry Diamond (1999: 220-221) defines civil society as “the realm of organized social life that is
open, voluntary, bound by a legal order or set of shared rules”.
 Civil society may comprise civic, issue-oriented, religious, and educational interest groups and
associations.
 Civil societies have a potential of playing numerous momentous roles for democratic
development and consolidation.
Human Rights: Concepts and Theories
 55

What Are Human Rights?

 Human rights are basic to humanity.

 They apply to all people everywhere.
 Human rights is an important part of our individual status as human beings and of our collective
status as members of the global community of humankind.
 It is also common to call them ‘natural’ rights, since they are natural entitlements to everyone.
 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, Article 2), stipulates that human rights
belong to every human being “without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex,
language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or
other status” (Art. 2).
 Human rights also guarantee people the means necessary to satisfy their basic needs, such as
food, housing, and education, so they can take full advantage of all opportunities. Finally, by
guaranteeing life, liberty, and security, human rights protect people against abuse by individuals
and groups who are more powerful.
 Human rights are established upon some main principles including universality, inalienability,
indivisibility and interdependence.
 When we say human rights are universal, it is to show their worldwide applicability.
 Human rights are inalienable. That means you cannot lose these rights any more than you can
stop to be a human being.
 Human rights are interdependent and interrelated. This is to mean that all rights have equal
weight/importance and it is not possible for one to fully enjoy any of his/her right without the
others.
 The other important principle of human rights is the principle of equality and non-
discrimination.
Human Rights and Responsibilities
 Promoting for the respect of human rights is one of the core missions of the UN and its agencies.
 Human rights protection and fulfillment is considered as one of the functions of governments,
one of the very reasons why people need a government or political system in general.
 This is clearly states in various human rights instruments and resolutions issued by the UN
including the UN Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), International
 56

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights (ICESC), Convention on the Rights of Children (CRC), Convention on all
forms Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Paris Principles.
 Mandates of state institutions in relation to human rights are also clearly stipulated in the FDRE
Constitution.
Landmarks in Development of Human Rights
The modern human rights notions are the result of extended tussles to end many forms of
oppressions; including slavery, genocide, discrimination, and government tyranny, in history of
world societies.
Rights Holders and Duty Bearers
 Rights become rights when the job of identifying the two main actors is done. These are right
holders and duty bearers.
 Right holders are those who are entitled to enjoy, possess or claim a given right. Human rights
provisions usually started by mentioning the right holder using terms like “every human being,
all children, women, people with disability…”
 Duty bearers are those who carry the obligation of promoting, protecting, and fulfilling these
right to the right holders.
 The primary (not the only) duty bearer for almost all of our rights is the state. Besides,
individuals and other non-state actors may be named as duty bearers depending on the nature of
the right.
Categories of Human Rights

 They include civil and political rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom from torture.
 They also include economic and social rights, such as the rights to health and education.
 Some rights apply to individuals, such as the right to a fair trial: these are called individual
rights.
 Others apply to groups of people, such as the right to a healthy environment or to native title:
these are called collective rights.
 There are various ways used by different scholars to categories human rights. Human Rights into
three: First, Second and Third generation rights.
 57

Civil and Political Rights

 Civil and political rights are the first generation rights which uphold the sanctity of the
individual before the law and guarantee his or her ability to participate freely in civil, economic,
and political society.
 Civil rights include such rights as the right to life, liberty and personal security, equality before
the law, protection from arbitrary arrest and the right to religious freedom and worship.
 Civil and political rights are seen as an immediately realizable rights
 They have also been called as ‘negative’ rights to indicate the fact that they simply entail the
absence of their violation in order to be upheld.

Social and Economic Rights

 Are second generation (social, economic, and cultural) rights. Social and economic rights include
such rights as the right to education, health and wellbeing, work and fair remuneration, form
trade unions and free associations, leisure time, and the right to social security, rituals, and
shared cultural practices, and speak one's own language and ‘mother tongue’ education.
 Unlike the civil and political rights, rights in this category are called ‘positive’ rights to indicate
that whose realization is highly subjected to the economic capability of states.
 Second generation rights are considered as “less fundamental” or unrealistic rights because of the
issues of justicialibility.

Peace, Development and Environmental Rights

 Third generation (solidarity) rights are aimed to guarantee that all individuals and groups have
the right to share in the benefits of the earth's natural resources, as well as those goods and
products that are made through processes of economic growth, expansion, and innovation.
 Many of these rights are transnational in nature. They requires redistribution of wealth, resources
from developed to developing nations.
 Solidarity rights also require global cooperation and shared responsibility to world peace,
development and the environment.
 Third Generation (solidarity) rights include rights to public goods such as the right to
development, the environment and peace.
 The third generation rights are still considered as an emerging rights, where the rights holders
and duty bearers of the rights included under this category are yet to be identified clearly.
 58

5.2.1. Derogations and Limitations on Human Rights

 There are two conditions under which human rights can be restricted: limitation and derogation.
 Limitations are lawful infringements of rights.
 Limitations can take the form of restrictions and/or derogation. Restrictions are acceptable or
justifiable limits of human rights during the normal times.
 Derogation means a temporary non-application and suspension of rights by the state in abnormal
or emergency (natural/artificial) situations.
 In Ethiopia, for example, both federal and regional governments have constitutional powers to
limit exercising human rights
 Regional states can declare in two conditions: natural disaster and epidemics.
 Federal Government can declare a State of Emergency in the following situations: 1) External
Invasion, 2) Breakdown of law and order when it: (i) endangers the constitutional order, (ii)
cannot be controlled by regular law enforcement, 3) Natural disaster, and 4) Epidemic.
5.2.2. Non-derogability of Human Rights 
 There are also certain unique and inherent human rights, which can never be suspended
under any circumstances.
 For instance, the ICCPR, non-derogable articles are: right against arbitrary deprivation of life
(art. 6); freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment; and
freedom from medical or scientific experimentation without consent (art. 7); freedom from
slavery and servitude (art. 8); freedom from imprisonment for inability to fulfill a contractual
obligation (art. 11); prohibition against the retrospective operation of criminal laws (art. 15);
right to recognition before the law (art. 16); and freedom of thought, conscience and religion (art.
18).
 The FDRE Constitution (art. 93(3[c])) states that rights under Articles 1, 18, 25, and sub-Articles
1 and 2 of Article 39 of the Constitution are non-derogable rights.
Implementation and Enforcement of Human Rights

International Mechanisms and the International Bill of Human Rights

The very reason behind the establishment of the international law is ensuring global peace and
security, the issues of human rights come into picture in the international law starting from the
adoption of the Charter of the United Nations on October 24, 1945.
 59

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a human rights instruments considered
as the groundwork of most of the post-1945 codification of human rights. It is the basis for
human rights protection and promotion around the world and has been endorsed by all countries.
Besides to the UN Charter and the UDHR, the UN presently has more than ten core human
rights treaty based human rights instruments.(see from module)
Ethiopia is a signatory member to all of the aforementioned core international human rights
instruments.

Regional Mechanisms
 Regional human rights systems are currently established only in Europe, Africa and American
regions. These human rights systems are established independent, but as part of regional
integration arrangements.
 In African, this system is established under the African Union (AU) structure; in the Americas it
is part of the Organization of American States (OAS); and in Europe it is embedded in the
European Union’s (EU) organizational structure.
 The other regional integration agreements we found in various places in the world does not have
such human rights mandate.
The Ethiopian Human Rights System
 The foundation of the observance of the human rights in Ethiopia is the FDRE Constitution,
which was ratified in 1994.
 The FDRE Constitution classifies human rights as one of its five fundamental principles and
declares that human rights and freedoms, emanating from the nature of mankind, are inviolable
and inalienable and that the human rights of citizens and peoples are respected.
 To end with, there have been established institutions with the specific and prominent mandate of
respect and promotions of human rights and the main organizations in this respect are: the
Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and the Ethiopian Institution of the
Ombudsman (EIO)..
60