Civic

UNIT 1. WHAT IS ETHICS?
Contents
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Aims and objectives
1.2 Definition and subject matter of Ethics
1.3 Relationship of Ethics with other fields
1.4 Classifications of Ethics
1.5 Importance of studying Ethics
1.6 Check your progress
1.7 Selected References
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This unit is your introduction to Block I that contains the ethics part of your course. The
unit begins by defining ethics and pointing out its subject matter. This will be followed by
the sub-unit that describes the relationship of ethics to other fields. The purpose of this
sub-unit is to explain further the meaning and concern of ethics by comparing and
contrasting it with other related fields. The next sub-unit presents description of different
parts or subdivisions of ethics. This is also intended to give you still more idea about the
concern of ethics. The section on the importance of studying Ethics will explain the
relevance of ethics and the benefits you are expected to gain from your study of ethics.
The last sub-unit contains questions that help you to “check your progress”.
1.1 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The aim of this unit is to introduce you to the meaning Ethic, its concern/subject matter a
s well as the relevance or importance of studying it. After you have studied the unit, you
are expected to be able to:
- define ethics
- name the subject matter of ethics
1
- explain the relationship between ethics and philosophy and other behavioral sciences
- distinguish ethics and morality
- distinguish ethical relativism and ethical objectivism
- name and describe the various sub-divisions of ethics
- explain the relevance of ethics
1.2 DEFINITION AND SUBJECT MATTER OF ETHICS
The following are some of the several but related definitions of Ethics: Ethics is the field
of study that is concerned with moral values. Moral values are values that determine
human conduct (behaviors, actions, decisions) as right or wrong, good or bad, moral or
immoral. Hence, ethics could also be defined as the field that studies rightness or
wrongness (goodness or badness, morality or immorality) of human conduct.
Ethics is also defined as “a set of principles prescribing a behavior code that explains
what is good and right or bad and wrong and outlines moral duty and obligations”.
According to still another definition, “Ethics is the discipline that is concerned with what
constitutes human welfare (good, happiness, benefit, safety) and the kind of conduct
necessary to promote it”.
We can give a working definition of ethics (the definition that we maintain in this course)
as follow: Ethics is a branch of philosophy that is concerned with rightness or wrongness
(morality or immorality) of human conduct/behavior.
Working definition of Ethics: Ethics is a branch of philosophy that is concerned with

rightness or wrongness (morality or immorality) of human conduct/behavior.
The subject matter of a discipline or field of study is what it is about or concerned with.
Ethics is about or concerned with human conduct/behavior. Hence, the subject matter of
Ethics is human conduct/behavior. In deed, the word ethics itself comes from a Greek
word which means character (conduct).
2
Ethics is concerned with human conduct because only human beings are said to be moral
or immoral. We cannot speak or think about morality of other things or animals. We do
not say, for example, a car or cow is moral or immoral. Hence, morality (that is, the
capacity of moral decision making, or being moral or immoral) is a major quality that
distinguishes human beings from other animals. It is in this sense that man is defined as
moral animal.
The reason why morality applies only to human beings is that it involves choice, choice
between right and wrong; and only human beings are endowed with the capacity for
choice. This capacity is known as will. Human beings are peculiarly endowed with the
will of choosing to do or not to do something.
Consideration of the will (also called will power) is important to understand or to talk
about morality because morality dose not make sense otherwise. A person is regarded or
evaluated as right or wrong, moral or immoral, good or bad only if he/she did the action
willingly, by his/her free will or choice. We cannot blame a person who performed an
action without his/her will or choice (or did it forced to do); or we do not regard such
person as immoral or bad person.
The subject matter of Ethics is human conduct/behavior.
In dealing with human conduct from the perspective of obligation and value, ethics
investigates a variety of related concerns. Among them are whether a standard of morality
exists that applies to all peoples at all times everywhere (which is the question whether
morality is relative or absolute), the origin of moral values (whether moral values derived
from an ultimate value), the precise nature of moral responsibility, the condition under
which one is accountable or responsible, and the proper end of law. Ethical objectivism
and absolutism and ethical subjectivism and relativism are positions that arise when
ethicians deal with the first of these concerns.
3
Objectivism is the doctrine that things are, when not experienced by us, just what they
seem when experienced by us. Hence, moral objectivism could be defined as the view
according to which morality is out side and independent the wishes and desires of
individuals. Ethical absolutism is the doctrine that there exists one and only moral code
that applies to everyone, at all times and places. What is a moral duty for me (Ethiopians,
etc.) must also be a duty for you (Americans, etc.).
Relativism, in epistemology, refers to the doctrine that every known object is relative to
the knowing subject and as such is dependent in its being upon the knowing subject and
is incapable of existing apart from consciousness. Ethical relativism is the doctrine that
denies that there is a single moral standard or code that is universally applicable to all
people at all times. Positively defined, ethical relativism is the doctrine that believes that
morality is relative to individuals; that is, it depends upon the perceptions, desires,
inclinations or tastes of the individual (whether the individual is a person, country,
society, or a group of people).
Ethical relativism should be distinguished from cultural relativism. Cultural relativism is

sociological fact proved by scientific or descriptive ethics according to which there exist
many obviously different and often contradictory moral codes. Hence, the difference
between ethical relativism and cultural relativism is that whereas the former is normative
position that involves value judgment the latter is non-normative position that is value
neutral.
1.3 Relationship of Ethics with other fields
The purpose of this sub-unit is to explain further the meaning and concern of ethics by
comparing and contrasting Ethic with other related fields. This is because there are some
questions that come necessarily from above explanation of the meaning and subject
matter of Ethics. We have said, for example, that the subject matter of Ethics is human
conduct/behavior. One may ask here: Is it only Ethics that is concerned with human
conduct/behavior? This question creates a need to point out the fact that there are a
4
number of field concerned with human conduct and to explain the difference between
Ethics and these fields.
As mentioned, there are several other fields that are concerned with human
conduct/behavior. For example, the fields that are commonly known as behavioral
sciences (fields such as psychology, sociology, anthropology, history and economics)
study different aspects of human behavior. Ethics is distinguished from such fields by
being normative. In other words, it is concerned with pronouncing judgment upon human
behavior, not merely describing the behavior. Ethics is the study not only of what is but
also that of what ought to be. Ethics, and only Ethics, is concerned with the “ought” of
human conduct. That is, whereas all other fields are limited to descriptions of how human
beings in fact behave, Ethics (particularly normative Ethics) is concerned with
prescriptions of how human beings ought to behave. Ethics not merely describes moral
ideals held by human beings but asks which ideal is better than others, more worth
pursuing, and why.
Put differently, all ethical questions involve a decision about what one should do in a
specific instance. Notice here the word should. It implies that ethical questions are not
concerned with what one would or may do (which is an essentially psychological
concern) but what one ought to do. Judgments about such decisions are generally
expressed with words like right and wrong, should and ought, or obligation and duty. For
instance, “I should tell the truth” or “Telling truth is the right thing to do”. A good portion
of ethics is devoted to problems concerning the right thing to do or what we should do,
which is the question of obligation. Hence, ethics is about ought, obligation, duty, or
responsibility. Think about what are our duties or obligations are as: human beings,
citizens, brothers, sisters, fathers/mothers, children, teachers, students, doctors,
accountants, etc.
All ethical decisions involve choice. But implied in any choice is a value or value
judgment. In effect, every choice involves an assessment of worth. We feel obliged to
behave a certain way because we seek a specific value or good. These values, just as
actions themselves, can be described with words such as good, bad, evil, desirable,
5
undesirable, beneficial, harmful, etc. In addition to dealing with obligation, therefore,
Ethics deals with questions of value. Taken together, questions of obligation and value
form the heart of ethics.
Questions of obligation and value form the heart of ethics.
Ethics and Philosophy

Ethics is essentially a philosophical field. It is one of the branches or standard field of
philosophy. Other major branches of philosophy are Metaphysics, Epistemology,
Aesthetics, Logic and Axiology. Each of these fields has its distinct respective subject-
matter or areas of concern. Briefly put: Metaphysics is the study of reality;
Epistemology is the study/theory of knowledge; Aesthetics is the study of beauty,
particularly in art, as a result of which Aesthetics is alternatively called Philosophy of
Art; Logic is the field of philosophy concerned with formulation of principles of correct
thinking; Axiology is the field of philosophy concerned with value.
Ethics is distinguished from other fields of philosophy by being concerned with moral
values (i.e., morality of human behavior). As a result, ethics is also known as moral
philosophy.
Within philosophy, ethics is a branch of the above mentioned philosophical field known
as axiology. Axiology, which comes from Greek word axios meaning “worthy”, is the
study of value in general. As such it is alternatively known as value theory. Specific
concerns of axiology include the nature of value (whether values are subjective or
objective, relative or absolute, etc.), the origin of values, classification of values and the
like.
As a branch of axiology, ethics is concerned with a particular type of value, namely

moral value. That is why ethics is also called known as moral philosophy. Moral values
are values that determine our actions/conduct as right or wrong, moral or immoral, good
or bad/evil.
Ethics and Morals/Morality
6
There is a common confusion regarding the meaning and relationship between ethics and
morals/morality. In ordinary language, these two terms are used interchangeably as if
they mean one and the same thing. In strict usage, however, there is remarkable
difference between the two terms. As could be seen from the above explanation of the
meaning and purpose of ethics, ethics is the discipline that studies or enquires into
morality. Hence, the difference between Ethics and morality is that whereas ethics is the
study or inquiry, morality is what is studied or inquired into by ethics. Morality refers to a
set of rules and principles that guide the people’s behavior/conduct in day-to-day life;
they are set of rules we ought to obey, or tell us what is right and wrong. Ethics, as the
philosophy of morals/morality, is the discipline that examines and formulates these rules
and principles; it attempts to discover how these rules and principles are justified, and the
logical consequences of the moral beliefs. To put the same thing in different words,
morality refers to the degree to which an action conforms to a standard or norm of human
conduct; ethics refers to the philosophical study of values and of what constitutes good
and bad human conduct.
1.4 Classification of Ethics
Ethics is generally divided into two major types, namely Normative Ethics and Non-
normative Ethics. In this sub-unit you will study these two types of Ethics and their
further classifications.
1.4.1 Normative Ethics

Normative ethics is the area of ethics that involves attempts to determine precisely what
moral standards to follow so that our actions may be morally right or good. It is called
normative because establishes norms of right conduct. Normative statements are
assertions that express value judgment. Every normative statement says or implies that
something is good or bad, better or worse, ought to be done or ought not to be done.
Normative ethics is further divided into two sub areas, namely general normative ethics
and applied normative ethics.
1.4.1.1 General Normative Ethics:
7
General normative ethics is reasoned search for principles of right conduct. It formulates
the principles that we should follow so that our conduct be morally right, principles that
are used to determine human behavior as right or wrong, good or bad, moral or immoral.
The word right comes from the Latin rectus which means straight or according to the
rule. Hence, an action is right/moral if it agrees with the rules and principles established
by General normative ethics.
1.4.1.2 Applied Normative Ethics: is the attempt to explain and justify positions on
specific moral problems/issues. It is called applied because here ethicists attempt to use
(apply (implement/put into practice) the general theoretical ethical principles to resolve
concrete or specific moral problems. Some of the issues of applied ethics include capital
punishment, abortion, euthanasia, war, sex, and corruption.
There are many sub-divisions of applied ethics depending upon the diverse moral issues
that call for theoretical considerations. The following are just few examples of the
specialized areas of applied ethics: Development Ethics, Environmental Ethics,
Professional Ethics, Medical Ethics, Business Ethics, Work Ethics, Social Ethics,
Individual Ethics, Political Ethics, and Historical Ethics. Though there may exist
overlapping between some of these subdivisions of ethics, each could be treated as
distinct area/concern of ethics. Some of these areas of applied ethics are defined below to
give you more ideas about the concern of applied normative ethics.
Environmental Ethics is the area of applied ethics where ethicists consider the ethical
relationship between human beings and the natural environment. There are many ethical
decisions that human beings make with respect to the environment. Consider the
following questions, for example: Should we continue to clear cut the forests for the sake
of human consumption? What environmental obligations do we need to keep for future
generation? Is it right for humans to knowingly cause the extinction of a species for the
convenience of humanity?
Medical Ethics is the discipline of evaluating the merits, risks, and social concern of
activities in the field of medicine. Ethicists of this area suggest methods that provide
8
principles that physicians (doctors) should consider while decision making. Medical
ethics is a branch of applied ethics generally known as Professional Ethics. Other related
branches of medical ethics are health care ethics and nursing ethics.
Business Ethics is a form of applied ethics that examines the ethical rules and principles
within a commercial/business context; the various moral problems that may arise in the
commercial/business settings; and any special duties or obligations that apply to persons
who are engaged in commerce/business. Hence, business ethics is also a branch of
applied ethics generally known as Professional Ethics.
Legal Ethics is refers to an ethical code that governs the persons in the practice of law. In
other words, it is the area of ethics concerned with professional responsibility of the
persons involved in legal decision making. Hence, legal ethics, too, is a branch of applied
ethics generally known as Professional Ethics.
1.4.2 Non-normative ethics

Non-normative ethics is the area of ethics that consists of two fields, namely Scientific or
Descriptive ethics and Meta-ethics. It is called non-normative because, unlike the
normative ethics, it does not involve the establishment of norms of right conduct. Its
statements are non-normative; that is, they do not assert or express value judgment. In a
word, they are value neutral.
1.4.2.1 Scientific or descriptive ethics

This area of ethics involves factual investigation of moral behavior of a given
community. It is concerned with how people do in fact behave. It is therefore factual
description that does not involve value judgment.
1.4.2.2 Meta-ethics
Meta-ethics is the second field of non-normative ethics. It is highly technical discipline
in which philosophers analyze and clarify the meaning of important terms used in ethical
discourse or writings, terms such as the good, right or wrong, moral or immoral,
obligation, responsibility, duty, and freedom of will. The concern of meta-ethics also
includes a critical study of how ethical statements can be verified.
9
Diagram 1 Classification of Ethics
Ethics
Normative Ethics Non-normative

ethics
General normative Applied

Scientific/Desc
ethics normative ethics Meta-ethics
riptive ethics
1. 5 Importance of studying Ethics
What is that makes Ethics relevant subject to students like you? Or, why should you
study Ethics? In order to get the best from your study of ethics, you must have a
satisfying explanation as to why you are studying ethics as a part of this course. Of
course you may answer the question by saying “I am studying ethics because I am
required to do so”. However, you should also know the reason why you are required to
study ethics. This section of the unit tries to answer such questions. That is, it will explain
the relevance of ethics and the benefits you are expected to gain from your study of
ethics.
Firstly, whether you are ordinary person, a manager, teacher, lawyer, and the like, as a
rational person you have to have moral justification for all your actions and decisions.
Your study of ethics (the rules, principles and theories) helps you to that end. That is, they
10
will make you sensitive to ethical/moral issues and help you to think and act in ethically
sound or justifiable way.
Secondly, you can also consider the general nature and concern of ethics to realize its
relevance. Ethics, especially through its, normative approach towards life, has practical
importance. Its problems and solutions have to do with the real questions of the conduct
of living. Its solutions are solutions for the problems of goals and means of goals in the
practical life of all human beings. As the question of the manner of living, ethics is also
concerned with the question of the meaning of life; and how we live our actual life could
be determined by our conceptions of the meaning of life. Hence, though theoretical, the
concern of ethics is clearly related to the concrete or practical life situations. That is to
say, it has obvious relevance to practical difficulties which confront every human being.
Its theorizing almost always stems from the efforts of human beings to solve the practical,
immediate, and pressing problems which arise in the everyday living.
Put differently, the ethical theories and principles you study in the course are the
framework by which we can intelligently conduct moral investigations. If adequately
understood, they could be applied to concrete moral situations or to solve specific moral
problems/dilemmas. However, you should note that the fundamental value of studying
and understanding of the ethical theories is not to obtain definitive guides to moral
conduct. Rather, the primary and fundamental value lies in becoming aware of the moral
options available to us for dealing with complex moral decisions on a personal and
collective level.
Finally, we hope you have recognized that there is currently a kind of universal
movement for ethical education. That is, everywhere in the world including our country
there is common understanding/urge by scholars as well as leaders and common people
for ethical education. If you have noticed this, what do you think the reason for that?
Discuss about it with your friends or colleagues. You may realize from your discussion
that there is great need for ethical education to the present generation.
11
1.6 I From the alternatives given to each question below, choose the best one.
1. Which of the following is wrong match?
A. Aesthetics/beauty
B. Epistemology/knowledge
C. Ethics/conduct
D. Logic/thinking
E. None of the above
2. Which of the following questions is not among the concerns of ethics?

A. What is the source of human knowledge?
B. How should human beings live?
C. What are the responsibilities of citizenship?
D. Is abortion moral or immoral?
3. The area of ethics that is concerned with clarification of ethical terms is known as
A. Normative ethics
B. Applied ethics
C. Metaethics
D. Scientific ethics
4. The fundamental value of studying and understanding of the ethical theories lies in
A. obtaining definitive guides to moral conduct
B. becoming aware of the moral options available to us for dealing with complex
moral decisions on a personal and collective level.
C. protecting immoral actions against us
D. providing particular skills of doing business
12
5. Which of the following is an example of normative statements?
A. Addis Ababa is the capital city of Ethiopia.
B. Haile Gebresilassie is an athletic hero.
C. Alcoholism should be made illegal.
D. All of the above
1.6 II Define the following terms

Axiology Ethics
Moral value Normative ethics
Applied ethics Scientific/Descriptive ethics
Metaethics Non-normative ethics
Environmental ethics Business ethics
Medical ethics Legal ethics
Moral objectivism Ethical relativism
Ethical absolutism Ethical subjectivism
Cultural relativism
1.6 III Say True or False

1. Ethics is concerned with part of our human values.
2. Ethics and morality have the same meaning.
3. Metaethics is normative study of human behavior.
4. Professional ethics is a branch of applied ethics.
5. All ethical questions involve a choice.
1.6 IV Questions for comprehension and reflection

1. What does “man is moral animal” mean?
2. What are the benefits you are expected to gain from your study of ethics?
3. According to your opinion, what is the reason for the universal urge for ethical
education?
13
Cryssides D. George and John H. Kaler. (1993) An Introduction to Business Ethics.
Donald Palmner (1996). Does the Center Hold? An Introduction to Western Philosophy.
(Chapter 7, Ethics; Chapter 8, Critique of traditional Ethical theories)
Miller, E. D. L.(1984) Questions That Matter: An Invitation to Philosophy. Part Four, The
Question of morality, Chapter 16 (pp 349-378)
Stroll Avrum and Richard H. Popkin, (1961) Introduction to Philosophy. (Chapter 5,

Ethics/Appraisal of Human Character, Conduct, and Aims)
Vincent Barry (1980) Philosophy: A Text With Readings. (Chapter 3, Ethics, pp. 89-103)
Unit 2. Classical Ethical Theories
Contents
2.0 Introduction
14
2.3 Sophists and Sophism
2.4 Platonism: ethical theory of Socrates and Plato
2.5 Nicomachean Ethics: ethical theory of Aristotle
2.6 Relevance of the classical ethical theories
2.0 Introduction
This second unit of your course intends to introduce you to the Greek Classical Ethical
Theories, particularly Platonism and Nicomachean Ethics, ethical theories of the three
popular Greek giants, namely Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. The first is ethical theory of
Socrates and Plato whereas the second is that of Aristotle. As such, this unit gives you an
opportunity to familiarize yourself with the most influential persons and philosophical
ideas in the history of mankind whose thoughts have laid foundation for all subsequent
thinkers including those of our times and that of each of us.
Platonism was a reaction to sophism, philosophical views of sophists; and Nicomachean

ethics was a reaction to Platonism. Hence we begin by outlining some of the major
features of the philosophy of the sophists. This will be followed by a relatively more
detailed description of Platonic ideas. Next to that you will study Nicomachean ethics and
its relation to Platonism. Finally you will find the section that explains the relevance of
the classical ethical theories or the reason why you have to study them.
At the end of your study of the unit you are expected to:
- explain the importance of knowing the relevance of the classical ethical theories
15
- know the meaning of sophists and sophism
- comprehend Platonism
- know the major elements of Nicomachean ethics
- the meaning of golden mean and the theory of moderation
2.3 Sophists and Sophism
Plato and Socrates severely criticized the Sophists because of their relativism,
subjectivism or skepticism. Indeed, a major part of Platonism was a reaction to the
philosophy and teaching of these Sophists, known as sophism. Hence, to understand
Platonism, you have to be acquainted with the major elements of the Sophists’
philosophy.
Sophists (literally “wise men”) were a group of philosophers in the fifth century BC who
offered to teach young Athenians how to use logic and rhetoric to defeat opponents in any
controversy. They were the first to teach wisdom for a fee, something that irked Socrates.
Actually, the Sophists may not have been as wise as they were clever with words, and
they were accused of making the stronger arguments appear to be the weaker and the
weaker arguments appear to be the stronger. But in the days of the Athenian democracy,
when an individual was required to defend himself in the law courts, the Sophists’
“wisdom” was much in demand. Socrates and Plato sharply criticized the Sophists
because they accepted monetary rewards for encouraging unprincipled persuasive
method.
Fifth century Athens was a politically troubled city-state. During several decades,
however, Athenians maintained a nominally democratic government in which “citizens”
had the opportunity to participate directly in important social decisions. This contributed
to a renewed interest in practical philosophy. The Sophists offered to provide their
students with training in the effective exercise of citizenship. Since the central goal of
political manipulation was to outwit and publicly defeat an opponent, the rhetorical
techniques of persuasion naturally played an important role.
16
Protagoras, one of the two most popular sophists who was active about 425 BC,
expressed the central philosophy of the sophists in the following statement which is
known to be one of the most famous lines ever uttered. He wrote: “A man is the measure
of all things; of the things that are, that they are, and of the things that are not, that they
are not.” This means that the individual, each and every person, is the criterion unto
himself or herself as to what exists and what does not. This thought was expanded to
include truth and morality. It implies that what ever you perceive as true or false is true or
false, and whatever you think as good/right or bad/wrong is good/right or bad/wrong.
This position is known as Relativism or Subjectivism because it makes the most

important things relative to and dependent upon the individual, or because it asserts that
the subject (either an individual person, community, or society) is the source and standard
of being, truth, and goodness.
“A man is the measure of all things; of the things that are, that they are, and of the things
that are not, that they are not.” Protagoras
The Sophists expanded this relativism to skepticism, uncertainty with respect to knowing;
philosophical epistemological position that doubts or denies the possibility of knowledge,
or holds that mankind cannot possess certain knowledge about anything. Skepticism is, in
other words, the epistemological position that varies between doubting all assumption
until proved and claiming that no knowledge is possible. The latter extreme position is
called absolute skepticism and the Sophists tend to hold this position (that is, that of
absolute skepticism).
The transition from the relativism of Protagoras to skepticism was expressed in the
following statement of Gorgias, the second popular Sophist: “Nothing exists; if
something does exist, we cannot know it; if we come to know it, we cannot teach it to
others.” Hence, the only thing remaining is the use of the word, and Gorgias affirmed that
all things can appear true and just, if oratorical power is capable of revealing things as
true and just, beyond every pretension of reality of content.
17
The traditional belief of the Greeks had been that their cities had received laws from
some divinity; protector of the cities, and that goodness or happiness consists in
conforming one’s life to these laws, accepted as divine and eternal. The Sophists shook
this faith to its very roots. By their subjectivist and skeptical prejudices they ended in the
conclusion that the good is that which satisfies one’s instincts and passions.
You have been studying about who the Sophists are and their philosophy or teachings.
You may ask at this point “what is then Sophism?” Sophism is just the manner of the
Sophists, which associated with cheating, making the stronger arguments appear to be the
weaker and the weaker arguments appear to be the stronger. Sophism is, in other words, a
plausible argument that is actually fallacious, especially when one presents it as if it were
legitimate reasoning.
Fallacy is incorrect or illogical argument that appears or seems correct or logical. It is, in
other words, deceptive argument, an argument that deceives, cheats or misleads. Sophism
(also called Sophistry) is intentional or deliberate use of such arguments to defeat one’s
opponent (or teaching to do so).
Contribution of Sophists to the history of philosophy

The pre-Socratics had turned all their attention to the physical world (cosmology). Man
had been considered as one of the many phenomena of the physical world. The Sophists
were the first to show complete indifference to the problem of the world of matter and to
center their efforts upon man. Thus, in the picture of history, Sophistic thought could be
considered as the transition from the old cosmological concepts to the new ideas about
man. (It is to be recalled that the Sophists centered their efforts on the problems of
knowledge as well as the problems of morality and justice.) But man can be an object of
study in his sense of knowledge as well as in that profound one of reason. The Sophists
stopped at the first, at the immediacy of sense impressions. (The analysis of reason was
reserved for Socrates and his disciples.) It was what they started that, in the immediate
process of time, culminated in the high speculations of Plato and Aristotle.
18
2.4. PLATONISM: THE ETHICAL THEORIES OF SOCRATES AND PLATO
As mentioned above, Platonism is the ethical theory of Socrates and Plato. Who is
Socrates? What is the relationship between Socrates and Plato and between Socrates’
views and those of Plato? In what follow immediately below you will read about who
Socrates is and his major moral views, the relationship between Socrates’ and Plato’s
views, and the finally views of Plato.
Socrates and his philosophical life

Although he was well known during his own time for his conversational skills and public
teaching, Socrates (469-399 BC) wrote nothing. As a result, the main evidence for his
opinions comes to us second hand and primarily from the writings of his student, Plato.
Indeed, Socrates is the protagonist (central character) of the Platonic dialogues.
Socrates has always been regarded as a kind of symbol of philosophical activity,

especially its rational and critical nature. This is because philosophy itself could be
defined as “rational and critical enterprise” or “the love and pursuit of wisdom”. The
wisdom of Socrates (for which he dedicated his whole life) consists of a critical habit, an
eternal vigilance about all things and a reverence for truth, whatever its form, wherever
its place. His is a perspective that allows him to transcend the narrowness, the smugness,
the arrogance, and the pettiness of mundane ego fulfillment. His method (popularly
known as Socratic Method) consisted of asking someone about the meaning of important
terms or ideas, usually moral concept, and then to cross-examining his opponent
mercilessly until some progress or clarity is achieved.
In his use of critical reasoning, by his unwavering commitment to truth, and through the
vivid example of his own life, Socrates set the standard for all subsequent Western
philosophy. His dedication to careful reasoning transformed the entire enterprise (Western
philosophy). Since he sought genuine knowledge rather than mere victory over an
opponent, Socrates employed the tricks (logic) of the Sophists to a new purpose, the
pursuit of truth. His willingness to call everything to question and his determination to
accept nothing less than an adequate account of the nature of things makes him the first
19
clear exponent of critical philosophy. Critical philosophy is the analysis and definition of
basic concepts and the precise expression and criticism of basic beliefs.
For the most part of his life, Socrates devoted himself to free-wheeling discussions with
the aristocratic young citizens of Athens, insistently questioning their unwarranted
confidence in the truth of popular opinions. Unlike the professional Sophists of the time,
Socrates refused to accept payment for his work with students. Despite (or, perhaps,
because) of his loft disdain for material success, many of his students were fanatically
loyal to him. Their parents, however, were often displeased with his influence on their
offsprings.
An Athenian jury found charges of impiety (corrupting the youth and interfering with the
religion of the city) upon which to convict him, and they sentenced him to death in 399
B.C, which he accepted with remarkable grace in obedience to the rule of law. He drank
hemlock and died in the company of his friends and disciples. The trial provides us with
one of the heroic moments in human history. Instead of defending himself, Socrates
continued his campaign. He refused to apologize or to promise to reform (to stop asking
everybody questions). As such, Socrates became one of the first and greatest martyrs in
mankind’s search for truth.
Civilization and all that it implies have not come easily. Many along the way have
suffered enormous intellectual agony. One of such persons is Socrates, who ultimately
paid with his life for what he believed. Consider how profoundly impoverished we would
be, personally and collectively, had Socrates been unwilling to pay the price. He, like
countless others, has paid his intellectual dues and, to a large extent, ours as well.”
Socrates, the great ethical philosopher, is thus regarded as a model of moral person with
respect to the search for, and devotion to, truth. “Unexamined life is not worth living”, he
said, and his whole life was dedicated to self-examination and questioning of both the
self and others. Analysis of his life provides a model as to “how life should be lived”.
Some find analogy between the place of Jesus Christ in the Christian religion and that
20
Socrates in philosophy, mainly because the latter is regarded as the symbol of
philosophizing and also because he gave his life for the principles/truth he taught.
“I tell you that to let no day pass without discussing goodness and all the other subjects
about which you hear me talking and examining both myself and others is really the very
best thing that a man can do, and life without this sort of examination is not worth
living.” Socrates
The moral views of Socrates

The history of hortatory ethical speculations, whether ancient or modern, can be
interpreted in the light of the philosophical attempts to answer the following two
interrelated questions: “What is the good life for man?” and “How ought men to
behave?” This was especially true for the classical ethical theories under discussion,
namely Platonism and Nicomachean ethics.
For Socrates, the answer to the second question, from the above two questions, was
obvious: Men ought to act in such a way as to achieve the good life. It was the first
question that was more troublesome – namely, what constitutes the good life? In dealing
with that question, the teaching of Socrates can be summarized in a remark: The good life
can be discovered if and only if men have knowledge. Indeed, “Socrates’ main
philosophical concern was with how anyone can know the right way to live.”
Note that this remark does not directly answer the question. That is, Socrates does not
purport to tell us what the good life is but only what we must do in order to discover it.
Nevertheless it was a remark of great historical significance. It was accepted by almost
all Greeks who followed Socrates.
The remark also expresses Socrates’ doctrine which is sometimes termed “the Socratic
paradox”. The paradox lies in the fact that although men in fact act immorally, none do
so deliberately. For it was Socrates’ belief that if a man knows what is good, he will
always act in such a way to try to achieve it. Evil, seen from this standpoint, is thus
always the product of ignorance (that is, a case of a man believing something to be good
21
when it is not). Socrates defended this point of view by the following argument: The
good, he maintained, is that which is most serviceable to men. Everyone aims at doing
that which is most serviceable to himself. It is, accordingly, unthinkable that anyone
should not do that which he recognizes as being most serviceable to himself. If anyone
should act in a way which is not conducive to his own good, therefore, his action must
result from a failure to recognize what is good in those circumstances. It follows from
this that immoral action is always due to lack of knowledge. It is this doctrine which is
summarized in the epigram “virtue is knowledge”, and also in the remark “nobody errs
wittingly”, which means nobody act immorally knowingly. In a word, Socrates held that
men do not act immorally if they know what is moral.
“Unexamined life is not worth living”.

“Only thing I know is that I know nothing.” Socrates
Socratic problem
Platonism is the ethical theories of Socrates and Plato. As mentioned above, Plato was a
student of Socrates. Plato (427-347) expressed his philosophy in numerous dialogues. In
earlier of these dialogues Plato develops the ideas of his teacher Socrates through
portrayals of Socrates’ discussions with his contemporaries, discussion which proceeded
by questions and answers. In the dialogues, which were composed over a long period of
nearly fifty years, Plato gradually introduced his own and more developed ideas in place
of those of the historical Socrates, though he continued to employ Socrates as the
mouthpiece of these ideas. It is difficult to determine where the real Socrates leaves off
and Plato’s own ideas begin. This is called the Socratic problem in the history of
philosophy. For the purpose of the discussions in this course we will not concern
ourselves with this problem; that is, we will make very simple distinctions between the
two: Except the statements indicated by quoting directly to be Socrates’ or Plato’s and the
specifically distinguished views, all other views are regarded here to belong to Platonism,
which equally refers, in this course, to Socrates and Plato.
Plato and his moral views
22
Like Socrates, Plato never answers the question “What is the good life for man?” But he
regarded the question as fundamental. What motivated the intensive search for the good
life is that Plato, like Socrates, believes that if a man knows what is good, he will always
act so as to try to attain it. In the complex arguments that involves his metaphysics,
epistemology and ethics Plato also provides the reason why men must possess knowledge
in order to understand the nature of good life.
Is knowledge necessary to lead the good life? Can not a person lead the good life without
knowledge? In The Republic, the major work of Plato which is known to be one of the
most popular literary works, Plato portrays Socrates maintaining that it is possible for
some men to lead the good life without possessing knowledge. They might do so if they
are men having virtuous character which has been molded through their imitating people
who are already virtuous. But in all such cases, they will lead the good life only
haphazardly or accidentally. It is only if they possess knowledge that they will necessarily
act morally.
Plato’s reaction to the Sophists/relativism:

Plato, implacable enemy of these philosophers, was the first to call them Sophists.
For Plato the relativism of the sophists leads to impossible conclusion. For him it was
absurd to say that being, truth, and morality are “up to grabs” and can be and mean
whatever an individual wishes. This would mean immediate collapse not only of all
serious talks about what is real and unreal, and what is true and false, but also of all talks
about moral responsibility, blame, praise, punishment , and so on. No, says Plato. Our
understanding of being, truth, and goodness or morality must – if it is to be really
meaningful – be anchored in some objective (that is, it exists outside of our minds),
independent (it is not dependent on any thing else for its existence), and absolute (it does
not come or go or otherwise change) reality.
Plato’s claim that knowledge of the good life is possible has been of the greatest
theoretical importance. Platonism constitutes one of the classical bulwarks or protection
against a commonly held point of view often termed “moral skepticism”. In Plato’s own
day, the most vigorous exponents of this outlook were the Sophists, but it is an outlook
23
which has never really vanished from the philosophical scene. Even today, it is possible
to find professional thinkers and ordinary men who hold the same idea about morality.
Advocates of this doctrine maintain, as you have seen above, that moral standards or
moral principles such as “you should not steal” are basically the products of arbitrary
human decisions. Such decisions, they argue, merely reflect the attitudes, preferences,
tastes, opinions and likings which people have. But since such attitudes, preferences,
tastes, and so forth are, in the last analysis, beyond the control of reason, the decisions
which reflect them can not have rational justifications or objective validity. Whether an
action is to be counted as right or wrong thus ultimately depends upon whether someone
approves or disapproves of it. If he approves of it, it is right; if he disapproves of it, it is
wrong – and that is the end of the matter. Indeed, in a sense, the same action may be both
right and wrong. Seen from one standpoint, it may be right; seen from another, wrong.
What label we choose to apply to it depends upon the point of view from which we see it.
It thus makes no sense to ask whether the action is really right or really wrong. It follows
from this principle that anybody’s opinion on moral matters is as good as anyone else’s,
whether one is Prime Minister of a country or a madman, a saint or sinner. The oft-quoted
remark of Protagoras that “a man is the measure of all things” is a succinct expression of
this point of view.
It was against such point of view (which could alternatively be called as subjectivism,
ethical relativism, or moral skepticism) that Plato was urging that moral standards are as
objective just as the principles of physics or mathematics. Those who think morality is a
matter of opinion think so because the lack the knowledge to judge otherwise.
Still another important element of Platonism is that, according to Socrates and Plato
morality (goodness/justice) consists in “minding one’s business” and not interfering in
the “business” of others. This is tantamount to saying fulfilling one’s moral
responsibility/obligation/duty. This is both in politics and individual life. Thus, morally
good person is one who “minds one’s business”; good/just or ideal society or political
system is one in which its members “mind their respective business”
24
Like that of Socrates, the basis of Plato’s ethics is that “if we know what the good life is
we will naturally act in such a way as to try to achieve it.” According to the beliefs of
both Socrates and Plato, “evil s due to lack of knowledge.” If a man can discover what is
right, he will never act wrongly. But the problem is to discover what is right, or as Plato
called it, “the good.” How could this be done where men differ so greatly in their opinion
about the good life?
Plato’s answer is that finding the nature of the good life is an intellectual task very similar
to the discovery of mathematical truths. Just as the latter can not be discovered by
untrained people, so the former can not be either. In order to discover what the good life
is men must first acquire certain kinds of knowledge.
Put in precise words, Plato’s view, too, is: knowledge is the good. According to Platonic
contention, reason comprises the essential nature of human being. It is what distinguishes
man from other animals. Man is human being. It is what distinguishes man from other
animals. Man is “a factional animal.” Human good and happiness lie therefore in the
activity and fulfillment of the rational faculty. That is, they lie in contemplation and
knowledge.
Plato believed that of the three aspects of the soul (Reason, Appetite, and Spirit), Reason
should predominate. Through Reason, through the intellect, humans can attain knowledge
about the Forms, especially of the predominant one, the Form Good. Thus, while Plato’s
emphasis is on the intellect, on knowledge, it is also on morality because of his belief that
virtue is a matter for human knowledge, and not just belief or opinion. Briefly, there is
such a thing as the truth about how we ought to live, and we can know this truth via the
human intellect, when we achieve knowledge of the timeless Forms”
Another basic element in Platonism is what contemporary scholars term his absolutism.
According to Plato, there is fundamentally one and only one good life for all men to lead.
This is because the good is something which is not dependent upon men’s desires,
inclinations, or their opinion. Goodness in this respect resembles the mathematical truth
that 2-3=5.this is a truth which is absolute; it exists whether any man likes such fact or
25
not, or even whether he knows mathematics or not. Likewise, goodness exists
independently of men and remains to be discovered if we can be trained properly.
This can be put in another way: Plato is arguing for the objectivity of moral principles as
opposed to all philosophies which contend that morality is a matter of opinion or
preference (which is known as ethical relativism). In more summarized way, his view is
that certain action is right or wrong absolutely and independently of anyone’s opinion.
2.5 Nicomachean Ethics: ethical theory of Aristotle
Nicomachean Ethics, the first systematic presentation of morality, is the ethical theory of
Aristotle (384-322 BC), one of the three Greek giants. It is so named after his father or
son, both of whom were of the same name. As Plato was the student of Socrates, Aristotle
was the student of Plato. However, Aristotle ruthlessly criticized the theories of his
master, Plato.
Greek philosophy was generally characterized by speculative approach. That is the Greek
philosophers attempted to discover the true nature of the world by the use of reason
alone. This speculative approach’s also noticeable in their ethical writings. Generally, the
speculative approach is non-scientific – for it does not try to collect facts and derive
conclusions for them; rather it tries to deduce facts about the nature of the world and the
nature of man by use of reason alone.
Aristotle one of these Greeks, departs from this tradition in his ethical writings and
adopts a scientific or empirical approach to ethical problems. Instead of trying to discover
the nature of good life for all men by reflection/ or reason” alone, he examined the
behavior and talk of people in everyday life. From this he noticed that what men of
common sense consider to be good contains one common character: via, Happiness. Thus
Aristotle’s answer to the basic ethical question “what is the good life for man?” can be
stated in one statement: “it is a life of Happiness.”
But what is this “happiness”? Is it success? fame? Pleasure? Or what?
26
In the Nicomachean ethics, which is the title of Aristotle’s chief work on ethics, he gave
the definition of the word “happiness” as follow: “Happiness is an activity of the soul in
accordance with the perfect virtue.” What Aristotle is stressing here is the fact that
happiness is not something static, but an activity. It is not something we arrive at; not
some object. It is not certain goal of this activity. It is the way of engaging in the various
activities of life such as eating, making love, etc.
As we have mentioned already, the ethical theories that we are discussing attempt to
answer two questions: “what is the good life for men?” and “how ought men to behave?”
Aristotle’s answer to the first questions was “the good life for men is a life of happiness.”
His answer to the second questions is equally direct: “men ought to behave so as to
achieve happiness.” This second answer is vague or question begging. We can ask, more
specifically, how should we behave in order to achieve happiness? Aristotle’s answer to
this question is to be found in the well-known formula called “the Doctrine of the mean
“or sometimes called the “golden mean”. We shall now turn to a discussion of the
Doctrine of the mean, and in this way we will show how Aristotle’s moral philosophy
differs from that of Plato.
Being happy, according to Aristotle, is like being well-fed. How much food should a man
eat in order to be well fed? Aristotle’s contention is that there is no general answer to this
question; i.e. we can not fix the amount, like two kilos. It depends on the size of the man.
What sort of work he does, whether he is ill or well. The proper amount for anyone of
work he does, whether he is ill or well. The proper amount for anyone to eat can be
ascertained by trial and error: if we eat certain amount of food and still feel hungry, we
should eat less, the correct amount is a mean between eating too much and too little. NB.
The word “mean” should not be interpreted as being synonymous with “average”.
The two important consequences of this doctrine for ethics are that: there are various
correct ways of living for different people. What is good for one person may not be good
for another. And, further, one can not tell prior to actual experimentation, by use of reason
alone, which is correct way of living for him. We can summarize these two points by
saying that Aristotle is both relativist and empiricist in ethics.
27
So with happiness “the proper way for a man to behave in the moral sphere is in
accordance with the mean. For Example, in order to be happy he must be courageous,
liberal, proud, witty, modest, and so on. Courage is the mean between cowardice and
rashness; liberty between prodigality and fragility, pride between vanity and so forth. So,
Aristotle’s philosophy of the golden mean can be condensed as follows:
In order to achieve happiness, men must act moderately, they must act so as to be striving
for the mean between two extremes middle course between two activities. If they do this:
than they will be happy. But the mean will vary from man to man: some men can be more
carious than others, and some less and each will be proper for that man.
Here it seems very important to note that Aristotle is one of the first great philosophers of
common-sense in dealing with ethical matters. As we have seen, Plato maintained that
good life is in no way connected with pleasure – for he lays down a rigid requirement for
all men to follow, regardless of their inclinations, desires, temperament, in life. Aristotle
rejects this view of Plato and maintained the view that no man can be happy without
certain amount of pleasure in his life.
2.6 Relevance of the classical ethical theories
By the way, you may ask, what is the relevance of these ancient persons and theories?
Why should you study ethical theories of the ancient times? To answer this question, you
have to know the following facts about the persons and theories here.
Plato and Aristotle are known to be the greatest of all philosophers/thinkers in the history
of mankind, not only with respect to ethical theories but with respect to almost all
thoughts. That is, Plato was the student of Socrates while Aristotle was the student of
Plato. (Aristotle was the teacher/tutor of Alexander the Great, a very popular historical
figure.) As expressed by a writer, it is hard to imagine a time so rich in human genius as
the Athens into which Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were born.
28
Hence, this unit introduced you to the most influential persons and philosophical ideas in
the history of mankind. Their thoughts have laid foundation for all subsequent thinkers.
For instance, so encompassing and magnificent is Plato’s philosophy that it is said that all
subsequent philosophy is but a series of footnotes to it.” That is, they have influenced the
way of thinking of all people including those of our times, if not that of each of us.
To put the same thing in different words, the relevance of the classical ethical theories has
to do with the meaning of the word classical. In usages such as these the word classical
means that which has passed the test of time and space, or that which applies to all times
and places. Undying ideas
2.7 I From the alternatives given to each question below, choose the best one.
1. The philosophy of the Sophists was characterized by

A. Relativism
B. Skepticism
C. Objectivism
D. All of the above
E. A and B are correct answers
2. There is one and only one good life for all men to lead, according to Plato. This view is
known as ____________________________.
A. Ethical relativism
B. Skepticism
C. Ethical absolutism
D. All of the above
3. Who is known to be one of the first great philosophers of common-sense in dealing

with ethical matters?
29
A. Plato
B. Socrates
C. Aristotle
D. Protagoras
4. Which of the following provide Aristotle’s answer to the question: “how should we
behave in order to achieve happiness”?
A. the Doctrine of the mean
B. golden mean
C. Objectivism
D. Absolutism
E. A and B are correct answers
5. What is the virtue or highest good according to Platonism?

A. Wealth
B. Power
C. Knowledge
D. Health

Platonism
Sophists Sophism
Socratic problem Socratic method
Nicomachean ethics Golden mean
1. The concern of the Sophists was discovering genuine knowledge.

2. Plato believed that “A man is the measure of all things”.
3. Socrates was ethical philosopher.
30
4. Aristotle was ethical absolutist.
5. Classical ethical theories have great relevance to present day moral thinking.
2.7 IV Questions for reflection

1. How do you evaluate the teachings of the Sophists? Is it morally right to teach
somebody how to persuade by cheating?
2. You have read in this unit that Socrates is regarded as a model of moral person with
respect to the search for, and devotion to, truth. Can you think of any person from your
experience who could also be regarded as a model of moral person. Why?
3. Many think that the place of Jesus Christ in the Christian and that of Socrates in
philosophy are analogous. What is the analogy?
4. In this unit you have encountered a statement which is said to be the most quoted
statement in the whole literature. What is the statement? What does it mean? Who is its
author?
Aristotle (1996) The Nicomachean Ethics, translated by Harris Rackham, Wordsworth

editions Ltd.
Byrn Mawr, 1999. Platonic Ethics Old and New, Classical Review
Miller, E. D. L.(1984) Questions That Matter: An Invitation to Philosophy. Chapter, 4;

Part Four, The Question of morality, Chapter 16 (pp 349-361)
31
Vincent Barry (1980) Philosophy: A Text With Readings. (Chapters 1 and 2 pp. 1-79)
Unit 3. Consequentialist/Teleological ethical theories
Contents
3.0. Introduction
3.1. Aims and objectives
3.2. What are Consequentialist/Teleological ethical theories?
3.3. Hedonism (Pleasure principle)
3.4. Egoistic hedonism: Epicureanism and Cyrenaicism
3.5. Utilitarianism/Social hedonism
3.6. Check your progress
3.7. Selected References
3.0 Introduction
32
In the previous unit you studied classical ethical theories. This unit familiarizes you to the
most dominant theories that underlie the ethical and political theories of the modern
world, such as egoism, hedonism, and utilitarianism. As such, the theories and the
concepts you study in this unit will help you to understand most of the ethical and
political ideas of the modern time.
Consequentialist/Teleological ethical theories are theories that emphasize consequences

of actions as the criteria of their rightness or wrongness. That is, they maintain that an
action is right if its consequences are good, it is wrong if its consequences are bad. The
unit begins by pointing out the common characteristics of consequentialist or teleological
theories. This will be followed by the descriptions of the two major versions of
consequentialist or teleological theories, namely egoistic hedonism and utilitarianism.
At the end of your study of this unit you should be able to

- point out the common characteristics of consequentialist/teleological theory
- know the meaning of egoistic hedonism and the difference between its two versions
(Epicureanism and Cyrenaicism)
- know the meaning of utilitarianism (social hedonism) and the difference between its two
versions (Bentham and Mill)
- compare and contrast egoism and altruism
3.2 What are Consequentialist/Teleological ethical theories?
In order to understand hedonism as an ethical theory it is necessary that you make a

distinction between two general types of ethical theories, namely, consequentialist or
teleological ethical theories and non-consequentialist or deontological theories. In this
33
unit you will study about consequentialist or teleological ethical theories. You will find
the non-consequentialist or deontological theories in the next unit.
How do you determine whether a given action is moral or immoral, right or wrong?
Consequentialist or teleological ethics provides one way of answering this question.
Theology, as a philosophical doctrine, is the belief in purpose or goals in the universe. In

other words, it is a belief in the purposeful arrangement of things in the universe.
Teleological theory of ethics is then that which stresses the consequence /end, goal,
purpose/ of actions, and even makes the consequence of actions the criterion or test of
their rightness. That is, and action is judged, or said to be right or wrong, moral or
immoral, depending on what happens as a results or consequences of it. It because it
emphasizes on consequences of actions that it is also called consequentialist theory.
As you will study in the next unit, non-consequentialist or deontological theory is the
direct opposite of the consequentialist/teleological theory. According to this theory what
makes an action right or wrong has to do with factors other than consequence.
3.3 Hedonism (Pleasure principle)
Hedonism is an example of consequentialist or teleological ethics you studies above. It is

a general ethical theory which views pleasure as the good. Hedonism, from the Greek-
hedone meaning pleasure, is the ethical philosophy which holds that only pleasure is
worth having for its own sake. In a word, hedonists view pleasure and only pleasure as
having intrinsic value. Therefore, according to this hedonistic principle, pleasure is the
criterion of right action; that is, an action is said to be right or wrong depending on the
amount or kind of pleasure that results from it, and depending on this alone.
Here, therefore, we have the answer to the two leading questions in ethical theories,
namely “What is the good life for man”? and “How ought men to behave?” The answers
that the hedonists provide to these questions are, respectively: “the good life for men is
that of pleasure” and “we ought to act so as to achieve pleasure”. In precise words,
34
hedonism is therefore in ethical doctrine that pleasure is the highest good, and the
production of pleasure is the criterion of right action.
Hedonism has two forms: egoistic hedonism and social hedonism. As forms of hedonism
both of them advocate pleasure as the good. The difference between the two arises when
we ask “whose pleasure?” That is, we are told by hedonists that “men ought to act so as
to achieve pleasure”, but whose pleasure? The answer to this question gives us the two
versions or forms of hedonism, namely egoistic hedonism and social hedonism.In the
following two sections of this unit you will study egoistic hedonism and social hedonism,
in that order.
3.4 Egoistic hedonism: Epicureanism and Cyrenaicism
What is egoistic hedonism? Egoistic hedonism is, of course, egoism + hedonism. Above,
you studied about what hedonism is. The question here must be therefore about what
egoism is.
Egoism comes from the Greek word “ego” which means “I” any form of egoism thus
makes the self the central concern, the beginning and the end of all consideration. It is, in
other words, self centeredness.
There are two forms of egoisms: psychological egoism and ethical egoism. Psychological
egoism is a doctrine about human nature, which claims that in fact everyone by nature
pressure’s primarily his or her own interest. Ethical egoism is, on the other hand, a value
judgment, claiming that everyone ought to pursue primarily his own interests. Ethical
egoism is, in other words, a consequentialist theory which contends that we act morally
when we act in a way that promotes our own interests.
35
Egoistic hedonism is thus the doctrine that each individual should pursue primarily his
or her own pleasure. In other words, egoistic hedonism is the doctrine that the pursuit and
production of one’s own pleasure is the highest good and the orientation of right action.
How do you evaluate the position of egoistic hedonists? Do you approve or disapprove
it? Do you think that we are egoists by nature? Anyway, consider here the principle
known as altruism. Altruism is the direct opposite of egoism. It is the principle that
everyone ought as much as possible to seek the good (well being, pleasure, happiness) of
others.
Egoistic hedonism is certainly very old moral philosophy. In fact, its two best examples
occur already in Greek philosophy: Cyrenaicism and Epicureanism. These are the two
versions of egoistic hedonism.
The distinction between them arises when we ask the questions of the nature or the type
of pleasure to be pursued. That is, we can categorize pleasure in various ways: lower and
higher, positive and negative, pleasure and displeasure (plain), of the present moment
(immediate) and that of long-run, and bodily (sensual) and mental. The bodily or sensual
pleasure is that obtained from bodily sensation- sensation of being trickled, rubbed, or
stroked of example. Mental pleasures are pleasurable states of mind obtained from
sources such as a reforesting swim, reading a good book, grappling with a philosophical
problem, creating a work of art, talking with a congenial basis of our conduct: we should
act in such a way as such a to maximize our own pleasure sensation.
Epicureanism, so named after Epicurus (300 B.C), its founder, is a more important form
of hedonism. It has often mistakenly been represented along with Cyrenaicism as “pig
philosophy.” This is a mistake because, although Epicureanism was certainly also an
egoistic hedonism, it differed in important respects from Cyrenaicism.
Influenced by his atomistic view of soul that we have seen earlier, Epicurus advises that
men should live as pleasant a life as possible. But the pleasant life meant to Epicurus
something quite different from what it meant for Cyrenaics. The pleasure Epicures
36
advocated was leisure 2 according to our distinction. The proper way of life is to live
pleasantly, but without suffering from any of the undesirable effects of such living. The
pleasure to be pursued must b one that does not produce painful or “displaceable”
consequences. His idea of the life of pleasure is this: health of the body peace of mind
(serenity).
Hence, one can see that although the epicureans were who believed that there is only one
thing worth aiming at, namely the maximum pleasure for one self, by pleasure they meant
long-run pleasure, as estimated over an entire life span. To obtain pleasure later, one must
often sacrifice it now. They condemned most pleasure seeks because they sought the
immediate pleasure such as food, drink and sex, instead of the long-term pleasures, such
as aesthetic satisfaction and knowledge. They considered not only today’s pleasure, but
tomorrow’s and year’s thus the advice “don’t scratch it now, even though it itches, or it
will feel worse tomorrow” opposed to the pro-verb “kill the goose that layers the golden
edges” goes to Epicureanism and Cyrenaicism respectively.
As could be seen from the quotation below, rather than sensual gratification, Epicurus
associated pleasure with what he termed sober thinking. He wrote:
“When I say that pleasure is the goal of living I do not mean the pleasures of the
libertines inherent in positive enjoyment. … I mean, on the contrary, the pleasure
that consists in freedom from bodily pain and mental agitation. The pleasant life is
not the product of one drinking party after another or of sexual intercourse. … On
the contrary, it is the result of sober thinking – namely, investigation of the
reasons of every act of choice and aversion, and elimination of those false ideas
about the gods and death which are the chief source of mental disturbance.”
3.5 UTILITARIANISM/SOCIAL HEDONISM
Social hedonism is popularly known as utilitarianism. In this text we use words social
hedonism and utilitarianism to mean the same thing. As a result, we continue to use the
word utilitarianism, instead of social hedonism.
Utilitarianism is ethical doctrine that an action is right or moral if and only if it promotes
the greatest pleasure for the greatest number of people. It is the ethical as well as political
37
theory according to which the best rule of life is to aim at the greatest pleasure for the
greatest number of people.
Utilitarianism is another version of teleological ethics. The utilitarian conceived of their

philosophical work as an attempt to lay down an objective principle for determining
when a given action was right or wrong. As such, it is seen as scientific approach to
morality. They called this maxim the principle of utility. This maxim is where the heart of
utilitarianism lies.
The word “utility” simply means “usefulness,” but the utilitarian employ it to mean “that
which promotes the greatest balance of good over evil.” i.e. if an action produces an
excess beneficial effects over harmful ones, then it is right otherwise it is not. Thus
utilitarianism is: the doctrine that we ought to act so as to promote the greatest balance of
good over evil. More good over evil is thus usefulness.
But what is the good? In fact utilitarianism has always gone hand in hand with hedonism
by specifying the nature of the good as pleasure. Therefore utilitarianism is: the doctrine
that we ought to act so as to promote the greatest balance of pleasure over pain.
Still another question: whose pleasure is to be maximized? In fact utilitarianism has

always gone hand in hand specifically with social hedonism and in deed may be regarded
as identical as social hedonism. Hence it becomes here necessary for us to compare and
contrast egoistic hedonism to social hedonism.
Like egoistic hedonism, social hedonism/utilitarianism holds teleological conception of

right action: it judges the rightness of an action by its consequences. And, like egoistic
hedonism, social hedonism (utilitarianism) is hedonist in it conception of right action: it
judges the rightness of an action by its production of pleasurable consequences. But the
difference is that: whereas the egoistic hedonist is motivated out of self interest and aims
at self satisfaction, the social hedonist or utilitarian is motivated out of an interest for the
greatest possible number of persons and aims at their satisfaction. In place of egoism of
egoistic hedonism, social hedonism or utilitarianism substitutes the benevolence
38
principle: happiness is t be distributed as widely and as equally as possible among all
people. Thus utilitarianism is: the doctrine that we ought to act so as to prompt the
greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. It is, in other words, hedonism plus
benevolence principle.
Hedonism + benevolence principle= utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill: the two versions of utilitarianism.
Historically, utilitarianism is identified with the English philosophers Jeremy Bentham
(1748-1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873). These two figures represent the two
versions of utilitarianism. Bentham was the founder of utilitarianism whereas Mill was
his successor but the most popular utilitarian of all.
The difference between these two versions is that whereas Bentham emphasized the
quantity of pleasure, Mill emphasized the quality. According to both thinkers, the best
rule of life is to aim at the “greatest pleasure of the greatest number of people”. However,
“the greatest” means “the most” for Bentham and “the best” for Mill. By adding quality
to Bentham’s version Mill meant that one pleasure hold moral superiority over another.
The central idea of Mill in that regard is expressed in his popular statement: “It is better
to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied.”
Pleasure: Quantity or Quality?

- Bentham: “If the game of push-pin furnishes more pleasure, it is valuable.”
- Mill: “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied.”
Act and Rule Utilitarianism

Act utilitarianism is the normative position that contends that we should act so as to
produce the greatest happiness/pleasure for the most people. In other words, before
acting, ask yourself: what will be the consequence of my action not only for myself but
also for everyone else involved? If the consequences are good (that is, they are calculated
to produce more happiness/pleasure than any other action will produce), the action is
39
right; if they are bad (that is, they are not so calculated), then the action is wrong. In
effect, for act utilitarianism the end justifies the means.
This position of act utilitarianism raises a problem: What if an action that promises the
greatest good for the greatest number, such as imprisoning an innocent person, appears to
be patently wrong? The consequences of removing a chronic public threat appear to
provide greater safety and happiness for the vast majority of people. Yet suppose that in
this particular case the individual is innocent.
A number of ethicists point out that we get into such dilemma when we apply the
“greatest happiness” principle to a particular act and not to the rule that the act
implements. What we should be concerned with is the consequences of keeping or
breaking the operative rule under which a particular act falls. This is a rule utilitarianism
position. In short, rule utilitarianism maintains that we should act in such a way that the
rule governing our actions produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number of
people.
3.6 I Choose the best answer from the alternatives given to each question
1. The ethical doctrine according to which pleasure and only pleasure is intrinsically good
is known as ________________________
A. Egoism
B. Utilitarianism
C. Altruism
D. Hedonism
2. The principle which the direct opposite of egoism is _________________________.

A. Hedonism
B. Utilitarianism
C. Altruism
40
D. Pleasure
3. As quantity is to Bentham __________ is to Mill.

A. Pleasure
B. Utilitarianism
C. Majority
D.Quality
4. The philosopher who is known to be the founder of hedonism is _________.

A. Epicurus
B. Aristipas
C. Bentham
D. Mill
5. Which of the following is true about Epicurean ideal of life?

A. Sober thinking
B. Sensual pleasure
C. Immediate pleasure
D. All of the above

Consequentialist/teleological theories Hedonism
Egoism Psychological egoism
Ethical egoism Altruism,
Epicureanism Cyrenaicism
Utilitarianism (social hedonism)
41
1. All consequentialist/teleological theories are hedonist.
2. Jeremy Bentham was egoistic thinker.
3. One of the differences between Epicureanism and Cyrenaicism is that whereas the one
is consequentialist/teleological theory the other is not.
4. An action is morally right if promotes the greatest balance of good over evil, according
to utilitarianism.
5. The words social hedonism and utilitarianism mean the same thing.
3.6 IV Questions for reflection and comprehension

1. How do you evaluate the position of egoistic hedonism? Do you believe that human
beings are always motivated by self interest (as psychological egoism says)? Even if it
be true that human beings are always motivated by self interest, is it morally right to
be so?
2. Both Cyrenaicism and Bentham’s version of utilitarianism are criticized by other
philosophers as “pig philosophy”. Do you understand why?
3. What is your attitude towards Kant’s popular statement: “It is better to be a human
being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied”? Do you approve or disapprove it?
4. What is the major difference between Act and Rule utilitarianism?
(Chapter 7, Ethics; Chapter 8, Critique of traditional Ethical theories.)
Question of morality, Chapter 17 and 18 (pp 379-391)
42
Vincent Barry (1980) Philosophy: A Text With Readings. (Chapter 3, Ethics, pp. 101-110)
Unit 4. Non-consequentialist/Deontological Ethical theories
Contents
4.0. Introduction
4.1. Aims and objectives
4.2. What are non-consequentialist/deontological ethical theories?
4.3. Kantian/Duty Ethics
4.4.Devine command theory
4.5.Check your progress
4.6. Selected References
4.0 INTRODUCTION
This unit introduces you to nonconsequentialist/deontological ethical theories which are

direct opposite of the type of ethical theories you studied in the previous unit, namely
consequentialist/teleological ethical theories.
In contrast to the consequentialist or teleological ethical theories that emphasize

consequences of actions as the criteria for their morality, nonconsequentialist or
deontological ethical theories hold that morality of an action depends on factors other
than its consequences. Two major representatives of nonconsequentialist or deontological
43
ethical theories are Kantian ethics and Divine command ethical theory. Kantian ethics is
one that emphasizes duty of the agent. Devine command theory is a single-rule
nonconsequentialist normative theory that says that we should always do the will of God.
You will study these two types of ethical theories in that order, beginning by what is
common to all nonconsequentialist/deontological ethical theories.
At the end of you study of this unit you should be able to

- know the common characteristics of the non-consequentialist/deontological ethical
theories
- distinguish consequentialist/teleological and non-consequentialist/deontological ethical
theories
- know the essential features of Kantian/Duty Ethics and categorical imperative
- know the meaning and basis of the Devine command theory
4.2 WHAT ARE NONCONSEQUENTIALIST (DEONTOLOGICAL) THEORIES
Philosophers who object the consequentialist ethical theories hold that any appraisal of
the rightness or wrongness of an action must take into account the motive from which it
is done. These philosophers contend that moral actions are those for which an agent can
be held responsible. To say this is to imply that they are actions which the agent intended
to do. It is thus not behavior per se which is capable of being right or wrong, but behavior
which results from one’s intensions and conscious motives. This explains why we do not
morally condemn a doctor who inadvertently kills a patient during an operation.
According to the critics, it is thus clear that no moral action can be evaluated as right or
wrong apart from some consideration of the agent’s intension in performing.
44
Deontological derives from the word deontology, which refers to the theory or study of
moral commitment. Deontological theories maintain that the morality of an action
depends on factors other than its consequences, and that is why these theories are
alternatively called nonconsequentialist theories.
Deontological theory is the direct opposite of the consequentialist or teleological theory

that you studied in the previous unit. As you recall from you lesson in Unit 3,
consequentialist or teleological theories morality (that is, rightness or wrongness) of
actions is determined by their consequences. According to the non-consequentialist or
deontological theories, on the contrary, morality of an action is determined by factors
other than consequences. According to these theories what makes an action right or
wrong is the actor’s conformity to his or her duty. An actors duty has nothing at all to do
with what might or might not happen – is the duty is not connected with the result or the
consequence of an action. Hence, whereas consequentialist/teleological ethics is one that
emphasizes on the results of actions as the tests of their rightness,
nonconsequentialist/deontological ethics is one that emphasizes on the performance of
duty, rather than results, as the sign of right action.
The most influential nonconsequentialist theories can best be categorized either as

proposing a single rule that govern human conduct or proposing multiple rules. Two
significant single-rule nonconsequentialist theories are Kantian theory and Divine
Command theory. What are these two ethical theories? You will first study about Kantian
ethics and next the Divine Command theory.
4.3 KANTIAN (DUTY) ETHICS
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is the philosopher who has stressed, above all others, that
the moral worth of an action depends on the motive on which it is done. His ethical
theory is an attempt to support this position. This sub-section of the unit introduces you to
Kantian Ethical.
45
Kantian ethics is the ethical theory of Immanuel Kant. It is the theory that emphasizes
the performance of duty as the criteria of morality and that is why it is alternatively called
duty ethics. The third alternative name for Kantian ethics is “categorical imperative” or
the ethics of “categorical imperative”. This is because, as you will see later, categorical
imperative is the most central concept in Kant’s ethical theory.
Kantian ethics is a variety of deontological ethics as opposed to teleological ethics. As we

have seen the teleological theory of ethics is one which emphasizes the intended
consequences or results of actions as the criterion of their rightness. That is, “such and
such is the right action because it produces such and such results.” On the contrary, the
Kantian ethics holds that “the consequences or results of your actions have nothing at all
to do with their rightness or wrongness.” Here the criterion is not what might or might
not happen, but the intent to perform one’s duty or obligation. Because they stress the
nations of duty and obligation, these theories are sometimes described as duty ethics.
The nature of morality as unconditional

The age of enlightenment saw a questioning of religion and traditional values, including
morality. As a result, philosophers needed to base moral systems on justifiable grounds.
Kant is one of such philosophers. His moral system is based on rationality. It attempts to
show how any rational being would agree to universal moral laws. Its influence is
enormous and modern philosophers still use Kant’s ideas as a starting point for
discussions on morality.
The attempt of Kant is to make morality unconditional, i.e. not conditioned by self
interest, majority interest, consequences, and the like. To that end, he makes distinction
between conditional “ought “and unconditional “ought”. Kant does this because morality
must be necessary and universal, that is, it must be absolutely binding, and absolutely
binding on everyone alike: whoever you are, what ever your situation, you ought to do X.
but the conditional “ought” involves “ifs” and “ in order that” and therefore gets mixed
up with all sorts of particular circumstances, changing desires, personal inclinations.
Good will as the basis of morality
46
As an argument for that nature of morality, Kant eliminates from the start any suggestion
that morality can be based on our natural states and inclinations (gifts of nature) including
pleasure or happiness. He eliminates all innate gifts (such as intelligence, wit and
courage) or the accidental gifts (such as power, wealth, and honor). They cannot be the
basis of morality because none of them are absolute goods, or because they do not have
intrinsic or unconditional value; moreover, any one of them could be corrupted or turned
to be evil. There must be more than these and which is absolutely and unconditionally
good. And this is something that all other things depend on for their goodness, and
without which they would become corrupted and turned into evil.
What is this thing, which is absolute good, and which has intrinsic or unconditional
value; and that which can never be corrupted or turned into be evil. This absolute good
and the necessary and sufficient condition for all right action, the foundation for rational
morality is the “good will” according to Kant. He wrote: “Nothing in the world – indeed
nothing beyond the world – can possibly be conceived which could be good without
qualification except a good will.” By the way, what is this good will?
Kant defined good will as “an intention to act in accordance with the moral law” and
moral law is what it is no matter what everything else. Good will is, in other words, to act
only out of respect for what is right and not for any other reason. To act out of good will
is, then, to do something because it is right to do it, and for no other reason. This would
be rational morality.
“Nothing in the world – indeed nothing beyond the world – can possibly be conceived
which could be good without qualification except a good will.” I. Kant
To put differently, by will Kant meant the uniquely human capacity to act according to the
concepts behind laws – that is, principles presumably operating in nature. A good will,
therefore, acts in accordance with nature’s laws. For Kant a will could be called good
without qualification only if it always had in view one principle: whether the maxim of
its action could become a universal law. This is the standard which is crucial part of
47
Kant’s theory of ethics. Kant formalizes this principle of all morality in the categorical
imperative, which you will find immediately below.
Natural law is a pattern of necessary and universal regularity holding in physical ration.
It is also a moral imperative, a description of what ought to happen in human
relationships.
Kant’s Categorical Imperative

Kant holds that the fundamental principle at the basis of all our moral duties is
categorical imperative, one of the most famous and important concepts in the history of
ethics. The categorical imperative is the fundamental principle of morality according to
him. It is imperative because it is a command. More precisely, it commands us to exercise
our wills in a particular way, not to perform some action or other. It is categorical in
virtue of applying to us unconditionally, or simply because we possess rational wills,
without reference to any ends that we might or might not have. It does not, in other
words, apply to us on the condition that we have antecedently adopted some goal for
ourselves.
Categorical imperative as a test of moral actions

The categorical imperative is a test of moral actions. How? Before starting a certain
course of action I must ask: Does universalizing the principle of my action result in
(practical) contradiction? If so, the action fails the test and must be rejected as immoral.
In other words, the ability to universalize (apply to everyone) the rule by which we act in
a given situation is a sufficient guarantee of the morality of our action, or that it is being
done out of respect for the moral law alone.
For Kant human beings, as moral agents, are rational and autonomous (free to make
choices). He thinks that as rational beings we are able to judge whether an action is moral
by asking if the action is consistent with the categorical imperative. One formulation of
the categorical imperative is, “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the
same time will that it should become a universal law.” What Kant means by this is that
the way we judge an action to be moral is to universalize it: If I want to know whether
48
telling a lie on a particular occasion is justifiable, I must try to imagine what would
happen if everyone was to lie. Kant thinks that any rational being would agree a world in
which there is no lying is preferable to one in which lying is common. In a society where
lying is common no one would trust the word of anyone else.
Sometimes the categorical imperative is referred to, for short, as the principle of
universalizibility, because it asks us whether we can “universalize” our actions, that is,
whether we could demand that everyone else in similar circumstances act in accordance
with the same rule as we would.
Different versions of the categorical imperative

Kant provided several formulations of the categorical imperative, one of which is the one
stated above. These are different versions of the same fundamental principle of morality.
Certainly, they overlap with one another, and they suggest important and differing ways
in which the fundamental principle may be viewed and applied.
A second formulation of the categorical imperative is: “Act only so that the will through
its maxims could regard itself at the same time as making universal laws.”
Still another formulation of Kant’s categorical imperative is: “Always act to treat
humanity, whether yourself or others, as an end in itself, never merely as a means”. What
Kant means by this is that a rational being should not be used as a means to another
person’s happiness; if we use another person as a means to our ends then we have
removed that person’s autonomy.
Tree versions of Kant’s categorical imperative

1. “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it
should become a universal law.”
2. “Act only so that the will through its maxims could regard itself at the same time as
making universal laws.”
3. “Always act to treat humanity, whether yourself or others, as an end in itself, never
merely as a means”.
49
Alternative approach to Kant’s theory
Kant’s theory is known to be highly complex. To make the matter simpler one must use
different approaches. And one of the possible alternative approaches is to base the
discussion of the major questions that Kant attempts to answer.
To bring out the essential features of Kantian ethics, we have to center around Kant’s
efforts to answer the question, “What is the good life for man?” and How do we
determine morality of an action? Or “How can we tell whether our actions are morally
right?” However, Kant’s answer to the question “When does a person have a moral
worth?” Or, formulated alternatively, “What distinguishes a person of virtue from a
person who is not virtuous?” will take us to the heart of his moral theory.
Kant’s answer, in brief, is that what determines a person to be morally worthy is not what
he does, but why he does it. A man who repays debts out of the fear of imprisonment is
not a virtuous person, according to Kant, even though he does what he ought to do; nor is
a man morally worthy who pays debt because he is inclined to do so. Kant describes the
former person as acting from “prudential considerations” and the latter as acting “in
accord with duty”, not “from duty”. Insofar as a person acts from such considerations, he
is not virtuous. An agent has moral worth only when he recognizes that he ought to act in
a certain way because it is his duty to do so. One who takes care of his children properly,
because he understands that he is under obligation to do so and is motivated by this
consideration, is a person of virtue.
For the deontologist Kant, the rightness or wrongness of an action has nothing to do with
its consequences (unlike the consequentialist theories). The question of whether an act is
right or wrong arises only if there is some obligation on the part of the agent to do it; that
is, if in relevant circumstances, one could properly say to the agent, “It is your duty to do
so and so”. Therefore, an action is right if it ought to be done in those circumstances, and
wrong, given those circumstances, if it ought not to be done.
Kant’s view can therefore be summarized as maintaining that a morally good person is a
person of “good will” – a man who acts “out of reverence for duty”. To act in this way is
50
always to act in a morally justifiable manner, for as Kant says: “Nothing in the world –
indeed nothing beyond the world – can possibly be conceived which could be good
without qualification except a good will”.
These remarks bring us to the heart of Kant’s theory and enable us to answer the first of
Kant’s fundamental questions, “What is the good life for man?” The highest good, as
Kant conceives it, is a product of two elements: personal happiness and the possession of
a virtuous character.
Like Aristotle, Kant holds that happiness is not an entity, a thing, or object; nor is it to be
identified with pleasure. Happiness consists of a sense of well being and it is a
concomitant of behavior, not a consequence of it.
Methodology
Throughout his moral works, Kant returns time and again to the question of the method
moral philosophy should employ when pursuing its aims. A basic theme of these
discussions is that the fundamental philosophical issues should be addressed a priori, that
is, without drawing on observations of human beings and their behavior. Once we “seek
out and establish” the fundamental principle of morality a priori, the we may consult
facts drawn from experience in order to determine how best to apply this principle to
human beings and generate particular conclusions about how we ought to act.
A priori is an important epistemological concept that was introduced to the history of

philosophy by Kant himself. It refers to knowledge that is before experience, and
therefore independent of experience. A priori knowledge is opposed to what Kant called a
posteriori knowledge. A posteriori knowledge is knowledge that is after experience, and
therefore dependent upon experience.
4.4 DIVINE COMMAND THEORY
51
Divine command theory is one of the two significant single-rule nonconsequentialist
normative theories, the other being Kantian theory which you studied above. It is the
theory that says we should always do the will of God.
To understand the divine command theory of morality you have to familiarize yourself
first with what is called the religious view of human nature. The issue or question of
views of human nature is about what it means to be human or what distinguishes human
beings from other things; that what makes us different from anything else in the world.
Religious view of human nature is one of the differing answers to this question. (Other
important views of human nature include the Rationalist view, the Scientific view,
Existentialist view, and Eastern view.)
According to the religious view of human nature, particularly the Judo-Christian

tradition, humans are made in the image of God. They are essentially divine beings,
because they contain something of the self-consciousness and ability to love that
characterizes their Creator. This ability to love is the distinguishing character of the
religious view. Where are as the Greeks (particularly Socrates, Plato and Aristotle) held
that only those capable of attaining theoretical and moral knowledge could realize the
purpose of living, the divine view contends that the two purposes of life – loving God and
serving God – are open to all regardless of intelligence. The single personal God created
man in His own image; that is, He endowed His creation with self-consciousness and the
ability to love. This ability is what makes humans unique.
The religious view on human nature fosters the following view of self: First, since the
universe is the expression of an intelligent mind (God), believers may see themselves as
part of a universe whose meaning and purpose they personally share through fellowship
with God. One’s purpose in life, therefore, is found in loving and serving God.
The religious view also fosters the concept of a moral self: Each of us is capable of great
good, but also of great evil. When we refuse to love and serve God, we commit our
greatest evil. This refusal is expressed in various ways such as injustice, vanity, pride, and
dishonesty.
52
Thus, in contrast to the Greek belief that we must develop our rational powers to perceive
the moral order in the universe, the divine view holds that intelligence is no prerequisite
for a moral sense. We do good when we make God the centre of our lives; we do wrong
when we retreat from this commitment. We are rational, but what makes us unique is our
divine likeness.
Divine command theory is, therefore, a single-rule nonconsequentialist normative theory

that says that we should always do the will of God. In other words, whatever the
situation, if we do what God wills, then we do the right thing; if we do not do what God
wills, then no matter what the consequences, we do wrong.
Notice that this theory does not state that we should obey God’s law because we will,
thereby, promote our own or the general good. Perhaps we may accomplish these ends,
but the sole justification for obeying God’s law is that God wills it. The theory also does
not defend the morality of an action by promising some supernatural reward to the
faithful; that is, though the faithful may be rewarded for his/her moral actions, egoistic
actions do not justify morality according to the divine command theorists.
Indeed, divine command theorists would see no intrinsic worth or value in such things as
pleasure, power, or knowledge; instead they propose something like a union with God as
taking the form of heavenly salvation. The great Christian theologian and philosopher
Thomas Aquinas, wring in one of his famous ethical works, Summa Contra Gentiles,
refers to the human’s ultimate happiness as being the contemplation of God. He arrives at
this conclusion after arguing that human happiness does not consist in wealth worldly
power, or sensual pleasures. He wrote the following in that regard:
Accordingly, if man’s ultimate happiness consists not in external things, which are
called goods of chance, nor in goods of the body; nor in the goods of the soul, as
regards the sensitive faculty; nor as regards the intellective faculty, in the practice
of moral virtue; nor as regards intellectual virtue in those which are concerned
about action, namely art and prudence; it remains for us to conclude that man’s
ultimate happiness consists in the contemplation of the truth. For this operation
alone is proper to man, and none of the other animals communicates with him
therein. Again, this is not directed to anything further as its end: since the
53
contemplation of truth is sought for its own sake. …. All other human operations
seem to be directed to this as their end. Because perfect contemplation requires
that the body should be disencumbered. …. It follows then that man’s ultimate
happiness consists in wisdom, based on the consideration of divine things. It is
therefore evident by way of induction that man’s ultimate happiness consists in
the contemplation of God, which conclusion was proved by above arguments.
This state of eternal bliss (perfect happiness/great joy) is the ultimate goal of all human
endeavors; it is the only thing of intrinsic value. What is valuable, then, is independent of
what any individual thinks or likes and what any society happens to sanction. Moral laws
are established by God; they are universally binding for all people and are eternally true.
Such God-established laws are generally interpreted in a religious tradition. The Ten
Commandments are good examples therein.
4.5 CHECK YOUR PROGRESS
4.5 I Choose the best answer from the alternatives given to each question
1. Which of the following is most relevant for Kant’s theory of morality?
A. the well being of society
B. consequences of actions
C. duty
D hypothetical imperative
E. none of the above
2. For Kant, the only truly good thing is _________________________.

A. Categorical imperative
B. Hypothetical imperative
C. Good will
D. Happiness
E. Pleasure
3. Which of the following could be an alternative for Kant’s “categorical imperative”?

A. good will
54
B. the principle of universalizibility
C. a priori knowledge
D. a posteriori knowledge
4. As a consequence of action is to teleological theory _________________________ is

to deontological theory.
A. result of action
B. the end of action
C. the nature of action
D. performance of duty
5. What is the ultimate goal of human endeavors according to the divine command
theory?
A. pleasure
B. wealth
C. power
D. all of the above

Nonconsequentialist (deontological) theory
Kantian/duty ethics,
Categorical imperative
Hypothetical imperative
Good will
Happiness (according to Kant)
Divine command theory
A priori
4.5 III Say true or false
55
1 Kantian ethics is an example of teleological ethical theories.
2. The purpose of life is found in loving and serving God, according to the religious view
of human nature.
3. Good will is the highest of all goods, according to Kant.
4. Divine command theory states that we should obey God’s law because we will,
thereby, promote our own or the general good.
5. In the final analysis, man’s ultimate happiness consists in the contemplation of God,
according to Thomas Aquinas.
4.5 IV Questions for reflection and comprehension

1. Why is it that Kant’s basic principle of morality called the “categorical imperative”?
How does the categorical imperative become the test for moral action?
2. What do you think of the effort to establish morality on purely a priori foundation?
Do you believe in objective moral law?
3. The Ten Commandments are good examples are said to be good examples of the
God-established laws of morality. Can you think of other examples of similar
assumption?
Question of morality, Chapter 19 (pp 416-429)

Vincent Barry (1980) Philosophy: A Text With Readings. (Chapter 3, Ethics, pp. 44-78 ;
113-124)
56
Wikipepea, the Free Encyclopeadia (Internet Explorer) Kantianism
Wikipepea, the Free Encyclopeadia (Internet Explorer) Deontological Ethics
BLOCK II CIVIC EDUCATION
Introduction
Civic Education is an important component of education that cultivates citizens to
participate in the public life of a democracy, to use their rights and to discharge their
responsibilities and duties with the necessary knowledge and skills that they acquire.
It should be recognized that the realization of a free society whose members exercise self-
governance highly depends on the active involvement of the citizens in every angle of the
social life.
Literally, democracy is defined as a political system implemented in a society in which

the members (citizens) administer themselves. In this political system, citizens are
decision makers on their socio-political and economic affairs. That is to mean self-
governing.
Here what should not be forgotten is that democracy is a process not an event. It is a
process in which it renews itself or progresses to the better level. This can be achieved if
the citizens are alert, informed and those who feel sense of belongingness. In this
building up process of democracy, the active involvement of citizens is vitally important.
The enjoyment of the fruits of democracy: development, peace, stability and the like is
possible, provided that the citizens, actively involve in the process. In short, citizens in
democratic society are expected to be vigilant, active participant, informed, duty-minded
and responsible, and the way to infuse them with the necessary qualities is through
education. That could be the very goal of civic education.
57
This second Block of the teaching material in general, is made in line with the above
mentioned purpose of civic education. For that end, the second Block has five units each
of which has brain storming, related quotations (sayings), review questions, assignments.
UNIT 5. What is Civic Education?
Contents
5.0 Introduction
5.1 Aims and Objective
5.2 Definition and Subject Matter of Civic Education
5.3 The ultimate goal of civics
5.4 The importance of civic education
5.0 Introduction
It is common and appropriate to begin with questioning about the very intention, meaning
and importance of learning a certain discipline. There must be purpose(s) when we attend
an education. In similar way, civics as an education about free people has a purpose. Its’
goal is arming citizens with the necessary knowledge and skill that will enable them to be
informed, responsible, competent and active participant in all the three life aspects
(political, social and economic). After having the necessary knowledge and skill citizens
are expected to develop attitude.
58
The first sub-division of the unit deals with the meaning of civic education and its subject
matter. In this sub-unit, you will see also the multi disciplinary nature of civic education.
The coming sub-unit (1.2) is dedicated to deal with the goal of civics, which has been
mentioned above. The third element of the unit (1.3) focuses at explaining the importance
of learning civic education.
5.1 Aims and Objectives
The purpose of this unit is to familiarize you with the very nature, essence and intention
of civic education. You might have asked your self, the reason why you learn civic
education. This unit tries to give you the reason why you learn it. In this unit, you learn
the importance of having this education.
In order to exercise, self administration, as a democratic citizens we need to enjoy those

rights that allow and encourage us to be active participant. The most important political
right, reserved to citizens is the right to participate in governing their nation. The unit will
discuss the importance and purpose of citizens’ participation.
When you finish the unit, you should be able to:

- explain what civic education means
- identify and explain what the goals of civic education are
- discuss the purposes and uses of learning civics.
- describe the interdependence between active participation of citizens and
building democratic system
- discuss goal of civics.
- Appreciate the multi-disciplinary nature of civic education
5.2 Definition and Subject Matter of Civic Education
Have you ever thought the relation among these words

civic, civil, civilian, civility, citizen, civilization, city?
Do you think that they have all one origin?

59
The origin of the concept civics is a Latin term civis meaning a citizen or free individual
belonging to a political community. The Latin term civis specifically refers to free native
individuals belonging to a civitas. Civitas is a Latin term, from which the English word
city is derived, signified not merely urban center or local municipality but the state or the
political community as a whole. In the ancient time the Greek small political units (city-
states) were known as civitas. The inhabitants particularly who were native and adult
were termed as citvis.
Civis is also the root word for the present time widely used concepts such as civil,
civility, civic, civics etc. One of the derivatives of this word, civics is also used as the
study of a person's rights and duties as a citizen. Civics is also sometimes understood as a
science of citizens and citizenship. It is a combination of many subjects, including
history, political science, geography, law, philosophy, economics, etc. Civics is the
science of comparative government and means of administering public trust - the theory
of governance as applied to state institutions. From its Etymological meaning, we can
understand that civic education is education about citizens (civis). In general, it is treated
as the study of citizenship and government, usually having to do with the rights and
duties of citizens and government.
Civics as a multi-disciplinary study, specifically deals with the following issues
* The meaning and essence of citizens and citizenship.
* Ways of acquiring citizenship.
* How law is made, executed and interpreted.
* The nature and importance of constitution.
* The structures of state
60
* Theories concerning the essence, origin and development of state
* Forms of government
* Rights, duties and responsibilities of citizens, government bodies and

their officials.
* The growing multi dimensional interdependence of nations of the world.
“There is in our hands as citizens an instrument to mould the minds of the young and
to create great and good and noble citizens for the future.”
Edward Shortt (1862 - 1935)
5.3 The ultimate goal of civics
The active participation of citizens in their own socio-economic and political affairs is
vitally important for the realization of a healthy democratic system. Democracy is a
political system in which people are decision makers on their own affairs. It is a system in
which people exercise self administration (self governance). Self administration demands
the active participation of citizens. The participation should not be for the sake of
participation, but for the purpose of bringing change (betterment) in the society.
In order to actively participate in the political, economic and social affairs, citizens
require the necessary knowledge, awareness and skills. Particularly, in the process of
building up a democratic system citizens should be armed with the necessary knowledge
and skill that enable them to be active participant.
The ultimate goal of civics is to enable students to participate competently and

responsibly in the monitoring and influencing of public policy. The primary concern of
61
civics is training in self government. Democratic self government means that citizens are
actively involved in their own governance; they do not just passively accept the
authoritative saying, statement, or pronouncement of others. In a genuine democratic
system citizens are expected to be critical thinkers. They critically examine the
government policy, behavior and activities. And when ever need arises they influence the
law making processes. The main goal of the study is to identify and examine, in a
comparative framework, the ways in which citizens are prepared to undertake their role
as citizens, in democratic system. To that goal civics provides students or trainees with
the necessary knowledge and skill that enable them to be competent, responsible and
vigilant citizens.
Democracy is a difficult kind of government. It requires the highest qualities of self-

discipline, restraint, a willingness to make commitments and sacrifices for the
general interest, and it also requires knowledge.
John Fitzgerald Kennedy (1917 - 1963)

U.S. president.
Speech, Dublin Castle, Republic of Ireland
5.4 The importance of civic education
Political philosophers insisted always that enlightened citizens, capable of following their
own initiatives are necessary for both, the perpetuation and the continuous renewal of
democracy. To foster the development of democratic values and institutions requires
careful attention assiduous cultivation. Civic education aims at producing such kind of
citizens who are competent, vigilant, informed, and responsible citizens.
The active participation of citizens in their own socio-economic and political affairs is
vitally important for the realization of a healthy democratic system. Citizens require the
62
necessary knowledge, awareness and skills in order to actively participate in the political,
economic and social affairs. Taking civic education course involves acquiring the
necessary knowledge, skill, and attitudes for the students to become, active participant
and responsible citizens.
Studying civic education is helpful because it enables citizens to
□ have knowledge of democratic principles
□ develop skills in interpreting political, social and economic activities and

communication
□ know concepts of democracy and citizenship;
□ develop attitudes related to trust in government institutions, the nation, and

Women’s Political Rights
□ effectively participate in civic-related and other aspects of their life.
Part I
Select the best answer among the given

alternatives.
1. Civic education does not borrow ideas or theories from one of the following
science. Which one is that?
A. Economics C. Anthropology
B. Sociology D. Philosophy
2. Why are vigilant, informed, responsible and active citizens needed in a

democratic society? Because
63
A. in the system citizens administer themselves
B. they control the activity and behavior of their government
C. they can properly enjoy their rights and discharge their duties and
responsibility
D. all of the above
3. As citizen is to civis ______ to civitas
A. state
B. political community
C. citizenship
D. none
4. All of the followings are uses of studying civic education except
A. It help us to know how government operates

B. It enables us to develop the skill of protecting our rights and involving in
political activities
C. Developing political, social and economic awareness
D. None
5. Which of the followings refer(s) to democracy?
A. It is a government of the people
B. It allows little participation of the people
C. It is a political system in which people are decision makers
D. A& B
E. A&C
6. One of the following is not the purpose of civic education. Identify that one?
A. It focuses at enabling citizens to be competent, responsible, active

participant
B. Providing the citizens with the necessary knowledge and skill that
make them capable of participating in different dimension of social life
C. Establishing a self-governing society
D. None
Part II
Match the items on the left with the items on
the right.
LEFT RIGHT
1. Free people A. self-
governance
2. Democracy B. Civis
64
3. Civic education C. Political community
4. State D. Civics
5. The Greek city states E. Civitas
F. minority rule
G. multi-disciplinary study
H. government
Part III
Define the following terms
Civic Democracy Rule of Law

Civic education Government Self-governance
Civic Participation Political Community State
Citizen
Part IV
Questions for reflection
1. Why are citizens required to be watchful, alert, actively involving in the decision
making process, in democracy?
2. What kind of democratic system do you imagine in which the people are passive
recipient of orders?
5.6 SELECTED REFEENCES
1. R.Ball Alan Modern Politics and Government Hong Kong, 1978.

2. H.Street, Freedom of the Individual and the Law, Great Britain, 1972.
3. R.Robert Calling All Citizens, 1952.
4. R.S.Peter, Ethics and Education, London, 1987.
5. C.Aleeds, Political Studies, 1975.
6. Odera H.Oruka The Philosophy of Liberty, USA 1976
7. W.E.Barker. Social Political Theory
8. Kassaye Amare (2003) Fundamental Principle of Civic Education(ii)
65
UNIT 6 The State and Government
CONTENTS
6.0 Introduction
6.2 Origin and Essence of State.
6.2.1 Definition of State
6.2.2 Theories of state
6.2.2.1 Divine Right Theory
6.2.2.2 Social Contract Theory
6.2.2.3 The Marxist Theory
6.2.2.4 The Conquest Theory of the State
6.3 Structure of state
6.4 Forms of Government
6.5 State Organs
6.7 Selected references
66
6.0 Introduction
The concept state has been a debatable issue through out the history of political
philosophy. It has been understood, interpreted and defined in different ways, by political
philosophers and even by lay persons or non-scholars. Some of the questions raised by
those prominent philosophers are: What political system is more preferable and why?
When, why and how state came in to existence? What are the essence and functions of
state? Who should rule and based on what? Where does the political legitimacy rulers
emanate from? Etc. This unit deals with some of these problems.
In this unit you will be introduced to those important concepts like criticizes, state,
territory, people, sovereignty and government. In this unit, the interrelation among the
above mentioned concepts, implicitly and explicitly is discussed in the sub-units.
The unit begins with students analyzing the meaning and purpose of living in a state. You
will be exposed to the problems of how and why state came in to existence. Why and
how human beings exist in a society and at large in a state? What would life look like in
the absence law, law enforcing body and authority? The unit will also focus upon the
interrelation and difference between state and government.
At the conclusion of the unit you should be able to
□ list the elements of state and explain each and their interdependence relation.
67
□ identify and explain the difference between state and government.
□ identify and explain different philosophical theories, concerning the origin and purpose
of state.
□ compare and contrast the purpose and functions of government in different political
systems.
□ explain how participation is related to the purpose of our constitutional government.
□ identify and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of political participation.
□ identify and explain ways of acquiring citizenship.
□ appreciate the importance of rule of law and exercise it.
□ take part in a problem-solving activity in which you learn of various forms of political
participation
6.2 Origin and Essence of State.
6.2.1 Definition of State
Man is by nature a political animal.
Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC), Politics
The term state is interchangeably used with nation, country, land and government. To
some extent, the interchangeable usage of these concepts, substituting state is possible. In
our day to day life we use these terms interchangeably; that means one substituting the
other. If you were asked what your nation, country, state or land was, (understanding all
68
these as to mean one thing) you would give one answer; that is, Ethiopia. In ordinary
conversation or communication that could be possible, but in the strict usage, state is
not exactly any of these listed above. It is rather, as we are going to see next, all of them
at once. In casual language, the idea of a "state" and a "country" are usually regarded as
synonymous, although some speakers make efforts to use "country" or "nation" for the
sovereign entities. Others would primarily understand "the State" as a synonym for "the
Government ", or be careful to distinguish between a territorial "country” and a "nation”
of people. Let us now see each and examine the difference among them.
As it has been cited above, the terms country, nation, state, government and land are often
used as synonyms, but in a more strict usage they are distinguished:
I. Country
Country is the geographical area that includes the landmass (valleys, plateau, plain land,
mountain, hill etc.) and water bodies (river, lake, sea, ponds etc.)/ Generally, it refers to
the physical features.
II. Nation
Nation designates a people. The English word people, refers to a specific group of
humans, or to persons in a general sense. Actually in common usage the two words
(Nation and State) are exchangeable. In scholarly discussion there is a distinction
especially when this topic is discussed As Defined by the New Oxford Dictionary of
English, “A Nation is a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history and
culture inhabiting a particular territory”.
A ‘people’ is also the problematic concept of a group of humans which are united by
some common factor, for example nationality, skin color, belief, tradition, custom or a
common culture. For example the Christian Bible mentions to the people of Moses. The
individuals of the people are assumed to share values and beliefs and be aware of the fact
that they are part of the group. The sum total of individuals who have permanent
existence; sharing common cultural elements makes people. When individuals live
69
collectively together, in a given area, they develop tradition, custom, belief, language
moral codes that evaluate the action and behavior of the members and more or less
similar way of life. These and more others are the constituting elements of culture. People
have permanent existence in a given geographical area, because they share something in
common (cultural elements). Every member of a group acts and behaves according to the
normally or usually accepted ways. So, a mere sum total of individuals does not make
people. It is the existence of culture that makes possible the existence of people. People,
that share more or less similar cultural elements are designated as nation. This is true in
the case of Ethiopia particularly in the present time.
III. Land
Land may be used for "a country and its people" but also thought of as country
belonging to a nation or a monarch. For instance, in the ancient time, the present time
northern part of Ethiopia, Eritrea, the western part of Yemen was ruled by queen Maceda
or commonly known as queen of Sheba ( in Amharic Saba; Negiste Saba yesaba negist ).
This area was called land of Sheba. The people were known as the people of Sheba or
Shebean. So, Sheba refers to both the people and the geographical area.
IV. Government
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
Voltaire (1694 - 1778)

Government is the administrative agent of a state. It is responsible to execute the laws. It
is simply the law enforcing body. The State was a jurisdictional claim to territorial
sovereignty that persisted through time. The Government was the actual agency that acted
to carry out the laws, decrees and proclamations of the State. Thus, the Government
might change from time to time. It is the most dynamic element of state. In U.S.A the
government changes from Republican to Democrat, but the State remained the same.
Whether Clinton or Bush occupies the White House, each man would represent the same
State, U.S.A. Similarly Ethiopia experienced different governments or administration
70
systems. Through the development of state formation, Ethiopia had exposure to different
types of governments, but the state Ethiopia remains unchanged. The government of
Ethiopia in the reign Emperor Haileselassei I was different from that of the Derge period
and the present time government. Each government has its own features and ways of
implementing laws. In the present Ethiopia, the Government at Federal level is the
Council of Ministers established and headed by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister,
according to the 1995 constitution, is the head of government (the executive body or the
Council of Ministers). The Council of Ministers is responsible to implement the laws
made by the legislative body (House of Peoples Representatives). Regarding the powers
and functions of the Council of Ministers, Article 77, sub-article 1 says;
“The Council of Ministers ensures the implementation of laws and decisions

adopted by the House of Peoples’ Representatives”.
No one of these sufficiently explain what state is. The following Convention, in America
provides us with working definition of state. The criteria for statehood are generally
accepted to be those set out in Article 1 of the Montevideo Convention Signed at
Montevideo on 26 December 1933 and entered into force on 26 December 1934.
The first article of the convention is read as follows,
"The state should possess the following qualifications:
(a) A permanent population;
(b) A defined territory;
(c) Government; and
(d) Capacity to enter into relations with the other states.
The last one, (d), refers to the Sovereignty of the government and the law making body;
having the highest decision making power over the social, political and economic affairs
of the people (citizens). This enables the state to have a capacity to enter into relations
with the other states." (The Montevideo is a regional American convention; but the
principles contained in this article have been generally recognized as an accurate
71
statement of customary international law.) However, some have questioned whether these
criteria are sufficient. What about recognition (getting acceptance by other states) of the
state by others.
Furthermore, the first sentence of Article 3 explicitly states that "The political
existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other
states." This is known as the declarative theory of statehood.
There is still a controversy over the definition and essence of state. A major issue in
defining state is the difference between the constitutive and declarative theories of
recognition of states. According to the constitutive theory, a state exists only insofar as it
is recognized by other states. The declarative theory, by contrast, holds that the existence
of a state is independent of its recognition by other states. Which theory is correct is a
controversial issue in international law. An example in practice was the collapse of
central government in Somalia in the early 1990s: the Montevideo convention would
imply that the state of Somalia no longer existed, and the subsequently declared republic
of Somaliland (comprising part of the so-called "former" Somalia) may meet the criteria
for statehood. However the self-declared republic has not achieved recognition by other
states.
Even if the Montevideo convention is regional American content convention, it became a

working definition of state at international level. Territory, people, government and
sovereignty are the necessary conditions if not sufficient for the existence of state. The
convention distinguishes four elements or phenomena of the state: geographical, people,
government, finally, the state as the formal legal subject of power (sovereignty). If one of
these elements that constitute the state is missing, there is no more state. Imagine
Ethiopia with out its territory, people, government and its sovereignty. How could you
think of a state with out having geographical area, human resource, law and law
implementing body and having supreme authority over the natural and human resource
(sovereignty?). The state cannot exist without population, or territory, or government, or
sovereignty. This is an incontrovertible truth.
72
FOUR ATTRIBUTES (ELEMENTS) OF THE STATE
Traditional theories of international politics attribute four Characteristics to the state a

fixed territory a specific population, a government recognized as legitimate, and
sovereignty over its territory and population.
Territory
The existence of a distinct territory with in fixed bounders is the basic element of the
state. Boundaries are intended to be as clear as possible, surveyors plot out exact lines not
only on the land, but also through inland waters that form part of the border Under
contemporary international law the territory of the state is considered to extend to the
oceans, air space, and the resources beneath its soil
Population
The state also possesses a distinct population over which it has legal jurisdiction. The
population of the state consists of two groups, citizens and aliens Citizens are persons
formally recognized under law as having membership in the state. The population of a
state may also include aliens, inhabitants who are not citizens of the state. According to
international law, states are entitled to admit or exclude aliens, but must observe
standards of decent treatment toward those who are admitted.
Government
The third attribute of statehood is the possession of on effective government capable of

extending its authority throughout the territory of the state. Traditional theories of the
state emphasize that the government must be effective capable of exercising real control
73
over the territory and population, and must be viewed by the majority of the population as
legitimate legitimacy requires that the government be considered morally acceptable
according to prevailing political norms.
Sovereignty
According to the theory of sovereignty, there is no higher authority above that of the
government of the state, and the state possesses supreme decision-making power with in
its territory.
In other words, sovereignty means that the state is the supreme power, subject to the rule
neither of some external power nor of a rival power with in its own boundaries
Thus, state is not merely identified with one or two of those synonymously used terms,
rather it is the totality of all. In short, the State is not a physical entity that exists
independently. It is an abstraction that has emerged many times and in many forms
throughout human history.
6.2.2 Theories of state
Through out the history of political philosophy, the meaning, purpose, function and origin
of state have been perplexing problems that were critically analyzed by the philosophers
existed in different periods. In the coming sub-division of the unit you will study different
political philosophers' theories concerning the essence and origin of state.
Historically, when political thinkers have attempted to discover the essential nature of 'the
State' and whether it has legitimacy, they have looked to the origins of that institution for
answers. In general, there are four basic and somewhat overlapping theories of how the
State originated. Each theory carries different implications for the State's relationship to
Society and individual citizens.
74
6.2.2.1 Divine Right Theory
The first theory is a supernatural one which claims that the State, or at least a certain
ruler, is in place through the will of God. State and its institutions, according to this
theory, are natural product. They are purposefully instituted by God/s or
Heavens/Divinity. In short the Super Natural entity created the State, other institution
like prisons, courts, police and military force etc. and appoints rules who are placed to
fulfill the will of the Creator.
pericles Kings are earth's gods; in vice their law's their will.
William Shakespeare (1564 - 1616)

English poet and playwright.
Pericles Act 1, Scene 1
This theory results in theocracy and the Divine Right of Kings. The Divine Right of
Kings is a phrase which refers to European political and religious doctrines of political
absolutism. These are largely, though not exclusively, associated with the mediaeval era,
based on contemporary Christian belief that a monarch owed his rule to the will of God,
not to the will of people, parliament, the aristocracy or any other competing authority and
that any attempt to depose a monarch or to restrict his powers ran contrary to the will of
God. In the western world it came to be associated with Roman Catholicism and other
Christian faiths in the Reformation period. The notion of divine right of kings was
certainly in existence earlier to the mediaeval period; however it was during this time that
the notion became extensively used as a primarily political mechanism i.e. for increasing
the power of kings within centralized monarchies relative to their nobles and subjects.
This theory has been a dominant one for a long period of time, before the appearance
Marxist ideology here in Ethiopia. Ethiopia has implemented this theory in reign of
different kings who ruled the state. Emperor Hileselasie I was the last Solomonic
emperor. (You will see about Solomnic Dynasty in the sub unit that deals with
constitutional development in Ethiopia in detail) He had the right to be emperor of
75
Ethiopia, because he was descendant of King Solomon of Jerusalem who was the third
king of Israel and anointed. Both the 1931 and 1955(The Revised) constitution of
Ethiopia described the blood line and the divine legitimacy of the emperor. The following
two articles (2nd and 4th Articles) are extracted of the Revised Constitution.
ARTICLE 2.
The imperial dignity shall remain perpetually attached to the line of

Haile Sellassie I, descendant of King Sahle Sellassie, whose line
descends without interruption from the dynasty of Menlik I, son of
the Queen of Ethiopia, the Queen of Sheba, and king Solomon of
Jerusalem.
ARTICLE 4.
By virtue of His Imperial blood, as well as by the anointing which
He has received, the person of the Emperor is sacred. His dignity is
inviolable and His power indisputable. He is, consequently, entitled
to all the honors due to Him in accordance with tradition and the
present Constitution. Any on so bold as to seek to injure the Emperor
will be punished.
From the above two articles we can understand that the source of political legitimacy (the
reason why people accept the authority of Monarchs) is Divinity. The people had no right
to question, resist or oppose the authority of the monarch, because he had Imperial blood
and elected of God. Revolting against the monarch means, revolting against God.
God chooses the rulers or royal family to run the State and govern their subjects.
Inhabitants of such States were generally considered to be "subjects" at the mercy of the
Ruler rather than "citizens" (with civil rights). According to the 1955 or Revised
Constitution of Ethiopia during the reign of Emperor Haileselassei I the majority of
Ethiopia were subjects. In the constitution, the word subject is used several times to
indicate the people. The following Articles of the constitution indicate that the people
were subjects (ruled persons)
76
ARTICLE 45.
Ethiopian subjects shall have the right, in accordance with the conditions prescribed by
law, to assemble peaceably and without arms.
ARTICLE 47.
Every Ethiopian subjects has the right to engage in any occupation and, to that end, to
form or join associations in accordance with the law.
ARTICLE 49.
No Ethiopian subject may be banished from the Empire.
KING RICHARD II Not all the water in the rough rude sea
Can wash the balm from an anointed king;
The breath of worldly men cannot depose
The deputy elected by the Lord.
William Shakespeare (1564 - 1616)
English poet and playwright.

In the Epistle to the Romans, ch. 13, St. Paul wrote that earthly rulers, even though they
may not be Christians, have been appointed by God to their places of power for the
purpose of punishing evildoers. St. Augustine, the prominent Christian philosopher in the
medieval period, modified these emphases in his work The City of God. While the City
of Man and the City of God may stand at cross-purposes, both of them have been
instituted by God and served His ultimate will. God (or Heavens/Divine power) has a
"purpose" in creating the State, which is the establish God's rule on earth; that is, "God's
kingdom on earth". Even though the City of Man --- the world of secular government ---
77
may seem ungodly and be governed by sinners, even so, it has been placed on earth for
the protection of the City of God. Therefore, monarchs have been placed on their thrones
for God's purpose, and to question their authority is to question God. In other words,
disobedience to king, queen, emperor or even the president is disobedience to God.
According to this theory, the power and authority of rulers emanate from entity or God.
The Ruler has absolute authority in worldly and spiritual matters Thus; the rulers are
accountable to the one who appointed them to be in their places or positions (God). It is
God that blames, punishes or removes them and replace by others.
It refers to King-God Type of States. According to it, God/s or Heavens/Divinity created
the State. The ruler is either a King-God or King who claims a Divine Right to rule.
Obedience to State is the same as obedience to God/Divinity.
Examples of States that have justified themselves as creations of

Divine/Heavens/Gods/Religion
Christian States of Europe in the medieval period
Rome and Roman Empire under Caesars
Many Native American empires of Central/South America
The State in China from ancient times to early 1900s
The State in Japan from ancient times to the 1945
6.2.2.2 Social Contract Theory
Social Contract Theory is the view that human beings' moral and/or political obligations
What in your opinion is the main purpose of government?
How should government get the authority or right to make laws telling
people what they can and cannot do?
What should the people have the right to do if their government does not
serve the purposes for which it was created? Why should they have this
right?
are dependent upon a contract or agreement between them to form state. According to
this theory human beings for the purpose of securing their life they deliberately agreed to
78
establish law , law enforcing institutions like police force, court, prison center etc and
there by the state. State is not created. It is a result of the development of society. Social
Contract, agreement by which human beings are said to have abandoned the "state of
nature" in order to form the society in which they now live. Hobbes, Locke and J.J
Rousseau, each developed differing versions of the social contract, but all agreed that
certain freedoms had been surrendered for society's protection and that the government
has definite responsibilities to its citizens.
Socrates uses something quite like a social contract argument in the early Platonic
dialogue, Crito, Socrates makes a compelling argument as to why he must stay in prison
and accept the death penalty, rather than escape and go into exile in another Greek city.
He personifies the Laws of Athens, and, speaking in their voice, explains that he has
acquired an overwhelming obligation to obey the Laws because they have made his entire
way of life, and even the fact of his very existence, possible. They made it possible for
his mother and father to marry, and therefore to have legitimate children, including
himself. Having been born, the city of Athens, through its laws, then required that his
father care for and educate him. Socrates' life and the way in which that life has
flourished in Athens are each dependent upon the Laws. Importantly, however, this
relationship between citizens and the Laws of the city are not such kind of laws which
force somebody to do something that he or she does not want to do. Citizens, once they
have grown up, and have seen how the city conducts itself, can choose whether to leave,
taking their property with them, or stay. Staying implies an agreement to abide by the
Laws and accept the punishments that they mete out. And, having made an agreement
that is itself just, Socrates asserts that he must keep to this agreement that he has made
and obey the Laws, in this case, by staying and accepting the death penalty. Importantly,
the contract described by Socrates is an implicit one: it is implied by his choice to stay in
Athens, even though he is free to leave. Why he must remain in prison and accept the
death penalty. However, Social Contract Theory is rightly associated with modern moral
and political theory and is given its first full exposition and defense by Thomas Hobbes.
After Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are the best known proponents of
this enormously influential theory, which has been one of the most dominant theories
79
within moral and political theory throughout the history of the modern West. This theory
is now widely implemented in many democratic nations of the world including Ethiopia.
We admit of no government by divine right...the only legitimate right to govern is an

express grant of power from the governed.
William Henry Harrison (1773 - 1841)

U.S. president.
Inaugural presidential address
A. Thomas Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes, (1588-1679), rejects the theory of the Divine Right of Kings or the
Natural Power of Kings. Its’ view held that a king’s authority was invested in him (or,
presumably, her) by God, that such authority was absolute, and therefore that the basis of
political obligation lay in our obligation to obey God absolutely. According to this view,
then, political obligation is subsumed under religious obligation. He argues, radically for
his times, that political authority and obligation are based on the individual self-interests
of members of society who are understood to be equal to one another, with no single
individual invested with any essential authority to rule over the rest. at the same time, he
maintained the conservative position that the monarch, which he called the Sovereign,
must have absolute authority if society is to survive.
Hobbes' political theory is best understood if taken in two parts: his theory of human
motivation, Psychological Egoism, and his theory of the social contract, founded on the
hypothetical State of Nature. Hobbes has, first and foremost, a particular theory of human
nature, which gives rise to a particular view of morality and politics, as developed in his
philosophical masterpiece, Leviathan, published in 1651. The Scientific Revolution, with
its important new discoveries that the universe could be both described and predicted in
accordance with universal laws of nature, greatly influenced Hobbes. He sought to
provide a theory of human nature that would parallel the discoveries being made in the
sciences of the inanimate universe. His psychological theory is therefore informed by
mechanism, the general view that everything in the universe is produced by nothing other
80
than matter in motion. According to Hobbes, this extends to human behavior. Human
macro-behavior can be aptly described as the effect of certain kinds of micro-behavior,
even though some of this latter behavior is invisible to us. So, such behaviors as walking,
talking, and the like are themselves produced by other actions inside of us. And these
other actions are themselves caused by the interaction of our bodies with other bodies,
human or otherwise, which create in us certain chains of causes and effects, and which
eventually give rise to the human behavior that we can plainly observe. We, including all
of our actions and choices, are then, according to this view, as explainable in terms of
universal laws of nature as are the motions of heavenly bodies. The gradual disintegration
of memory, for example, can be explained by inertia. As we are presented with ever more
sensory information, the residue of earlier impressions ‘slows down' over time. From
Hobbes’ point of view, we are essentially very complicated organic machines, responding
to the stimuli of the world mechanistically and in accordance with universal laws of
human nature.
In Hobbes' view, this mechanistic quality of human psychology implies the subjective
nature of normative claims. ‘Love’ and ‘hate’, for instance, are just words we use to
describe the things we are drawn to and repelled by, respectively. So, too, the terms
‘good’ and ‘bad’ have no meaning other than to describe our appetites and aversions.
Moral terms do not, therefore, describe some objective state of affairs, but are rather
reflections of individual tastes and preferences.
In addition to Subjectivism, Hobbes also infers from his mechanistic theory of human
nature that humans are necessarily and exclusively self-interested. Human beings are self-
centered. All men pursue only what they perceive to be in their own individually
considered best interests - they respond mechanistically by being drawn to that which
they desire and repelled by that to which they are averse. This is a universal claim: it is
meant to cover all human actions under all circumstances – in society or out of it, with
regard to strangers and friends alike, with regard to small ends and the most generalized
of human desires, such as the desire for power and status. Everything we do is motivated
solely by the desire to better our own situations, and satisfy as many of our own,
individually considered desires as possible. We are infinitely appetitive and only
81
genuinely concerned with our own selves. According to Hobbes, even the reason that
adults care for small children can be explicated in terms of the adults' own self-interest
(he claims that in saving an infant by caring for it, we become the recipient of a strong
sense of obligation in one who has been helped to survive rather than allowed to die).
In addition to being exclusively self-interested, Hobbes also argues that human beings are
reasonable. Rationality is purely instrumental. It can add and subtract, and compare sums
one to another, and thereby endows us with the capacity to formulate the best means to
whatever ends we might happen to have.
From these premises of human nature, Hobbes goes on to construct a provocative and
compelling argument for why we ought to be willing to submit ourselves to political
authority (Sovereign). He does this by imagining persons in a situation prior to the
establishment of society, the State of Nature.
According to Hobbes, the justification for political obligation is this: given that men are
naturally self-interested, yet they are rational, they will choose to submit to the authority
of a Sovereign in order to be able to live in a civil society, which is conducive to their
own interests. Thus the origin of state is the desire of human beings to abandon the State
of Nature and enter in to agreement to form a state under the despotic monarch. Hobbes
argues for this by imagining men in their natural state, or in other words, the State of
Nature. In the State of Nature, which is purely hypothetical according to Hobbes, men are
naturally and exclusively self-interested, they are more or less equal to one another, (even
the strongest man can be killed in his sleep), there are limited resources, and yet there is
no power able to force men to cooperate. Given these conditions in the State of Nature,
Hobbes concludes that the State of Nature would be unbearably brutal. In the State of
Nature, every person is always in fear of losing his life to another. In such condition men
find themselves in the absence of freedom, security and peace. They have no capacity to
ensure the long-term satisfaction of their needs or desires. No long-term or complex
cooperation is possible because the State of Nature can be aptly described as a state of
utter distrust. Given Hobbes' reasonable assumption that most people want first and
foremost to avoid their own deaths, he concludes that the State of Nature is the worst
82
possible situation in which men can find themselves. It is the state of perpetual and
unavoidable war. It is a situation in which every one is the enemy of every other. His
Leviathan (1651) presents a bleak picture of human beings in the state of nature, where
life is "nasty, brutish, and short." Fear of violent death is the principal motive that causes
people to create a state, contracting to surrender their natural rights and to submit to the
absolute authority of a sovereign.
The situation is not, however, hopeless. Because men are reasonable, they can see their
way out of such a state by recognizing the laws of nature, which show them the means by
which to escape the State of Nature and create a civil society. The first and most
important law of nature commands that each man be willing to pursue peace when others
are willing to do the same, all the while retaining the right to continue to pursue war
when others do not pursue peace. Being reasonable, and recognizing the rationality of
this basic precept of reason, men can be expected to construct a Social Contract that will
afford them a life other than that available to them in the State of Nature. This contract is
constituted by two distinguishable contracts. First, they must agree to establish society by
collectively and reciprocally renouncing the rights they had against one another in the
State of Nature. Second, they must imbue some one person or assembly of persons with
the authority and power to enforce the initial contract. In other words, to ensure their
escape from the State of Nature, they must both agree to live together under common
laws, and create an enforcement mechanism for the social contract and the laws that
constitute it. Since the sovereign is invested with the authority and power to mete out
punishments for breaches of the contract which are worse than not being able to act as
one pleases, men have good, albeit self-interested, reason to adjust themselves to the
artifice of morality in general, and justice in particular. Society becomes possible
because, whereas in the State of Nature there was no power able to "overawe them all",
now there is an artificially and conventionally superior and more powerful person who
can force men to cooperate. While living under the authority of a Sovereign can be harsh
(Hobbes argues that because men's passions can be expected to overwhelm their reason,
the Sovereign must have absolute authority in order for the contract to be successful) it is
at least better than living in the State of Nature. And, no matter how much we may object
to how poorly a Sovereign manages the affairs of the state and regulates our own lives,
83
we are never justified in resisting his power because it is the only thing which stands
between us and what we most want to avoid, the State of Nature.
According to this argument, morality, politics, society, and everything that comes along
with it, all of which Hobbes calls ‘commodious living' are purely conventional. Prior to
the establishment of the basic social contract, according to which men agree to live
together and the contract to embody a Sovereign with absolute authority, nothing is
immoral or unjust - anything goes. After these contracts are established, however, then
society becomes possible, and people can be expected to keep their promises, cooperate
with one another, and so on. The Social Contract is the most fundamental source of all
that is good and that which we depend upon to live well. Our choice is either to abide by
the terms of the contract, or return to the State of Nature, which Hobbes argues no
reasonable person could possibly prefer. Reason led men to abandon their previous worst
condition of life, in the State of Nature and agree to establish ordered life in a state. In a
state there is no fear of death, no insecurity, no lack of peace, etc
Do you agree that according to Hobbes the reason of state is the self-centeredness nature
of human beings?
B. John Locke
For Hobbes, the necessity of an absolute authority, in the form of a Sovereign, followed
from the utter brutality of the State of Nature. The State of Nature was completely
intolerable, and so rational men would be willing to submit themselves even to absolute
authority in order to escape it. For John Locke, 1632-1704, the State of Nature is a very
different type of place, and so his argument concerning the social contract and the nature
of men's relationship to authority are consequently quite different. While Locke uses
Hobbes’ methodological device of the State of Nature, as do virtually all social contract
theorists, he uses it to a quite different end. Locke’s arguments for the social contract and
for the right of citizens to revolt against their king were enormously influential on the
democratic revolutions that followed, especially on Thomas Jefferson, and the founders
of the United States.
84
Locke's most important and influential political writings are contained in his Two
Treatises on Government. The first treatise is concerned almost exclusively with the
argument intended to prove that political authority was derived from religious authority,
also known by the description of the Divine Right of Kings was wrong. The second
treatise contains Locke’s own constructive view of the aims and justification for civil
government, and is titled "An Essay Concerning the True Original Extent and End of
Civil Government".
According to Locke, the State of Nature, the natural condition of mankind, is a state of
perfect and complete liberty to conduct one's life as one best sees fit, free from the
interference of others. This does not mean, however, that it is a state of license: one is not
free to do anything at all one pleases, or even anything that one judges to be in one’s
interest. The State of Nature, although a state wherein there is no civil authority or
government to punish people for transgressions against laws, is not a state without
morality. The State of Nature is pre-political, but it is not pre-moral. Persons are assumed
to be equal to one another in such a state, and therefore equally capable of discovering
and being bound by the Law of Nature. The Law of Nature, which is on Locke’s view the
basis of all morality, and given to us by God, commands that we not harm others with
regards to their "life, health, liberty, or possessions" (par. 6). Because we all belong
equally to God, and because we cannot take away that which is rightfully His, we are
prohibited from harming one another. So, the State of Nature is a state of liberty where
persons are free to pursue their own interests and plans, free from interference, and,
because of the Law of Nature and the restrictions that it imposes upon persons, it is
relatively peaceful.
The State of Nature therefore, is not the same as the state of war, as it is according to
Hobbes. It can, however devolve into a state of war, in particular, a state of war over
property disputes. Whereas the State of Nature is the state of liberty where persons
recognize the Law of Nature and therefore do not harm one another, the state of war
begins between two or more men once one man declares war on another, by stealing from
him, or by trying to make him his slave. Since in the State of Nature there is no civil
85
power to whom men can appeal, and since the Law of Nature allows them to defend their
own lives, they may then kill those who would bring force against them. Since the State
of Nature lacks civil authority, once war begins it is likely to continue. And this is one of
the strongest reasons that men have to abandon the State of Nature by contracting
together to form civil government.
Property plays an essential role in Locke's argument for civil government and the contract
that establishes it. According to Locke, private property is created when a person mixes
his labor with the raw materials of nature. So, for example, when one tills a piece of land
in nature, and makes it into a piece of farmland, which produces food, then one has a
claim to own that piece of land and the food produced upon it. Given the implications of
the Law of Nature, there are limits as to how much property one can own: one is not
allowed to take so more from nature than oneself can use, thereby leaving others without
enough for themselves. Because nature is given to all of mankind by God for its common
subsistence, one cannot take more than his own fair share. Property is the linchpin of
Locke’s argument for the social contract and civil government because it is the protection
of their property, including their property in their own bodies that men seek when they
decide to abandon the State of Nature.
According to Locke, the State of Nature is not a condition of individuals, as it is for

Hobbes. Rather, it is populated by mothers and fathers with their children, or families -
what he calls "conjugal society". These societies are based on the voluntary agreements
to care for children together, and they are moral but not political. Political society comes
into being when individual men, representing their families, come together in the State of
Nature and agree to each give up the executive power to punish those who transgress the
Law of Nature, and hand over that power to the public power of a government. Having
done this, they then become subject to the will of the majority. In other words, by making
a compact to leave the State of Nature and form society, they make “one body politic
under one government” and submit themselves to the will of that body. One joins such a
body, either from its beginnings, or after it has already been established by others, only
by explicit consent. Having created a political society and government through their
consent, men then gain three things which they lacked in the State of Nature: laws, judges
86
to adjudicate laws, and the executive power necessary to enforce these laws. Each man
therefore gives over the power to protect himself and punish transgressors of the Law of
Nature to the government that he has created through the compact.
Given that the end of "men's uniting into common-wealth" is the preservation of their
wealth, and preserving their lives, liberty, and well-being in general, Locke can easily
imagine the conditions under which the compact with government is destroyed, and men
are justified in resisting the authority of a civil government, such as a King. When the
executive power of a government devolves into tyranny, such as by dissolving the
legislature and therefore denying the people the ability to make laws for their own
preservation, then the resulting tyrant puts himself into a State of Nature, and specifically
into a state of war with the people, and they then have the same right to self-defense as
they had before making a compact to establish society in the first place. In other words,
the justification of the authority of the executive component of government is the
protection of the people’s property and well-being, so when such protection is no longer
present, or when the king becomes a tyrant and acts against the interests of the people,
they have a right, if not an outright obligation, to resist his authority. The social compact
can be dissolved and the process to create political society begun anew.
Because Locke did not envision the State of Nature as grimly as did Hobbes, he can
imagine conditions under which one would be better off rejecting a particular civil
government and returning to the State of Nature, with the aim of constructing a better
civil government in its place. It is therefore both the view of human nature, and the nature
of morality itself, which account for the differences between Hobbes' and Locke’s views
of the social contract.
87
C. Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 1712-1778, lived and wrote during what was arguably the
headiest period in the intellectual history of modern France--the Enlightenment. He was
one of the bright lights of that intellectual movement.
Rousseau has two distinct social contract theories. The first is found in his essay,
Discourse on the Origin and Foundations of Inequality Among Men, commonly referred
to as the Second Discourse, and is an account of the moral and political evolution of
human beings over time, from a State of Nature to modern society. As such it contains his
naturalized account of the social contract, which he sees as very problematic. The second
is his normative or idealized theory of the social contract, and is meant to provide the
means by which to alleviate the problems that modern society has created for us, as laid
out in the Second Discourse.
Rousseau wrote his Second Discourse in response to an essay contest sponsored by the
Academy of Dijon. (Rousseau had previously won the same essay contest with an earlier
essay, commonly referred to as the First Discourse.) In it he describes the historical
process by which man began in a State of Nature and over time ‘progressed' into civil
society. According to Rousseau, the State of Nature was a peaceful and quixotic time.
People lived solitary, uncomplicated lives. Their few needs were easily satisfied by
nature. Because of the abundance of nature and the small size of the population,
competition was non-existent, and persons rarely even saw one another, much less had
reason for conflict or fear. Moreover, these simple, morally pure persons were naturally
endowed with the capacity for pity, and therefore were not inclined to bring harm to one
another.
As time passed, however, humanity faced certain changes. As the overall population
increased, the means by which people could satisfy their needs had to change. People
slowly began to live together in small families, and then in small communities. Divisions
of labor were introduced, both within and between families, and discoveries and
88
inventions made life easier, giving rise to leisure time. Such leisure time inevitably led
people to make comparisons between themselves and others, resulting in public values,
leading to shame and envy, pride and contempt. Most importantly however, according to
Rousseau, was the invention of private property, which constituted the pivotal moment in
humanity's evolution out of a simple, pure state into one characterized by greed,
competition, vanity, inequality, and vice. For Rousseau the invention of property
constitutes humanity’s ‘fall from grace’ out of the State of Nature.
Having introduced private property, initial conditions of inequality became more

pronounced. Some have property and others are forced to work for them, and the
development of social classes begins. Eventually, those who have property notice that it
would be in their interests to create a government that would protect private property
from those who do not have it but can see that they might be able to acquire it by force.
So, government gets established, through a contract, which purports to guarantee equality
and protection for all, even though its true purpose is to fossilize the very inequalities that
private property has produced. In other words, the contract, which claims to be in the
interests of everyone equally, is really in the interests of the few who have become
stronger and richer as a result of the developments of private property. This is the
naturalized social contract, which Rousseau views as responsible for the conflict and
competition from which modern society suffers.
The normative social contract, argued for by Rousseau in The Social Contract (1762), is
meant to respond to this sorry state of affairs and to remedy the social and moral ills that
have been produced by the development of society. The distinction between history and
justification, between the factual situation of mankind and how it ought to live together,
is of the utmost importance to Rousseau. While we ought not to ignore history, nor ignore
the causes of the problems we face, we must resolve those problems through our capacity
to choose how we ought to live. Might never make right, despite how often it pretends
that it can.
Rousseau says, "Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains". Humans are
essentially free, and were free in the State of Nature, but the ‘progress' of civilization has
89
substituted subservience to others for that freedom, through dependence, economic and
social inequalities, and the extent to which we judge ourselves through comparisons with
others. Since a return to the State of Nature is neither feasible nor desirable, the purpose
of politics is to restore freedom to us, thereby reconciling who we truly and essentially
are with how we live together. So, this is the fundamental philosophical problem that The
Social Contract seeks to address: how can we be free and live together? Or, put another
way, how can we live together without succumbing to the force and coercion of others?
We can do so, Rousseau maintains, by submitting our individual, particular wills to the
collective or general will, created through agreement with other free and equal persons.
Like Hobbes and Locke before him, and in contrast to the ancient philosophers, all men
are made by nature to be equals, therefore no one has a natural right to govern others, and
therefore the only justified authority is the authority that is generated out of agreements
or covenants.
The most basic covenant, the social pact, is the agreement to come together and form a
people, a collectivity, which by definition is more than and different from a mere
aggregation of individual interests and wills. This act, where individual persons become a
people is "the real foundation of society”. Through the collective renunciation of the
individual rights and freedom that one has in the State of Nature, and the transfer of these
rights to the collective body, a new ‘person', as it were, is formed. The sovereign is thus
formed when free and equal persons come together and agree to create themselves anew
as a single body, directed to the good of all considered together. So, just as individual
wills are directed towards individual interests, the general will, once formed, is directed
towards the common good, understood and agreed to collectively. Included in this version
of the social contract is the idea of reciprocated duties: the sovereign is committed to the
good of the individuals who constitute it, and each individual is likewise committed to
the good of the whole. Given this, individuals cannot be given liberty to decide whether it
is in their own interests to fulfill their duties to the Sovereign, while at the same time
being allowed to reap the benefits of citizenship. They must be made to conform
themselves to the general will, they must be “forced to be free”.
90
For Rousseau, this implies an extremely strong and direct form of democracy. One cannot
transfer one's will to another, to do with as he or she sees fit, as one does in representative
democracies. Rather, the general will depends on the coming together periodically of the
entire democratic body, each and every citizen, to decide collectively, and with at least
near unanimity, how to live together, i.e., what laws to enact. As it is constituted only by
individual wills, these private, individual wills must assemble themselves regularly if the
general will is to continue. One implication of this is that the strong form of democracy
which is consistent with the general will is also only possible in relatively small states.
The people must be able to identify with one another, and at least know who each other
are. They cannot live in a large area, too spread out to come together regularly, and they
cannot live in such different geographic circumstances as to be unable to be united under
common laws. (Could the present-day democratic states. satisfy Rousseau’s conception of
democracy? It could not. ) Although the conditions for true democracy are stringent, they
are also the only means by which we can, according to Rousseau, save ourselves, and
regain the freedom to which we are naturally entitled.
Rousseau's social contract theories together form a single, consistent view of our moral
and political situation. We are endowed with freedom and equality by nature, but our
nature has been corrupted by our contingent social history. We can overcome this
corruption, however, by invoking our free will to reconstitute ourselves politically, along
strongly democratic principles, which is good for us, both individually and collectively.
6.2.2.3 The Marxist Theory

The Marxist and the fourth theories are ones of conflict or straggle. The Marxist theory
claims that the State emerges due to internal warfare within the Society. Karl Marx
popularized this view by analyzing the State as an agency of class warfare by which the
capitalists controlled the workers. For Marx and his belief in inevitable class conflict, the
State is an expression and protector of one segment of Society at the expense of another
segment. Marx and Engels asserted that the key to understanding human culture history
and the essence of state was the struggle between the classes. They used the term class to
refer to a group of people within society who share the same social and economic status.
91
The classes are antagonistic. According to Marx and Engels, class struggles have
occurred in every form of society, no matter what its economic structure, or mode of
production: slavery, feudalism, or capitalism. In each of these kinds of societies, a
minority of people own or control the means of production, such as land, raw materials,
tools and machines, labor, and money. This minority constitutes the ruling class. The vast
majority of people own and control very little. They mainly own their own capacity to
work. The ruling class uses its economic power to exploit workers by appropriating their
surplus labor.
It is inconceivable that we could transform this society without a major extension

of public ownership.
Neil Kinnock (1942 - )

British politician.
Marxism Today
Marx, in order to understand the origin, essence and function of state, studied the selected
past and capitalist societies’ social, economic and political conditions. Marx in his
analysis introduced five social systems: primitive social system, slave owning, feudalism,
capitalism, socialism and the last social system communism, which is the Marxist dream.
According to Marxists, state appeared at a certain evolutionary development human
society. State came in to existence with the appearance of private property in the slave
owning system. Private property resulted in the class division (propertied, the slave
master and property less, the slave). A state is a machine for the maintenance of the
domination of one class over another. Thus, when private property is abolished and when
and where there will be no class division (in a communist society) state gradually
‘weathers away’. Since in the classless society (Communism) in which property is owned
communally, the state has no function of defending the economic interest of any class. At
last, it brings about the no more existence of the state.
92
The state did not always exist. Until the appearance of classes the state did not exist. In
developed communism there will be no state. Thus, state has historical beginning and
end (in the communism). What is the earliest social system in which there was no class
division and state? What were the features of the society?
I'm not interested in classes...Far be it from me to foster inferiority complexes among

the workers by trying to make them think they belong to some special class. That has
happened in Europe but it hasn't happened here yet.
John L. Lewis (1880 - 1969)

U.S. labor leader.
Prior to class division there appeared division of labor, in the antiquity societies
(primitive societies). At last, social division of labor gave birth to social classes division.
In other words, the emergence of the state is a product of the social division of labor. In
the primitive societies, the division of labor was based on nature. It was between males
and females. So long as this social division of labor is only at elementary or level, all
members of the society in turn exercise practically all its functions. There is no state.
There are no special state functions.
In the primitive communal society, there is no private property. Any thing that is
important for the members belongs to the community. It is a communal and egalitarian
society, in which every one is at equal status and enjoys communal property.
In connection with the Bushmen, Father Victor Ellenberger writes that this tribe knew
neither private property nor courts, neither central authority nor special bodies of any
kind. Another author writes of this same tribe: “The band, and not the tribe, is the real
political body among the Bushmen. Each band is autonomous, leading its own life
independently of the others. Its affairs are as a rule regulated by the skilled hunters and
the older, more experienced men in general.”
But to the extent that social division of labor develops and society is divided into classes,
the State appears - and its nature is defined: The members of the collectivity as a whole
93
are denied the exercise of a certain number of functions; a small minority, alone, takes
over the exercise of these functions. The appearance of the state consists in taking away
from a majority of the members of the society certain functions they formerly exercised
(collectively in the beginning) in order to arrogate these functions to a small group of
individuals.
First example: Arms.
This is an important function. Engels said that the state is, in the final analysis, nothing
other than a body of armed men. In the primitive collectivity, all male members of the
group (and sometimes even all adults, male and female) are armed. In such a society the
concept that the bearing of arms is the particular prerogative of some special institution
called army, police, or constabulary, does not exist. Every adult male has the right to bear
arms. (In certain primitive societies, the ceremony of initiation, which marks coming of
age, confers the right to bear arms.)
It is exactly the same in societies that are still primitive but already close to the stage of
division into classes. For example, this holds true for the Germanic peoples at about the
time they attacked the Roman Empire: all free men had the right to bear arms and they
could use them to defend their person and their rights. In ancient Greece and Rome, the
struggles between patricians and plebeians often revolved about this question of the right
to bear arms.
Second example: Justice.
In general, writing is unknown to primitive society. Thus there are no written codes of
law. Moreover, the exercise of justice is not the prerogative of particular individuals; this
right belongs to the collectivity. Apart from quarrels decided by families or individuals
themselves, only collective assemblies are empowered to render judgments. In primitive
Germanic society, the president of the people’s tribunal did not pass judgment: his
function consisted in seeing that certain rules, certain forms, were observed. The idea that
there could be certain men detached from the collectivity to whom would be reserved the
right of dispensing justice, would seem to citizens of a society based on the collectivism
94
of the clan or the tribe just as nonsensical as the reverse appears to most of our
contemporaries.
To sum up: At a certain point in the development of society, before it is divided into
social classes, certain functions such as the right to bear arms or to administer justice are
exercised collectively - by all adult members of the community. It is only as this society
develops further, to the point where social classes appear, that these functions are taken
away from the collectivity to be reserved to a minority who exercise these functions in a
special way.
What are the characteristics of this “special way”?
In the feudal society the feudal lord, and only he, exercises throughout his domain all
the functions enumerated above, functions that had devolved on the adult collectivity in
primitive societies.
This feudal lord is the absolute master of his realm. He is the only one who has the right
to bear arms at all times; he is the only policeman, the only constable; he is the sole
judge; he is the only one who has the right to coin money; he is the sole minister of
finance. He exercises throughout his domain all the classic functions performed by a state
as we know it today.
Later, an evolution will take place. As long as the estate remains fairly small, its
population limited, the “state” functions of the lord rudimentary and not very
complicated, and as long as exercising these functions takes only a little of the lord’s
time, he an handle the situation and exercise all these functions in person. But when the
domain grows and the population increases, the functions for which the feudal lord is
responsible become more and more complex and more and more detailed and
burdensome. It becomes impossible for one man to exercise all these functions.
What does the feudal lord then do?
95
He partially delegates his powers to others - but not to free men, since the latter belong to
a social class in opposition to the seigniorial class. The feudal lord delegates part of his
power to people completely under his control: serfs who are part of his domestic staff.
Their servile origin is reflected in many present-day titles: “constable” comes from comes
stabuli, head serf of the stables; “minister” is the serf ministrable, i.e., the serf assigned
by the lord to minister to his needs - to act as his attendant, servant, assistant, agent etc.;
“marshal” is the serf who takes care of the carriages, the horses, etc. (from marah scalc,
Old High German for keeper of the horses).
To the extent that these people, these non-free men, these domestics, are completely
under his control, does the seigneur partially delegate his powers to them.
The state functions exercised by the ruling class do not only concern the most immediate
areas of power, such as the army, justice, finances. Also under the land lord’s thumb are
ideology, law, philosophy, science, art. Those who exercise these functions are poor
people who, in order to live, have to sell their talents to a feudal lord who can take care of
their needs. (Heads of the church have to be included in the class of feudal lords,
inasmuch as the church was the proprietor of vast landed estates.)
Needless to say, in the course of the evolution of society, the function of the state
becomes much more complex, with many more nuances, than it is in a feudal regime
such as we have just very schematically described.
Nevertheless, we must start from this transparently clear and obvious situation in order to
understand the logic of the evolution, the origin of this social division of labor that is
brought about, and the process through which these different functions become more and
more autonomous and begin to seem more and more independent of the ruling class.
The modern bourgeois state
96
This new society is no longer dominated by feudal lords but by capitalism, by modern
capitalists. As we know, the monetary needs of the modern state - the new central power,
more or less absolute monarchy - become greater and greater, from the fifteenth to
sixteenth century onward. It is the money of the capitalists, of the merchant and
commercial bankers, that in large part fills the coffers of the state.
Ever since that time, to the extent that the capitalists pay for the upkeep of the state, they
will demand that the latter place itself completely at their service. They will make this
quite clearly felt and understood by the very nature of the laws they enact and by the
institutions they create.
Several institutions which today appear democratic in nature, for example the
parliamentary institution, clearly reveal the class nature of the bourgeois state. Thus, in
most of the countries in which parliamentarianism was instituted, only the bourgeoisie
had the right to vote. This state of affairs lasted in most Western countries until the end of
the last century or even the beginning of the twentieth century. Universal suffrage is, as
we can see, of relatively recent invention in the history of capitalism. How is this
explained?
Easily enough. In the seventeenth century, when the English capitalists proclaimed “No
taxation without representation. It was only, representation for the bourgeoisie that they
had in mind; for the idea that people who owned nothing and paid no taxes could vote,
seemed absurd and ridiculous to them. Isn’t parliament created for the very purpose of
controlling expenditures made with the taxpayers’ money?
This argument, extremely valid from the point of view of the bourgeoisie, was taken up
and developed by our Doctrinaire bourgeoisie at the time of the demand for universal
suffrage. For this bourgeoisie, the role of parliament consisted in controlling budgets and
expenditures. And only those who pay taxes may validly exercise this control; because
those who do not pay taxes would constantly have the tendency to increase expenditures
97
Here, too, the situation is fairly clear. Modern parliamentary finds its origin in the battle
cry that the English bourgeoisie hurled at the king, “No taxation without representation!”
In plain words this means: “Not a cent will you get from us as long as we have no say in
how you spend it”.
The parliamentary institution is a typical example of the very direct very mechanical
bond that exists - even in the bourgeois state - between the domination of the ruling class
and the exercise of state power.
There are other examples. Let us look at the jury in the judicial system. The jury (a group
of people, usually twelve people, chosen to give a verdict (jury decision) on a legal case
that is presented before them in a court of law) appears to be an institution eminently
democratic in character, especially when compared to the administration of justice by
irremovable judges, all members of the ruling class over whom the people have no
control.
But from what social layer were - and still in very large measure today, are - the members
of a jury chosen? From the bourgeoisie. There were even special qualifications,
comparable to property-holding requirements for voting, for being able to sit on a jury - a
juror had to be a homeowner, pay a certain amount of taxes, etc. To illustrate this very
direct link between the machinery of the state and the ruling class in the bourgeois era.
The parliament of Ethiopia in the reign of Emperor Haileselassie I had such nature. Who
were the members of the parliament, legislators? The then parliament was bicameral (A
parliament with two legislative chambers: having two separate and distinct lawmaking
assemblies) in its structure. The two chambers were Chamber of Deputy (“Yehege
Memeria Meker Bet”) and Chamber of the Senate (“Yehege Mewesegna Meker Bet”).
Both chambers were composed of nobilities, lords, princes, high rank persons, gentle men
from well to do families etc. Serfs, the majority were not represented in the parliament
nor had totally the right to be elected. The 1955 constitution of Ethiopia explicitly shows
that privet property or wealth was important requirement to join the parliament. Article
96 and 103 are dedicated to separate the eligibles from the nonstarters to be
98
parliamentarians. Article 96 prohibits those who are with out property, to be the members
of the Chamber of Deputy. It says;
ARTICLE 96
To be eligible as a Deputy, a person must be, by birth, an Ethiopian

subject who:
(a) has reached the age of twenty-five years;
(b)is a bona fide resident and owner of property in his electoral
district, to the extent repaired by the electoral law; and
(c) is not disqualified under any provision of the electoral law.
Among the legal requirements (age, property, nationality and loyalty to the Emperor)
property is the most difficult one to possess. Property was owned by few lords, princes,
nobilities and the like. Among the princes, lords, nobles and high rank persons the
Emperor appoints to be the members of the Chamber of the Senate Article 103
concerning this states as follows
To be eligible for appointment as a member of the Senate, a person

must be, by birth, an Ethiopian subject who:
(a) has reached the age of thirty-five years;
(b) is a Prince or other Dignitary, or a former high governmental
official, or other person generally esteemed for his character,
judgment and public services; and
(d) is not disqualified under any provision of the electoral law.
The majority of Ethiopian population was land or property less. These few propertied
privileged persons occupy sits in the parliament discuss issues, make laws and polices.
Do you think that the laws made by the propertied people reflect the interest of the
99
majority, the property less? Never at all. The laws made by the parliamentarians and the
above two articles are not intended to satisfy the majority or the poor. The propertied
class uses the parliament as a means of fulfilling their desire.
In the same way as the state, law is inseparably tied to the division of society into classes.
Every law is the law of the ruling class. The basis of law is the formulation and
consolidation of the relationship to the means of production, owing to which in
exploitative society, one part of the people can appropriate to itself the unpaid labor of
another
The appearance and withering away of law, similar to the appearance and withering of
the state, is connected with two extremely important historical limitations. Law (and the
state) appears with the division of society into classes. Passing through a long path of
development, full of revolutionary leaps and qualitative changes, law and the state will
wither away under communism as a result of the disappearance of classes and of all
survivals of class society.
To sum up, the state for Marxism is a special organ that appears at a certain moment in
the historical evolution of mankind and that is condemned to disappear in the course of
this same evolution. It is born from the division of society into classes and will disappear
at the same time that this division disappears. It is not the agreement of the people as the
consent theory says rather disagreement or internal conflict between the antagonistic
classes that gave birth to the state. It is born as an instrument in the hands of the
possessing class for the purpose of maintaining the domination of this class over society,
and it will disappear along with this class domination.
6.2.2.4 The Conquest Theory of the State
100
All great civilizations, in their early stages, are based on success in war.
Kenneth Clark (1903 - 1983)

British art historian
Civilization
The fourth theory looks to external conflicts and maintains that the State arose as the
result of one tribe conquering another tribe. The conquest theory of the state stands in
sharp contrast to the preceding social contract theory, and attempts to ground the
primitive State in historical fact rather than political conjecture. A common expression of
the conquest theory runs as follows: originally there were agricultural tribes who settled
in certain areas where they became dependent upon the land. Roving nomads, who were
perhaps herders, waged war on the more sedentary tribes for the obvious economic
benefits to be gained. At first, the nomads killed and pillaged, but they discovered it was
in their long term economic interests to enslave and extract tribute from the conquered
people instead. This is used as the basic model for how the institution of the State arose.
The advocates of this theory believed that material need was the prime motivator of
human beings and that progress is produced by economic causes, not by political ones.
The 19th-20th century German sociologist Franz Oppenheimer spearheaded an analysis
of these key terms in his classic work The State. Oppenheimer defined the State, "I mean
by it that summation of privileges and dominating positions which are brought into being
by extra-economic power....I mean by Society, the totality of concepts of all purely
natural relations and institutions between man and man..."(xxxiii). (1) He contrasted what
he terms 'the political means' with 'the economic means' of acquiring wealth or power.
The State uses the political means -- in other words, force -- to plunder and exploit
Society which used the economic means -- in other words, co-operation. The State may
be considered to be a continuing act of war committed against Society by a separate
group. Thus, the State was the enemy of Society.
The use of force alone is but temporary. It may subdue for a moment; but it does
not remove the necessity of subduing again: and a nation is not governed, which
is perpetually to be conquered.
Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Irish-born British statesman and political philosopher. Referring to "Conciliation
101
Oppenheimer identified the two basic means by which men satisfy their material needs:
through their own labor or through expropriating the labor of others. The former is the
economic means: the latter is the political means.
Oppenheimer discovered the origin of the State within the 'economic impulse of man' --
or, rather, within those men who wished to satisfy this impulse through the political
means. He posited six stages through which a conquering group typically passes in order
to become a State. At first, a warlike group raids and plunders another vulnerable one.
Second, the victimized group ceases to actively resist. In response, the raiders now
merely plunder the surplus, leaving their victims alive and with enough food to ensure the
production of future plunder. Eventually, the two groups come to acknowledge mutual
interests, such as protecting the crops from a third tribe. Third, the victims offer tribute to
the raiders, eliminating the need for violence. Fourth, the two groups merge territorially.
Fifth, the warlike group assumes the right to arbitrate disputes.
Oppenheimer described the last stage in which both groups develop the 'habit of rule':
"The two groups, separated to begin with, and then united on one territory, are at first
merely laid alongside one another, then are scattered through one another...soon the
bonds of relations united the upper and lower strata."
Thus the State that originated from external conquest evolves into one of continuing
internal conquest by which one group -- or a coalition of groups -- use the political means
to attain wealth and power at the expense of those who actually labor. The State arises
and maintains itself as the enemy of Society.
Although the conquest theory has much greater historical validity than the consent theory,
debate continues as to what implication the origin of the State has upon the legitimacy of
current states.
An empire founded by war has to maintain itself by war.
Charles Louis de Secondat Montesquieu, Baron de (1689 - 1755)

French writer and jurist.
102
Do you see any similarity between the Marxist and conquest theory of
the state?
Oppenheimer's position may resemble Marx's but there are at least two key differences.
1. He contends that, however the State may evolve, its origin is to be found in external
conflict, not an internal one. For Marx the origin of state is internal conflict between the
propertied and property less section of the society. But for the conquest theory the source
of state is external conflict; that is, the powerful ones control the weak.
2. He defines two classes as entirely separate entities -- those who use the political means
(the State) and those who use the economic means (Society), thus removing the
inevitability of conflict within Society. The State is an imposed cost upon Society, not an
inevitable result of internal conflict.
The only stable state is the one in

which all men are equal before
the law.
Aristotle
6.3 structure of state.
The states of the world are different in different ways. Their difference might be because
of either their structure (how power is distributed), the form of government (how the top
official is selected) that they have, the type of ideology that they use in order to the
leaders have political legitimacy, how and for how long the important public officials or
the representatives of the people are elected. Political legitimacy is the willingness of the
103
population to accept decisions of the state, its government and courts, which go against
personal choices or interests.If the leaders are periodically elected, the state in question is
a republic. On the other hand if the head of the state is a monarch, it will be believed that
he (king) or she (queen) had divine right. As it has been mentioned above, in a monarchic
system of government the head of the state is elected by God to rule the subjects till the
time of his or her death. There is no periodic election. The next diagram may help us to
observe the different characteristics of the state.
Forms of State
Structure o f Forms of Politico- legal system

State Government (Ideology)
Dictatorship Monarchic
Unita Presidenti
ry al
Federal Parliamentary Democrati Republ

c ic
Confederal Semi-presidential
(A) Unitary state structure
It is a type of state in which a constitution vests all governmental power in the central
government. Most countries are unitary systems, with laws giving virtually all authority
104
to the central government. The central government may delegate duties to cities or other
administrative units, but it retains final authority and can retract any tasks it has
delegated.
This type of state structure is appropriate in relatively homogenous society; that means,
where there is no a great disparity in terms of language, culture, religion etc. in the
society. It is also appropriate in geographically compact country. The central government
in a unitary system is much more powerful than the central government in a federal
system. Cameroon, France, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Morocco, South Korea, Sweden,
Uruguay and Ethiopia, during the reign of Emperor Haile Selassie and Reign of Dergue
are examples of unitary systems.
(b) Federal State Structure
The word federal comes from the Latin term fidere, meaning “to trust.” Countries with
federal political systems have both a central government and governments based in
smaller political units, usually called states, provinces, or territories. These smaller
political units surrender some of their political power to the central government, relying
on it to act for the common good.
Federalism a state structure in which two levels of government control the same territory
and citizens. In federalism a constitution distributes powers between a central
government and sub divisional governments, giving to both substantial responsibilities
and powers, including the power to collect taxes and to pass and enforce laws regulating
the conduct of individuals.
This state structure is common in the nations which have heterogeneous society and that
are not geographically compact (that is not easy for centralized administration). In a state
whose people are diversified in terms of ethnicity, language, tradition, custom, way of
life, psychological make-up, etc. implementing federal state structure is advisable.
In this state structure dual jurisdictions and dual systems of government exist. In a federal
system, laws are made both by state, provincial, or territorial governments and by a
105
central government. In the United States, for example, people who live in the state of
Ohio must obey the laws made by the Ohio legislature and the Congress of the United
States. In Canada, residents of the province of Québec follow the laws made by Québec’s
legislature and those made by the Canadian parliament. The same holds also true in
Ethiopia, for example, the residents of the Oromia regional state are obedient to both the
federal state law and the Oromia regional state law.
The division of powers is set down in written constitution. The mere existence of both
national and state governments does not make a system federal. What is important is that
a constitution divides governmental powers between the national government and the
constituent governments, giving substantial functions to each.
In USA constitutional court exists to settle disputes between the two levels of
government. In the existing Ethiopia this is done by the House of Federation whose main
task is interpreting the constitution. In a federal system of government, neither the federal
government nor the state government has the right to take away power and authority
constitutionally belonging to the other.
In the United States the subunits are called states (of which there are 50 Fifty) in
Germany Lander (10), in Austria also Lander (9) in Canada provinces (10) in
Switzerland, cantons (26) in Ethiopia also state or Kilele (9)
Federal political systems divide power and resources between central and regional
governments. The balance of power between the two levels of government varies from
country to country, but most federal systems grant substantial autonomy to state or
provincial governments. Central governments decide issues that concern the whole
country, such as organizing an army, building major roads, and making treaties with other
countries. In addition to the United States, Canada and Ethiopia countries that are
considered federalist include Australia, Brazil, Germany, India, Malaysia, Mexico,
Nigeria, and Switzerland.
(C) Confederal state structure
It is the third kind state in which sovereign nations by a constitutional compact create a
Central government but carefully limit the power of the central government and do not
106
give it the power to regulate the conduct of individuals directly. A confederation is similar
to a federal system but gives less power to the central government. This political concept
refers to a union of sovereign states each of which is free to act independently. Some
times this is termed as loose federation. The loose alliances of countries or other political
entities that make up a confederation seek to cooperate with one another while retaining
ultimate control of their own internal policies. Unlike federal systems, confederations
usually give each member nation absolute control over its citizens and territory. The
central government decides only issues that affect all members of the confederation.
Confederations are uncommon; most are international bodies with limited and specific
responsibilities, such as the European Union (EU) and the British Commonwealth.
6.4 Forms of Government

Concerning who should be the head law implementing body; how law should be
implemented and what would be the power and function of the head of state and head of
government what ever government is one of these:
1. Presidential form of government
2. Parliamentary form of government
3. Semi-presidential form of government
1. Presidential form of government

A presidential system is a system of government that features a president as the nation's
head of state and active chief executive authority. The term is usually used in contrast to a
parliamentary system.
In a presidential system, the central principle is that the legislative and executive
branches of government should be separate. This leads to the separate election by the
electorate or an electoral college of the president, who is elected to office for a fixed term
of office, and only removable in extreme cases for gross misdeamour by impeachment
and dismissal. In addition he or she does not need to choose cabinet members from or
commanding the support of, a parliamentary majority.
107
In a presidential system, the president usually has special privileges in the enactment of
legislation, namely the possession of a power of veto over legislation of bills, in some
cases subject to the power of parliament by weighed majority to over-ride the veto.
However, it is extremely rare for the president to have the power to directly propose laws,
or cast a vote on legislation. The legislature and the president are thus expected to serve
as a check on each other's powers. The fact that a presidential system separates the
executive from the legislature is sometimes held up as an advantage, in that each branch
may scrutinize the actions of the other. In a parliamentary system, the executive is drawn
from the legislature, making criticism of one by the other considerably less likely.
According to supporters of the presidential system, the lack of checks and balances
means that misconduct by a prime minister may never be discovered.
In this system, the legislature and the president have equally valid mandates from the
public. There is often no way to reconcile conflict between the branches of government.
When president and legislature are at loggerheads and government is not working
effectively, there is a powerful incentive to employ extra-constitutional maneuvers to
break the deadlock (block to progress)
A prime minister is usually chosen by a few individuals of the legislature, while a

president is usually chosen by the people. According to supporters of the presidential
system, a popularly elected leadership is inherently more democratic than a leadership
chosen by a legislative body, even if the legislative body was itself elected.
Presidential governments also make no distinction between the positions of Head of

Government and Head of State, both of which are held by the president. While many
parliamentary governments have a symbolic president or monarch whose constitutional
prerogatives may generally be exercised by the Prime Minister, presidents in presidential
systems are always active participants in the political process, and never symbolic
figurehead, though the extent of their relative power or powerlessness may be influenced
by the political makeup of parliament, and whether their supporters or opponents are
dominant. In some presidential systems such as South Korea or the Republic of China (on
Taiwan), there is an office of the Prime Minister or premier, but unlike semi-presidential
or parliamentary systems, the premier is responsible to the president rather than to the
108
legislature. Countries with Presidential systems include the United States, Mexico, and
most nations in South America.
2. Parliamentary form of government
A parliamentary system of government, in short Parliamentarism, is a multi-party form of

government in which the executive branch (the Cabinet) is formally dependent on the
Parliament's acceptance. The Cabinet, or single members thereof, can be removed by the
Parliament through a vote of non-confidence. In addition, the executive branch can
dissolve the legislature and call extra-ordinary elections. There is no clear-cut separation
between the Parliament (the legislature) and the other branches of government.
The leader of the executive Cabinet, the Prime Minister is usually the head of
government - at least in practice. In most parliamentary systems the Prime Minister and
the members of Cabinet are also members of the legislature. The leader of the leading
party in the Parliament is often appointed to Prime Minister. This is also true in the
present Ethiopia.
Under the parliamentary system the roles of head of state and head government are more
or less separated. In most parliamentary systems, the head of state is generally a
ceremonial position, often a monarch or president, however sometimes retaining duties
without much political relevance, such as Civil Service appointments. In many (but not
all) parliamentary systems, the head of state may have reserve powers which are usable in
a crisis. In most cases however, such powers are either by convention or by constitutional
rule only exercised upon the advice and approval of the head of government.
Parliamentary systems vary as to the degree to which they have a formal written
constitution and the degree to which that constitution describes the day to day working of
the government. They also vary as to the number of parties within the system and the
dynamics between the parties. Also, relations between the central government and local
governments vary in parliamentary systems; they may be federal or unitary states.
In contrast in parliamentary systems, government is usually carried out by a cabinet
headed by a Prime Minister who in many instances are members of parliament, are
directly accountable to parliament and may by parliamentary vote be dismissed.
109
A fusion of power exists between the legislative and the executive in which the executive
is not independently elected as in a presidential system, but instead is elected by the
members of the majority party or parties in the legislature,
The Britain and Canada the head of government is called the prime minister, in Italy and
Sweden the states under discussion have bicameral legislatures, and the chief of
government is elected by the members of the lower house.
Britain and Canada the lower house is the house of commons. In Italy the chamber of
Deputies, and in Germany the Burdestag.
The Unicameral legislature of Sweden is the Riksdag elected the head of government
selects the members of the cabinet, the group of top ministers who direct the various
depts. (ministries) of the government bureaucracy. Ministers not only administer their
departments but also take responsibility for the development of policies with in the scope
of their Ministries.
At the heart of the parliamentary system is the concept of responsible government cabinet
responsibility to the legislature the prime minister and the cabinet are accountable to the
full house of the legislature for all their political and administrative actions. General
election for the lower house must be held with in fire years in Britain, Canada, Italy, with
in three years in Sweden and in Ethiopia in five years term.
3. Semi-presidential form of government
The semi-presidential system is a system of government that features both a Prime

minister and a president who are active participants in the day to day functioning of
government. It differs from the parliamentary system in that it has a president who is not
a ceremonial figurehead and it differs from the presidential system in that it has an
executive prime minister who has some responsibility to the legislature.
How the powers between president and prime minister are divided can vary greatly
between countries. For example, in France the president is responsible for foreign policy
and the prime minister for domestic policy. In this case, the division of power between
110
the prime minister and the president is not explicitly stated in the constitution, but has
evolved as a political convention.
Semi-presidential systems are sometimes characterized by periods of tense cohabitation,

in which the prime minister and president are elected separately, and often from rival
parties. This can create an effective system of checks and balances or a period of bitter
stonewalling, depending on the attitudes of the two leaders, the ideologies of their parties,
or the demands of their constituencies. Some current nations that feature semi-
presidential systems include: France, Finland, Peru, Russia, and South Korea.
6.5. State Organs
As I try to mention earlier, in the second chapter, any democratic state is expected to have
three benches or organs that are separated in power and function have a check and
balance relation. The three branches are (1) Legislative that has power to make laws; (2)
Executive is responsible to implement and administer laws and (3) Judiciary has the task
of settling dispute and interpreting laws.
Legislature
Legislature is a branch of government empowered to make, change, or repeal its laws and
to levy and regulate its taxes. Most modern legislatures are representative- composed of
many members who are chosen directly or indirectly by popular vote. Legislatures that
provide direct representation are usually considered more democratic in practice because
they are less susceptible to being dominated by a single faction.
Nearly all modern governments have a bicameral, or two-house, legislature. The so-
called lower house is generally elected on a basis of direct representation; and the upper
house commonly on a basis either of indirect representation or of direct representation
limited to certain occupational, territorial, or hereditary categories. The traditional
theoretical justification for an upper house is that it can exercise moderation and delay on
legislation by the lower house and thus restrain the effects of impulsive or excessive
111
fluctuations of public opinion. Some states have unicameral, or single-house, legislatures.
For example, Ethiopia during the time of Derg had unicameral legislature (Shengo)
The various legislatures throughout the world are known by different names, such as
Congress, Parliament, Duma, Assembly and ‘Shengo’. Most are limited in their powers
by the Constitution.
Executive (Government)
This branch of state (government) has a law administering and implementing power.
According to the 1995 Constitution of Ethiopia, the executive power of the state is vested
in the Council of Ministers, whose head is the Prime Minister. The law is made by the
parliament (the legislative organ) administered and enforced by the Council of Ministers.
In the US, laws are written by the legislative branch (Congress), approved by the
president who is the head of the cabinet (the executive), and subject to interpretation by
the judicial branch.
The executive branch has major departments and scores of separate agencies. Executive
branch agencies, departments, and other entities are all bureaucracies—large
organizations composed of clerks, administrators, and other workers. Executive branch
bureaucracies disperse funds, manage programs and police, provide services, and enforce
regulations and laws. They also make rules that have the force of law behind them.
Judiciary
Interpreting and settling disputes are the important tasks of the judiciary branch. This
refers to courts at different levels. In different nations, courts are established to administer
the civil and criminal law. The independency of this organ from any other political organ
or institution is very vital for the realization of a healthy democracy. The present
constitution of Ethiopia guarantees the independency of the judiciary. In the present
Ethiopia courts are found in three levels at federal and regional state level. The three
court levels are:
1. the First Instance Court
112
2. the Higher Court
3. the Supreme Court
4. These three levels are found at central or federal level and member states level.

PART. I
Read each of the following questions carefully. Select the best answer
among the given alternatives.
1. Identify the one that best describes the Marxian theory of the state.
A. The state came in to existence when society is divided in to

the antagonistic social classes. The purpose of the state is to defend the
the interest of the economically dominant class.
B. The authority of political leaders emanate from the will of God.
No authority exists with out God’s permission. The state emerges from
consent of God.
C. The state came in to existence due to contractual agreement between the
people and the governing body.
D. The state exists for the purpose of defending the people from external
invasion and any injury in the territory of the state.
2. According to the social contract theory the head of the state is responsible to
A. the people C. parliament

B. the divine power D. either to the parliament or to the people
3. Identify the wrong proposition among the following

A. In the parliamentarian form government the president is directly elected
113
by the people.
B. The parliament during the time of Emperor Hileselassei I was structured
based on Bi-cameral
C. In the presidential system the president acts both as the ceremonial head of
the state and head of government.
D. None of the above.
4. As republic is to the representative of the people ______to the divine power.
A. Democracy C. Monarchy
B. Federal D. Authoritarian
5. Concerning its structure one of the following is different from the others
A. Unitary state B. Federal state

C. Amalgamation state D. Confederal state
PART. II
True or False
1. According to the social contract theory state theory, state has a historical mission to
serve the economic dominant class of the society to exploit the property less section
of the society.
2. According to the social contract theory, rulers are accountable to the people.
3. The very purpose of government is protecting the rights of citizens.
PART. III
114
State Country Legislative
Government Land Executive
Territory Sovereignty Judiciary
People Legitimacy Social contract
Monarch Divine right
PART. IV

1. What does the next passage indicate?
Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of

individuals life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness it is the
right of the people to alter or to abolish it.
2. What conditions must prevail for the people to alter or abolish this type of
government mentioned above. (Question № 1)?

● McDermott, Timothy. Aquinas Selected Writings. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1993.
● McInerny, Ralph. Thomas Aquinas Selected Writings. London:
Penguin Classics, 1998.
● Locke, John, 1690, The Second Treatise of Government, ed. C.B.
MacPerson, Indianapolis: Hackett 1980.
● Marx, Karl, 1875, Critique of the Gotha Program, reprinted in: Marx-
Engels-Werke (MEW) vol. 19, Berlin 1978, and in: Marx-Engels-
Gesamtausgabe (MEGA-B), Berlin 1975 ff., vol. I 25.
● McKerlie, Dennis, 1989, "Equality and Time," Ethics 99 (1989) 274-296,
reprinted in L. Pojman & R. Westmoreland (eds.), Equality. Selected
Readings, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1997
115
● R.Ball Alan Modern Politics and Government Hong Kong, 1978.
● Progress Publisher, The theory of the State and Law, Moscow, 1987
● R.S.Peter, Ethics and Education, London, 1987.
● The Ethiopian Constitutions (1931, 1955, 1987and 1995)
● Bernard Crick Basic Forms of Government, London, 1975
● Microsoft Encarta Reference Library 2003. 1993-2002 Microsoft
Corporation.
● Franz Oppenheimer, The State. New York: Free Life Editions, 1975.
● As quoted in C. Hamilton's introduction to Oppenheimer's The State.
New York: Free Life Editions, 1975,
● Karen I. Vaugh, "John Locke's Theory of Property: Problems of
Interpretation" in Literature of Liberty, Vol.III, No.1,Spring 1980,
UNIT 7 Citizenship
116
CONTENTS
7.0 INTRODUCTION
7.2 The Origin and Definition of the terms Citizen and Citizenship
7.3 Citizenship as the Totality of Rights, Duties and Responsibility
7.4 Full membership of citizens
7.5 Nationals, Citizens and Subjects
7.6 Ways of Acquiring Citizenship
7.0 INTRODUCTION
When the term citizen is properly used, it means a legal and political member of the state.
And the legal and political status of the citizen is termed as citizenship. In this unit you
will be familiarized with concepts like citizen, citizenship, subjects, law, duty,
responsibility and rights. The unit begins with the etymological meaning of citizen and
citizenship. This is followed by an explanation concerning the characteristics of citizens.
There is also one subunit that is dedicated to treat the similarity and difference among the
terms nationals, citizens and subjects. Citizenship can also be understood as the legal and
political relation between the state and citizens. It is the political little that citizens
possess. So its acquirable not with which we are born. The last subunit deals with the
two ways and means of acquiring citizenship.
The very goal of this unit to raise your awareness concerning who you are in relation to
the state (Ethiopia) in which you are the citizen. As citizens you are charged with some
117
duties and responsibilities, and entitled to some rights which you enjoy. Those who
properly discharge their duties and responsibilities and enjoy their right are good citizens.
Are you such type?
At the conclusion of this unit you should be able to
□ explain the relation between state and citizens.
□ identify and examine some problems likely to arise in situations where there is an
absence of rules or other effective authority.
□ explain the definition of the terms citizen and citizenship.
□ describe the characteristics of a citizen.
□ appreciate and enjoy the advantages of being a citizen.
□ take part in a problem-solving activity in which you learn of various forms of political
participation
7.2 The origin and definition of the terms citizen and citizenship
“Citizen,” as it is defined by Encarta Reference Library 2003 E-Encyclopedia “in its most
general sense, is an individual member of a given political society or state; by extension,
a citizen is one who owes allegiance to and may lawfully demand protection from the
government of that state.” The more specific sense of the term citizen is closely in accord
with the original meaning of the word. In the free republics of classical antiquity, the term
citizen signified not merely a resident of a town but a free, governing member of the
state, just as the Latin term civitas, from which the English word city is derived, signified
not merely a local municipality but the state as a whole.
118
As it has been mentioned in the previous unit (Unit Five), “Civis “a Latin term that has
the English meaning “citizen” refers to those free individuals who were the full members
of the civitas and the right to participate in political decision making process. Here by full
membership we should understand that the term civis was used to refer those who had the
right to participate, directly and fully in the socio-economic and political affirs of their
Civitas, city-state, political community or state to which they were Civis or citizens. This
shows the legal and political relation between the citizens and the political unit (State) to
which they are full members. This political and legal relation or status that citizens have
with the state is termed as citizenship. Generally the term was applied to those free
individuals who were able to take part in the law making (legislating) implementing
(executing) and interpreting (judiciary). Aristotle, the ancient Greek philosopher
expressed the Greek idea of citizens and citizenship. He expressed citizens are those free
individuals who had the right to participate in both the legislative and judicial functions
of their political community. This right was carefully guarded and was rarely conferred
on anyone of foreign birth.
In ancient Rome two classes of citizens were recognized. The first possessed the rights of
citizenship, including the privilege of voting in the public assembly; the other possessed
these rights and the additional right of holding offices of state. In the first category, the
citizens had limited political participation. They where excluded from holding political
power in government office. They had no chance to participate in a direct decision
making process except in the case of giving vote. They were negatively discriminated. It
will be difficult to say that they were full members of the empire, because they had no
right to be the member of the legislative body and to make laws. In the second category,
the citizens were positively discriminated. These had extra rights including the right
reserved to the ordinary citizens (the right to vote). These were the favored section of the
empire or state, having both the right to elect and to be elected which is the important
right of citizens. As in our state Ethiopia, the United States and other modern states,
citizenship in Rome, although usually acquired by birth, could also be attained by
naturalization, or by special grant of the state. Naturalization is a way of acquiring
citizenship with out birth related cases. It requires legal processes to be a citizen of a
119
given state. We will see this when we deal with ways of acquiring citizenship in the
coming sub unity
7.3 Citizenship as the totality of rights, duties and responsibility
It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities

to give validity to his convictions in political affairs.
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), 'Treasury for the Free World,'

1946
Citizens are charged with some rights, equalities, freedoms generally, benefits that
citizens enjoy because they are all both human beings and legal as well as political
members of a political community or state. They have also duties and responsibilities that
they are required to discharge, what they have been charged as citizens. Citizens
discharge their duties and responsibilities when they properly fulfill what they are
expected to perform by the law of the state. When somebody charges whatever
rechargeable battery he is loading power which enables the device to accomplish certain
tasks. Analogy to this fact, citizen is loaded (charged) with those legal and moral
obligations.
A citizen is a person who is acknowledged as a legal member of a community (usually a
nation). A person obtains this status through birth, the nationality of a parent or parents,
or by going through the “naturalization” process through which he/she is legally made a
citizen. It is presumed that a citizen shows loyalty to a country. Citizenship refers to the
status of citizens being a member of a state. Citizenship implies that people owe
allegiance to the government and are entitled to its protection and political rights. In
general, citizen is a legal and political member of the state. And citizenship is the legal as
well as the political status of citizens. Citizenship refers to the political and legal relation
that the citizens have with the state.
120
7.4 Full membership of citizens
It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good

citizen.
Aristotle, 'Nicomachean Ethics,' 325 B.C

Being a citizen is not simply limited to having a legal document like passport from the
country in which one is born, or being a resident of a particular city, state, or country.
Citizenship implies certain rights (e.g., legal, economic, political, and social); it also
implies responsibilities, including placing the well-being, or common good, of society
before private and personal interests.
We divide responsibilities into two areas: personal and civic. Personal responsibilities
include taking care of oneself, accepting responsibility for the consequences of one’s
actions, taking advantage of opportunities to become educated, and fulfilling
responsibilities to one’s family, friends, and neighbors. Civic responsibilities, on the other
hand, comprise obeying laws, respecting the rights and opinions of others, paying taxes,
serving in the military, voting, and being informed and attentive to the needs of one’s
community and nation. Civic responsibility can also include the obligation to be honest,
compassionate, tolerant, fair, trustworthy, respectful, open minded, and open to
negotiation and compromise.
Responsible citizens are often said to be active socially and politically. Social activity
might entail joining citizens’ groups that are devoted to solving societal problems, such as
homelessness, social relations, or neighborhood crime; social activity could also involve
volunteering in a local hospital, school, homeless shelter, or helping disabled individuals.
Political activity is quite different from social activity. Political activity usually refers to
more than the simple act of voting in periodic elections. It might entail talking about
public issues; writing letters to public official; presenting a problem to a governmental
council; staying informed about important issues by reading the newspaper, listening to
television news, or attending public meetings; or getting involved in a political campaign.
121
Recent discussions of responsible citizenship have taken on new dimensions and have
expanded to include the concept of worldwide citizenship. As international travel,
communication, and exchanges have become easier and more common, citizens of
different countries are becoming more dependent upon one another. This interdependence
has given birth to the notion of world citizenship that is, being a citizen of the world. In
general, world citizens are concerned about issues that affect all nations and all people,
including overpopulation, the mismanagement of natural resources, and pollution. World
citizenship, as a new type of citizenship, requires new sets of individual responsibilities.
7.5 Nationals, Citizens and Subjects
Nationality refers to, in law, condition or status of belonging to, or having legal identity
with, a nation or state. In various political systems a distinction is made between
nationality and citizenship; the latter represents a higher political status, usually involving
rights to full participation in governmental affairs. Nationals were classed as citizens and
non-citizens in ancient Greece and Rome, with citizens often forming a minority of the
population; this distinction still prevails in some countries. Although the term national is
not used in the U.S. Constitution, the law recognizes as nationals of the U.S. all citizens
and certain groups of non-citizens who owe permanent allegiance to the U.S.A
Nationality is a legal relationship existing between a person and a state. The person
becomes subject to the state's jurisdiction even while not on the state's territory; in
exchange the subject becomes entitled to the state's protection and to other rights as well.
The nationals of a state generally possess the right to reside in the territory of the state
they are nationals of, though there are some exceptions (e.g. British Nationality Law that
made distinction between subjects and privileged individuals or citizens).
British nationality law has its origins in mediaeval times. There had always been a
distinction in English Law between the subjects of the monarch, and aliens or outsiders.
The subjects of the monarch owed the monarch allegiance, and were either natural born
subjects (those born in the monarch's realms), or those who later gave their allegiance to
the monarch (naturalized subjects).
122
During the period of the monarchic administration, the Ethiopian people were treated as
subjects not citizens. The following articles which are taken from the 1955 Revised
Constitution of Ethiopia indicate this fact.
The first Article of Chapter I states…”All Ethiopian subjects, whether living within or
without the Empire, constitute the Ethiopian People”. From this article we can understand
that the people of Ethiopia are all subjects.
Chapter III. Article 38. “There shall be no discrimination amongst Ethiopian subjects
with respect to the enjoyment of all civil rights.” The term ‘Ethiopian subjects’ is found
else where in the Revised Constitution.
The 39th article of Chapter III made distinctions of subjects as it has been made by
British Nationality Law:
1. Born subjects
2. Naturalized subjects.
Chapter III, Article 39. “The law shall determine the condition of acquisition and loss of
Ethiopian nationality and of Ethiopian citizenship”. According to this article Ethiopian
nationality refers to born subjects whereas Ethiopian citizenship refers to naturalized
subjects (those who later became subject to the monarch. The Amharic version of this
article translates the later as ‘zegenet’ referring the naturalized one and the former as
‘tewelagenet’ referring the born subjects.
When the British Empire came into existence, there remained a single category of
nationality: British subject. British subjects included not only persons within the United
Kingdom, but those throughout the British Empire, in the colonies and the self-governing
dominions (namely Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Canada and Newfoundland).
The law on nationality was spread across many statutes, and much of it was unwritten.
123
Nationality must be distinguished from citizenship: citizens have rights to participate in
the political life of the state they are a citizen of, such as by voting or standing for
election; while nationals need not have these rights, though normally they do.
Traditionally under international law, determining who its nationals are was the exclusive
competence of the state in question. However there were nonetheless many similarities in
the laws of each nation, and today the law of nationality is increasingly coming under
regulation, e.g. by the various conventions on statelessness, and the European Convention
of Nationality.
Nationality can generally be acquired by jus soli, jus sanguinis or naturalization. These
are discussed next. A person who is not a national of any state is referred to as a stateless
person. The nationality of a legal person is generally the state under whose laws the legal
person is registered.
7.6 Ways of Acquiring Citizenship.
Different states of the world provide different ways of acquiring citizenship. Generally,
acquisition of citizenship is divided in to two broad categories:
(I) By birth (related to the place of birth of the child or inheriting the citizenship of
the parent or parents).
(II) Naturalization (This refers to any way of acquiring citizenship, other than
cases related to birth). Naturalization is the process whereby a person becomes a
national of a nation, or a citizen of a state other than the one of his birth.
I. Acquisition of Citizenship by birth
The following are the most commonly known acquisitions of citizenship by birth.
(A) Jus sanguinis (Latin for "right of blood") is a right by which nationality or
citizenship can be recognized to any individual born to a parent who is a national or
citizen of that state. It contrasts with jus soli (Latin for "right of soil").
124
Usually a practical regulation of the acquisition of nationality or citizenship of a state by
birth to a parent who is already a citizen of the state is provided by a derivative law called
lex sanguinis. Most states provide a specific lex sanguinis, in application of the respective
jus sanguinis, but citizenship is not normally automatically inherited. This is to avoid the
creation of generations of overseas citizens with no real connection with the state, but
still being able to claim rights such as immigration and protection from that state.
In many European countries, lex sanguinis still is the preferred means of passing on
citizenship. This has been criticized on the grounds that, if the only means, it can lead to
generations of people living their whole lives in the state without being citizens of it.
More recently these countries have begun to move more towards use of lex soli, partially
under the influence of the European Convention on Nationality. The European
Convention on Nationality (E.T.S.No. 166, done at Strasbourg, 6 November, 1997) is a
comprehensive convention dealing with the law of nationality.
Common practice among states at the beginning of the twentieth century was that a
woman was to have the nationality of her husband; thus upon marrying a foreigner she
would automatically acquire the nationality of her husband, and lose her own nationality.
Even once the nationality of a married woman was made no longer dependent on the
nationality of her husband, legal provisions were still retained automatically naturalizing
married women, and sometimes married men as well. This could lead to a number of
problems, including loss of the spouses' original nationality, the spouse losing the right to
consular assistance (since consular assistance cannot be provided to nationals under the
jurisdiction of a foreign state of which they are also nationals), and becoming subject to
military service obligations. It provides that neither marriage nor dissolution of marriage
shall automatically affect the nationality of either spouse (article 4d).
Article 5 provides that no discrimination shall exist in a state's internal nationality law on
the grounds of "sex, religion, race, color or national or ethnic origin". It also provides that
a state shall not discriminate amongst its nationals on the basis of whether they are
naturalized or native born nationals.
125
Article 6 relates to the acquisition of nationality. It provides for nationality to be acquired
at birth by descent from either parent to those born within the territory of the state. (States
may exclude partially or fully children born abroad). It also provides for nationality by
virtue of birth in the territory of state; however states may limit this only to children who
would be otherwise stateless. It requires the possibility of naturalization, and provides
that the period of residence required for eligibility cannot be more than ten years lawful
and habitual residence. It also requires to "facilitate" the acquisition of nationality by
certain persons, including spouses of nationals, children of its nationals born abroad,
children one of whose parents has acquired the nationality, children adopted by a
national, persons lawfully and habitually resident for a period before the age of eighteen,
and stateless persons and refugees lawfully and habitually resident on its territory.
Article 7 regulates the involuntary loss of nationality. It provides that states may only
deprive their nationals of their nationality in the cases of voluntary acquisition of another
nationality, fraud or failure to provide relevant information when acquiring nationality,
voluntary military service in a foreign military force, or adoption as a child by foreign
nationals. It also provides for the possibility of loss of nationality for nationals habitually
residing abroad. Finally it provides loss of nationality for "conduct seriously prejudicial
to the vital interests of the State Party".
Article 8 provides nationals with the right to renounce their nationality, providing they do
not thereby become stateless. States may however restrict this right with respect to
nationals residing abroad.
Article 6 (Chapter I) of the 1995 Constitution of Ethiopia, regarding the Ethiopian

nationality, states as follows:
1. Any person of either sex shall be an Ethiopian national where both or either parent is
Ethiopian.
2. Foreign nationals may acquire Ethiopian nationality.
3. Particulars relating to nationality shall be determined by law.
126
Many states have both lex sanguinis and lex soli, including,Isreal,German, andIreland.
Despite this, the jus sanguinis laws of Israel are sometimes used to link Zionism and
racism.
(B) Jus soli (Latin for "right of the territory") is a right by which nationality and
citizenship can be recognized to any individual born in the territory of the related state. It
contrasts with sanguinis("right of blood")
Usually a practical regulation of the acquisition of nationality or citizenship of a state by

birth on the territory of the state is provided by a derivative law called lex soli. Most
states provide a specific lex soli, in application of the respective jus soli, and it is the
most common means of acquiring nationality.
However, increasingly countries are restricting lex soli by requiring that at least one of
the child's parents be a national of the state in question at the child's birth, or a legal
permanent resident of the territory of the state in question at the child's birth, or that the
child be a foundling found on the territory of the state in question.
In short, citizens are legal and political members of a state. The citizen’s state is
collectively sovereign. The citizens have the right to change the government that fails to
protect individual right. Therefore, citizenship is the total membership of the sovereign
body (state)
Check your progress

PART. I
1. One of the following does not characterize a citizen. Which one of that?
A citizen is a person who is acknowledged as a legal member of a political
127
community.
B. A person becomes citizen if she or he is born in the territory of the state.
C. A citizen is a person who belongs to a state and has a status of full
participation in governmental affairs.
D. A person who is legally recognized and full member of the state is the
citizen of the political community.
E. A citizen is a person who resides in the territory of the state.
2. A male child was born in a certain territory and yet he had no chance to be the citizen
of the state in which he was born. From this we can understand that
N.B The parents are not the citizens of the state where the
chilled was born
A. the state does not implement lex soli
B. the child is a naturalized citizen
C. he is a stateless child
D. the state does not implement lex sanguinis
3. What condition determines the child mentioned above (in question № 9)
to acquire the citizenship of the state.
A. The citizenship law of the state

B. The citizenship of his parents
C. The international convention on the rights of the child
D. None of the above
PART. II
True or False
1. Citizens are individuals who are found in a dictatorial political system that enjoy their
rights and discharge their duties
2. Subjects as members of a state that don't exercise full rights.
3. A person can get a new citizenship through the method called naturalization.
128
PART. III
1. What does the present constitution of Ethiopia regarding nationality refer to? Is it Jus
soli or Jus sanguinis?
2. Can you identify and categoris the above articles of the Europian Convention on
Nationality in to jus sanguinis, jus soli and naturalisation
3. Citizenship law that states “a child becomes a citizen of the state provided that either
of the two parents or both are the citizens of the state” often is related to racism. Do
you agree with idea? Whether your answer is yes or no give your justification.
PART. IV
Citizenship Citizen
Subject Lex soli
Jus soli Jus sangunise
Lex sangunise Naturalization
129
Selected References
● The Ethiopian Constitutions (1931, 1955, 1987and 1995)
● Microsoft Encarta Reference Library 2003. 1993-2002 Microsoft
Corporation.
● Karen I. Vaugh, "John Locke's Theory of Property: Problems of
Interpretation" in Literature of Liberty, Vol.III, No.1,Spring 1980,
● McKerlie, Dennis, 1989, "Equality and Time," Ethics 99 (1989) 274-296,
reprinted in L. Pojman & R. Westmoreland (eds.), Equality. Selected
Readings, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1997
● Wood, A., 1998, "Kant on Duties Regarding Nonrational Nature"
Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supplement, Volume LXXII.
● Benn, Stanley I. & Richard S. Peters, 1959, Social Principles and the
Democratic State, London: Allen & Unwin 1959.
UNIT 8. Constitution and Constitutionalism
Contents
130
8.0 Introduction
8.2 Meaning of Constitution
8.3 Forms of Constitution
8.4 Constitutional Development in Ethiopia
8.5 Constitutionalism
8.0 Introduction
This lesson describes the ideas about what kind of government is most likely to protect
the basic rights of people. In this unit you learn to distinguish between limited and
unlimited government, and develop their understanding of concepts such as constitution,
and constitutional government. You also learn that while all nations have constitutions,
not all nations have constitutional governments. The essential characteristics that
differentiate constitutional government from autocratic or dictatorial government include
the idea that in a constitutional government the powers of a person or group in
government are limited by a set of laws and/or established customs (a constitution) which
must be obeyed. The constitution is a form of higher law, either written or unwritten that:
(1) sets forth the basic rights of citizens to life, liberty, and property;
(2) establishes the responsibility of the government to protect those rights;
(3) establishes limitations on how those in government may use their power;
(4) establishes economic, polices; and
(5) may not be changed without the widespread consent of the citizens.
During the lesson, you learn how a constitutional government protects natural rights and
how constitutional governments can be organized to prevent the abuse of power,
131
including a system of distributed and shared powers and checks and balances. At the end
of the unit you will see the historical development of constitution in Ethiopia.
The very intention of the unit is to enable you to understand the importance of rule of law
for stability, development, peace, enjoyment of rights in any society.
At the conclusion of this unit, students should be able to:
□ explain the concepts of constitution and constitutional government
□ explain the essential characteristics of constitutional governments that differentiate

them from autocratic or dictatorial governments
□ explain the essential characteristics of a constitution or higher law
□ understand and explain the difference between limited and unlimited government, the
difference between written and unwritten constitutions,
□ explain why a government with a constitution is not necessarily a constitutional

government
□ identify and explain the features of constitution

□ describe the stages in which a constitution is formulated in a democratic way
□ compare and contrast the provisions and contents of the constitutions that Ethiopia
experienced till the present.
8.2 Meaning of Constitution
132
Constitution is the Fundamental law of a country. As a fundamental law, a Constitution
includes the basic principles, values, beliefs and traditions that direct the internal affairs
of a Country
It also gives directions to the country’s foreign policy. Its relations with other Countries
The economic, political, and social policies of a given country are also indicated in the
constitution of that country.
In other words, a constitution is a document containing the basic principles on the
structure and distribution of governmental or state power. It establishes the relationship
between citizens and the state. That means it includes the power and responsibility of the
government and the rights of citizens. In that, it specifies the Limits of powers of the
government. Constitution is different form specific laws, because it is the supreme or
fundamental law of a given country. As supreme law no other laws may contradict the
constitution. A constitution also provides the major principles to be respected by any
concerned body or organ.
Law is mind without reason.
Aristotle
8.3 Forms of Constitution

There are two forms of constitution
(A) Written Constitution
(B) Unwritten constitution
(A) Written Constitution: - are constitutions that are found as a single, handy, and
readable document. They are written down with several sections, chapters, articles & sub
articles
Some nations of the world which have written constitutional experience are Ethiopia,
USA and India
133
(B) Unwritten constitution: - those rules, regulations, declarations and laws passed
by either a parliament or other competent government body at different times and are at
the same time not compiled in a single document.
Example of state which still experience unwritten constitution Israel, New Zealand,
Saudi Arabia, United kingdom (Britain)
There are many differences among constitutions from the point of view of both style and
content. indeed, Great Britain to this day has no single document labeled “Constitution,”
and for this reason it has become customary to describe the British Constitution as being
an “unwritten” one. This is very misleading, since many parts of this Constitution are
written, for constitutional status is invariably ascribed to such documents as
Magna Carta (1215), the Habeas Corpus Act (1641), the Bill of Rights (1689), the Act of
Settlement (1701), the Act of Union (1707), the Parliament Act (1911), and the
successive Representation of the People, Judicature, and Local Government Acts. All of
these written documents, it is generally agreed, are parts of the British Constitution. But
this Constitution includes much more, notably the rules of the common law, and well-
established customs and conventions which deal with very basic matters, such as the
principle of ministerial responsibility to the House of Commons, and which are observed
as faithfully as the formal law itself.
The unusual usage of these terms has noting to do with putting ideas on paper. Their
peculiar meaning here is related to do whether constitutions are found in a handy and
single document or not. Those Countries with out written Constitution use laws passed at
different times and widely accepted traditions as their Constitution. These laws and
traditions Concerning various Political, economic and social issues are found in different
and separate pieces. That means; they are not compiled in a single document. Therefore,
they are not accessible to Ordinary Citizens. Thus, Citizens would be in different
situations to control the behaviors of their government, while in the case of a written
constitution, the traditions, values, principles or norms that are parts of the constitution
are found in a single written document. Hence, citizens have easy access to their
constitution and make reference to it in monitoring the behavior of their government
134
What is crucial about constitutions, written or unwritten, is their content and not their
form. It is their content that indicates their respective roles in the consolidation of sate
power in their societies.
8.4 Constitutional Development in Ethiopia
The history of constitutional practice in Ethiopia is traced back to the formation of the
earliest states of ancient Ethiopia one of those earliest Ethiopian states was the Aksumite
state that emerged in the north in first century A.D. It was during the Aksumite
civilization that Christianity was introduced to Ethiopia. Ever since, Christianity had
remained the dominant state religion ideology up to 1974. On the other hand, a political
system of monarchy was established in the very early times in Aksume on the basis of
divine right of kings
As you have seen in the sixth unit divine right of kings is the claim of monarchs or kings
for absolute power over their “Subjects”. Not only that they assumed unquestioned
power, they also claimed that they and only their descendants were selected by God to
rule: ever lasting authority of kings. Accordingly, they claimed that God gives them the
power to rule.
Accordant to the divine right of kings, their rule was meant to be not only secular but also
spiritual. That means they were seen to be as partly human and partly supernatural
beings. Such rulers presented them selves, thus, as the only respected and trusted
representative of God for the service of the ruled or Subjects. With this ideology, they
made their people believe and accept kings as Unquestionable beings who cannot be
challenged by the people so their reign is made to Continue, while their subjects remain
to obedient and loyal to them. Religion particularly Christianity served as the ideology of
the state. This, in fact, is far from the truth. It is only a political strategy of enforcing and
strengthening the authority of kings on their subjects. It is the method of influencing the
people not develop challenging attitudes and questioning mentality. As a result, until
135
recent times, public expressions such as,”a king can not be accused, as the sky can not be
ploughed” were part of the tradition in our society.
A monarchical system of the divine rule of kings is a type of political rule with the belief
that the right to rule is given only to those who are believed to be born to rule. These are
members of the families of kings. This political system being justified by the Orthodox
Church established the development of traditional constitution in Ethiopia. The traditional
Constitution gave absolute power to the monarchy over their “Subjects.” The basic
traditional documents that used to serve as the source of tradition constitution are the
Fetha Negest, the kibre Negest and the serate Mengist. The monumental Fetha Negest
was basically a codex of Law provding for secular and religious legal provisions rather
than a constitution. The Kibre Negest colorfully wove the legend of a Solomonic dynasty
and there by served certain politico-religious needs of the times in the constitutional
process. The Serate Mengist of the 19thc entury also provided certain administrative and
protocol directives useful to the constitutional process. But none of these were
constitutions in the modern sense even though they were instrumental documents that
served specific purposes with in the constitutional process. Thus it is safe to say that prior
to 1931 Ethiopia had no written Constitution.
Before the introduction of the first written and modern constitution in Ethiopia, in 1931
Ethiopia had constitutional experience, but not a written type. It had unwritten
constitutional experience. One should hasten, though to make the point that the absence
of a written constitution does not signify the absence of a constitution. Indeed, Ethiopia
had a sophisticated traditional, Unwritten constitution.
Some of the major principles of rule stated in these traditional documents include:
Only the descendants of the Solomonic Dynasty has the divine right to rule, Kings must
be members of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church; Only male descendants must be crowned
as kings.
136
Therefore, Ethiopia had a complex traditional Constitutional experience. The change in
1931 involved the introduction not of a constitution, only of a written formal for the
constitution.
8.4.1 The 1931 Constitution
Modern Written Constitution was introduced in Ethiopia in 1931 by Emperor Haile
Selassie I. The introduction of the Written Constitution however, does not mean that a
new philosophy or ideology was introduced to the Ethiopian political system instead; it
was an attempt of simply changing the Unwritten dynastic claim in to a Written form.
The fourth Article of the Revised (1955) constitution proves this fact.
... He [the Emperor] is, consequently, entitled to all the honors due
to Him in accordance with tradition and the present Constitution.
Any on so bold as to seek to injure the Emperor will be punished.
The phrase ‘in accordance with tradition’ refers to the unwritten constitutional
experience.
In other words, the 1931 Constitution was founded up on the very idea of the divine right
of kings. You have seen this, in the previous unit that dealt with theory of state.
Therefore, it did not; provide genuine freedom to the Ethiopian peoples. Its main aim was
to give the Country and the Imperial rule on image of modernity. By and large, the
measure aimed at guaranteeing the continuity of the rule of the emperor. This can be
clearly seen in the constitution of 1931 that the king was presented as the representative
of God. In the some constitution, the king is presented as Niguse Negest seyume
Egziabher, which literally means king of kings elect of God. Those who were
participating in the political leadership were only the noblemen. Even then, the power
was absolutely in the hands of the Emperor. Generally, the main objectives of the 1931
Constitution were To achieve or get diplomatic recognition
abroad and to strengthen the basis of political

legitimacy i.e. to justify the rule of king
The 1931 Constitution laid foundation for experimenting the modern government system
such as the following:
137
1. Parliament system. The Constitution Created a semblance of a bicameral (two - house)
parliament – upper House and Lower House. The upper House (the senate) was strong
Composed of important members of the nobility selected & appointed by the Emperor.
The Lower House (deputies) had on advisory role, which was composed of individuals
elected by the nobility in the upper house therefore; there was no popular election of any
of the members of the Houses.
2. Another innovation of the written constitution was the concept of a fixed annual budget
for government traditionally; authorization on expenditure was carried out through the
mazeja- a written order by the Ministry of pen on the Emperor’s instructions. During
Scheduled audiences with the Emperor, Known as Akabe Saat, individual ministers
presented their requests. The Mazeja would then authorize the transfer of government
funds from the Ministry of Finance to respective ministries. No over-all balance sheet had
ever been prepared before the written constitution, which now expected a Ministry of
Finance budget proposal to deliberated up on by the chambers and submitted to the
Emperor for approval-The budget concept never became viable during the life-time of
the constitution of 1931 and remained an embarrassing paper model.
3. Introduced a ministerial system of government. These were executive bodies which

were responsible to the emperor, not to the parliament. The constitution mentioned both
individual and collective ministerial responsibilities to the Emperor. All power emanates
from the sovereign; it is an inevitable, “logical” out come of the centralization of power
that the one closest to the sovereign becomes the most influential.
4. Introduced judicial branches. It provided for two separate systems of courts regular
courts & administrative tribunals. The regular court would handle civil and criminal
cases. Civil cases affecting government, however, would be “with drown from the
jurisdiction of ordinary (regular) Courts and placed in the administrative tribunals. The
head of the Court was the Emperor.
138
In general, the 1931 Constitution was Undemocratic because it didn’t give the right to
self-governance, democratic and human rights, fundamental freedom of citizens, nations,
nationalities and people. They remained “Subjects of the king.”
8.4.2 The Revised Constitution of 1955
The political principles and objectives of the revised constitution was similar to the 1931
Constitution But it was more clear in defining the power and Functions of the
government. In that period the social process had altered to such an extent that The
Constitutional frame work provided by the written constitution was visibly inadequate.
- The world war had affected Ethiopia tremendously
- The short Italian occupation had created closer ties with the out side world. The war had
enhanced the movement of goods, ideas, and people. The Italians left in their wake a
modern communication infrastructure
- In 1945 Ethiopia become a founding member of the United Nations organization
- Political alliances brought western ideas and socio-economic reorientation, Then in
1952 came the Eritrean Federation. The General Assembly of the United Nations passed a
resolution, the federal Act, by which Eritrea, as an autonomous Unit, came Under the
sovereignty of the Ethiopian crown. This necessitated incorporation of the Federal Act in
to the Ethiopian Constitutional system and the ratification of the Eritrean Constitution by
the newly created Eritrean Representative Assembly and the Emperor.
The written constitution, on the one hand, and the Federal Act and Eritrean Constitution
on the other, were poles apart in their ideologies and conceptions of government. The
federal Act was modeled after the declaration of Human Rights and contained progressive
concepts.
For instance, according to the federal law
Eritrea had an elected government while Ethiopia had an absolute monarchy system. In
the some sovereign state there were different political systems.
The Eritrean Constitution was Liberal and granted political and religious diversities and
equality while in Ethiopia political parties were illegal
139
Thus the legal engineering necessary to make the two systems function was an acrobatic
feat. The revised Constitution therefore, took over.
The 1995 revised Constitution however, failed to guarantee political and human rights of
the people. The only individual rights guaranteed were Limited to property, life and
private affairs. The revised constitution instead further consolidated the executive,
legislative and judicial power of the Emperor.
8.4.3 The Constitution of the people’s Democratic Republic

of Ethiopia.(The 1987 constitution)
Under the absolute rule of the Emperor, the large majority of the Ethiopian societies
suffered a great deal. The messes of the Ethiopian peasants suffered from the economic
relation of the Feudal system. The peasants were forced to share to the land lord up to
three-fourth of their small yield in every production cycle. The peasants had no guarantee
of ownership of the land. Any time, a peasant could be displaced from the piece of land
on which he toils. The system of taxation was harsh. Only the few family members of the
ruling class benefited from the resources and fruits of the country at expense of the labor
of the masses.
In due course of time, however out of dissatisfaction, different challenges began to

surface against the absolute monarchy. One of those revolves was the 1961 coup d’etat.
The coup attempt was not successful, but it challenged & questioned the powers of the
Emperor and the political system. Another resistance against the rule of the Emperor was
the movement of students with slogan like “Land to the tiller.” This was the historical
movement, which was based upon the basic problems and voices of the Ethiopian
peoples.
In rural areas as well peasants in different region made rebellions against the Imperial
rule. Other forms of the struggle included several strikes by Teachers, Taxi drivers and
other workers. As Living standards deteriorated and oppression become worst, the
140
Conditions for a revolution emerged through out the country, then, in 1974 the Imperial
government was overthrown.
However, the popular Uprising was suppressed by military coup d’etat Known Derg
which took power. The 1955 constitution was suspended and the country was ruled by
decrees and proclamation until 1987. The Junta nationalized all lands, extra houses,
industries, commercial farms, private school etc and monopolized political power.
In 1987, a new constitution was ratified and a new government was formed called
peoples Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (PDRE). The new constitutions justified the
power of the junta (Derg).
The 1987 Constitution was different from the previous constitutions because it was
drafted by popular participation (though limited to voting) which was major contribution
for constitutional development in Ethiopia. It incorporated some democratic principles. It
declared the source of the government to be the National shengo (a legislative body).
However in reality the national shengo was nominal supreme organ of the state. The
national shengo led the responsibility to endorse the election of the presidents and other
higher officials.
Recognized the cultural identify and equality of nations and

nationalities.
However, the 1987 constitution failed to address the national question in Ethiopia. The
state organ was highly centralized.
The constitution officially took effect on February 22, 1987, when the People's
Democratic Republic of Ethiopia was proclaimed, although it was not until September
that the new government was fully in place and the Provisional Military Administrative
Council (PMAC) formally abolished. The document, which established the normative
foundations of the republic, consisted of seventeen chapters and 119 articles. The
preamble traced Ethiopia's origins back to antiquity, proclaimed the historical heroism of
its people, praised the country's substantial natural and human resources, and pledged to
continue the struggle against imperialism, poverty, and hunger. The government's primary
concern was proclaimed to be the country's development through the implementation of
141
the Program for the National Democratic Revolution (PNDR). In the process, it was
assumed that the material and technical bases necessary for establishing socialism would
be created.
The constitution attempted to situate Ethiopia in the context of the worldwide movement
of so-called "progressive states" and made no direct reference to Africa. Critics claim that
the constitution was no more than an abridged version of the 1977 Soviet constitution,
with the exception that strong powers were assigned to the newly created office of the
president. A second difference between the Ethiopian and Soviet constitutions is that the
former declared the country to be a unitary state rather than a union of republics. It was
reported that the problem of nationalities was hotly debated in the Constitutional
Commission, as well as in the WPE Central Committee, but the regime would not
abandon its desire to create a single multiethnic state rather than a federation.
The Social Order

Chapter 1 of the constitution defined Ethiopia's social order. The People's Democratic
Republic of Ethiopia (PDRE) was declared to be "a state of working peasants in which
the intelligentsia, the revolutionary army, artisans, and other democratic sections of
society participate." The commitment to socialist construction was reaffirmed, as was the
idea of egalitarianism within the context of a unitary state. The official language
remained Amharic. The functioning and organization of the country was proclaimed to be
based on the principles of democratic centralism, under which representative party and
state organs are elected by lower bodies. The vanguard character of the WPE was
asserted, and its roles as well as those of mass organizations were spelled out.
Chapter 2 dealt with the country's economic system. The state was dedicated to the
creation of a "highly interdependent and integrated national economy" and to the
establishment of conditions favorable to development. In addition, the constitution
committed the state to central planning; state ownership of the means of production,
distribution, and exchange; and expansion of cooperative ownership among the general
population.
142
Chapter 3 addressed social issues, ranging from education and the family to historical
preservation and cultural heritage. The family was described as the basis of society and
therefore deserving of special attention by means of the joint efforts of state and society.
In addition, the constitution pledged that health insurance and other social services would
be expanded through state leadership.
National defense was the subject of the first article asserted the nation's need to defend its
sovereignty and territorial integrity and to safeguard the accomplishments of the
revolution. It was declared that the Ethiopian people had a historical responsibility to
defend the country. The defense force was to be the army of the country's working
people. The army's fundamental role would be to secure peace and socialism.
Foreign policy objectives were spelled out in four brief articles in Chapter 5 and were
based on the principles of proletarian internationalism, peaceful coexistence, and
nonalignment.
Citizenship, Freedoms, Rights, and Duties
Chapters 6 and 7 were concerned with defining citizenship and spelling out the freedoms,
rights, and duties of citizens. The language was egalitarian, and Ethiopians were declared
to be equal before the law, regardless of nationality, sex, religion, occupation, and social
or other status. They had the right to marry, to work, to rest, to receive free education, and
to have access to health care and to a fair trial. Ethiopians were guaranteed freedom of
conscience and religion. As was not the case in imperial Ethiopia, religion and the state
were proclaimed to be separate institutions. Citizens were assured the freedoms of
movement, speech, press, assembly, peaceful demonstration, and association. Regarding
political participation, citizens had the right to vote and the right to be elected to political
office. Their duties included national military service, protection of socialist state
property, protection of the environment, and observance of the constitution and laws of
the country.
143
In spite of the attention the constitution paid to basic freedoms, until the last days of the
regime international human rights organizations were virtually unanimous in condemning
the Mengistu’s regime. Summary execution, political detention, torture, and forced
migration represented only some of the violations cited by these groups.
National Shengo (National Assembly)
The constitution's most detailed sections related to the central government's organization
and activities. In these sections, the document described the various state organs and
explained their relationship to one another.
The supreme organ of state power was the National Shengo (National Assembly). Its
responsibilities included amending the constitution; determining foreign, defense, and
security policy; establishing the boundaries, status, and accountability of administrative
regions; and approving economic plans. The National Shengo was also responsible for
establishing the Council of State; the Council of Ministers, ministries, state committees,
commissions, and state authorities; the Supreme Court; the Office of the Prosecutor
General; the National Workers' Control Committee; and the Office of the Auditor
General. In addition, the National Shengo elected the president and officials of the
Council of State and approved the appointment of other high-ranking authorities.
Candidates to the National Shengo had to be nominated by regional branches of the WPE,
mass organizations, military units, and other associations recognized by law. Balloting for
seats in the National Shengo was required to be secret, and all individuals eighteen years
of age and above were eligible to vote. Elected members served five-year terms, and the
body met in regular session once each year. These sessions were usually public but might
on occasion be held in camera. In 1987 the National Shengo had 835 members.
Council of State
The Council of State, consisting of the president of the republic, several vice presidents, a
secretary, and other members, was an organ of the National Shengo. The Council of State
served as the most active oversight arm of the government, and it exercised the national
144
legislative role when the National Shengo was not in session. In addition to its normal
functions, the Council of State was empowered to establish a defense council and might
be assigned special duties by the National Shengo . The Council of State had the further
authority to issue decrees in the pursuit of the duties stipulated by law or assigned by the
National Shengo. The power of this organ was evident in the constitutional provision that
stated, "When compelling circumstances warrant it, the Council of State may, between
sessions of the National Shengo, proclaim a state of emergency, war, martial law,
mobilization or peace."
The President
The 1987 constitution established the office of president. Theoretically, the Council of
State ruled along with the president and exercised legislative oversight in relation to other
branches of government. In reality, however, the office of the president in particular and
the executive branch in general were the most powerful branches of government. The
president was able to act with considerable independence from the National Shengo.
Although the constitution stipulated that the president was accountable to the National
Shengo, Mengistu demonstrated repeatedly that there was no authority higher than his
own office. By law he was responsible for presenting members of his executive staff and
the Supreme Court to the National Shengo for election. At the same time, the president,
"when compelling circumstances warrant it" between sessions of the National Shengo,
could appoint or relieve the prime minister, the deputy prime minister, and other members
of the Council of Ministers; the president, the vice president, and Supreme Court judges;
the prosecutor general; the chairman of the National Workers' Control Committee; and
the auditor general. The National Shengo was by law supposed to act on such decrees in
its next regular session, but this appeared to be only pro forma.
The president, who could be elected to an indefinite number of successive five-year

terms, had to submit nominations for appointment to the Council of Ministers (his
cabinet) to the National Shengo for approval. However, by the time nominations reached
the National Shengo for consideration, their appointment was a foregone conclusion. In
practice, President Mengistu would chose individuals for particular offices without any
apparent input from the National Shengo, the WPE, or the Council of State.
145
The president, who was also commander in chief of the armed forces, was also
responsible for implementing foreign and domestic policy, concluding international
treaties, and establishing diplomatic missions. If he deemed it necessary, the president
could rule by decree.
Council of Ministers
The Council of Ministers, defined in the constitution as "the Government," was the
government's highest executive and administrative organ. The body consisted of the
prime minister, the deputy prime minister, the ministers, and other members as
determined by law. Members were accountable to the National Shengo, but between
sessions they were accountable to the president and the Council of State. Members of this
council were chosen from regularly elected members of the National Shengo and served
five-year terms, unless they resigned or were removed by the president. For example, in
early November 1989 Prime Minister FikreSelassie Wogderes resigned his office,
allegedly for health reasons. However, some reports maintained that he was forced out by
Mengistu because of his apparent loss of enthusiasm for the regime's policies. At the
same time, Mengistu reshuffled his cabinet. Significantly, these events occurred weeks
after the annual session of the National Shengo had concluded.
The Council of Ministers was responsible for the implementation of laws and regulations
and for the normal administrative functions of national government. It prepared social
and economic development plans, the annual budget, and proposals concerning foreign
relations. In their respective areas of responsibility, members of the Council of Ministers
were the direct representatives of the president and the government; and because they
typically held parallel offices within the WPE, as a group they tended to be the most
significant political actors in the government.
In 1991 there were twenty-one ministries. Portfolios consisted of the Ministry in Charge
of the General Plan and the ministries of agriculture; coffee and tea development;
communications and transport; construction; culture and sports affairs; domestic trade;
education and fine arts; finance; foreign affairs; foreign trade; health; industry;
146
information; internal affairs; labor and social affairs; law and justice; mines, energy, and
water resources; national defense; state farms; and urban development and housing. In
addition to these ministries, there were several other important state authorities, such as
the Office of the National Council for Central Planning, the Institute for the Study of
Ethiopian Nationalities, the Relief and Rehabilitation Commission, and the National
Bank of Ethiopia.
Judicial System
The constitution provided for Ethiopia's first independent judiciary. Traditionally, the
Supreme Court and various lower courts were the responsibility of the Ministry of Law
and Justice. After Haile Selassie's overthrow, much of the formal structure of the existing
judicial structure remained intact. Over the years, regional and district level courts were
reformed somewhat. However, the new constitutional provisions had the potential to
change Ethiopia's national judicial system significantly.
The constitution stipulated that judicial authority was vested in "one Supreme Court,
courts of administrative and autonomous regions, and other courts established by law."
Supreme Court judges were elected by the National Shengo; those who served at the
regional level were elected by regional shengos (assemblies). In each case, the judges
served terms concurrent with that of the shengo that elected them. The Supreme Court
and higher courts at the regional level were independent of the Ministry of Law and
Justice, but judges could be recalled by the relevant shengo.
The Supreme Court was responsible for administering the national judicial system. The
court's powers were expanded to oversee all judicial aspects of lesser courts, not just
cases appealed to it. At the request of the prosecutor general or the president of the
Supreme Court, the Supreme Court could review any case from another court.
Noteworthy is the fact that, in addition to separate civil and criminal sections, the court
had a military section. In the late 1980s, it was thought that this development might bring
the military justice system, which had been independent, into the normal judicial system.
147
However, it became evident that it would be some time before the Supreme Court could
begin to serve this function adequately.
Between 1987 and 1989, the government undertook a restructuring of the Supreme Court
with the intent of improving the supervision of judges and of making the administration
of justice fairer and more efficient. The Supreme Court Council was responsible for
overseeing the court's work relating to the registration and training of judges and lawyers.
The Supreme Court Council's first annual meeting was held in August 1988, at which
time it passed rules of procedure and rules and regulations for judges. Although the
government reported that the courts were becoming more efficient, it admitted that there
was much to be done before the heavy case burden of the courts could be relieved.
Chapter 15 of the constitution established the Office of the Prosecutor General, which
was responsible for ensuring the uniform application and enforcement of law by all state
organs, mass organizations, and other bodies. The prosecutor general was elected by the
National Shengo for a five-year term and was responsible for appointing and supervising
prosecutors at all levels. In carrying out their responsibilities, these officials were
independent of local government offices.
Local tribunals, such as kebele tribunals and peasant association tribunals were not
affected by the 1987 constitution. People's courts were originally established under the
jurisdiction of peasant associations and kebeles. All matters relating to land redistribution
and expropriation were removed from the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Law and Justice
and placed under the jurisdiction of the peasant association tribunals, whose members
were elected by association members. In addition, such tribunals had jurisdiction over a
number of minor criminal offenses, including intimidation, violation of the privacy of
domicile, and infractions of peasant association regulations. The tribunals also had
jurisdiction in disputes involving small sums of money and in conflicts between peasant
associations, their members, and other associations. Appeals from people's tribunals
could be filed with regional courts. Kebele tribunals had powers similar to those of their
counterparts in peasant associations.
148
8.4.4 The Charter of the Transitional period (July 22, 1991 August 21,
1995)
After the fall of Derg a transitional government was established in July 22, 1991 and
terminated on August 21, 1995. During this period, our country was led by the
transitional period Charter of Ethiopia.
A charter is a document of important principles and lows that serve as a highest low in
the country in place of a constitution. In other words, the Charter was a basic legal &
general document similar to that of a constitution that addressed the problems of the
period The Transitional factors that necessitated the transitional period charter included.
- The period between the over thrown of the military regime & the formation of a new
government required marinating peace & stability by introducing low & order;
Attempts had to be made to solve some of the problems inherited from the previous
regime;
The Derg institutions & practices of repression had to be terminated
Mutual Confidence among people had to be brought for long period of time with positive
attitudes;
Disintegration had to be avoided and the way for peaceful transition to a democratic
Order paved.
Based on the transitional period Charter a Transitional Government came in to being by
convening a peace and Democratic Transitional conference in Addis Ababa between July
1 and 5, 1991 to ensure its democratic nature the conference represented different
political entities, national Liberation movements, religious institutions and intellectuals
from various sectors. This conference drafted, discussed and ratified the charter. The
peace and democratic conference established the major principles and ideas by which the
country was to be governed Until a Constitutionally Limited government was formed.
The charter gave opportunity for self-governance & recognized the diversity of the
Ethiopian Societies and laid down foundation for the 1995 Constitution.
149
8.4.5.The F.D.R.E. Constitution (The 1995 constitution)
The Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia was different from the
Previous Constitution in that it was
Formulated through popular participation based up on the reality need and demand of the
people was based up on major UN Human Rights instruments and other international
Conventions endorsed by Ethiopia.
The formulation of the 1995 (F.D.R.E) Constitution
The 1995 Ethiopian Constitution has passed through three stages
1. Drafting
2. Discussion and Development
3. Adoption/ratification.
1. The drafting stage
A special body known as a Constitutional commission carried out the drafting task. The
Commission took enough time and conducted a number of activities. Various seminars
and workshops have been held in order to come up with the initial from of the
constitution. More over, experts with a good deal of experiences form other countries
were invited to such seminars and workshops that have helped immensely in sharing
others’ experience.
2. The Discussion and development stage
The Second stage is the form of popular ratification of the initial draft of the constitution.
That was the opportunity given to all citizens of the country where by they examined,
commented and improved the various tentative provisions of the draft constitution.
That was important since it enabled citizens to know the tentative provisions that would
be parts of their final Constitution
Amend or improve the provisions before they are enforced in to action and to participate
in the formulation of their own constitution.
150
In the nation wide discussion on the initial draft, different ideas and views have been
shared and obtained that enriched the final form of the constitution.
3. The Ratification stage
This was the final phase of the series of decisions on the draft to be rationally accepted as
the constitution of the country. A Constitutional Assembly –a Specially Constituted body
of elected representatives of the nations, nationalities and people of Ethiopia-
accomplished the historic task of ratifying or endorsing the draft Constitution In the
constitutional Assembly 538 elected Citizen participated. The Assembly thoroughly
discussed on the draft constitution for three weeks. Each article of the draft Constitution
was passed by vote.
Finally, The Constitutional Assembly ratified the Constitution of the Federal Democratic
Republic of Ethiopia on 8 December 1994. It established the new federal structure where
power is shared between central and regional government. The constitution came in to
effect on the 21st day of August, 1995. The new government began its five-year term in
August of the same year.
7.4.5.1 CONTENTS OF THE F.D.R.E. CONSTITUTION (1995) MEMBER

STATES
This Constitution explicitly recognized that Ethiopia is to have a Federal system and
parliamentarian form of government. In this course of action there are at present nine
member states that formed the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia whereby
member states of the Federation have equal rights and powers. By and large the Federal
Democratic Republic of Ethiopia comprises the Federal Government and the State
members with their own legislative, executive and judicial powers. Based on the
constitution a general election was held and EPRDF won the election and formed a
government at federal level.
At state level, from the nine member states of the Federation, the majority party, EPRDF
won a majority only in four states, i.e., the State of Tigray, Amhara, Oromiya, and
Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples. In the rest five States i.e. the State of Afar,
151
Somalia, Benishangul Gumuz, Gambella peoples and the Harari People the minority
parties won the election and formed government.
THE PARLIAMENT
The present federal parliament is bicameral in its structure; i.e. it has two houses: the
House of Peoples' Representatives (HPR) and the House of the Federation (HF).
Members of the HPR are directly elected by the people for a term of five years on the
basis of universal suffrage by secret ballot. HPR is the highest authority of the Federal
Government. Currently there are 548 members who have been elected from different
parties and independent members by way of democratic electoral processes. Out of the
548 seats EPRDF has the majority seats of 496 and the rest are under minority parties and
independent members. Each member of the HPR represents 100,000 constituencies. By
the same token, they are representatives of the Ethiopian People at large and have the
power of legislation in all matters assigned by the constitution to Federal jurisdiction.
There are nine standing committees in the HPR of which two of them are being chaired
by the members of minority parties. This shows that the minority parties have shared
power in the parliament with the majority party, EPRDF. It is not only in the parliament
that the minority parties shared power with the majority, but also in the government i.e.
they are members of the cabinet. In order to share parliamentary experience with other
countries eight parliamentary friendship groups have been formed and have started
functioning so as to cultivate friendly relationship with other countries.
1. The House of Federation.
The House of the Federation is composed of representatives of Nations, Nationalities and

Peoples of Ethiopia. Each Nation, Nationality and People is to be represented by at least
one member and by one additional representative for each one million of its population.
Members are to be elected by the State Council or by the people of the State directly. At
present there are 108 members in the House. The House has the power to interpret the
constitution, decide on the issues relating to the rights of Nations, Nationalities and
Peoples to self determination including the right to secession, strive to find solutions to
152
disputes or misunderstandings that may arise between states, determine the division of
revenue to the States and the like. The House of the Federation holds at least two sessions
annually and its term of mandate is five years.
As it has been mentioned above the House of Federation has unique duties and
responsibilities such as interpreting the Constitution and protecting the rights of the
nations, nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia. In many countries, matters of constitutional
interpretation are decided by the Constitutional Court (as in the case of Germany) or by
the Supreme Court (as in the case of USA). The Constitutional Assembly, elected to ratify
the Constitution, decided that because of the multitude of nations and nationalities in
Ethiopia, the House of Federation would be the best place to protect and ensure the rights
of all nations and nationalities.
Article 62 (3-11) of the Constitution gives the House of Federation responsibility for
□ interpreting the Constitution;
□ organizing the Council of Constitutional Inquiry;
□ deciding on claims based upon the rights of nations, nationalities, and peoples to self-□
determination, including their right to secession;
□ Promoting the equality of the peoples of Ethiopia enshrined in the constitution and
□ promoting their unity based on their mutual consent;
□ exercising the powers and the functions concurrently entrusted to it and the Council of
Peoples’ Representatives;
□ Striving to find solutions to disputes or misunderstandings that may arise between
States;
□ determining the division of revenues derived from joint Federal and State tax sources
and the subsidies that the Federal Government may provide to the States;
□ identifying civil cases that require legislation by the House of Peoples’
Representatives
Ordering Federal intervention if any State, in violation of this Constitution, endangers the
constitutional order;
The House of Federation has 108 representatives who are elected by the state
governments for a five-year term of office. The composition of the House of Federation is
153
determined according to a system of proportional representation where each nation and
nationality is entitled to at least one member and one additional representative for each
one million of its population. The House holds at least two sessions annually, each lasting
a week, and also holds a joint meeting annually with the House of Peoples'
Representatives at the start of the Parliamentary session. Both Houses hold a joint session
concerning election of the president of the Republic, at the commencement of the annual
session of the parliament, human rights problem, amending the constitution etc.
The members of the House of Federation are usually members of their state governments
as well and, in this way, they are close to the issues of their people.
The House of Federation is semi-autonomous in that its budget is submitted for approval
to the House of Peoples' Representatives. Regarding this article 65 says that “The House
of the Federation shall submit its budget for approval to the House of Peoples’
Representatives”.
2. The House of Peoples' Representatives
The members of House of Peoples’ Representatives are the representative of the

Ethiopian People as a whole” (Article 54 Sub-article 4). It has 548 members elected for a
term of five years. One month before the expiry of the House’s term election for a new
House shall be held. The House of Representatives has one annual session from October
to June. Decisions are made if they are supported by the majority members of the House.
The House of Peoples' Representatives is a powerful legislative body with its legitimacy
based on popular election and representation. It is granted broad legislative powers in a
large number of areas and it controls the purse strings of the national government, which
cannot levy taxes or spend money without its approval.
The Constitution entrusts Parliament with significant electoral, legislative and budgetary
powers. Article 55 of the Constitution lists the legislative powers of the House of Peoples'
Representatives, which include the power to legislate in the areas of:
 Land and natural resources;
 Inter-State and foreign commerce;
 Transportation, postal and telecommunication services;
 Enforcement of political rights;
154
 Nationality and immigration;
 Standards of measurement and calendar;
 Patents and copyrights;
 The possession and bearing of fire arms;
 Labor, commercial and Penal Codes
 Civil laws "which the Federal Council deems necessary to maintain and sustain
one economic community" and
 The organization of national defense, public security and national police force.
In addition, the Constitution gives the House of Peoples’ Representatives important fiscal
and budgetary powers, including the power to:
 Approve general policies and strategies of social and economic development, and
fiscal and monetary policy of the country;
 Enact laws on matters relating to the administration of the National Bank,

exchange of foreign currency, and local currency;
 Levy taxes and duties on revenue sources reserved to the Federal State. It shall
ratify the Federal budget.
THE PRESIDENT
The President of the F.D.R.E is the Head of State. The President is elected by a two-thirds
majority vote of a joint session of the House of Peoples' Representatives and the House of
Federation. The term of duty is six years and the President shall not be elected for more
than two terms.
Prime Minister and the Council of Minister
The highest executive powers of the Federal Government are vested in the Prime
Minister and in the Council of Ministers. The Prime Minister is elected from among
members of the House of Peoples' Representatives and power of government shall be
assumed by the political party, or a coalition of political parties, that constitutes a
155
majority in the House of Peoples' Representatives. The Prime Minister is the chief-
executive, the chairman of the Council of Ministers and the Commander-in-Chief of the
National Armed Forces.
Judiciary
A notable feature of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia is
that it accords a dignified and crucial position to the Judiciary. Ethiopia's judicial
machinery is well ordered and well regulated, with the Supreme Court at the top. The
Ethiopian Government is federal in nature. Ethiopia has a dual system of courts - a
Federal Judiciary with the Supreme Court at the top along with a separate and parallel
judicial system in each Regional State. The Federal Supreme Court, the Federal High
Court and the Federal First Instance Court constitute a single Federal Judiciary, having
jurisdiction over all cases pertaining to federal matters. Likewise, there is a similar court
structure in each Regional State that has jurisdiction over all regional matters. The
Judiciary in Ethiopia has been assigned a significant role. It has to dispense justice not
only between individuals, but also between the state and the citizens. It interprets and
applies all the laws of the land. To enable the courts to discharge their functions
impartially, without fear or favor, the constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of
Ethiopia contains provisions which guarantee and safeguard independence. Thus,
independence of the Judiciary is enshrined in the Constitution for the first time, which is
rightly considered a historic landmark. The Judiciary is independent. Judicial powers,
both at Federal and State level, are vested in the courts. Judges shall exercise their
functions in full independence and shall be directed solely by the law. The Federal
Supreme Court shall have the highest and final judicial power over Federal matters.
The judges of the Federal Courts are appointed by the House of Peoples' Representatives
and the Regional State judges are appointed by the Regional State Council, after
consultation with those most competent to advise on the subject - the Federal Judicial
Administration Commission and the State Judicial Administration Commission.
Once appointed, the judges hold office until they reach pension age, and thus their tenure
is independent of the will of the executive. A special procedure has been laid down for
removal of judges on the grounds of incompetence, inefficiency or misbehavior. Judges
are supposed to exercise their function in full independence and shall be directed solely
156
by the law. The Federal Supreme Court draws up and submits the Federal Court budget to
the House of Peoples' Representatives for approval and, upon approval, administers the
budget.
Protection of Rights and Freedoms
Articles 13 to 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

pertain to fundamental rights. The fundamental rights have been grouped under several
headings. The Constitution guarantees rights and freedom, equality before the law, equal
protection of laws, freedom of speech and expression, freedom of religion, belief and
opinion, freedom of assembly and association, freedom of person, freedom against
jeopardy and ex post fact laws, the right to property.
In this regard, the Judiciary has the power and duty to ensure effective and speedy
enforcement of the rights of individuals. To ensure the fundamental rights effectively and
speedily the courts in Ethiopia have yet to develop full capacity. Towards this end, special
efforts are underway to build the capacity of the courts. One such effort is focusing on
increasing the supply of qualified lawyers, with impeccable integrity and honesty for
appointment as judges. Given the independence of the Judiciary, which is enshrined in
the constitution, the unreserved efforts to fully build the capacity of the Judiciary and the
commitment, sincerity and good intention of those on the bench, individuals surely have
remedies in the case of infringement of their rights.
8.5 Constitutionalism
Constitutionalism is descriptive of a complicated concept, which subjects the officials

who exercise governmental powers to the limitations of a higher law or constitution.
Constitutionalism proclaims the desirability of the rule of law as opposed to rule by the
arbitrary judgment or mere flat of public officials (Rule of Man). Thus Charles H.
McIlwain has written that the essential quality of constitutionalism is that “it is a legal
limitation on government; it is the antithesis of arbitrary rule...” (Constitutionalism:
157
Ancient and Modern, p. 21). Another eminent scholar of constitutional law, Howard Jay
Graham, has observed that “constitutionalism... is the art and the process of assimilating
and converting statute and precedent, ideals and aspirations, into the forms and the Rule
of Law—into a Fundamental and Supreme Law” (Everyman's Constitution, p. 6).
The concept of constitutionalism is that in political society government officials are not
free to do anything they please in any manner they choose; they are bound to observe
both the limitations on power and the procedures which are set out in the supreme,
constitutional law of the community. As you have seen in the previous unit, one of the
important tasks of constitution is limiting the power of governors. It may therefore be
said that the touchstone of constitutionalism is the concept of limited government under a
higher law.
This should not be taken to mean that if a state has a constitution; it is necessarily
committed to the idea of constitutionalism.
But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom,

can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.
John Adams (1735 - 1826
A good illustration of this point is the so-called Stalin Constitution of the Soviet Union.
For a variety of reasons the Russian dictator found it desirable, in 1936, to adopt a written
constitution. For example, Article 125 declares that citizens are guaranteed freedom of
speech, press, assembly, street processions and demonstrations, but only “in conformity
with the interests of the working people, and in order strengthen the socialist system....”
Furthermore, these individual freedoms are not in fact respected by the government of the
Soviet Union, and even mild expressions of dissent from prevailing official policy are
subject to police repression and severe punishment. Communist China presents another
158
example of a state which has a constitution without a commitment to constitutionalism.
For example, Article 87 of the Constitution of the People's Republic of China (1954)
provides: “Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, freedom
of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of pro- cession and
freedom of demonstration.” In actual fact, these freedoms do not exist in Communist
China, and institutions and procedures are lacking for their effective implementation.
Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it

dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save
it.... While it lies there, it needs no constitution, no
law, no court to save it.
Learned Hand, jurist
The higher law of the constitution is not subject to formal alteration by ordinary
legislative procedures, and the constitution, unlike statutes, emanates directly from the
whole body of citizens in the form of an organic document written and ratified in some
special way which stresses that the people are the ultimate repository of political power,
and that their enduring will must be obeyed by government officials.

PART. I
1. Which of these is not included in a constitution?
A. government structure and functions
B. powers and functions of the legislative organ of the state
C. The socio-economic policy of the country
D. Rights, duties and responsibilities of citizens
E. None of these
159
2. Which one of the following is wrong about the president of the federal
Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
A. The head of state
B. Elected by the House of peoples’ Representative
C. The term of office of the president is six years
D. He shall award medals, prizes and gifts in accordance with conditions &
procedures established by law
E. None of these
3. What do you understand from the following passage?
The constitution is the supreme law of the land any law, customary
practice or decision of an organ of state or public official which
contravenes this constitution shall be no effect
A. The sovereign Authority of the people
B. Supremacy of the Constitution
C. Separation of state & religion
D. Separation of power
E. All of these
4. One of the following does not refers to the 1931 constitution
A. It is the first written constitution in Ethiopia
B. It introduced parliamentary system
C. Its main aim was to give the country and the Imperial rule and image of
Modernity in the minds of the Westerners
D. It was drafted by popular participation
E. None of these
5. The 1987 constitution was different from the previous constitutions because it
A. Incorporated some democratic principles
B. Recognized the cultural identify and equality of nations and nationalities
C. was founded upon the very idea of the divine right of kings
D. A& B
E. B &C
160
6. Which of the following best describes constitution
A. Constitution is a document that contains the fundamental principles
in which a given state is established and governed whether embodied
in the low, custom or convention
B. A government document that contains different rules principles.
C. Constitution is concerned with how decisions are reached, how power
distributed
D. It is a document that limits governmental authority.
7. From which constitution of Ethiopia is the following passage taken?

‘Ethiopian subjects shall have the right in accordance with the
conditions prescribed by law to assemble peaceably and without
arms.’
A. from the revised constitution
B. from the first written constitution
C. from the 1955 G.C constitution
D. from the present constitution
E. both A and B are correct
PART. II
True or false
1. The 1931 constitution of Ethiopian did not include the Universal Human
Rights.
2. Constitutionalism refers to that public officials and ordinary citizens act and behave
according to the law
3. By unwritten constitution we mean the highest law of the state which is not in the text
form but that orally transmitted from generation to generation.
161
PART. III
Constitution Rule of law
Constitutionalism Unwritten constitution
Written constitution
PART. IV
PART II: - Consider the following passage and answer the questions that come after
the passage.
N.B. Write your answer in space provided under each question.
It shall, on its own initiative, request a joint session of the House of the
Federation and of the House of Peoples’ Representatives to take
appropriate measures when State authorities are unable to arrest
violations of human rights within their jurisdiction. It shall, on the basis
of the joint decision of the House, give directives to the concerned State
authorities.
1. What is the structure of the state mentioned in the passage?
2. Does the state have a parliament? If it does what type of parliament does the
states have?
3. From which constitution of Ethiopia is the passage taken?
4. What do you understand from the passage?
5. What is the form government that the state mentioned in the passage has?
8.7 SELECTED REFERENCES

● Charles H. McIlwain, Constitutionalism and the Changing World
(New York, 1939)
● Charles H. McIlwain, Constitutionalism: Ancient and Modern (Ithaca, 1947).
Howard Jay
● Graham, Everyman's Constitution (Madison, 1968);
● Fasil Nahum Constitution for Nation of Nations The Ethiopian perspectives
Asmara Red sea press Inc
● The Ethiopian constitutions (1931,1955, 1987 and 1995)
162
UNIT 9 The theory and Practices of Democracy
CONTENTS
9.0 INTRODUCTION
9.2 Origin and definition of democracy
9.2.1 What is democracy and democratic system?
9.3 Types of Democracy
9.3.1 Direct/Pure democracy
9.3.2 Indirect /Representative democracy
9.4 Characteristics of democracy
9.5 Constitutional Democracy and Participation of Citizens
9.0 INTRODUCTION
Generally it is possible to divide theories of governance in to two broad categories. One

includes types of authoritarian government, which allow little or no participation in
decision making by individuals and groups outside the upper reaches of the government.
The second category includes democratic government which allows much broader and
more meaningful participation.
The term democracy is as old as the golden age of Greek. The Athenians, in the fifth
century BC reached at the highest level in democratic development in comparison with
other city-states of the time. In a short period of time, they were able to promote it
surrounding world. In the existing world many nations are building the political system in
which the citizens are in the process of self-governance. We the people of Ethiopia are
now in that process.
163
Nowadays, the word democracy is commonly used in our state, Ethiopia. Some people
wrongly understand. Some times you might have heard even people saying “this is my
democracy”, which is absurd.
In this unit you learn the meaning of democracy; what democracy is all about; the two
ways of implementing democracy; the features of democracy. The last part of the unit
gives emphasis to the necessity of rule of law for effective and full participation of
citizens in the process of building constitutional democracy.
People, in the process constructing democracy, should be able to have a reliable and clear
understanding and knowledge about the system that is being built by them. They need to
have also the required skill, in order to effectively participate in the building up process.
At the end of this unit you should be able to:
□ explain the meaning of democracy

□ identify and explain the two ways in which citizens exercise democracy
□ describe how the historical development of democracy proceeded
□ identify and explain the roles played by citizens in the building up process of
democracy
□ identify and explain the fundamental principles of democracy `
□ develop the value of the culture of tolerance, skills of conflict resolution and
respect for the rule of law
9.2 Origin and definition of democracy
The term democracy and the classical conception of democratic rule are firmly rooted in
Ancient Greece. Like other words that end in ‘Cracy’ democracy is derived from the
ancient Greek word kratos, meaning ‘power’ or ‘rule’. Democracy there fore means ‘rule
164
by the demos’ demos standing for ‘the many’ or’ the people’. In other words, in
democracy the people are the source of political power.
9.2.1 What is democracy and democratic system?
The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here,
but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us, the living,
rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who
fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us that
government of the people, by the people, and for the
people, shall not perish from the earth.
Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865)

U.S. president.The dedication of the national cemetery on the site
of the Battle of Gettysburg, known as the Gettyburg Address.
Address, Gettysburg
Democracy is a concept that has very complex and wide meaning the following
definitions are among the common ones;
1. Democracy is a system of government in which the supreme political power resides
in the people
2. Democracy is a form of government in which political control is exercised by the
people either directly or through their elected representatives
3. Democracy (rule by the people) is a system of government in which all adults with
the exception of disqualified by criminal behavior or mental incapacity have the right
and the means to exercise some form of genuine control over government
4. In the phrase of Abraham Lincoln democracy is a government ‘ of the people , by the
people and for the people’
A democratic system is a system of government in which people are governed by persons

whom they elected are their leaders. Democracy is the way to social and economic
development of the people. One reason people need to build democracy is to secure
sustainable social and economic development of the people One reason people need to
165
build democracy is to secure sustainable social and economic development in democracy
involves fair distribution of resources Democracy thus provides citizens with
opportunities for fulfillment of their economic and social needs such as food, shelter,
education, healthcare, etc. Democracy is a flexible and open political system. It seeks to
find new solutions to the many problems and issues facing society.
Democracy is management of conflict. Democracy is composed of values of tolerance

co-operation Compromise, consensus pragmatism, compassion, civility etc. These values
are instruments to resolve differences peacefully therefore; democracy is peaceful
resolution of differences
Democratic government has however, varied considerably over the centuries. Perhaps the
most fundamental distinction is between democratic systems, that are based up on direct
popular participation in government and those that operate through some kind of
representative mechanism This highlights two contrasting models of democracy direct
democracy and representative democracy
If liberty and equality, as is thought by some are chiefly to

be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all
persons alike share in the government to the utmost.
Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC), Politics
9.3 Types of Democracy

As it has been repeatedly mentioned, democracy is a political system in which the
citizens administer or govern themselves. But how do people administer or govern
themselves? For the purpose of answering this question let us see the two types of
democracy.
166
1. Direct
2. Indirect democracy
9.3.1 Direct democracy (pure democracy/ participatory

democracy)
Direct democracy, classically termed pure democracy, is any form of government in

which all citizens can directly participate in the decision-making process. All citizens,
with out the intermediary of elected or appointed officials can participate in making
public decisions. A political system that does not participate citizens directly, in decision
making process is not democracy. It is when citizens are able to pass decisions on their
own affairs that can be said that they are governing themselves. At theoretical level
democracy means a political system in which all eligible citizens directly involve in law
making, implementing and interpreting activities.
Historically, the Athenians exercised this pure democracy. During the 4th century BC, the
population of Athens may well have comprised some 250,000—300,000 people. Citizen
families may have amounted to 100,000 people and out of these some 30,000 will have
been the adult male citizens entitled to vote in the assembly. This excluded a majority of
the population, namely slaves, children, women and resident foreigners.
Nowadays, at manageable population size level for example keble, town meeting,
community and trade union, direct democratic system is practical. Referendum and
election are two processes in which people exercise direct democracy. In these processes
not the representatives but the citizens themselves appear in person and pass their own
decision. In this system the people pass decision on behalf of themselves. But in the case
of indirect or representative democracy, the representatives pass decision on behalf of the
people.
167
Parliament is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile
interests; which interests each must maintain…but parliament is a
deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the
whole; where, not local purposes… ought to guide, but the general
good, resulting from the general reason of the whole.
Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Irish-born British statesman and political philosopher. Edmund Burke
was elected Member of Parliament for Bristol in 1774.
Speech to the electors of Bristol
9.3.2 Indirect /Representative democracy: - is at best, a limited and indirect form of

democracy It is Limited in the sense that popular participation is both frequent and brief
being reduced to the act of voting every few years depending on the length of the political
term It is indirect in the sense that the public is kept at arm’s length from government the
public participate only through the choice of who should govern it, and never, or only
rarely exercise power itself.
Some advocates of representative democracy argue that it is the only practicable form of
democracy in modern conditions Because, a high level of popular participation is
possible with in relatively small Communities in that face-to-face communication can
take place between and amongst citizens moreover, to consult the general public on each
and every issue, and permit wide-ranging debate and discussion threatens to paralyze the
decision- making process and make a country virtually ungovernable
The most fundamental objections to direct democracy is however, that ordinary people
lack the time, maturity and specialist knowledge to rule wisely on their won behalf In this
sense, representative democracy merely applies the advantages of the division of labor to
168
politics specialist politics able to devote all their time and energy to the activity of
government, can clearly do a better job than would the general public.
Therefore, today the most common form of democracy is representative democracy, in

which citizens elect officials to make political decisions, formulate laws and administer
programs for the public good
9.4 Characteristics of democracy
In democracy it's your vote that counts; In feudalism it's your

count that votes.
Mogens Jallberg
Democracy is characterized by certain principles and values

1. Sovereign Authority of the people: - It is the with mate power vested in all the people
rather than in some of them to make political decisions
 Sovereignty:- Supreme power, or the ultimate decision making power
 Vestment (dispositions) in the people power possession of the people or the source of
power is in the people
 The ‘People’ all adult citizens (Citizens who are in the legal –maturity)
There fore, sovereignty of the people implies the ultimate decision making power of the
people
2. The rule of law (The supremacy of the constitution)
Democracy is characterized by the rule of low In democracy Constitutional government
lead the political order In such Cases, both public officials and citizens live and behave
according to the low public officials abide by constitution their power is granted and
limited by low The transfer of power is also made peacefully through periodic elections
this is essential features of the prevalence of the rule of low
169
3. Separation of powers:- It avoids the concentration of political power at the centre or
in the hands of the few Instead, political power is shared among different organs and
levels of government In democracy decision making is usually shared among three
branches of government These are the legislative the executive and the judiciary this
helps to check and balance political power among independent bodies of the government
separation of power therefore, avoids the possession or control of political power by a
single body
4. Human and Democratic Rights democracy provides to the people (citizens) fund
mental rights & freedoms these rights includes the most basic ones such as the right to
life, liberty, equality, and other economic social and political rights and freedoms because
without which one can not think of a democratic system
5. Conduct and accountability of government

This refers to the transparent activity of government that enables the people to make the
government officials accountable for the failure that they committee to discharge their
official duties
6. Majority Rule and minority Rights
In the system of democracy, decisions are usually made based on majority vote the
opinion and believes supported by majority members would be accepted and implement
by minorities who oppose it. However, the basic rights of the minority would be
protected and served and their voices is also heard (Listened)
6. Multi-party system
In a democratic political system there exist two or more political parties competing
peacefully for political power the parties generate different views, ideas or opinions
etc, for the benefit of society. In multi-party system elections are conducted fairly,
freely and periodically. The winner party assumes power independently or in coalition
with minority parties. The activities of the party in power which is checked and
observed by other parties which are not in power
7. Free, Fair and periodic Elections
170
Periodic election is a process of democracy in which public officials are chosen to
positions at every specified time through this process citizens determine those who
assume leadership Not all elections serve this purpose but those that are Characterized
for being free from biases and corruption, fair for allowing the opportunity for all
eligible persons and periodic in that the government is constantly renewed by
citizens’ political participation
To sum up, in democracy the people exercise self-governance either directly or through
their chosen representatives. Democratic government means popular government in
theory; the people are fundamentally responsible for their own political well-being.
However, the people are the source of governmental power, they can’t simply do any
thing they wish virtually every democracy imposes Limitations on majority rule.
Furthermore, well-established rules and regulations usually dictate the procedures
according to which government operates where governments are determined by
meaningful elections and where such limitations are in force, the government is said to be
a constitutional democracy
9.5 Constitutional Democracy and Participation of Citizens
Civic participation refers to the active involvement of citizens in the political, economic
and social affairs which are their own. Providing human and democratic right
constitutional democratic system facilitates the active participation of citizens in the three
spheres mentioned above.
As it has been cited in the previous unit, a constitution is defined as sets of laws,
principles, policies etc serving as guiding and the highest law of the state. It describes a
government and its operation. It has also a function of issuing of rights, freedoms,
equalities, and liberties to citizens to play active role in socio-economic and political
affairs of their own. Thus, constitutional democracy (democratic system based on
constitution) has a great importance for the active participation of citizens and in turn a
great contribution for the healthy development of constitutional democracy.
171
As we shall see later, when we deal with constitution and constitutionalism, the mere
existence of constitution does not bring about the active participation of citizens. There
must be constitutionalism. The active and effective involvement of citizens, in their own
affairs is possible if their constitutional rights are properly protected and enjoyed. It
requires rule of law; that means acting or behaving according to the law. The government
bodies and their officials have the duty to obey and observe the constitution. The
government is expected to protect not violet, the rights of citizens issued by the
constitution. The rights include
* Right of Thought, Opinion and Expression

* The Right of Assembly, Demonstration and Petition
* The Right to Vote and to be Elected etc.
Constitutional democracy depends on a participation of enlightened citizens, those who

control their representatives (public officials). Limited government remains limited only
by vigilance of citizens who prevent on protest ethical and constitutional violation. It is
only through thoughtful participation of citizens that the promises can be achieved and a
healthy democracy can be established. The fourth and last part of the unit gives emphasis
to the necessity of rule of law for effective and full participation of citizens in democracy.

PART. I
1. As hereditary authority is to monarchy __________is to democracy.

A. periodic election
B. republicanism
C. Federalism
D. parliamentarianism
E. Both A and B
172
2. Sovereign Authority of the people implies
A. Public officials have absolute power over the people
B. People are the source of Political power
C. Political power comes by force
D. Peaceful Transition of political power
E. All of these
3. Which one of the following is not the principle of democracy?
A. It enables the people to be sovereign.

B. It recognizes and protects the individuals as well as group rights, liberties
and equality.
C. Rule of Law
D. Decision is made based on majority vote system.
4. In an Indirect democracy, decisions are passed by
A. All citizens
B. peoples’ Representative
C. Investors
D. Media
5. Which one of the following best express sovereignty
A. It refers to the supremacy of rulers in implementing laws.
B. It is an attribute of the state
C. It refers to having an ultimate law making and implementing power.
D. It refers to power of the people to elect their representatives.
PART. II
True or false
173
1. At present time implementing direct democracy at community level is possible.
2. Uni-party system is one of the important features of democracy.
3. There is interdependence relation between civic participation.
4. Periodic election of rulers is one of the important values of democracy
PART. III
Define the following words and phrases

Democracy Representative Democracy
Sovereignty Majority Rule and minority Rights
Rule of law Constitutional Democracy
Participatory democracy Direct Democracy
Indirect Democracy
Accountability of government
PART. IV
1. Mention the reason why indirect democracy is sometimes said to be representative
democracy.
2. Is there any means of implementing direct democracy in the present condition of the
World? Give your justification for your answer
3. List any of two indicators of constitutional democracy
9.7 SELECTED REFERENCES
● Markoff, John, Waves of Democracy, 1996,

● Muhlberger, Steve, Phil Paine, Democracy's Place in World History, Journal of
World History.
● Charles Tilly, Contention and Democracy in Europe, 1650-2000, Cambridge
University Press, 2004, Google Print
● Miller L(ed)(): Questions that Matter 1984
● Ball Alan Modern Politics and Government Hong Kong, 1978.
174
UNIT 10 Fundamental Human Rights
CONTENTS
10.0 INTRODUCTION

10.2 Meaning and Nature of Human Rights
10.3 Principles of Human Rights
10.4 Families of Human Rights
10.5 Universal Declaration o Human Rights
10.6 The Present Ethiopian Constitution and Human
and Democratic Rights
10.0 INTRODUCTION
In today's world, Human Rights are the great ethical yardstick that is used to measure a
government's treatment of its people. A broad consensus has emerged in the twentieth
century on rhetoric that frames judgment of nations against an international moral code
prescribing certain benefits and treatment for all humans simply because they are human.
Human rights those benefits that we enjoy for the simple reason that we are humans. We
deserve them because of our nature. These are all natural rights.
Natural rights are those which appertain to man in right of his existence. Of this kind are
all the intellectual rights, or rights of the mind, and also all those rights of acting as an
individual for his own comfort and happiness, which are not injurious to the natural rights
of others.
175
This unit is mainly concerned with these natural rights with which we human beings are
born. The unit starts with providing you the working definition and features of human
rights. And it goes on providing you with important principles of these natural benefits of
human beings. Human rights nowadays have many branches or members. At present time
you hear different types of human rights. In the coming up sub-unit, you will see also
four types human rights. Around the end of the unit you will be introduced to UDHR and
the human right provision of the existing constitution of Ethiopia.
Only the educated are free.
Epictetus (55 AD - 135 AD), Discourses
One of the important indicators whether the political system is democratic or not is the
provision of human rights. The proper enjoyment of these rights is also another important
related issue. So, citizens, in a democratic society, are those who are expected to enjoy
their rights. Exercising one’s rights presupposes knowing which one is our right and why.
At the conclusion of this unit you should be able to

□ define human rights
□ explain what the nature of human rights is
□ identify and explain the features of human rights
□ identify and explain the different branches of human rights
□ develop a positive attitude to wards the protection or□ enjoyment of human rights
□ identify and exercise the rights included in the present constitution of Ethiopia
176
10.2 Meaning and Nature of Human Rights
Rights are our advantages or benefits that we obtain as the member of community in
which we belong. For example, we enjoy rights because we belong to human community.
Human rights are our benefits that we acquire because of our essential nature. These are
natural rights with which we human beings are born. Human rights are the rights
available to human beings by virtue of their being human. They are natural rights which a
human being acquires simply through birth.
Because you are in control of your life. Don't ever forget that. You are
what you are because of the conscious and subconscious choices you
have made.
Barbara Hall, A Summons to New Orleans, 2000
There are some rights which we enjoy because of our nature (human being). These are
rights that are considered by most societies to belong automatically to everyone, for
example, the rights to life, freedom, justice, and equality, liberty etc. Thus, they are
inalienable and inviolable rights of all human beings living in whatever country and
political system.
We hold in our hands, the most precious gift of all: Freedom. The
freedom to express our art. Our love. The freedom to be who we
want to be. We are not going to give that freedom away and no one
shall take it from us!
Diane Frolov and Andrew Schneider, Northern Exposure, Cicely, 1992
10.3 Principles of Human rights
177
● Inalienability: human rights are inalienable and cannot be separated from human
beings;
● Inviolable: human rights are secured from infringement, violence or attack
● Universality: human rights are universal and are available to all individuals and
peoples without discrimination on the basis of gender, political affiliation, race,
religion and so on;
● Indivisibility: human rights are indivisible and all rights are dependent on other
rights. There are no hierarchies of human rights. And human rights cannot be
applied selectively (this does not mean that all states have accepted and
implemented all rights contained in the Universal Declaration and the
international human rights conventions).
10.4 Families of Human Right
Questions about which rights are human rights arise in regard to many families of human
rights. Discussed below are:
(1) Civil and Political rights;
(2) Economic and Social rights;

(3) Minority and Group rights; and
(4) Environmental rights.
(1) Civil and Political Rights
These rights are familiar from historic bills of rights such as the French Declaration of the
Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) and the United States Bill of Rights (1791, with
subsequent amendments). Contemporary sources include the articles of the UDHR, and
such treaties as the ECHR, the ICCPR and the American Convention on Human Rights.
Some representative formulations follow:
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and expression. This right includes freedom
to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers,
178
either orally, in writing, in print, in the form of art, or through any other medium of one's
choice. (American Convention on Human Rights, Article 13.1)
Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association
with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his
interests (ECHR, Article 11).
Every citizen shall have the right to participate freely in the government of his country,
either directly or through freely chosen representatives in accordance with the provisions
of the law. 2. Every citizen shall have the right of equal access to the public service of his
country. 3. Every individual shall have the right of access to public property and services
in strict equality of all persons before the law (African Charter, Article 13).
These rights fit the general idea of human rights suggested above. First, they are political
norms that primarily impose responsibilities on governments and international
organizations. Second, they are minimal norms in that they protect against the worst
things that happen in political society rather than setting out standards of excellence in
government. Third, they are international norms establishing standards for all countries --
and that have been accepted by more than 140 of the world's countries. Finally, it is
plausible to make claims of high priority on their behalf, and to support these claims of
importance with strong reasons. Consider the right to freedom of movement. One
approach to justifying this right and its high priority would argue the importance of free
movement to being able to find the necessities of life, to pursuing plans, projects, and
commitments, and to maintaining ties to family and friends. A related approach argues
that it is impossible to make use of other human rights if one cannot move freely. The
right to political participation is undermined if a person is not permitted to go to political
rallies or to the polls (that means in the electoral process).
Civil and political rights are not absolute, and they may sometimes be suspended. Some
civil and political rights can be restricted by public and private property rights, by
restraining orders related to domestic violence, and by legal punishments. Further, after a
disaster such as a hurricane or earthquake free movement is often appropriately
suspended to keep out the curious, to permit access of emergency vehicles and
equipment, and to prevent looting. The ICCPR permits rights to be suspended during
times "of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation" (Article 4). But it
179
excludes some rights from suspension including the right to life, the prohibition of
torture, the prohibition of slavery, the prohibition of ex post facto criminal laws, and
freedom of thought and religion.
(2) Economic and Social Rights
Besides the "civil and political" rights just discussed, the UDHR includes "economic and
social" (or welfare) rights. For example, the UDHR included a putative right to holidays
with pay (Article 24), and such a right pertains to a good life, not to a minimally good
life. In addition to this there are equality and nondiscrimination for women and
minorities, access to employment opportunities, fair pay, safe and healthy working
conditions, the right to form trade unions and bargain collectively, social security, an
adequate standard of living (covering adequate food, clothing, and housing), health care,
and education. These rights were made part of international law by treaties such as the
European Social Charter, the ICCPR. which amended the American Convention on
Human Rights. Whether economic and social rights are genuine human rights is
discussed below.
The International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR's) list
of rights includes nondiscrimination and equality for women in the economic and social
area (Articles 2 and 3), freedom to work and opportunities to work (Article 4), fair pay
and decent conditions of work (Article 7), the right to form trade unions and to strike
(Article 8), social security (Article 9), special protections for mothers and children
(Article 10), the right to adequate food, clothing, and housing (Article 11), the right to
basic health services (Article 12), the right to education (Article 13), and the right to
participate in cultural life and scientific progress (Article 15).
Article 25, sub-article (1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is read as
follows:
“Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of
himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and
necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment,
sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances
beyond his control.”
180
These are as important rights as others. To show their importance we better to use two
welfare rights as examples: the right to an adequate standard of living, and the right to
free public education. These rights require governments to try to remedy widespread and
serious evils such as hunger and ignorance.
The importance of food and other basic material conditions of life is easy to show. These
goods are essential to people's ability to live, function, and flourish. Without adequate
access to these goods, interests in life, health, and liberty are endangered and serious
illness and death are probable. The connection between having the goods the right
guarantees and having a minimally good life is direct and obvious -- something that is not
always true with other human rights.
In the contemporary world lack of access to educational opportunities typically limits

(both absolutely and comparatively) people's abilities to participate fully and effectively
in the political and economic life of their country (Hodgson 1998). Lack of education
increases the likelihood of unemployment and underemployment.
Another way to support the importance of welfare rights is to show their importance to
the full implementation of civil and political rights. If a government succeeds in
eliminating hunger and providing education to everyone this promotes people's abilities
to know, use, and enjoy their liberties, due process rights, and rights of political
participation. This is easiest to see in regard to education. Ignorance is a barrier to the
realization of civil and political rights because uneducated people often do not know what
rights they have and what they can do to use and defend them. It is also easy to see in the
area of democratic participation. Education and a minimum income make it easier for
people at the bottom economically to follow politics, participate in political campaigns,
and to spend the time and money needed to go to the polls and vote.
In support of this UDHR Article 26, (2) says this: “Education shall be directed to the full
development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human
rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and
friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of
the United Nations for the maintenance of peace”.
181
(3) Minority and Group Rights
Concern for the rights of minorities is a longstanding concern of the human rights
movement. Human rights documents emphasize that all people, including members of
minority ethnic and religious groups, have the same basic rights and should be able to
enjoy them without discrimination. The right to freedom from discrimination figures
prominently in the UDHR and subsequent treaties. The ICCPR, for example, commits its
participating states to respecting and protecting their people's rights "without distinction
of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, political or other opinion, national or
social origin, property, birth, or social status."
Some standard individual rights are especially important to ethnic and religious
minorities, including rights to freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of
religion, and freedom from discrimination. Human rights documents also include rights
that refer to minorities explicitly and give them special protections. For example, the
ICCPR in Article 27 says that persons belonging to ethnic, religious, or linguistic
minorities "shall not be denied the right, in community with other members of their
group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use and
develop their own language."
Minority groups are often targets of violence and human rights norms call upon
governments to refrain from such violence and to provide protections against it. This
work is partly done by the right to life, which is a standard individual right. But the right
against genocide protects groups from attempts to destroy or decimate them. The
Genocide Convention was one of the first human rights treaties after World War II. It
says:
…genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in
whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such: (a) Killing
members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of
the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to
bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures
intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of
the group to another group.
182
The right against genocide seems to be a group right. It is held by groups and provides
protection to groups as groups. It is largely negative in the sense that it requires
governments and other agencies to refrain from destroying groups; but it also requires
that legal and other protections be implemented for this purpose.
Can a group right fit the general idea of human rights proposed earlier? It can if we
broaden the conception of who can hold human rights to include ethnic and religious
groups. This can be made more palatable, perhaps, by recognizing that the beneficiaries
of the right against genocide are individual humans who enjoy greater security against
attempts to destroy the group to which they belong (Kymlicka 1989).
(4) Environmental Rights
In spite of the danger of rights inflation, there are doubtless norms that should be counted
as human rights but are not generally so treated. After all, there are lots of areas in which
fundamental human interests are threatened by governmental actions and omissions.
Consider environmental rights, which are often defined as rights of animals or of nature
itself. Conceived in this way they do not fit our general idea of human rights because the
right holders are not humans or human groups. But more modest formulations are
possible; environmental rights can be understood as rights to an environment that is
healthy and safe. Such a right is human-oriented: it does not cover directly issues such as
the claims of animals, biodiversity, or sustainable development.
The right to a safe environment can be sculpted to fit the general idea of human rights
suggested above by conceiving it as primarily imposing duties on governments and
international organizations. It calls on them to regulate the activities of both
governmental and nongovernmental agents to ensure that environmental safety is
maintained. Citizens are secondary addressees. This right sets out a minimal
environmental standard, safety for humans, rather than calling for higher and broader
standards of environmental protection. (Countries that are able to implement higher
standards are of course free to enact those standards in their law or bill of rights.
183
Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you
equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you
take it.
Malcolm X (1925 - 1965), Malcolm X Speaks, 1965
10.5 UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
After the atrocities committed by the Germans in the Holocaust, the slaughter of Jews
that occurred during World War II (1939-1945), the UN adopted a Universal Declaration
of Human Rights. The declaration affected the terms of several national constitutions that
were written after World War II. The declaration was adopted on December 10, 1948,
which is now celebrated annually as Human Rights Day. It is an international document
affirming the dignity and rights of all human beings.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was prepared by the Commission on Human
Rights of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations.. French
jurist and Nobel laureate René Cassin was the declaration’s principal author. In 1968
Men are equal; it is not birth but virtue that makes the difference.
Voltaire
René Cassin was awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace.
The rights described in the 30 articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
include the right to life, liberty, and security of person; to freedom of conscience,
religion, opinion, expression, association, and assembly; to freedom from arbitrary arrest;
to a fair and impartial trial; to freedom from interference in privacy, home, or
correspondence; to a nationality; to a secure society and an adequate standard of living; to
education; and to rest and leisure. The declaration also affirms the rights of every person
to own property; to be presumed innocent until proven guilty; to travel from a home
country at will and return at will; to work under favorable conditions, receive equal pay
184
for equal work, and join labor unions at will; to marry and raise a family; and to
participate in government and in the social life of the community.
It proclaims that “all human beings are born free and equal” (Article 1) and the second
article of the declaration mentions the entitlement of all human races with out any
discrimination to these basic rights. Article 2 says that “Everyone is entitled to all the
rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, 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. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of
the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a
person belongs, whether it is independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other
limitation of sovereignty”.
It says that all people have the right to liberty, life, and religious and political freedom,
education, and economic well-being, freedom of peaceful assembly and association,
freedom of opinion and expression
It bans torture, inhuman treatment, arbitrary arrest, detention or exile, arbitrary

interference with somebody’s privacy, arbitrarily deprivation of nationality and property,
being compelled to belong to an association, servitude etc. It also states that all people
have the right to participate in their governments. Some of the important rights are
mentioned in the previous section this chapter.
The UN operates a Commission on Human Rights, which monitors human rights abuses
in countries, holds international meetings on human rights concerns, and handles
complaints about human rights violations. In 1993 the General Assembly also created the
position of High Commissioner for Human Rights. The commissioner oversees all the
UN’s human rights programs, works to prevent human rights violations, and investigates
human rights abuses. The commissioner also has the power to publicize abuses taking
place in any country, but does not have the authority to stop them. However, most
publicity about human rights abuses does not come from the UN but from rival countries
or from nongovernmental organizations, such as Amnesty International.
185
10.6 The Present Ethiopian Constitution and Human
and Democratic Rights
In the eighth unit, particularly in the sub unit that deals with historical development of
constitution in Ethiopia, you have already seen that the contents of Universal Declaration
Human Rights were included for the first time in the Revised Constitution of Ethiopia
(during the reign of Hileselassie I). As it has been cited above, in the third chapter, the
1955 constitution was different from that of the 1931 because the former included human
rights following the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. One chapter, namely
Chapter III which had 29 articles(Article37-Article65) was reserved to these human
rights. The following are some of the human rights provisions of the constitution:
Article 41 Freedom of speech and of the press is guaranteed throughout the Empire in
accordance with the law.
Article 45 Ethiopian subjects shall have the right, in accordance with the conditions
prescribed by law, to assemble peaceably and without arms.
Article 46 Freedom to travel within the Empire and to change domicile therein is assured
to all subjects of the Empire, in accordance with the law.
Article 47 Every Ethiopian subject has the right to engaged in any occupation and, to that
end to form or join associations in accordance with the law.
Article 56 No one shall be subjected to cruel and inhuman punishment.
Article 61 All persons and all private domiciles shall be exempt from unlawful searches
and seizures
186
A phrase “in accordance with the law” was found in many of the articles of this chapter.
To some extent the inclusion of the phrase restricted the proper implementation of the
rights. During the time of Hailesellassie I regime many of the rights issued by the
constitution were all at theoretical level not at practical. Violation of human rights
reached its climax and that brought about the overthrow of the regime.
The 1987 constitution also included the basic human rights. Chapter Seven (Article 35-
Article 58) was concerned with the issuance of human and democratic rights. Article 35,
sub article 1 guaranteed all Ethiopians would enjoy equality before the law, regardless of
nationality, sex, religion, occupation, and social or other status. They had the right to
marry (Article 37), to work, to rest, to receive free education, and to have access to health
care and to a fair trial. Ethiopians were guaranteed freedom of conscience and religion.
As was not the case in imperial Ethiopia, religion and the state were proclaimed to be
separate institutions. Citizens were assured the freedoms of movement, speech, press,
assembly, peaceful demonstration, and association. Regarding political participation,
citizens had the right to vote and the right to be elected to political office (Article 50).
Sub-article 1&2 of the 2nd article says that all Ethiopian nationalities would be given
equal recognition in the republic.
The existing constitution of Ethiopia made distinction between human and democratic
rights. The chapter three that deals with fundamental rights and freedoms has two parts:
Part One (Article 14 - Article 28) contains Human Rights. The first three articles (Article
14, 15 and 16) are about the right to life, the security of person and liberty. This is based
on the crucial point of the Social contract theory which was the foundation of modern
western states societies- all men are created equal as well as free. The above mentioned
articles of the existing constitution of Ethiopia prohibit arbitrary arrest, deprivation of life
and liberty. They are made in conformity with article 3, 5 and 9 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Article 18 of the present constitution is about the
prohibition against cruel or inhuman treatment-no serfdom or slavery. As any individual
citizens arrested, accused or those persons who are held in custody are all human beings.
Thus, they are expected to enjoy the human rights and be treated as any other human
187
beings. Article 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 are reserved to the rights of persons arrested,
accused, held in custody and imprisoned. These are human beings who are either
suspected criminals or proved to be guilty (sentenced) but still human beings. Thus, “All
persons held in custody and imprisoned upon conviction and sentencing have the right to
treatment respecting their human dignity” (Article 21). They must obtain fair and timely
justice. This may remind us the famous saying; “Justice delayed is justice denied”.
Referring to this the 1995 constitution of Ethiopian says that “accused persons have the
right to a public trial by an ordinary court of law within a reasonable time after having
been charged….” (Article 20). It also indicates that arrested persons would be required to
be told immediately, the reason why they were arrested.” Persons arrested have the right
to be informed promptly, in a language they understand, of the reasons for their arrest and
of any charged against them” (Article 19, Sub- article 1). “Persons arrested have the right
to be brought before a court within 48 hours of their arrest” (Article 19 Sub-article 3).
According to article 24 every Ethiopian has the right to respect for his/her human dignity,
the free development of his/her personality and recognition as a person. Article 25
guarantees that all Ethiopians with no discrimination on the basis of social status,
religion, political opinion, skin color, sex, language etc. are entitled to equal treatment or
protection of the law. The right to privacy is another important right issued by the
constitution. It prohibits arbitrary searches of citizens’ home or his or her personal
seizure. This includes the right of citizens to use their own telephone, postal service, e-
mail or any other means of correspondence with out the interference of any political
organ, institution or person.
The second part of chapter three (Article 29 –Article 44) contents civil rights or
democratic rights. The first article of this part (Article 29) states the right of thought,
opinion and expression. Every Ethiopian citizen has the right to hold his/her personal
view, freedom of expression that includes “freedom to seek, receive and import
information and ideas of all kinds, regardless pf frontiers either orally, in writing or in
print, in the form of art, or through any media of his choice”(Article 29, Sub-article 2).
Provided that the assembly and the demonstration are peaceful and not war propagating
“every one has the right to assemble and to demonstrate together with others peaceably
nd unarmed, and to petition….”(Article 30 Sub-article10). Freedom of association and
188
movement are also the other important freedoms included in the constitution. Article 31
and 32 respectively point out freedom of association and movement. Every one has the
right to be the member of any organization or association whose purpose of establishment
is not against the well-being of the society. Regarding freedom of movement, any
Ethiopian has the right to establish his residence any where in the territory of the state.
And any one is free to leave the state and return to the state at any time he wishes.
According to Article 35 women have equal rights with men in what ever respect: social,
political and economic. Children as the foundation of the coming society have to have
some basic rights. The rights of children ( Article 36) includes the right to life; a name
and nationality; know and be cared for by his or her parents or legal guardians; not to be
forced to work which my cause hazard or harm to his or her physical or psychological
condition or well-being.
Article 38 assures that all Ethiopian citizens “…with out any discrimination based on
race, color nation, nationality, sex, language, religion political and other opinion or other
status… have the right to vote and to be elected.
Article 39 is regarding group rights (Rights of Nations Nationalities, and Peoples). Sub-
article 1 of the same article states that “Every Nation, Nationality, and People in Ethiopia
has an unconditional right to self-determination, including the right to secession.”(Sub-
article 1) .This means any Nation, Nationality, and People of Ethiopia is free to separate
(secede) itself from the union (federation) and establish its own independent state. The
Nations, Nationalities and peoples in Ethiopia have “the right to speak, to write and to
develop [their] own language; to express, to develop and to promote their culture; and to
preserve its history.”(Sub- article 2)
Articles 40, 41, 42 and 43 deal with economic, social and cultural rights. The right to own
private property is guarantied by article 40. However this does not include land and other
natural resources. “ …ownership of rural and urban land, as well as of all natural
resources, is exclusively vested in the State and in the peoples of Ethiopia.” It also goes
189
on saying that “Land is a common property of the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of
Ethiopia…”
Every Ethiopian has the right to engage in whatever economic activity and choose his/her
occupation or profession. In order to protect their rights in group; improve their living
and working conditions civil servants, factory workers, farmers etc have the right to
establish professional associations or trade unions.
The last article of this chapter (Article 44) is about environmental rights. It indicates that
every one has the right to live in clean and healthy living area.
All the above mentioned fundamental rights and freedoms are “interpreted in a manner
conforming to the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [and other]
International Conventions on Human Rights adopted by Ethiopia.”

PART. I
1. Identify the one that indicates the universality of Human Rights

A. They cannot be separated from human beings;
B. They are available to all individuals and peoples without discrimination on
the basis of gender, political affiliation, race, religion and so on.
C. There are no hierarchies of human rights
D. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention, or exile"
190
2. Which one of the following does not characterize The Universal Declaration of
Human Rights?
A. It is a declaration that includes natural rights which are interdependent
B. They are enjoyed the whole human race
C. All human rights are interrelated to one another.
D. Human rights are inalienable and natural rights.
E. All of the above
3. One of the following Ethiopian constitutions was the first to include the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Which one of that?
A. The 1931 constitution C. The revised constitution
B The 1955 constitution D. The 1995 constitution
4. The following article is extracted from the 1995 constitution of Ethiopia. What does
the article e refer to?
Every Ethiopian has the right to choose his or her means of livelihood, occupation and
profession.
A. Minority and Group Rights
B. Environmental Rights
C. Economic and Social Rights
D. Civil and Political Rights
PART. II
True or false
1. All human rights are for all human beings.
2. Let a person be in what ever political system, he is entitled with all the benefits that he
obtained naturally.
3. Democratic rights are established on the natural rights
PART. III

Human Rights Duty
Democratic rights Declaration
191
Right
PART. IV
1. What are the possible results of violation of human rights?
2. The important task of government is protecting the natural rights of citizens. Do you
agree? Do you think that this is true in what ever political system?
10.8 SELECTED REFRENCES
● Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man, New York: Penguin Books, 1985
● Douglas Husak, "The Motivation for Human Rights", (1985)
● Jack Donnelly, Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice, Ithaca:
Cornell University Press, 1989
● Allan Gewirth, "Why There Are Human Rights", (1985)
● Douglas Husak, "Why There Are No Human Rights", (1984)
● John O'Manique, "Universal and Inalienable Human Rights, (1990)
● Gayle Binion, "Human Rights: A Feminist Perspective," (1995)
UNIT 11. International Relations and Contemporary Global

Issues
CONTENTS
11.0 INTRODUCTION
11.2 Meaning and Historical Development of International Relations
11.3 Contemporary Global Issues
11.3.1 Political tension and armed conflicts:
11.3.2 Globalization
192
11.3.3 Terrorism
11.3.4 Legal and Security Issues
11.4 The principles and objectives of the International Organizations
11.5 The Major International Organizations
11.0 INTRODUCTION
The primary focus of international relations is on the interactions between nations. It is

true that there is no self-sufficiency at individual or nation level. Every nation demands
the help of other nations for the purpose of fulfilling its demands. There may arise also a
territorial dispute between or among the neighboring countries. In this or that way, the
interaction among the world nation is inevitable. In the present world, implementing
“close door” policy or total isolation is unthinkable.
In this final unit of the material you are going to deal with the multi-facetted relations
among the world nations. The unit starts with defining the concept; international
relations. In the next sub-unit the important current world wide issues are identified and
discussed
So as to solve the problems that the world nations encounter with, they established
regional or international organizations. In this unit some important international
organization established for this purpose are selected and dealt at the end of the unit.
One the feature of good citizens is being informed about their localities, community and
their world at large. Citizens require a proper knowledge and understanding of the
situations in which the surrounding world is found. The problems that the world faces are
the problems that affect many people of the world. So the people should be fully aware of
these problems and ways of solving them. That is why this unit that deals with global
relations is included.
193
At the conclusion of the unit you should be able to
□ develop the value of the culture of tolerance, skills of conflict resolution and
respect for the international order;
□ apply their intellectual and participatory skills in investigating issues related

to the affairs of their community and their nation;
□ develop awareness national policies and international relations

□ identify and explain the current global issues.
11.2 Meaning and Historical Development of International

Relations
International relations (IR) is a branch of political science, which studies foreign affairs
of and relations among states within the international system, including the roles of
states, Inter-Governmental Organizations (IGOs), Non-Governmental Organizations
(NGOs), and Multinational Corporations (MNCs). These are companies that operate in
more than one country)
The history of international relations is often traced back to the Peace treaty of
Westphalia which was, signed on October 24, 1648. The main participants were France
and Sweden and their opponents Spain and the Holy Roman Empire. By the terms of the
treaty, the sovereignty and independence of each state of the Holy Roman Empire was
fully recognized, making the Holy Roman emperor virtually powerless.
The peace treaty closed the Thirty Years' War and readjusted the religious and political
affairs of Europe. Thirty Years’ War is known in the history of Europe as series of
European conflicts lasting from 1618 to 1648, involving most of the countries of Western
Europe, and fought mainly in Germany. At first the struggle was primarily based on the
profound religious antagonism engendered among Germans by the events of the
Protestant Reformation. Religious animosity, especially among non-German adherents of
the contending Protestant and Roman Catholic factions, broadened the war. In 1648 the
194
war came to an end and the peace treaty was signed in the German cities of Münster and
Osnabrück, in Westphalia.
After this treaty the modern state system was developed ever before. Prior to this, the
European medieval organization of political authority was based on a vaguely
hierarchical religious order. Westphalia peace treaty instituted the notion of sovereignty,
which essentially meant that rulers, or sovereigns, would recognize no internal equals
within a defined territory, and no external superiors. Classical Greek and Roman
authority at times resembled the Westphalian system, but both lacked the notion of
sovereignty. Westphalia encouraged the rise of the nation-state and the institutionalization
of diplomacy and armies. This particular European system was exported to the Americas,
Africa, and Asia via colonialism and the "standards of civilization". The contemporary
international system is established on and facilitated by the advancement of science and
communication technology. Today, many of the foundations of the interstate system are
being challenged by changes in technology and international norms. The idea of
territorial integrity and a nation’s sovereignty—that is, it’s absolute authority over its own
internal matters—are being undermined. Neither ballistic missiles nor television signals
respect borders. Television, the mass media, telephones, and the Internet are erasing the
boundaries between nations, blending once-distinct cultures together and expanding
transnational connections. Mass communication is also drawing worldwide attention to
domestic issues that in the past were of little concern to other nations, such as human
rights, the status of women, environmental practices, and democracy. These may relate
violation sovereignty. Thanks to the development of science and technology, and the
appearance of new phenomenon (Globalization) the world nations interaction or relation
is now very intense. It is because of this reason that it was said the world was becoming a
village. In addition, the territories of nations are changing from time to time. Some
nations are becoming integrated into larger entities—for example, the European Union.
Others are fragmenting into smaller units, as did the Soviet Union and Ethiopia.
Since the 1970s the importance of economics in international relations has grown and the
study of international political economy has received increased attention. Scholars in this
field believe that the primary force driving the interaction between nations is economic,
not military. They focus on trade and economic relations among nations, especially the
195
political cooperation between nations to create and maintain international organizations
which benefit all nations involved, such as the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund. (Source: Microsoft Encarta Reference Library Encyclopedia, 2003,
Microsoft Corporation)
One is left with the horrible feeling now that war settles nothing; that
to win a war is as disastrous as to lose one.
Agatha Christie (1890 - 1976), Autobiography (1977)
Conflicts among nations are inevitable since their political and economic aims and
interests often diverge. Cooperation does not refer to the absence of conflict but to the
ability of nations to peacefully resolve their differences in a way that is acceptable to all
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World
War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
parties involved. When cooperation fails, conflicts often escalate into coercion and
ultimately war. As you know war costs so many things including human life. Still some
nations of the world find themselves in armed conflict or war. In the following sub-unit
you see ways of handling conflicts in a peaceful manner.
11.3 Contemporary Global Issues
The major issues and problems that confront the peoples and the world states at present
are related to political tension and armed conflicts, economic integration and
globalization, terrorism, legal and security issues.
11.3.1 Political tension and armed conflicts:
196
Globally, political tensions manifest themselves through ideological differences,
territorial disputes, trade imbalances, dispute over utilization of natural resources etc.
If political tensions are not properly managed, they could lead to conflicts and eventually
to violence or war. Therefore, it is essential to curb political tensions from maturing to
armed conflicts through proper mechanism of conflict management and resolution—
peaceful ways of resolving conflicts. Three peaceful ways of resolving conflicts are
identified: Mediation, Arbitration and Negotiation.
Our first and most pressing problem is how to do away with warfare as
a method of solving conflicts between national groups within a society
who have different views about how the society is to run.
Margaret Mead (1901 - 1978)
Arbitration is the process of resolving disputes between people or groups by referring

them to a third party, either agreed on by them or provided by law, that makes a judgment
(Arbitrator). In this case the third party passes decision which is expected to be binding
for the conflicting groups.
Negotiation is a process of reaching of agreement through discussion and compromise.

In this case there is no the third body that either passes decisions or that facilitates the
resolution of the dispute. It requires also the willingness of the conflicting parties
(Negotiators) to settle their disputes through discussion and compromise.
The third type of a peaceful way resolving conflicts is mediation. This way of settling
disputes is possible through the intervention by a third party (Mediator) between two
sides in a dispute is an attempt to help them reach an agreement. The task of the third
body is facilitating a favorable condition in which those that are in conflict would come
to agreement.
197
11.3.2 Globalization
Thanks to the contemporary world development in science and technology, conditions

have been created for international economic integration, rather than, isolation and semi-
independence among the world nations. This new phenomenon in the world affecting all
aspects of life is called globalization. Microsoft Encarta Reference Library Encyclopedia
gives a comprehensive definition of globalization and it defines that “Globalization is
[phenomenon] of integration and democratization of the world’s culture, economy, and
infrastructure through transnational investment, rapid proliferation of communication and
information technologies, and the impacts of free-market forces on local, regional and
national economies.” (Microsoft Encarta Reference Library [Encyclopedia], 2003
Globalization: Microsoft Corporation 1993-2002)
Thanks again to the advancement of science and technology speedy communication and
information exchange among the world people are now possible. Due to the appearance
of internet and satellite communication which are incredibly speedy means of
information exchange system, space diminishes. According to physics speed is distance
per time. From the relation among speed, distance (space) and time we can say that as
the speed is high the time required to link different areas becomes negligible and thereby
the distance between distant areas conceptually diminishes. Business people on different
continents now engage in electronic commerce (internet and communication satellite);
television allows people situated anywhere to observe the impact of terrible wars or
terrorist attack occurred far from the comfort of their living rooms; teleconference, a
conference or seminar held among people in different places by means of
telecommunications equipment, made the physical appearance of participants less
important. Using this technology seminars or conferences are organized in which
participants are located at disparate geographical locations. The Internet allows people to
communicate instantaneously with each other notwithstanding vast geographical
distances separating them. Nowadays sending messages around the world in a split
second becomes an easy task. This situation enables corporations to manage far-flung
operations and currency traders to make their trades anywhere, anytime. In 1848 in the
communist manifesto the German socialist theorist Karl Marx pointed out that the
198
historical development of capitalist production inevitably drove the bourgeoisie
(capitalists) to “nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, and establish connections
everywhere.” In Marx's account the international feature of industrial capitalism
constituted the most basic source of technologies resulting in the compression of space,
helping to pave the way for “intercourse in every direction, universal interdependence of
nations.” (Marx, 1979 [1848]: 476) Communications technology literally makes the
global corporation and global markets easy. People around the globe are more connected
to each other than ever before. The flow of information and money, at global level
became quicker than ever before. This is possible due to the existence of transnational
corporations here and there. Goods and services produced in one part of the world are
increasingly available in all parts of the world. International travel is more frequent.
International communication is commonplace. This phenomenon made the world a small
village (“Global village”).
Pros and cons of Globalization.
Nowadays globallization is becoming a debatable issue different of scholars. There are

two views about globalization: the first view is in favor of globalization and the other one
against it or it says that the negitive impact weighs more than its positive aspects. Let us
see the two views below.
According to globalization advocates, globalization makes more goods available to more

people, disseminates new technologies, and encourages a more efficient allocation of
resources among nations. In addition, supporters note that trade helps hold down inflation
and increase product quality around the world because imports create competition that
compels domestic industries to keep prices down while producing better goods and
services. Those who are in favor of this phenomenon are telling us that free trade
encourages the national or domestic industries that inevitably in competition with those
giant transnational corporations to produce good quality commodities. Thus,
globalization has a positive effect on the production of goods that have the highest or
finest standard. On top of this, they argued that globalization would promote international
trade that would lift living standards around the world. It favors the world nations in
199
different aspects: it facilitates the rapid flow of information from one corner of the world
to the other; it encourages the development of industries. The World Trade Organization
(WTO) director-general Michael Moore noted that increased trade was the best tool to
raise living standards in developing nations. Through trade, he explained, a country such
as South Korea has living standards that rival those of many wealthy nations. Thanks to
trade, it has moved from having an agricultural economy to being an industrial
powerhouse, producing automobiles, television sets, and other sophisticated products. It
brings about the rapid industrial development as the case in point is South Korea.
(Microsoft Encarta Reference Library, March 2000 article from Encarta Yearbook, New
York Times reporter Steven Greenhouse: The WTO and the Politics of Global Trade,
Microsoft Corporation, 2003.) Supporters also suggest that because globalization
produces an increased demand for free economic information, it breaks down
authoritarian political systems and spreads democracy.
On the other hand, there are those who are averse to globalization. Some scholars
criticize globalization because it impoverishes the developing nations while it enriches
the industrial nations ever before. Developing nations are expected to implement liberal
economy and democratize themselves, so as to get loans from IMF and World Bank. The
following article indicates how globalization suffered developing nations.
At the end of the 20th century many developing

countries, especially in Africa, still lacked a strong
industrial sector.
These countries continued to rely on money earned

from exports of cash crops and raw materials to buy
manufactured goods and service their debts. An
emphasis on the export of cash crops and raw materials
leads to increases in production. As transportation
became more efficient, countries began to compete to
sell the same goods and more goods and increased
competition drove down prices. This cycle perpetuated
poverty.
Facing an inability to attract further investment or pay

for imports, many debtor nations turned to the World
Bank and the IMF during the 1980s and 1990s for relief
in the form of extended credit and new loans. In
exchange for this relief, debtor countries had to present
200
a plan of reforms to the lending institutions. These
reforms often included privatization plans and
reductions in government expenditures. The measures
were intended to ensure that these countries could repay
their loans, but reforms were often painful.
(Microsoft Encarta Reference Library Encyclopidia article: Life in the Global

Marketplace, Microsoft Corporation, 1993-2002.)
Globalization has an impact on the sovereignty of nations. Opponents of globalization

argue that freedom from outside interference and the right to self-government of states
were violated by the globalization that brought about economic integrity and
interdependence. Governments themselves are joining regional trade groupings to give
themselves more size and power in a globalizing world. European nations have
submerged much of their national sovereignty in the European Union (EU), by far the
most evolved of these groupings. The EU nations are using a common currency, the euro.
in January 1999, and several others are expected to join. Over time, many analysts
believe the common currency will force EU nations to coordinate many other policies,
such as budgeting and taxation (see below). Analysist anticipated a single European
government and euro is widely viewed as a decisive step towards it. Despite growing
regional cooperation, national governments have seen globalization erode much of their
ability to control their own economies as traders and corporations move beyond the reach
of national law. For the world's market-oriented democracies, erosion of national
sovereignty means a reduction in the power of the ordinary citizen's ability to influence
events through the vote; hence, they concluded that it had the potential to erode
democracy.
201
Nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political and moral
questions of our time; the need for mankind to overcome
oppression and violence without resorting to oppression
and violence. Mankind must evolve for all human conflict a
method which rejects revenge, aggression, and retaliation.
The foundation of such a method is love.
Martin Luther King Jr. (1929 - 1968), December 11, 1964
11.3.3 Terrorism.
One of the problems that the present world faces is terrorism. “Terrorism”, defines
dictionary, “is violence or the threat of violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and
assassination, carried out for political purposes” (Microsoft Encarta Dictionary, 2003).
Terrorism results in violation of the basic human rights; such as the right to liberty
(kidnapping), the right to life. In the present world terrorism is a great threat of the world
that required the collaborative effort of world nations. Regarding this the UN Secretary-
General Kofi Annan pointed out that
“Terrorism is a global threat with global effects; ... its
consequences affect every aspect of the United Nations agenda –
from development to peace to human rights and the rule of law. …
By its very nature, terrorism is an assault on the fundamental
principles of law, order, human rights, and the peaceful settlement
of disputes upon which the United Nations is established. … The
United Nations has an indispensable role to play in providing the
legal and organizational framework within which the international
campaign against terrorism can unfold” (The UN office on Drugs
and Crime press release: Global Programme against Terrorism on
internet on Monday, 24 May 2004).
Terrorism often targets innocent civilians in order to create an atmosphere of fear,

intimidation, and insecurity. Some terrorists deliberately direct attacks against large
numbers of ordinary citizens who simply happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong
time. Terrorism disturbs the peaceful living condition of civilians. It prefers war, threat or
violence to round table discussion or peaceful ways of resolving conflicts that has been
discussed above. Terrorists attempt to introduce sudden feeling of fear or anxiety,
especially among the victims or their target country. Terrorism is therefore designed to
have psychological effects that reach far beyond its impact on the immediate victims or
202
object of an attack. Terrorists mean to frighten and thereby intimidate a wider audience,
such as a rival ethnic or religious group, an entire country and its political leadership, or
the international community as a whole.
A terrorist act is a political act “because it involves the acquisition and use of power for
the purpose of forcing others to submit, or agree, to terrorist demands. A terrorist attack,
by generating publicity and focusing attention on the organization behind the attack, is
designed to create this power. It also fosters an environment of fear and intimidation that
the terrorists can manipulate. As a result terrorism’s success is best measured by its
ability to attract attention to the terrorists and their cause and by the psychological impact
it exerts over a nation and its citizens.” (Microsoft Encarta Reference Library, 2003
Encyclopedia article on Terrorism Microsoft Corporation. 1993-2002)
From this we can say that terrorism tries to replace peace with insecurity, and absence of
law and order. It endangers the peaceful living situation of the people of the state at
which terrorism targets. It causes enormous amount of property destruction, moreover
loss of human life which is priceless. It is the very enemy of peace, security, stability. It
also hinders the exercise of basic human rights, thereby the development of democracy.
11.3.4 Legal and Security Issues
Among the legal issues that arise between states of the world are those related with
genocide, drug trafficking, international robbery, violation and abuse of human rights etc.
Border disputes, nuclear proliferation and building of war weapons, nuclear waste
disposal, the problem of the equitable use of international waters and natural resources
etc. are referred as security issues.
The relations among states are basically regulated by International Law. International
Law is a body of principles and rules of conduct that nations regard as binding upon them
and, therefore, are expected to and usually do observe in their relations with one another.
It is a law of the international community. The International Court of Justice, the UN
judiciary organ is responsible to interpret and execute this International Law.
203
Whenever legal or security disputes arise between states it is expected that the parties to
the dispute should resolve their differences with mutual comprehension or understanding.
If they fail to come up with a solution they possibly present their cases for arbitration to
the International Court of Justice. (see below for further explanation about the
International Court of Justice)
11.4 The principles and objectives of the International Organizations
International relation is the method created to deal with the above mentioned current
global issues and problems. So as to deal their relations or problems world states
establish international or regional organizations.
The main conditions for the establishment of the regional or international institutions are:
□ due to the division of the world in to different states as independent political units.
□ due to the necessity of relations interdependence between the states.
□ because states must develop an awareness of the problem which arise out of their
coexistence
□ states must also recognize the need for creation of systematic methods
for regulating their relations with each other.
The interdependence of nations in the modern world means that no single nation can
dictate the outcome of international conflicts. Nor can private groups and individuals rely
on national governments to solve major world problems. Therefore, both governments
and individuals will continue to turn to the International Organizations as an important
way to address these problems and to protect their own interests.
The following international and regional organizations are the results of development in
the above areas.
11.5 The Major International Organizations
11.5.1 The United Nations Organization (UNO)
In 1945, representatives of 50 countries met in San Francisco at the United Nations

Conference on International Organization to draw up the United Nations Charter. The
204
Organization officially came into existence on 24 October 1945, when the Charter had
been ratified by the five veto powers: China, France, the previous Soviet Union, the
United Kingdom, the United States and a majority of other signatories. United Nations
Day is celebrated on 24 October. The charter is the constituting instrument of the United
Nations, setting out the rights and obligations of Member States, and establishing the
Organization's organs and procedures.
Purposes
The purposes of the United Nations, as set forth in the Charter one are to maintain
international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to
cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems
and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; and to be a centre
for harmonizing the actions of nations in attaining these ends.
Structure
The six principal organs of the United Nations are the: General Assembly, Security
Council, Secretariat, Economic and Social Council, Trusteeship Council and International
Court of Justice. In addition to these the United Nations has 15 agencies and several
programs and bodies that assist the organization to perform its intended tasks properly.
It is by universal misunderstanding that all agree. For if, by ill luck,

people understood each other, they would never agree.
Charles Baudelaire (1821 - 1867)
The General Assembly
205
The General Assembly is the main deliberative organ of the United Nations. It is
composed of representatives of all Member States, each of which has one vote. Decisions
on important questions, such as those on peace and security, admission of new Members
and budgetary matters, require a two-thirds majority. Decisions on other questions are
reached by a simple majority.
FUNCTIONS AND POWERS
Under the Charter 4, article 10 of the UN the functions and powers of the General
Assembly include:
● to consider and make recommendations on the principles of cooperation in the
maintenance of international peace and security, including the principles governing
disarmament and arms regulation;
● to discuss any question relating to international peace and security and, except where
a dispute or situation is being discussed by the Security Council, to make
recommendations on it;
● to discuss and, with the same exception, make recommendations on any question
within the scope of the Charter or affecting the powers and functions of any organ of the
United Nations; to initiate studies and make recommendations to promote international
political cooperation, the development and codification of international law, the
realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, and international
collaboration in economic, social, cultural, educational and health fields;
● to make recommendations for the peaceful settlement of any situation, regardless of
origin, which might impair friendly relations among nations;
● to receive and consider reports from the Security Council and other United Nations
organs;
● to consider and approve the United Nations budget and to apportion the
contributions among Members;
● to elect the non-permanent members of the Security Council, the members of the
Economic and Social Council and those members of the Trusteeship Council that are
elected;
206
● to elect jointly with the Security Council the Judges of the International Court of
Justice; and, on the recommendation of the Security Council, to appoint the Secretary-
General.
The Security Council
The Security Council is the most powerful body in the UN. It has primary responsibility,
(under the Charter, article 23) for the maintenance of international peace and security and
for restoring peace when conflicts arise. The same Chapter and article determined that the
Security Council would consist of fifteen Members of the United Nations. Its decisions
are binding on all UN members. The Security Council has the power to define what is a
threat to security, to determine how the UN should respond, and to enforce its decisions
by ordering UN members to take certain actions. For example, the Council may impose
economic sanctions, such as halting trade with a country it considers an aggressor.
The Council convenes any time there is a threat to peace. A representative from each
member country who sits on the Council must be available at all times so that the Council
can meet at a moment’s notice. The Security Council also frequently meets at the request
of a UN member—often a nation with a grievance about another nation’s actions.
Out of the 15 members of the Security Council the five “great powers” hold permanent
seats. The Assembly elects the other ten members for two-year terms. The five permanent
members—the United States, Britain, France, Russia (formerly the Soviet Union), and
China—have the most power. These nations were the winning powers at the end of World
War II, and they still represent the bulk of the world’s military might. Decisions of the
Council require nine votes. But any one of the permanent members can veto an important
decision. This authority is known as the veto right of the great powers. As a result, the
Council is effective only when its permanent members can reach a consensus. This
created problems during the Cold War, the post-1945 struggle between the United States
and Soviet Union that ended when the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. The period of
Cold War was a situation in which the council has exhibited no further progress to solve
the dispute between United States and Soviet Union, because the two ideologically
antagonistic states were unwilling to change their positions or to compromise In the
207
1990s, increased cooperation between the United States and Russia has enabled the
council to become more effective.
The Council has a variety of ways it can try to resolve conflicts between countries.
Usually the Council’s first step is to encourage the countries to settle their disagreements
without violence. The Council can mediate a dispute or recommend guidelines for a
settlement. It can send peacekeeping troops into a distressed area. If war breaks out, the
Council can call for a ceasefire. It can enforce its decisions by imposing economic
sanctions on a country, or through joint military action.
Since the 1990s, there has been growing controversy over which countries should have
permanent seats on the Council. Some nations believe that other countries beside the
original five should be included. For example, Japan and Germany are powerful countries
that pay large membership dues and make substantial contributions to the UN, yet they do
not have permanent seats. There is no easy solution to this problem. Political scientists
argue that adding more permanent members would create its own set of complications,
including how to decide which countries get a seat and which do not. For example, if
Germany joined, three of the permanent members would be European, giving that region
an unfair advantage. Several proposals for addressing this problem have been considered,
including adding Germany and Japan as permanent members, waiving the veto power of
the permanent members, and limiting Council membership to one year. Thus far, none of
the proposals have been adopted, partly because the present structure works well for the
five permanent members and they can veto any changes to it.
The Security Council
It has primary responsibility, under the Charter 5, article 23 for the maintenance of
international peace and security. The same Chapter and article determined that the
Security Council would consist of fifteen Members of the United Nations. The Republic
of China, France, the previous Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America would be
permanent members of the Security Council. Ten other Members of the United Nations
208
would be elected by the General Assembly to be non-permanent members of the Security
Council,
When a complaint concerning a threat to peace is brought before it, the Council's first
action is usually to recommend to the parties to try to reach agreement by peaceful
means. Article 33, sub-article 1 states the pacific settlement of disputes in the following
manner.
“The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the
maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a
solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial
settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful
means of their own choice.”
In some cases, the Council itself undertakes investigation and mediation. It may appoint
special representatives or request the Secretary-General to do so or to use his good
offices. It may set forth principles for a peaceful settlement.
Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise

whenever you can. As a peacemaker the lawyer has superior
opportunity of being a good man. There will still be business
enough.
Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865)

When a dispute leads to fighting, the Council's first concern is to bring it to an end as
soon as possible. On many occasions, the Council has issued cease-fire directives which
have been instrumental in preventing wider hostilities. It also sends United Nations
peace-keeping forces to help reduce tensions in troubled areas keep opposing forces apart
and create conditions of calm in which peaceful settlements may be sought. The Council
may decide on enforcement measures, economic sanctions (such as trade embargoes) or
collective military action.
A Member State against which preventive or enforcement action has been taken by the
Security Council may be suspended from the exercise of the rights and privileges of
209
membership by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council. A
Member State which has persistently violated the principles of the Charter may be
expelled from the United Nations by the Assembly on the Council's recommendation.
Under the Charter, the functions and powers of the Security Council
are:
● to maintain international peace and security in accordance with the principles and
purposes of the United Nations;
● to investigate any dispute or situation which might lead to international friction;
● to recommend methods of adjusting such disputes or the terms of settlement;
● to formulate plans for the establishment of a system to regulate armaments;
● to determine the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression and to
recommend what action should be taken;
● to call on Members to apply economic sanctions and other measures not involving
the use of force to prevent or stop aggression;
● to take military action against an aggressor;
● to recommend the admission of new Members;
● to exercise the trusteeship functions of the United Nations in "strategic areas";
● to recommend to the General Assembly the appointment of the Secretary-General
and, together with the Assembly, to elect the Judges of the International Court of
Justice.
The Secretariat
The Secretariat is the UN’s executive branch. It oversees the administration of the UN’s
programs and policies and carries out day-to-day operations. This branch is headed by the
secretary general, who acts as the UN’s spokesperson.
The UN’s Secretariat staff includes administrators, experts on technical issues such as
environmental protection, and economic advisors working on various programs and
210
projects in the member countries. These workers have a variety of responsibilities, such
as overseeing the operations of peacekeeping missions, preparing studies on world issues,
organizing international conferences, and surveying economic and social trends. The
largest concentration of staff outside New York City is in Geneva, Switzerland, where
several UN programs and agencies have headquarters.
One purpose of the Secretariat is to develop an international civil service of diplomats

and bureaucrats whose loyalties are not tied to any one country. The staff answers only to
the UN and takes an oath not to obey any outside authority. The UN charter calls on its
members to respect the independence and international character of the staff. However,
the UN has had mixed success following through on this ideal. The secretary general is
generally seen as an independent diplomat. But member nations still compete to place
their citizens in control of staffs that administer important UN programs.
In the early 1990s the UN bureaucracy came under increasing criticism for inefficiency
and even corruption. Much of this criticism came from the United States, which believed
it was bearing an unfair share of the costs of supporting the UN. By the mid-1990s, these
criticisms had led to a series of reforms, including budget and staff reductions.
The secretary general
The secretary general is a powerful public figure who oversees the daily operations of the
UN and plays a major role in setting the organization’s agenda in international security
affairs. The secretary general under Article 99 of the charter can bring to the Security
Council any matter that might threaten world peace. The secretary general has the
authority to serve as a neutral mediator in international conflicts and to bring hostile
parties together to negotiate. The secretary general’s personal attention to a problem can
often help bring about a resolution. For example, in the 1990s Secretary General Boutros
Boutros-Ghali personally mediated conflicts in Somalia, the former Yugoslavia, and
elsewhere.
The Economic and Social Council
211
The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) works under the authority of the General
Assembly to coordinate the economic and social work of the UN. ECOSOC has 54
member countries elected by the General Assembly for overlapping three-year terms.
Seats on the Council are allotted based on geographical representation with fourteen
allocated to African States, eleven to Asian States, six to Eastern European States, ten to
Latin American and Caribbean States, and thirteen to Western European and other States.
The Economic and Social Council coordinates the work of the 14 UN specialized
agencies, 10 functional commissions and five regional commissions; receives reports
from 11 UN funds and programs); and issues policy recommendations to the UN system
and to Member States. The agencies operate independently but work with other programs
in the UN. Those programs include the World Health Organization (WHO), the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the International
Labor Organization (ILO), and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
Under the UN Charter ECOSOC is responsible for promoting higher standards of living,
full employment, and economic and social progress; identifying solutions to international
economic, social and health problems; facilitating international cultural and educational
cooperation; and encouraging universal respect for human rights and fundamental
freedoms. Article 62 of the Charter lists the following powers and functions of the
council.
1. The Economic and Social Council may make or initiate studies and reports with
respect to international economic, social, cultural, educational, health, and related matters
and may make recommendations with respect to any such matters to the General
Assembly, to the Members of the United Nations, and to the specialized agencies
concerned.
2. It may make recommendations for the purpose of promoting respect for, and
observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all.
3. It may prepare draft conventions for submission to the General Assembly, with respect
to matters falling within its competence.
4. It may call, in accordance with the rules prescribed by the United Nations,
international conferences on matters falling within its competence.
212
In carrying out its mandate, ECOSOC consults with academics, business sector
representatives and more than 2,100 registered non-governmental organizations. The
Council holds a four-week substantive session each July, alternating between New York
and Geneva. The session includes a high-level segment, at which national cabinet
ministers and chiefs of international agencies and other high officials focus their attention
on a selected theme of global significance. This year, the high-level segment will cover
"Resources mobilization and enabling environment for poverty eradication in the context
of the implementation of the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for
the Decade 2001-2010". The Council will adopt a Ministerial Declaration, providing
policy guidance and recommendations for action.
The Trusteeship Council
In setting up an International Trusteeship System, the Charter established the Trusteeship

Council as one of the main organs of the United Nations and assigned to it the task of
supervising the administration of Trust Territories placed under the Trusteeship System.
Trusteeship System refers to the administration of a country that is not self-governing by
a foreign country under terms laid down by the United Nations
Major goals of the System were to promote the advancement of the inhabitants of Trust
Territories and their progressive development towards self-government or independence.
The Trusteeship Council is made up of the five permanent members of the Security
Council --China, France, Russian Federation, United Kingdom and United States.
The aims of the Trusteeship System have been fulfilled to such an extent that all Trust
Territories have attained self-government or independence, either as separate States or by
joining neighboring independent countries. For example, Eritrea between the years was
trust territory under the administration of Britain (1942-1952) until it was unified with
Ethiopia in 1952.
Under the Charter, the Trusteeship Council is authorized to examine and discuss reports
from the Administering Authority on the political, economic, social and educational
advancement of the peoples of Trust Territories and, in consultation with the
213
Administering Authority, to examine petitions from and undertake periodic and other
special missions to Trust Territories.
The International Court of Justice
The International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, is the principal
judicial organ of the United Nations. Its seat is at the Peace Palace in The Hague
(Netherlands). It began work in 1946, when it replaced the Permanent Court of
International Justice which had functioned in the Peace Palace since 1922(in the period of
League of Nations). It operates under a Statute largely similar to that of its predecessor,
which is an integral part of the Charter of the United Nations.
Functions of the Court
The Court has a dual role: to settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes
submitted to it by States, and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by
duly authorized international organs and agencies.
Composition
The Court is composed of 15 judges elected to nine-year terms of office by the

United Nations General Assembly and Security Council sitting independently of each
other. It may not include more than one judge of any nationality. Elections are held every
three years for one-third of the seats, and retiring judges may be re-elected. The Members
of the Court do not represent their governments but are independent magistrates.
The judges must possess the qualifications required in their respective countries for
appointment to the highest judicial offices, or be jurists of recognized competence in
international law. The composition of the Court has also to reflect the main forms of
civilization and the principal legal systems of the world. When the Court does not include
214
a judge possessing the nationality of a State party to a case that State may appoint
a person to sit as a judge ad hoc for the purpose of the case.
AFRICAN UNION
Organization of African Unity (OAU) that preceded African Union, established in 1963 at
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, by 37 independent African nations to promote unity and
development; defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of members; eradicate all
forms of colonialism; promote international cooperation; and coordinate members'
economic, diplomatic, educational, health, welfare, scientific, and defense policies. The
OAU was, at the time, the most significant result of Pan-Africanism which anticipated
the establishment of the United States of Africa. The organization mediated several
border and internal disputes and was instrumental in bringing about majority rule and the
end of apartheid in South Africa, which in 1994 became the 53rd nation to be admitted to
the organization. In 1997, OAU members established the African Economic Community
(AEC), envisioned as an African common market; the AEC signed an agreement with
regional African economic groupings that was intended to lead to harmonization of
policies of those common markets.
A more radical expansion and transformation of the OAU was adopted at Lome, Togo, in
2000, in the form of the Constitutive Act of the African Union (AU). The AU is a
successor organization to the OAU with greater powers to promote African economic,
social, and political integration, and a stronger commitment to democratic principles. The
AU was first proposed in 1999 by Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi as a more effective
institution for increasing prosperity throughout the region. In general, it is hoped that the
new AU will have the authority and the ability to achieve true economic and political
integration among its member states by promoting democratic values, defending human
rights and providing a forum for internal and regional conflict. The 53 African states who
composed the OAU are now members of the new inter-governmental organization, the
AU, modeled after the European Union (EU). It is headquartered in Ethiopia.
The Vision of the AU
215
● The AU is Africa’s premier institution and principal organization for the promotion
of accelerated socio-economic integration of the continent, which will lead to greater
unity and solidarity between African countries and peoples.
● The AU is based on the common vision of a united and strong Africa and on the need
to build a partnership between governments and all segments of civil society, in particular
women, youth and the private sector, in order to strengthen solidarity and cohesion
amongst the peoples of Africa.
● As a continental organization it focuses on the promotion of peace, security and
stability on the continent as a prerequisite for the implementation of the development and
integration agenda of the Union.
The Objectives of the AU
● To achieve greater unity and solidarity between the African countries and the peoples
of Africa;
● To defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of its Member States;
● To accelerate the political and socio-economic integration of the continent;
● To promote and defend African common positions on issues of interest to the
continent and its peoples;
● To encourage international cooperation, taking due account of the Charter of the
United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
● To promote peace, security, and stability on the continent;
● To promote democratic principles and institutions, popular participation and good
governance;
● To promote and protect human and peoples' rights in accordance with the African
Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and other relevant human rights instruments;
● To establish the necessary conditions which enable the continent to play its rightful
role in the global economy and in international negotiations;
● To promote sustainable development at the economic, social and cultural levels as
well as the integration of African economies;
● To promote co-operation in all fields of human activity to raise the living standards of
216
African peoples;
● To coordinate and harmonize the policies between the existing and future Regional
Economic Communities for the gradual attainment of the objectives of the Union;
● To advance the development of the continent by promoting research in all fields, in
particular in science and technology;
● To work with relevant international partners in the eradication of preventable diseases
and the promotion of good health on the continent.
The Organs of the AU

The Assembly
"Assembly" means the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Union.
1. The Assembly shall be composed of Heads of States and Government or their duly
accredited representatives.
2. The Assembly shall be the supreme organ of the Union.
3. The Assembly shall meet at least once a year in ordinary session. At the request of any
Member State and on approval by a two-thirds majority of the Member States, the
Assembly shall meet in extraordinary session.
4. The Office of the Chairman of the Assembly shall be held for a period of one year by a
Head of State or Government elected after consultations among the Member States
Powers and Functions of the Assembly
1. The functions of the Assembly shall be to:

(a) determine the common policies of the Union;
(b) receive, consider and take decisions on reports and recommendations from the other
organs of the Union;
(c) consider requests for Membership of the Union;
(d) establish any organ of the Union;
(e) monitor the implementation of policies and decisions of the Union as well ensure
compliance by all Member States;
217
(f) adopt the budget of the Union;
(g) give directives to the Executive Council on the management of conflicts, war and
other emergency situations and the restoration of peace;
(h) appoint and terminate the appointment of the judges of the Court of Justice;
(i) appoint the Chairman of the Commission and his or her deputy or deputies and
Commissioners of the Commission and determine their functions and terms of office.
2. The Assembly may delegate any of its powers and functions to any organ of the Union.
Decisions of the Assembly
1. The Assembly shall take its decisions by consensus or, failing which, by a two-thirds
majority of the Member States of the Union. However, procedural matters, including the
question of whether a matter is one of procedure or not, shall be decided by a simple
majority.
2. Two-thirds of the total membership of the Union shall form a quorum at any meeting
of the Assembly.
The Executive Council

"Executive Council" means the Executive Council of Ministers of the Union. It
iscomposed of Ministers or Authorities designated by the Governments of Members
States. The Executive Council is responsible to the Assembly.
1. The Executive Council shall be composed of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs or such
other Ministers or Authorities as are designated by the Governments of Member States.
2. The Executive Council shall meet at least twice a year in ordinary session. It shall also
meet in an extra-ordinary session at the request of any Member State and upon approval
by two-thirds of all Member States.
First keep the peace within yourself, then you can also bring peace to
others.
Thomas a Kempis (1380 - 1471), 1420
218
Decisions of the Executive Council
1. The Executive Council shall take its decisions by consensus or, failing which, by a
two-thirds majority of the Member States. However, procedural matters, including the
question of whether a matter is one of procedure or not, shall be decided by a simple
majority.
2. Two-thirds of the total membership of the Union shall form a quorum at any meeting
of the Executive Council
The Commission
1."The Commission" means the Secretariat of the Union. 1. There shall be established a
Commission of the Union, which shall be the Secretariat of the Union.
2. The Commission shall be composed of the Chairperson, his or her deputy or deputies
and the Commissioners. They shall be assisted by the necessary staff for the smooth
functioning of the Commission.
3. The structure, functions and regulations of the Commission shall be determined by the
Assembly
The Permanent Representatives' Committee
Composed of Permanent Representatives of Member States accredited to the Union. The
Permanent Representatives Committee is charged with the responsibility of preparing the
work of the Executive Council.
Peace and Security Council (PSC)
By decision AHG/Dec 160 (xxxvii) of the Summit of Lusaka, July 2001, a decision was
made for the creation within the African Union of the Peace and Security Council. The
Protocol establishing the PSC is in the process of ratification
219
Peace is not a relationship of nations. It is a condition of mind brought
about by a serenity of soul. Peace is not merely the absence of war. It
is also a state of mind. Lasting peace can come only to peaceful
people.
Jawaharlal Nehru (1889 - 1964)
Pan-African Parliament.
A Pan-African Parliament and organ to ensure the full participation of African peoples in
governance, development and economic integration of the Continent. The protocol
relating to the composition, powers, functions and organization of the Pan-African
Parliament has been signed by Member States and is in the process of ratification. It was
in this year, 2004 that the pan-African Parliament was established.
The Economic, Social and Cultural Council (ECOSOCC)
The Economic, Social and Cultural Council, an advisory organ composed of different
social and professional groups of the Member States of the Union. The statutes
determining the functions, powers, composition and organization of the Economic, Social
and Cultural Council have been prepared and will be submitted to Maputo Summit.
Peace has never come from dropping bombs. Real peace comes from
enlightenment and educating people to behave more in a divine
manner.
Carlos Santana, Associated Press interview, September 1, 2004
220
The Court of Justice
A Court of Justice of the Union shall be established. The statutes defining the
composition and functions of the Court of Justice have been prepared and will be
submitted to the Assembly in Maputo.
The Specialized Technical Committees

The following Specialized Technical Committees are meant to address sartorial issues
and are at Ministerial Level:
The Committee on Rural Economy and Agricultural Matters;
The Committee on Monetary and Financial Affairs;
The Committee on Trade, Customs and Immigration Matters;
The Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, Energy, Natural Resources and
Environment;
The Committee on Transport, Communications and Tourism;
The Committee on Health, Labor and Social Affairs; and
The Committee on Education, Culture and Human Resources.
The Financial Institutions
The African Central bank
The African Monetary Fund
The African Investment Bank
EUROPIAN UNION
Origins
The original impetus for the founding of (what was later to become) the European Union
was the desire to rebuild Europe after the disastrous events of World War II, and to
prevent Europe from ever again falling in disaster.
History
The body was originally known as the European Economic Community (informally
called the Common Market in the UK), this later changed to the European Community
221
and then to the European Union. The EU has evolved from a trade body into an economic
and political partnership.
Member States
At present, the European Union comprises 15 member states. In 1950 the six founding
members were:
France Italy West Germany
Belgium Netherlands Luxemburg
Nine further states have joined in successive waves of enlargement:

in 1973: Ireland the United Kingdom and Denmark and
in 1981:Greece
in 1987Spain and Portugal in 1995: Finland, Sweden and Austria
EU territories outside Europe
France: the four overseas departments d'outre-mer (DOM) of French Guiana in South
America, Guadeloupe and Martinique in the Caribbean Sea, and La Reunion in the Indian
Ocean., Spain: Canary Islands in the Atlantic Ocean, Ceuta and Melilla, in Africa.
Portugal: Azores and Madeira in the Atlantic Ocean.
France: French Polynesia, Wallis and Futuna, New Caledonia, Saint Pierre and Miquelon,
Mayotte and uninhabited territories...
Denmark: Greenland, FaroeIsland..
Extension of the EU
The total area of the European Union is 3,235,000 km2 Were it a country, it would be the
eighth largest in the world by area. The number of EU citizens (all EU member State
citizens are EU citizens under the terms of the Maastricht treaty) is approximately 379
million as of October 2001. In population size this is the third largest in the world after
China and India.
Economic Status
222
The EU, considered as a unit, has the second largest economy in the world, with a 2002
GDP of 8,447 billion euro, second only to that of the United States (9,239 billion euro,
2002 equivalent). The EU economy is expected to grow further over the next decade as
more countries join the union - although the new States are usually poorer than the EU
average, and hence GDP per capita over the whole Union will fall over the short-term.
Main Policies
Free Trade of goods and services among member states A common external custom tariff,
and a common position in international trade negotiations
Removal of border controls between its member states (excluding the UK and Ireland,
which have derogations)
Freedom for citizens of its member states to live and work anywhere within the EU,
provided they can support themselves (also extended to the other EEA states).
Freedom for its citizens to vote in local government and European Parliament elections in
any member state
Free movement of capital between member states (and other EEA states).
Harmonization of government regulations, corporations law and trademark registrations
A single currency, the Euro (excluding the UK, Sweden and Denmark, which have
derogations).These three states still use their own monetary unit.
A large amount of environmental policy co-ordination throughout the Union.
A Common Agricultural Policy and a Common Fisheries Policy.
Co-operation in criminal matters, including sharing of intelligence (through EUROPOL),
agreement on common definition of criminal offences .A Common foreign policy as a
future objective, however this has some way to go before being realized. A Common
security policy as an objective, including the creation of a 60,000-member Rapid
Reaction Force for peacekeeping purposes, an EU military staff and an EU satellite enter
(for intelligence purposes)
Common policy on asylum and immigration
Common system of indirect taxation, the VAT, as well as common customs duties and
excises on various products
223
Funding for the development of disadvantaged regions (structural and cohesion funds)
Funding for programmes in candidate countries and other Eastern European countries, as
well as aid to many developing countries
Funding for research
As the deadline for EMU approached, misgivings arose from many quarters that the
economic climate was not right, that levels of economic performance across the countries
were still too disparate, and that several countries had not strictly met the Maastricht
criteria. However, the EU officially agreed in May 1998 to adopt a single European
currency—the euro—for 11 of the 15 member countries beginning on January 1, 1999.
This agreement also created the European Central Bank (ECB) to oversee the new
currency and to take charge of the monetary policies of the EU. The countries that
adopted the euro were Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy,
Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain. Greece adopted the euro in January
2001, becoming the 12th member of the euro zone.
The United Kingdom, Sweden, and Denmark met the economic criteria to join in the
adoption of the euro but decided not to participate. Greece had hoped to be included in
the first wave of countries to adopt the euro but did not meet the criteria. On January 1,
1999, the 11 nations began to use the euro for electronic money transfers and for
accounting purposes, while continuing to use their individual currencies for other uses. In
2002 the ECB will begin issuing euro coins and banknotes. At that point the currency of
the countries that have adopted the euro will cease to be legal tender.
STRUCTURE OF THE EU
The members of the EU cooperate in three areas, often referred to as pillars. At the heart
of this system is the EC pillar with its supranational functions and its governing
institutions. The EC pillar is flanked by two pillars based on intergovernmental
cooperation: Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Justice and Home Affairs
(JHA). These two pillars are a result of the Maastricht agreement to develop closer
cooperation in these areas. However, because the members were unwilling to cede
authority to supranational institutions, policy decisions in these pillars are made by
224
unanimous cooperation between members and cannot be enforced. For the most part, the
governing institutions of the EC pillar have little or no input in the other two.
The CFSP and JHA pillars are based entirely on intergovernmental cooperation, and
decisions have to be made unanimously. CFSP is a forum for foreign policy discussions,
common declarations, and common actions that work toward developing a security and
defense policy. It has successfully developed positions on a range of issues and has
established some common policy actions; however, the CFSP has failed to agree on a
common security and defense. Some countries, led by France, want an integrated
European military force, while others, especially the United Kingdom, insist that United
States involvement via the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is vital for
European security.
This second argument was reinforced when the EU failed to resolve the Yugoslavian
crisis that began in 1991. Between 1991 and 1992 the Yugoslav republics of Slovenia,
Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Macedonia declared independence, leaving a
Yugoslavia that consisted only of the republics of Serbia and Montenegro. The Croatian
and Bosnian secessions were strongly opposed by Serbia, and violent conflict resulted
between ethnic Bosnian, Croat, and Serb populations. The EU attempted to find a
settlement for these conflicts. However, these efforts were ineffective because EU
members could not agree on how they should be involved, and they feared being dragged
into military intervention. The Yugoslav crisis underlined the difficulties in achieving a
common foreign policy for the EU. Effective international intervention in Yugoslavia
ultimately came only with U.S. and NATO involvement, acting under the auspices of the
United Nations. (Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia 2003. ar1993-2001 Microsoft
Corporation.)
The EC pillar contains all the governing institutions of the EU. The major organs of the
EU are the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, the European
Parliament, the European Court of Justice, and the Court of Auditors. In addition, there
are many smaller bodies in the EU, such as the Economic and Social Committee, and the
Committee of the Regions.
225
European Commission
The European Commission is the highest administrative body in the EU. Unlike the
European Council, which oversees all three pillars of the EU, the commission
concentrates almost solely on the EC pillar. It initiates, implements, and supervises
policy. It is also responsible for the general financial management of the EU and for
ensuring that member states adhere to EU decisions. The commission is meant to be the
engine of integration, and it spearheaded the preparations for the single market and the
moves toward establishing the euro.
Currently there are 20 commissioners, who are appointed by the member governments
and are supported by a large administrative staff. The United Kingdom, France, Germany,
Italy, and Spain each appoint two commissioners; the other countries appoint one each.
The policy of each member state selecting a commissioner has become an issue with the
possibility that the EU will become larger during the next decade. If each country in an
enlarged EU were allowed to appoint at least one commissioner, the commission would
be much larger, making it too unwieldy to be an effective executive and decision-making
authority. In addition, the fact that the commission is appointed by member governments
and not elected by the people has raised questions about how much power it should be
allowed to exercise. The lack of democratic accountability has become a more important
issue with the expansion of EU control into different policy areas and the intention to
admit more countries into the EU.
Council of the European Union
The Council of the European Union (formerly called the Council of Ministers) represents
national governments. It is the primary decision-making authority of the EU and is the
most important and powerful EU body. Although its name is similar to that of the
European Council, the Council of the European Union’s powers are essentially limited to
the EC pillar, whereas the European Council oversees all three pillars of EU cooperation.
226
When the Council of the European Union meets, 15 government ministers, one from each
member state, are present. However, the minister for each state is not the same for every
meeting. Each member state sends its government minister who is most familiar with the
topic at hand. For example, a council of 15 defense ministers might discuss foreign
policy, whereas a council of 15 agriculture ministers would meet to discuss crop prices.
The Council of the European Union adopts proposals and issues instructions to the
European Commission. Paradoxically, the council is expected to further EU integration
while at the same time protecting the interests of the member states—two goals that are
not always compatible. This contradiction will probably become more difficult to
reconcile as the EU continues to expand.
Decision making in the council is complex. A few minor questions can be decided by a
simple majority. Many issues, however, require what is called qualified majority voting,
or QMV. In QMV each country has an indivisible bloc of votes roughly proportional to
its population. It takes two-thirds of the total number of votes to make a qualified
majority. QMV was introduced in some areas to replace the need for a unanimous vote.
This has made the decision-making process faster and easier as it prevents any one state
from exercising a veto. QMV was extended to more areas by the Single European Act.
Many important decisions, however, still require unanimous support.
The European Parliament
The European Parliament (EP) is made up of 626 members who are directly elected by
the citizens of the EU. Direct elections to the EP were implemented in 1979. Before that
time, members were appointed by the legislatures of the member governments. The
European Parliament was originally designed merely as an advisory body; however, its
right to participate in EU decision making was extended by the later treaties. It must be
consulted about matters relating to the EU budget, which it can reject; it can remove the
European Commission as a body through a vote of no confidence; and it can veto the
accession of member states. The European Parliament was originally designed merely as
an advisory body. The European Parliament’s influence is essentially negative: It can
227
block but rarely initiate legislation, its consultative opinions can be ignored, and it has no
power over the Council of the European Union. Its effectiveness is limited by two
structural problems: It conducts its business in 11 official languages, with consequent
huge translation costs, and it is nomadic, using three sites in different countries for its
meetings. Unless changes are made, these weaknesses will most likely intensify as the
union grows larger. At the same time, there have been frequent calls for expanding the
power of the European Parliament, which would increase the democratic accountability
of the EU. The weaknesses of the European Parliament can be remedied, however, only
by the national governments.
European Court of Justice (ECJ)
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) is the judicial arm of the EU. Each member country
appoints one judge to the court. The ECJ is responsible for the law that the EU establishes
for itself and its member states. It also ensures that other EU institutions and the member
states conform to the provisions of EU treaties and legislation. The court has no direct
links with national courts and no control over how they apply and interpret national law,
but it has established that EU law supersedes national law.
Historically, the ECJ has declared both for and against EU institutions and member states.
Its assertion that EU law takes precedence over national law, and the fact that there is no
appeal against it, have given the ECJ a powerful role in the EU and have on occasion
drawn criticism from both national governments and national courts.
Historically the ECJ had a very high caseload, but this was eased in 1989 when the Court
of First Instance was created. This court hears certain categories of cases, including those
brought by EU officials and cases seeking damages. Rulings by the Court of First
Instance may be appealed to the ECJ, but only on points of law.
Court of Auditors
228
The Court of Auditors is made up of 15 members, one from each EU member state. The
court oversees the finances of the EU and ensures that all financial transactions are
carried out according to the EU budget and laws. The court issues a yearly report to the
Council of the European Union and the European Parliament detailing its findings.
European Central Bank (ECB)
The European Central Bank (ECB) began operations in 1998. It is overseen by a six-
member executive board that is chosen by agreement of the EU member governments
and includes the ECB president and vice president. The ECB has exclusive authority for
EU monetary policy, including such things as setting interest rates and regulating the
money supply. In addition, the ECB played and continues to play a major role in
overseeing the inauguration and consolidation of the euro as the single EU currency. Its
authority over monetary policy and its independence from other EU institutions make the
ECB a very powerful body. There are misgivings that the ECB has been given too much
independence, leading to a debate over whether it should be subject to political direction.
Other Bodies
Other important bodies in the EU include the Economic and Social Committee and the
Committee of the Regions. The Economic and Social Committee is a 222-member
advisory body drawn from national interest groups of employers, trade unions, and other
occupational groups. It must be consulted by the European Commission and the Council
of the European Union on issues dealing with economic and social welfare. The
Committee of the Regions, also with 222 members, was formed in 1994 as a forum for
representatives of regional and local governments. It was intended to strengthen the
democratic credentials of the EU, but it has only a consultative and advisory role.
IMPORTANT FEATURES AND POLICIES OF THE EU
One of the major goals of the EU has been to establish a single market in which the
economies of all the EU members are unified. The EU has sought to meet this objective
229
in three ways: by defining a common commercial policy, by reducing economic
differences among its richer and poorer members, and by stabilizing the currencies of its
members.
The 1957 Rome treaties obliged the EU to adopt a common commercial policy. The EU
adopted several common policies, the main ones being the Common Agricultural Policy
(CAP) and the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). By 1968 the EU had also created a
customs union in which all tariffs and duties among members were eliminated. Finally,
members had defined uniform commercial practices for trade with nonmember states.
The EU has attempted to address regional economic differences through agencies such as
the European Social Fund, the European Regional Development Fund, the Cohesion
Fund, and the European Investment Bank (EIB). These agencies provide money through
loans or grants to further economic development in the poorer areas of the EU.
Finally, the EU attempted to stabilize the currencies of its members with the European
Monetary System (EMS). The EMS was prompted not only by the desire for a single
market, but also by international economic problems and fluctuations in exchange rates.
These problems also convinced the EU of the importance of Economic and Monetary
Union (EMU), in which both the economies and the currencies of the members would be
unified.
Check your progress

PART. I
1. Which one of the following best describes Globalization

A. It is a new phenomenon of cultural proliferation
B. It is integration and democratization of the world’s culture, economy,
and infrastructure through transnational investment,
230
C. It is rapid proliferation of communication and information technologies,
and the impacts of free-market forces on local, regional and national
economies
D. It is a process in which the world becomes a small village.
2. International relation deals with:
A. the current problems of the world nations
B. the multi-dimensional relations among world political units
C. how the international organizations facilitate smooth relations among the
member states
D. All of the above
4. One of the following is not an advantage of globalization
A. It facilitates the speedy flow of ideas as well as commercial items.
B. It encourages scientific and technological development.
C. It makes quality goods available at lowest price.
D. None
PART. II

International relations Armed conflicts
Treaty Arbitration
Assembly Negotiation
Security Council
Peace Mediation
Trusteeship Globalization
International Organizations
Terrorism
PART. III
231
1. Identify any of one current global issue and explain the reason why it is global issue?
2. Mention any of two reasons why regional or international organizations established?
3. What do you understand from the next passage?
Karl Marx pointed out that the historical development of capitalist

production inevitably drove the bourgeoisie (capitalists) to “nestle
everywhere, settle everywhere, and establish connections
everywhere.”
SELECTED REFERENCES
Rour Ke. John T. (1993) International Politics on the world stage 4 th ed. USA. Dushkinpus
Company
S.J.R.Bilgramii, International Organization, Bombay, 1970.
W.E.Barker. Social Political Theory
R.Ball Alan Modern Politics and Government Hong Kong, 1978.
232

Civic

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Civic

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

UNIT 1. WHAT IS ETHICS?

1.1 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

1.2 DEFINITION AND SUBJECT MATTER OF ETHICS

Working definition of Ethics: Ethics is a branch of philosophy that is concerned with

The subject matter of Ethics is human conduct/behavior.

Ethical relativism should be distinguished from cultural relativism. Cultural relativism is

1.3 Relationship of Ethics with other fields

Questions of obligation and value form the heart of ethics.

Ethics and Philosophy

As a branch of axiology, ethics is concerned with a particular type of value, namely

Ethics and Morals/Morality

1.4.1 Normative Ethics

1.4.1.1 General Normative Ethics:

1.4.2 Non-normative ethics

1.4.2.1 Scientific or descriptive ethics

Normative Ethics Non-normative

General normative Applied

1. 5 Importance of studying Ethics

2. Which of the following questions is not among the concerns of ethics?

1.6 II Define the following terms

1.6 III Say True or False

1.6 IV Questions for comprehension and reflection

Stroll Avrum and Richard H. Popkin, (1961) Introduction to Philosophy. (Chapter 5,

Unit 2. Classical Ethical Theories

Platonism was a reaction to sophism, philosophical views of sophists; and Nicomachean

2.1 Aims and objectives

2.3 Sophists and Sophism

This position is known as Relativism or Subjectivism because it makes the most

Contribution of Sophists to the history of philosophy

Socrates and his philosophical life

Socrates has always been regarded as a kind of symbol of philosophical activity,

The moral views of Socrates

“Unexamined life is not worth living”.

Plato and his moral views

Plato’s reaction to the Sophists/relativism:

2.5 Nicomachean Ethics: ethical theory of Aristotle

But what is this “happiness”? Is it success? fame? Pleasure? Or what?

2.6 Relevance of the classical ethical theories

2.7 Check your progress

1. The philosophy of the Sophists was characterized by

3. Who is known to be one of the first great philosophers of common-sense in dealing

5. What is the virtue or highest good according to Platonism?

2.7 II Define the following terms

2.7 III Say True or False

1. The concern of the Sophists was discovering genuine knowledge.

2.7 IV Questions for reflection

2.8 Selected References

Aristotle (1996) The Nicomachean Ethics, translated by Harris Rackham, Wordsworth

Miller, E. D. L.(1984) Questions That Matter: An Invitation to Philosophy. Chapter, 4;

Unit 3. Consequentialist/Teleological ethical theories

Consequentialist/Teleological ethical theories are theories that emphasize consequences

3.1 Aims and objectives

At the end of your study of this unit you should be able to

3.2 What are Consequentialist/Teleological ethical theories?

In order to understand hedonism as an ethical theory it is necessary that you make a

Theology, as a philosophical doctrine, is the belief in purpose or goals in the universe. In

3.3 Hedonism (Pleasure principle)

Hedonism is an example of consequentialist or teleological ethics you studies above. It is

3.4 Egoistic hedonism: Epicureanism and Cyrenaicism

3.5 UTILITARIANISM/SOCIAL HEDONISM

Utilitarianism is another version of teleological ethics. The utilitarian conceived of their

Still another question: whose pleasure is to be maximized? In fact utilitarianism has

Like egoistic hedonism, social hedonism/utilitarianism holds teleological conception of

Hedonism + benevolence principle= utilitarianism