This article explores the relationship between federalism and conflict in the light of the experience of the federal experiment in contemporary Ethiopia. By reinforcing the truism in federal studies that federalism is not a panacea to the ailments of divided societies that are prone to conflict, it seeks to point out that while federalism, as a reaction to some long-standing historic problems, helps us deal with some conflicts, it also has the potential to generate some other (new) ones. By assuming that conflict is primarily a relation of divergence of interests among parties with diverging strategies and methods, the article describes federalism in general and the federal experiment in Ethiopia and its persistent attempts to deal with the old and new conflicts that emerged in/from the past and are emerging day by day. Throughout, it is argued that we need to understand federalism as a tool of governance that both solves and generates different kinds of conflicts, and that we need to lessen our expectations of the federal experiment (by remembering that it does not establish the 'peaceable kingdom' that idealist philosophers long hoped for), and take the modest road of learning to live with the conflicts.
3 Indeed, a number of theories can be identified on the nature of rights. Prominent among these are the will theory, the interest theory, the claims theory, the entitlement theory, and the entitlement-plus theory. For a crisp summary and the details of their differences from one another, see James W. Nickel, Making Sense of Human Rights (2 nd ed). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006. An excerpt of the earlier version of the same book entitled, "Making Sense of Human Rights" (revised edition
This article describes the making of the 1995 constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) and analyzes its implications for legitimacy. It contends that legitimacy of the constitution, which fosters delity to it, can –as one among other factors– help bridge the gap between constitutional design and constitutional practice. By making a process-content-context analysis of the constitution, it argues that the Ethiopian constitution which had a weak original legitimacy, can earn a derivative legitimacy through aggressive implementation. Aggressive imple- mentation, it is maintained, demands fidelity to the constitution. Fidelity and other components of a redemptive constitutional practice (such as creative constitutional interpretation, constitutionally informed legislation, positive constitutional amendment, and constitutionally responsible voting) help deal with the perennial question of how to bridge the gap between constitutional design and constitutional practice in Ethiopia and beyond. Key words: Ethiopia, making of constitutions, constitutional legitimacy, fidelity to constitutions, constitutional redemption
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.