Minority Rights Denials in Ethiopia

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
Awol Ali Mohammed
{"title":"Minority Rights Denials in Ethiopia","authors":"Awol Ali Mohammed","doi":"10.1163/15718115-bja10146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis article explores the constitutional promises and practices of self-rule in Ethiopia federal system focusing on the Konso ethnic group’s quest for self-rule. Given that the federal project in Ethiopia is a new model (synthesis) that has replaced the failed ‘Nation-State’ building effort since 1991, self-rule has become the ideological heart of the incumbent party and a pillar of the constitution. To this end, the article used a qualitative research approach that relied on both primary and secondary sources of data. Interviews, field observation, focus group discussions, and document analysis were utilised to obtain data. The findings show that, despite the fact that both the fdre and snnprs constitutions promised “unconditional right to every national, nationality, and people to have the right to self-determination up to secession,” the Konso quest for self-rule was rejected, their previous semi-autonomous status was dissolved, and they were relegated to ordinary Woreda. The merger transformed Special Woredas into ordinary Woredas while also shifting nationality self-rule to multi-ethnic self-rule, resulting in a paradigm shift in terms of self-rule practice. The Woredas lack essential identity-related self-government autonomy, such as the capacity to choose the working language and the right to appoint and remove officials as needed. A major source of concern is the decline in capital budgets and the delayed development of infrastructure. As a result, the snnp regional government has breached both its original ideological vows and the framework of the constitution.","PeriodicalId":44103,"journal":{"name":"International Journal on Minority and Group Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal on Minority and Group Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718115-bja10146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article explores the constitutional promises and practices of self-rule in Ethiopia federal system focusing on the Konso ethnic group’s quest for self-rule. Given that the federal project in Ethiopia is a new model (synthesis) that has replaced the failed ‘Nation-State’ building effort since 1991, self-rule has become the ideological heart of the incumbent party and a pillar of the constitution. To this end, the article used a qualitative research approach that relied on both primary and secondary sources of data. Interviews, field observation, focus group discussions, and document analysis were utilised to obtain data. The findings show that, despite the fact that both the fdre and snnprs constitutions promised “unconditional right to every national, nationality, and people to have the right to self-determination up to secession,” the Konso quest for self-rule was rejected, their previous semi-autonomous status was dissolved, and they were relegated to ordinary Woreda. The merger transformed Special Woredas into ordinary Woredas while also shifting nationality self-rule to multi-ethnic self-rule, resulting in a paradigm shift in terms of self-rule practice. The Woredas lack essential identity-related self-government autonomy, such as the capacity to choose the working language and the right to appoint and remove officials as needed. A major source of concern is the decline in capital budgets and the delayed development of infrastructure. As a result, the snnp regional government has breached both its original ideological vows and the framework of the constitution.
埃塞俄比亚剥夺少数群体权利的情况
本文探讨了埃塞俄比亚联邦制中自治的宪法承诺和实践,重点关注 Konso 族群对自治的追求。鉴于埃塞俄比亚的联邦项目是一种新模式(综合体),取代了 1991 年以来失败的 "民族国家 "建设努力,自治已成为执政党的意识形态核心和宪法的支柱。为此,文章采用了一种定性研究方法,同时依赖一手和二手数据来源。通过访谈、实地观察、焦点小组讨论和文件分析来获取数据。研究结果表明,尽管埃塞俄比亚宪法和埃塞俄比亚国家宪法都承诺 "每个国家、民族和人民都无条件地享有自决权,直至分离",但孔索人对自治的追求遭到了拒绝,他们之前的半自治地位被取消,并被降级为普通县。合并将特别区转变为普通区,同时也将民族自治转变为多民族自治,导致自治实践的范式转变。各县缺乏与身份相关的基本自治权,如选择工作语言的能力和根据需要任免官员的权利。令人担忧的一个主要问题是资本预算的减少和基础设施发展的延迟。因此,Snnp 地区政府违背了其最初的意识形态誓言和宪法框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信