‘Indigenous’ versus ‘Non-indigenous’ People’s Rights in Ethiopia. Political Participation of ‘Non-Indigenous’ People in Bambasi Woreda

TABLE OF CONTENT

Chapter one Rational of the study
1.1. Background of the study
1.2. Statement of the problem
1.3. Research questions
1.4. Research objectives
1.5. Significance of the study
1.6. Scope of the study
1.7. Research methodology
1.7.1. Source
1.7.2. Data collection techniques and tools
1.7.2.1. Sampling techniques
1.7.2.2. Data collection tools
1.7. . 'RFXPHQW $QDO\VLV ..
1.8. Data analysis method
1.9. Ethical consideration
1. /LPLWDWLRQ RI WKH 6WXG\
1.11. Structure of the study

Chapter Two Review of Related Literature
2. The right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people
2.1. Conceptualizing the right to political participation
2.1.1. The concept of the right to political participation
2.1.1.1. The right to elect and be elected
2.1.1.2. The right to participate in decision making
2.1.1.3. The right to fair representation
2.1.2. Limitation and scope of the right to political participation
2.2. Conceptual framework of ‘indigenous’ and ‘non-indigenous’ people
2.2.1. Who are ‘indigenous’ and ‘non-indigenous’ people?
2.2.1.1. Definition by scholars
2.2.1.2. Definition by inter-governmental organizations
2.2.1.3. Some examples of national definition
2.2.2. ‘Indigenous’ and ‘non-indigenous’ people in Ethiopia
2.2.2.1. Making of ‘indigenous’ and ‘non-indigenous’ people
2.2.2.2. Concept of ‘indigenous’ and ‘non-indigenous’ people
2.2.3. The concept of ‘indigenous’ and ‘non-indigenous’ people in Benishangul-Gumuz regional state
2.3. The right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people: Global overview
2.4. The right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in Ethiopia
2.4.1. The right to political participation in Ethiopia
2.4.2. The right to elect and be elected
2.4.3. The right to fair representation
2.4.4. The right to participate in public decision making

Chapter Three Political participation and ethnic accommodation in Benishangul-Gumuz regional state
3.1. Benishangul-Gumuz regional state: an overview
3.1.1. Demography of the region
3.1.2. Administrative structure of the regional state
3.2. Accommodation of ethnic diversities in Benishangul-Gumuz regional state
3.2.1. Constitutional accommodation of ethnic diversities
3.2.2. The institutional accommodation and representation of ethnic diversities in Benishangul- gumuz regional state
3.2.2.1. The regional parliament
3.2.2.2. The regional executive
3.2.2.3. Other institutions
3.3. The paradox of ‘indigenous’ vs. ‘non- indigenous’ people in Benishangul-Gumuz regional state

Chapter Four Study Area Description
4.1. Geographical location of Bambasi Woreda
4.2. Demography of Bambasi Woreda
4.2.1. Socio-economic activity
4.2.2. Organizational structure of Bambasi Woreda
4.2.2.1. Woreda administration
4.2.2.2. Kebele administration

Chapter Five Data Analysis and Interpretation
5.1. Introduction
5.2. An assessment of the right to political participation in Bambasi Woreda
5.2.1. The right to elect and be elected
5.2.2. The right to fair representation
5.2.3. The right to take part and influence public decision making
5.3. The right to political participation of ‘ non-indigenous ’ people in Bambasi Woreda
5.3.1. Participation of ‘ non-indigenous ’ people in decision making
5.3.1.1. Freedom of movement, expression, association and demonstration for ‘non- indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda
5.3.1.2. The right of access to information and opinion
5.3.1.3. The right of access to basic public services and goods
5.3.2. ‘Non-indigenous’ people in election
5.3.2.1. The right to vote
5.3.2.2. The right to be elected
5.3.3. Representational rights of ‘ non-indigenous ’ people in Bambasi Woreda
5.3.3.1. Representation in kebele and woreda level
5.3.3.2. Representation in zonal and regional administration
5.4. Challenges for political participation of ‘ non-indigenous ’ people in Bambasi Woreda
5.5. Measures taken to alleviate challenges and problem

Chapter Six Conclusion and Finding of the Study
6.1. Summary and finding of the study
6.2. Conclusion and recommendation

Bibliography

Appendix

Appendix: ,nterview guiding questions for data collection

Acknowledgment

First and Foremost my heartfelt thanks goes to the Almighty God who gave me patience and health that helped me to challenge this inconvenient environment. Lord deserves this ever living praise that, he was on my side as true advocates and sole strength while I was working on this thesis. The same goes to his mother Saint Virgin Marry for her beseeching.

Second, I would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to my advisor, Mr. Getahun Kassa for his scholarly invaluable advice and constructive comments he has given to me on each part of the draft of the thesis.

Next, I would like to forward my appreciation to Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State Administration, Bambasi Woreda Administration, especially for Ms. Ayalew Molla, Deputy Chief Administrator of Bambasi Woreda, and all interviewees for their lovely and supportive cooperation in providing give the necessary information that help me to accomplish my thesis.

Finally I would like to thank many individuals who directly and indirectly support my endeavors.

Abstract

The right to political participation, as stated under the UDHR and ICCPR, is a basic right of human beings that influence the inter-relation and interaction of human beings. Ethiopia, as signatory of these international human right instruments, the FDRE constitution stipulates the right to political participation right of all Nation, Nationalities and People of the country without any discrimination. However, regional states, like Benishangul-Gumuz, had face serious criticism that ‘ non-indigenous ’ people are face serious problem in the enjoyment of their right to political participation. Hence, this research has aimed to assess the political participation of ‘ non- indigenous ’ people of Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State: case study of Bambasi woreda. It looks and measures the participation of ‘ non-indigenous ’ people in public decision making and assess the ‘ indigenous ’ vs. ‘ non-indigenous ’ composition of institution of Bambasi Woreda administration and normative instruments for the accommodation and consideration of the right to political participation of ‘ non-indigenous ’ people. In investigating reliable data, the researcher utilizes qualitative research approaches unstructured in-depth interview, key informant interview and field observation as data collection instruments with different documents and articles. As finding of the study reveals, the right to political participation has been shortened by normative and institutional constraints that range from the federal up-to kebele administration level. Hence, it is highly recommended that there must be a structural change that helps to establish an inclusive normative and administrative institution that range from the reconsideration of ‘ non-indigenous people up to constitutional amendment and re-institutionalization of the administration.

Key Terms

Indigenous, Non-Indigenous, Political Participation, Right to Political Participation

List of Abbreviations

illustration not visible in this excerpt

List of table

Table 1:- Number of ethnic groups, indigenous and non-indigenous peoples in the selected regions

Table 2:-Number of representatives of each ethnic group in Benishangul-Gumuz regional state council and standing committees

Table 3:- Benishangul-Gumuz regional state Permanente Employee of the regional council office

Table 4:- Benishangul-Gumuz regional state permanent employees of the regional administrative bureau

Table 5:- The ethnic composition of the standing committee of Bambasi Woreda council

Table 6:- The population, registered voters and candidate ratio of Bambasi Woreda

Table 7:- The ethnic composition and population- representation dynamics of Bambasi Woreda council

Table 8:-The ethnic composition of the standing committees of Bambasi woreda council

Table 9:- `Indigenous’ vs. ‘non-indigenous’ and ethnic composition of Kebele council

Table 10:- The ethnic and ‘indigenous’ vs. ‘non-indigenous’ people composition of Kebele administrative council

CHAPTER ONE RATIONAL OF THE STUDY

1.1. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Ethiopia has a long history of statehood with the ancient civilizations of the Abyssinian, Axumite Empire and the Zagwe Dynasty.¹ Minding this, Zemelak argued, Ethiopia was one of the most decentralized states from the period of ancient civilization up to the late 1850.² However, Edmond Keller argues, though it is not effective and had breakages (like period after the fall of Axumite civilization, and ‘Zemene Mesafint’), the process of centralization were back rooted to the ancient period of Axumite civilization.³ However, the then centralization process of Axumite civilization were very loose which mostly ended with an ‘imaginary empire’ but not central government.⁴ For example, According to Assefa Fisseha, the process of centralization of state power, which began since the reign of Emperor Tewodros II in the 1850s, marked the beginning of Ethiopia’s nation (empire) building.⁵ Alem Habtu argues, the southward expansion of the Ethiopian state was completed at the end of the 19th century under Menelik II which also attributed to the completion of the formation of centralized state.⁶ However, Zemelak argues, despite their desire, three monarchal governments (Tewodros II, Yohanes IV and Menilik II) were unable to establish a centralized government because of the technological and economic factors, the impenetrable terrain and an entrenched culture of regional and local consciousness.⁷ Hence, he generalize that the formation of strong central government was realized in the period of Emperor Haile Selassie through his own first written constitution of 1931 in which the emperor use to strip the regional and local lords of their traditional privileges from the local community.⁸ He also argues, the local and provincial administration reform through promulgation of Decree No 1/1942 was the most drastic formal measure of centralization of local autonomies and authorities since the period of 1942.⁹ Hence, Zemelak concludes, following this period, the local and provincial administrative unites become clear extension of the central government and the local and regional administrators were not only appointed by the Emperor but also required to act as his agent.¹⁰

Following the fall of the Imperial rule, Derge had continued with centralized administration process. Derge attempted to deal with issues of self-administration by establishing lower level local governments elected by dwellers of their areas. For example, according to Smith Lahra, Derg established two local level institutions: the Urban Dwellers’ association (UDA) and the Peasant association (PA) in kebele (sub-district), Woreda (rural district) or Kefitegna (urban district) and city or regional level as autonomous institutions to run their own affairs, solve their own problems and directly participate in political, economic and social activities.¹¹ Zemelak also argues, these institutions, despite their establishment, were degenerated into apparatus of repression and terror in which the UDA and PA was renamed in to “public safety squad ” and “peasant defense squad ” respectively to eliminate political opponents.¹²

The move to the adoption of constitutional federalism was only a beginning of the process of decentralization that was taking place since 1991, which ushered after the fall of the military regime.¹³ The newly established government, TGE, recognized the right to self-determination of each ethnic groups of the country which latter further strengthened even after the new federal

constitution is established in 1995.¹⁴ Owing to this, the main political issues which carried out by the current Ethiopian government was a federal state structure with regional autonomy, protection of minorities, self-administration, democracy and development since the country suffers from the loss of these critical democratic elements under its previous political history.¹⁵ Cultural and language policies of the country have significantly changed in helping oppressed minorities to gain recognition and to develop confidence in their language and culture.¹⁶ It also further strengthens the right to self-administration of the constituent parts of the federation. The FDRE Constitution to this effect states that, “Every nation, nationality and people in Ethiopia has the right to a full measure of self-government which includes the right to establish institutions of government in the territory that it inhabits and to equitable representation in a state and federal governments respectively”.¹⁷

Despite introducing such arrangement for self-administration, the current Ethiopian federal system is criticized from the perspective of empowerment of different resident ethnic groups who sometimes referred as ‘non-indigenous’ ‘non-native’, ‘non-founder’ group of people.¹⁸ For example, Yonatan and Beken argued, in contradiction to Article 38 of the federal constitution,¹⁹ those individuals who did not speak the ‘working language’ (one of the indigenous language) of the region are barred from contesting in election²⁰ and the political participation of the ‘non-native’ people in state administration has been increasingly affected by measures taken by local governments as part of exercising its power.²¹ Even though the federal structure of Ethiopia is appreciated for its empowerment of different ethnic groups (especially ‘ historical minorities’),²² both the federal and the regional constitutions are criticized regarding the recognition and protection of the rights of ‘non-native residents’²³ of the regional states. However, some regional states, which establish ‘Special Woreda’ and ‘independent kebele’ administrations, tries to guarantee the right of ‘indigenous’ or ‘native’ people by their regional constitutions.²⁴ Nonetheless, as Getachew Assefa argues, it is contentious, while the 1995 constitution so generously recognizes the right to self-determination of ethno-national groups, it utterly fails to pay required attention to the ‘non-indigenous’ (non-native) groups who find themselves in the ‘wrong’ regional states.²⁵

(c) To vote and to be elected at periodic elections to any office at any level of government; elections shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors.

On other side of the spectrum, because the ‘non-native’ groups of people outnumbers the ‘native’ group of people in some regional states, there was strong competition and tension among ‘native’ and ‘non-native’ groups of people in which it will further develop to ethnic tension and rivalry.²⁶ For example, according to the 2007 population census, ethnic composition of Benishangul-Gumuz regional state, ‘ indigenous ’ population, Benishangul ethnic group (Berta) accounts 25.4 percent, Gumuz 21.1 percent, Shinasha 7.7 percent, Mao 1.9 percent, and Komo 0.9, the ‘ non-indigenous ’ population, Amhara 21.1 percent, Oromo 13.5 percent, Agew 4.5 percent, Tigray 0.7 percent and others 4.1 percent of the total population of the region.²⁷ Hence, the total share of the ‘non- indigenous’ people in the region reaches around 44.1 percent. This rivalry and tension directly affects the harmonious political cooperation and trust among the ‘indigenous’ and ‘non- indigenous’ groups of people.²⁸

Due to the federal state structure and Ethiopian approach to federalism, the regional state of Benishangul-Gumuz has its own regional constitution in which the regional administration is organized and structured. Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State Constitution has some unique features. Among its unique feature is that it introduced distinction of between ‘non-indigenous’ and ‘indigenous’ ethnic groups and their respective rights. Hence, according to the Revised Constitution of Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State, five ethnic groups- Berta, Gumuz, Shinahsa, Mao and Komo are identified as ‘indigenous’ people while the rest group of people are ‘non- indigenous’ to the region. But, according to ILO’s and World Council of Indigenous people’s (WCIP)²⁹ definitions of ‘indigenous’ people, “….racial group who survive in the area and who do not control the national government of the country/region in which they live”³⁰, there will not be a group of people who is ‘indigenous’ in Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State. However, the regional state constitution announce some groups as legal to own the region (indigenous) while others are dependent and referred as ‘non-indigenous’.³¹

According to Mesfin, subsequent to the constitutional amendment of Benishangul-Gumuz regional state constitution in 2002 and distinction of the ‘non-indigenous’ and ‘indigenous’ people, the ‘non-indigenous’ people face forceful eviction from some areas where they live for not less than 30 years.³² Similarly, Alemante G/Selassie also argues that:-

The recent expulsions of Ethiopians of Amhara heritage from Gura Ferda and Benishangul, the confiscation of their properties and the crime of rape an d other forms of victimization inflicted upon them, are not only a negation of the for going values but also unmistakable harbingers of worse form of ethnic oppression, di scrimination, and social conflict looming on the horizon.³³

On the other direction, some argue that the ethnic exploitation and suppression by previous governments in the country makes difficult to develop ethnic trust among different groups. For example, Marije Frank argues that one of the major explanations for the failure of democracy in such region is the decline of trust in the states as governing body because of experiences of exploitation by the governing elites of the previous governments.³⁴ According to him, because most ‘non-native’ people in the regional states are historically linked with the previous governing elites, the native (indigenous) people has a suspicion that the ‘non-indigenous’ people are suppressor and exploiter who come to their land to exploit their resources and dominate them in their region.³⁵ He further argues, more than lack of constitutional and institutional protection of ‘non-native’ people, mistrust among ethnic groups make the right of ‘non-native’ people more complicated and worsen further.³⁶ However, beside the historical legacies that create mistrust among different ethnic groups, since one goal of federalism in Ethiopia is to develop equality among unequal ethnic groups, the researcher tries assess the right to political participation of ‘non- indigenous’ residents in Bambasi Woreda, Asossa Zone of Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State.

1.2. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

After the fall of the military regime, through the 1995 constitution, Ethiopia created a federal state structure that devised to hold together the state. “The new political system combines federalism, self-determination (up to and including secession) and legal pluralism as solutions to the erstwhile unequal relationships among ethno-national groups of people in the country”.³⁷ However, some scholars like Getachew Assefa, Christophe Van der Beken and Mengie Legesse argue, despite the fact that these solutions were devised to tackle problems, the new political arrangement displays many loose ends with regard to the protection and promotion of the right of ‘non-native’ or ‘non- indigenous’ people’s in regional state administration systems.³⁸ According to Christophe Van der Beken, because the sovereignty of nation, nationality and people of the country resides with a defined territory, groups of people (ethnic groups) who moved from one to the other region either by settlement program or by any means could not have a sovereign power.³⁹ Mengie Legesse also generalize that under the Ethiopian ethnic federal system, individuals living even for life in a region, zone or district they were not designated as their ‘homeland’⁴⁰ did not entertain the same political rights granted to those who belong to that ethnic groups.⁴¹ Hence, this shows that, those group of people who literally known as the ‘non-native’ or ‘non-indigenous’ people in Ethiopia face the challenge of exercising the right to political participation.

Under the international human rights framework, human rights are entitled to every human beings regardless of nationality, residence, colour, sex, ethnicity, language etc.⁴² However, according to ICCPR and general comment of the Human Right Committee, the right to political participation are subject to certain specification and these rights are the rights which guaranteed to citizens of certain national state.⁴³ The specifications for the enjoyment of the right to political participation of citizens of the country were also further justified by the local administrative unites of the local community in specified territory.⁴⁴ However, this specification and limitation of the right to political participation territorially directly violates the right to free movement of individuals and the inherent nature of the human right to political participation of individuals.⁴⁵ Hence, the right to political participation of ‘non-native’ people in regional states of Ethiopia had face similar problem. According to some scholars like Mengie Legesses, Van der Beken and Yonatan Tesfay had argued that FDRE constitution had no clear legal statement about ‘non-native’ people of regional states and the protection of their rights.⁴⁶ According to Mengie Legesse, it means that those people who have no identifiable territory because they are dispersed in different area did not have any place under the FDRE constitution.⁴⁷ Therefore, this implies the federal arrangement in Ethiopia at present has some problems in regards to guaranteeing the right to political participation of ‘non-native’ or ‘non-indigenous’ people.

Rather dealing the issues of these group of people, the federal government in Ethiopia had been criticized that it leaves alone to the regional states. For example, Tsegaye Regassa argues, because of the state constitutions’ closeness to the local issues, the federal government has forced the issues of ‘non-native’ people upon them.⁴⁸ He also argue that, the creation of the categories of “zone” as a form of local government and “special woreda” for minority groups of people in Benishangul- Gumuz and SNNPRS; and of the “administrative unit of nationalities” in Amhara Regional State are one of the mechanisms of ensuring self-rule rights minor group of people in regional state constitutions.⁴⁹ But in his argument Tsegaye does not clearly state to whom this self-rule rights exclusively given under the regional constitutions. For example, under the Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State Constitution, “Special Woreda” arrangement is not for ‘non-indigenous’ people, rather for the numerically smaller ‘indigenous’ ethnic groups called Mao and Komo⁵⁰ and “the nationality administration” is for those ‘indigenous’ people of the region; namely Berta, Gumuz and Shinasha ethnic groups.⁵¹ Therefore, the place of ‘non-indigenous’ people’s right to political participation in the region remained unclear and merit further research and study.

Mesfin Gebremichael and Asnake kefale had a strong argument that ethnic federalism with territorial boundary will be potentially a threat for the protection of ‘non-native’ people rights in regional (local) political administration. For example, Mesfin tries to show how federalism can create ethnic based elite groups in controlling regional and local state powers and resources, which contribute for ethnic based conflicts, hostile inter-governmental relations, lack of law and order along the common borders of regional state.⁵² According to Mesfin’s argument, ethnic based elite group uses the ethnic identities as an instrument to control the patrimonial state resources. As Mesfin vividly argues, the existence of the structural cause of ethnic conflicts which created by the federal arrangement when it assures the territorial rights of ‘native’ people and protecting the integrity of their territories from encroachment by neighboring (non-native) ethnic groups.⁵³ The ‘legal orientation’⁵⁴ accompanied by ‘unfaithful historical background’⁵⁵ of ethnic groups and the emergence of ethnic elite groups will disturb the horizontal equality of the ‘native’ and ‘non- native’ ethnic groups and undermine the harmonious relationship among different ethnic groups in the region.⁵⁶ Mesfin also generalizes, the ‘non-native’ (non-indigenous) ethnic groups does not get an equal legal protection in Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State. So, due to this, even though the rights of the political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in the region is under question mark, there are study gaps that needs to have a further assessment on the rights to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ minorities in regional states of the country.

Thus, in order to fill the gaps discussed above, the study will assess the situation, extent and condition of the right to political participation of the ‘non-indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda of Benishangul-Gumuz regional state in light of the, national, regional and international human right standards and principles.

1.3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

- What institutional and legal protection mechanisms are in place to secure the right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda?
- What is the extent of participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda in the local, regional and federal organs?
- Are there challenges that impede realization of the right to political participation and representation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda?
- Are there measures taken by the regional/local governments with the aim to guarantee the right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda?

1.4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

This research will have the general objective of assessing the enforcement and protection of the right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda of Benishangul- Gumuz National Regional State. The research will also have the following specific objectives:-

- To examine the institutional mechanisms for the accommodation of the right to political participation of the ‘non-indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda.
- To assess the normative tool of the regional state for the protection of the right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda.
- To scrutinize the level of participation and representation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda, for local, regional and Federal organs.

1.5. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The researcher intended to conduct this research because the study will provide basic information about the level of political participation, normative and institutional protection mechanism of the right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State. It also intended to fill the study gap that discussed in the statement of the problem. The study will grant access of up-to-date and reliable information about the existing and actual situation of the right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people and provide an alternative solutions concerning the existed problem of ‘non-indigenous’ people’s rights in Benishangul-Gumuz regional state of Asossa Zone in Bambasi Woreda.

1.6. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

As the problem of the study signifies, the presence of ‘non-indigenous’ people and their challenge to the right to political participation are throughout the country. However, because Benishangul- Gumuz Region is the only regional state which constitutionally categorize its people as ‘indigenous’ and ‘non-indigenous’ to which the concept can signify more diverse interpretation, Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State were purposefully selected for this study. Additionally, to make the study area more manageable and able to support it with specific case study, to assess the issues in time and in consideration of the available financial and material resources at hand the study were limited on the geographical areas of the Bambasi Woreda, Asossa Zone of Benishangul-Gumuz Region.

Even though the political participation right is a broad concept, the study focused on some elements of the right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in federal, regional and local government organs. So, here moderately the study were focused on the right to participate and influence public decision making, right to elect and hold public offices, and get fair representation on any level of governments of ‘non-indigenous’ people. Despite of the conceptual ambiguity of the term ‘non-indigenous’ people, the focus of this study were those people who are Ethiopian Nationals and not identified as ‘indigenous’ people of the region.

1.7. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The research assessed the right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people in Bambasi Woreda of Benishangul-Gumuz Regional State in line with the national and international human rights standards and principles. It critically analyzed and assessed the practice in relation to exercising the right to political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ people. For these purposes, the study deployed a qualitative research approach, which allow the researcher to investigate participant responses: by using open ended questions like why or how as well as explore different documents, laws, and constitutions both at state and federal level and relevant regional and international human right instruments to cross-check one from the other.

1.7.1. Source

The source of data collection that the researcher used is both primary and secondary source of information. The primary data source were ‘non-indigenous’ people, law enforcement officials, legal experts, and other concerned government officials to obtain firsthand information, as well as legal documents like constitutions, proclamations and policies for supporting the information that collected from interviews. The researcher also used secondary sources like handbooks, previously conducted research papers, state document records, official statistic, mass media outputs, journal articles and conference papers to obtain the full picture of the situation.

1.7.2. Data Collection Techniques and Tools

1.7.2.1. Sampling Techniques

As a qualitative research, to gather relevant information, the research has applied the non-probable sampling techniques. The focus area of the study needs to have special knowledge and experience of the respondents on what and how the situation of political participation of ‘non-indigenous’ have been experiencing in the political and legal systems of the regional state as well as local administrations. Hence, the researcher used purposive sampling technique for identifying key interview respondents. Moreover, the researcher has applied snowball sampling techniques that involve identifying people with relevant characteristics to obtain information from the respondents. The respondents were also help in identifying relevant respondent who have better experience and knowledge about the subject of the study.

The focus area of the study, Bambasi Woreda, one of the six woreda’s of Asossa Zone, has an ethnic composition of the Amhara (35.5%), Berta (33.8%), Oromo (12.8%), Shinasha (11.2%), Tigray (5.2%), and Mao (3.2%) the population.⁵⁷ Hence the total population of ‘non-indigenous’ people of the Woreda is double than the ‘indigenous’ people who live in the area. Therefore, the researcher purposefully selects this woreda due to the ethnic composition and reality of the existing situation in the area.

1.7.2.2. Data Collection Tools

A. In-depth Interview

Interview was the main primary data collection tool to obtain first-hand information that used to cross check the information with the secondary data which primarily collected from documents. The researcher also applied an in-depth interview to effectively explore people with best experience of the research problem in the study area. Hence, ‘non-indigenous’ people who were identified through snow-ball sampling techniques were interviewed. Accordingly, 8 kebele residents were interviewed. The respondents were asked open-ended questions that designed to allow the interviewee to converse and reply the questions freely and to look short and precise answers respectively.

Since the working language of the region is Amharic, the interview was conducted in Amharic language, and then it was translated to English. Before the interview, the respondents were asked whether recording their voice and taking pictures is possible or not. During the interview, the researcher notified and explained their information will be used only for academic matters and their identity were kept confidential.

B. Key Informant Interview

The researcher also applied key informant interview to gain quickly some insight on sensitive information from particular and well-informed respondents. The key informant interview was conducted with selected government officials of the study area and professionals from relevant fields with the subject matter of the study to get supportive expert analysis. Accordingly, the President of the Supreme Court of the Regional State, Head of the Regional Chief Administrator and Cabinets Affairs Bureau, Head of regional Council office, Chief Administrator of Berta Nationality Administration, Chief Administrator of Bambasi Woreda Administration, Speaker of Woreda Council were interviewed. From Professionals, Dean of school of law and governance, instructor from Political science and international relation department, and dean of school of journalism were interviewed. These professionals were identified in accordance with their relevance and experience on the study area.

C. Field Observation

In addition to the above data collection tools, the researcher gathered data through personal observation directly from the areas for 30 days where many ‘non-indigenous’ people are settled. This data collection tools helps the researcher to reach to different situations and circumstances of the disclosed participants. The researcher were observe the settlement pattern, provision of basic goods and services, the structural arrangement of kebele, and the socio-economic and political associations of kebele residents.

1.7.3. Document Analysis

Legal documents like regional and federal proclamations, constitutions and policies, documents and literatures that have relevance to the subject under investigation were examined and analyzed together with the data collected from primary sources through interviews. Hence, a number of legal documents, rules, policies, reports and constitutional provisions of both regional and federal level as well as international instruments with regard to political rights of the ‘non-indigenous’ people were used to demonstrate the conceptual discussion on the right to political participation of ‘non- indigenous’ people.

1.8. DATA ANALYSIS METHOD

The researcher used different techniques and methods of analyzing and interpreting the data collected from interview and field observation. As Ian Dey say, data analysis in qualitative research involves description, classification and interconnection of data. Hence, similarly, the researcher sort, organize, integrate and finally conclude and verify the data that are collected from interview and observation.

1.9. ETHICAL CONSIDERATION

The researcher took necessary ethical cares and considerations throughout the interaction in between the researcher and people directly and indirectly participate in the study process. Because the well-being of the research respondents and participants are the main priority concern of the research questions, the respondents were treated in due respect and dignity as well as their identity were kept confidential for their security and safety. The researcher also exerted an effort to avoid a risk to respondents of the research and clearly informed them of their right to withdraw from the interview at any time if they feel discomfort.

1.10 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

During conducting this research, the researcher face different restraints and obstacles that affect the quality of the research. The financial and time constraint as well as lack of adequate and relevant data on time are among the main factors that moderately affect the quality of the research. Moreover, the actual sensitivity of the study area and frustration of the respondents makes some concerned respondents (non-indigenous) unwilling to give answers for interview questions. Hence, since most key informant interviews were ‘indigenous’ people, the data that they provided were lacks simplicity and clarity to touch the actual local communities problem. Finally, the assessment of right to political participation of all ‘non-indigenous’ people associated issues, challenges and prospects as well as rules, laws, regulations, policies in the woreda or region is not possible in this short period of time and space limitation. However, the researcher used the available resource properly and communicate the respondents wisely to keep the quality of the research.

1.11.STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY

This study paper contain six chapters. Chapter one is an introductory part which contains, background of the study, statement of the problem, objective of the study, research questions, significance of the study, scope of the study, methodology of the study, document analysis, ethical considerations, data processing and analysis techniques, limitation of the study and structure of the study. Chapter two is the review of related literature for understanding the basis of the subject matter. Chapter three provides an explanation of the general framework and root source of the problem of the study area. Chapter four discusses the general background and description of the case study area. Chapter five presents data interpretation and analysis obtained from the respondents with supportive related documented materials. Lastly, the final chapter provide the conclusion and recommendations.

CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2. THE RIGHT TO POLITICAL PARTICIPATION OF ‘NON-INDIGENOUS’ PEOPLE

2.1.CONCEPTUALIZING THE RIGHT TO POLITICAL PARTICIPATION

2.1.1. The Concept of the Right to Political Participation

Owing to the rapid expansion of political activities in the last decades and the spread of expressive mode of the political participation, putting aside subjective definition for the concept of the right to political participation has become increasingly difficult.⁵⁸ Jan Van Deth states that, political participation had been loosely defined as “citizen’s activities affecting politics”.⁵⁹ According to Jan Van Deth, however, “the list of specimen of political participation is virtually endless and includes such divergent phenomena as voting, demonstrating and boycotting-but also guerrilla gardening, volunteering, flash mobs and even suicide protest”.⁶⁰ On the other hand, Hans Klein defines political participation as “the overall activity of citizens to voting in election, joining political parties, and standing as a candidate in election, joining a non-governmental advocacy groups or participation in demonstration”.⁶¹ But according to Julie Ballington, Politics and political activities are very general concept which revolves and includes the interrelation and interaction between people- men and women, parent and children’s, minority and majority in share and operation of resource and power among individuals or groups of people in each level of human interaction.⁶²

If politics is a general concept which involves around each and every human interactions, the right to political participation refers to citizens’ right to seek to influence such interaction in which the public decisions are made.⁶³ The fundamental notion of the right to political participation were assembled from the international instruments of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to protect the right of minorities to take part in government or in the conduct of public affairs.⁶⁴ The right to political participation is spelled out in the UDHR in article 21 (1&3) as below:-

1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. 3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot by equivalent free voting procedures. ⁶⁵

Similar to the UDHR, the ICCPR under article 25 states that:

Every citizens shall have the right and the opportunity, without ..unreasonable restrictions: a) to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives; b) to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors. ⁶⁶

The Human Rights Committee General Comment No. 25 on article 25 of the ICCPR, which reads as: - “….. the right to every citizen to take part in the conduct of public affairs, the right to vote and to be elected and the right to have access to public service”,⁶⁷ shows that the right to political participation of citizens in public affair and the right to vote are the basic manifestation of the right to political participation. According to the general comment of the human rights committee, the conduct of public affairs is a broad concept which relates to the exercise of political power, citizens participation directly to public issues through referendum and other electoral process, taking part in popular assemblies to make decision about local issues or affairs of particular community, to be represented and to have consultation with government and so on.⁶⁸

Minding to UDHR, ICCPR and the general comment provide by the Human Right Committee, Ian Van Deth, tries to categorize the right to political participation in to three main areas.⁶⁹ These are: the right to elect and be elected, the right to participate directly in public decision making and the right to get fair representation.⁷⁰

2.1.1.1.The Right to Elect and Be Elected

Formal constitutional or statutory recognition of the citizen’s right to vote, and to run for public office is common to democratic states and plays both a substantive and a confidence-building role.⁷¹ The right to elect and be elected is the composition of two basic, but inseparable rights in which one is the right to hold public position and represent its fellows in any level of governments while the rest is the right to vote one’s own representative and made decisions.⁷² The basis of the right to elect and be elected is the UDHR stipulated under article 21 (3) which reads as: “the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures”⁷³ and the ICCPR under article 25 (b) which reads as:- “to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors”.⁷⁴

Owing to the expansion of the concept of election and its contents under it, now a days, the right to elect and be elected include the following three basic elements:- universal and equal suffrage, non-discrimination and scrutiny of restrictions on suffrage.⁷⁵ Hence, universal and equal suffrage of the right to elect and be elected refers that this right is guaranteed to all citizens of adult without any discrimination or restriction based on any subjective criteria.⁷⁶ The non-discrimination of the right to elect and be elected refers to the equal treatment and guarantee of the right above certain age without any reference of differences in age, colour, sex, language, political or other opinion, association with a national minority.⁷⁷ While the scrutiny of restrictions on suffrage refers to the principle or mechanism in which any legal norm, policies or political strategies which curtailed or suspended be subject to scrutiny and further reference of objective criteria.⁷⁸

As the rest elements of political rights, the right to elect and be elected can be suspended and limited in certain circumstances. According to the general comment No. 25 paragraph 10 of the Human Right Committee, which read as; “the right to vote at election and referenda must be established by law and may be subject only to reasonable restrictions, such as setting a minimum age limit for the right to vote” clearly state that there may be reasonable restriction on the right to vote at election and referendum.⁷⁹ Additionally, general comment No.25 of the Human Rights Committee under paragraph 4 implies that there may be a possibility to require a higher age for election or appointment to a particular office.⁸⁰ Even, as stated under paragraph 11 of general comment No. 25 of the human rights committee, if reasonable, there can be residence requirement to register voters.⁸¹

2.1.1.2.The Right to Participate in Decision Making

The right to public participation in decision making is a vital right which brings an individual to the decision making power and also helps the public and government to recognize the voice and need of the public in decision making process.⁸² However, as the rest of other political rights, article 21 (1&2) of the UDHR which reads as “… everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. ….everyone has the right of equal access to public services in his country” is the one of the basic normative foundation of the right to participate in public decision making.⁸³ Similarly, article 25 (a &c) of ICCPR is also among the basic international norms of human rights that paves the way for the development of the right to participate public decision making. Article 25 (a & c) reads as follows:-

Every citizen had the right and opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions: - to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives; and to have access, on general term of equality, to public services in his country. ⁸⁴

According to general comment No. 25 of the Human Rights Committee, the right to participate in public decision making is a broader concept which includes the right of citizens to participate in public referendums, take part in popular assemblies, exert influence through public debate and dialogue in a way that insures freedom of expression, assembly and association, and right to freely access public services.⁸⁵

The right to public participation in decision making is very crucial both for the government and individual communities since it makes citizens part of the decision making process and gives the government trust and recognition from the public by making public preference decision.⁸⁶ On the advantage of public participation, Renee A. Irvin and John Stansbury states that:-

It is widely argued that increased community participation in government decision making produces many important benefits. It is difficult to envision anything but positive outcomes from citizens joining the policy process, collaborating with others, and reaching consensus to bring about positive social and environmental change. ⁸⁷

According to Renee Irvin and John Stansbury, public participation in decision making had the advantage for citizens to learn from and inform government representatives, persuade and enlighten government, gain skill for activist citizenship, gain some control over policy process, make better policy and implementation decision and break gridlocks; and advantage for government to learn from and inform citizens, persuade citizens, build trust and allay anxiety, avoid litigation costs and better policy and implementation decision.⁸⁸

2.1.1.3.The Right to Fair Representation

In any democratic system, political representation is the most notable way which enables a large number of community can represent their own best candidates to make decision on behalf of them. The right to fair representation is also stated under UDHR article 21 (1) which stipulates that, “everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives”.⁸⁹ Similarly, under article 25 (a) of the ICCPR stipulates that “every citizen shall have the right and opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions: to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives…”⁹⁰

According to general comment No. 25 of the Human Rights Committee, the representatives do exercise governmental (executive, legislative and judiciary) powers allocated to them in accordance with the constitutional principles.⁹¹ Hence, representatives and representations enables the general public to exercise the governmental power of executive, legislative and judiciary indirectly through representatives in accordance with the constitutional principle.

A number of countries have adopted measures intended to improve the political representation of their own citizens.⁹² However, people argues that the representative democracy can never to give mirror image of the general public. For example, Karen Bird argues that, “the mechanism of representative democracy have never offered up elected assemblies that are a mirror image of the general public they are supposed to represent, nor have they been intended to do so”.⁹³ Even Will Kymlicka also states that, people, or groups of people especially minorities are underrepresented and only few state passed laws to correct the under-representation of groups (ethnic groups, communities, women’s and children’s), which did not apply to poly ethnic immigrant minorities.⁹⁴

2.1.2. Limitation and Scope of the Right to Political Participation

The right to political participation is a fundamental right that forms one of the foundations of any free and democratic society, Nevertheless, exercising this right is not without qualification and limitation.⁹⁵ Minding the Human Right Committee General comment No. 25, Hans Klein, Jan Van Deth and Shimelis Sisay argues that, when other rights recognized in the UDHR and ICCPR are inherent to human beings on the basis of being a human, the right to political participation is restricted to people endowed with the status of citizen.⁹⁶ Nonetheless, according to Hans Klein, it is the unique features of the right to political participation which presupposes a political community with individual members (citizens) and with an organizational form (government).⁹⁷ Shimelis Sisay also argues that, unlike other human rights and basic freedoms that are recognized as rights to “everyone”, the right to political participation under the general comment No. 25 of the Human Right Committee is granted to “citizens”.⁹⁸ As Shimelis Sisay and others argues, General Comment No.25 of Human Right Committee, which reads as “….the rights protected by article 25 of the ICCPR should be based on objective and reasonable criteria”, clearly show that this right had an exceptions and only reserved to the citizens of the state in which non-citizens and emigrants will not entitled to enjoy this rights.⁹⁹

2.2.CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF ‘INDIGENOUS’ AND ‘NON-INDIGENOUS’ PEOPLE

2.2.1. Who are ‘Indigenous’ and ‘Non-Indigenous’ People?

The concept of ‘indigenous’ people and their right to self-identification had passed through many discussions and debates for standard setting in international human rights law.¹⁰⁰ who define ‘indigenous’ people, the set of criteria’s for identifying ‘indigenous’ people, and the scope of rights that they enjoy makes the attempt of defining ‘indigenous’ people more complicated.¹⁰¹ However, beginning from its etymological concept of the term ‘indigenous’ up to international human right institutions tries to pass many decisions on definition of ‘indigenous’ people, who defines them, criteria’s for identifying and scope of rights that they enjoy.

Conversely, the effort of defining ‘indigenous’ people in international human rights regime also uses to understand the rest group of people who literally referred as ‘non-indigenous’ people. Even though the definitions are unilaterally directed to conceptualize ‘indigenous’ people, in making the distinction of the ‘indigenous’ from the rest group of people, the definition also address the sociopolitical status of ‘non-indigenous’ people.¹⁰²

To start with the etymological definition, the word ‘indigenous’ has its root in Latin term ‘indigena’ which mostly used to distinguish between persons born in particular place and those who comes from elsewhere.¹⁰³ The term ‘indigenous’ was used to distinguish the colonized from the colonizer, the settlers from conqueror and the original settlers from new comers and so on.¹⁰⁴ Hence, when the colonized and original settlers are considered as ‘indigenous’ people, the colonizer, conqueror and newcomers are considered as ‘non-indigenous’ people. Meanwhile the concept of ‘indigenous’ was defined by academicians, international organizations which passed so many declarations and conventions on issues of ‘indigenous’ people.¹⁰⁵

2.2.1.1. Definition by Scholars

First social scientist and researcher, Franke Wilmer, defines ‘indigenous’ people in broader sense as follows:-

With traditional based culture, who were politically autonomous, before colonization; who, in aftermath of colonization and their cultural integrity, economic self-reliance, and political independence by resisting the assimilationist policies of nation-state.¹⁰⁶

According to the argument of Jeff Corntassel, the definition of Franke Wilmer was too general which even did not clearly addressed whether ‘indigenous’ people are different in terms of their culture and goals from other groups like ‘non-indigenous’ people and minorities.¹⁰⁷ On the other hand, the definition does not clearly address who would have an assimilationist policies and from who does the ‘indigenous’ people would resist an assimilation policy. Because of this, the definition is too general which did not indicate for the existence of ‘non-indigenous’ people in aftermath of colonization.

However, some scholars, like James Anaya and Solomon, argues that the group of people who runs the assimilationist policy is the ‘non-indigenous’ people who had a dominant position in the socio-political system of nation state. Hence, under the definition of Franke Wilmer, the ‘nonindigenous’ people are the rest group of people who had socio-political dominance and who assimilates the ‘indigenous’ people of the nation state.¹⁰⁸

The more flexible definition of ‘indigenous’ people was given by Kingsbury by establishing the following four ‘essential requirements’:-

1) Self-identification as distinct ethnic groups; 2) Historical experience of, or contingent vulnerability to, sever disruption, dislocation with the region; 3) Long connection with the region; 4) The wish to retain a distinct identity. ¹⁰⁹

As Jeff Corntassel states, Kingsbury also includes other relevant indicator like ‘non-dominance’, ‘historical continuity’, ‘socio-economic and socio-cultural difference’, ‘language’, ‘race’, and ‘material or spiritual culture’ to conceptualize ‘indigenous’ people.¹¹⁰ According to Kingsbury definition of ‘indigenous’ people, the requirement of being distinct, dislocation and non- dominance position clearly indicates that there would be group of people who had a dominance position over the ‘indigenous’ people and had also distinct ethic value. With regard to the definition of Kingsbury, Anaya and Solomon also argues, the rest group of people who dominate, dislocate and disrupt the ‘indigenous’ people of state is the ‘non-indigenous’ people.¹¹¹

2.2.1.2.Definition by Inter-Governmental Organizations

An attempt of the conceptual definition of ‘indigenous’ people in international human rights framework was mostly falls within the international organizations like the World Bank, International Labor Organization, United Nations, World Council of Indigenous People.¹¹² The attempt of defining ‘indigenousness’ also leads to the distinction of ‘indigenous’ people from the ‘non-indigenous’ groups of people. For example, the World Bank assesses the degree of ‘indigenousness’ in the following five characteristics under its original operational directives 4.20:-

1) a close attachment to ancestral territories and to the natural resources in these areas; 2) Self-identification and identification by others as members of a distinct cultural group; 3) An indigenous language, often different from the national language; 4) Presence of customary social and political institutions; and 5) Primarily subsistence-oriented production. ¹¹³

According to the World Bank definition, ‘indigenousness’ may lost when the ‘indigenous’ language extinct, lost and mixed as well as when the ‘indigenous’ people inter to urban areas.¹¹⁴ Therefore, ‘indigenousness’ also requires being outside the reach of urban or living in urban areas. However, World Bank’s definition of ‘indigenous’ people did not precisely show the position of ‘indigenous’ people from the ‘non-indigenous’ people of the region, country or political community.¹¹⁵

The other inter-governmental organizations which give basic definition of ‘indigenous’ people focused on the rights of self-identification as basic criteria is the ILO. The ILO convention No. 169 article 1(1) reads as:-

A) Tribal people in independent countries whose social, cultural and economic conditions distinguish them from other sections of the national community, and whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions or by special laws or regulations;

B) people in independent countries who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonization or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions. ¹¹⁶

[...]

---

¹ Kidane, M., 1997. New approaches to State Building in Africa: The Case of Ethiopia's Ethnic-Based Federalism. African Studies Review, Volume 40, p. 119.

² Zemelak, A., 2011. Law democracy and development: local governments in Ethiopia: Still an apparatus of control? Volume 15, p. 1.

³ Keller, E., 2005. Making and Remaking State and Nation in Ethiopia. Nationalism and the African States, 3(1), p. 88.

⁴ Assefa, F., 2007. Federalism and the Accommodation of Diversity in Ethiopia: A comparative Study. Revised ed. Addis Ababa: Artistic Printing Enterprise. P.15

⁵ Assefa, F., 2007. Federalism and the Accommodation of Diversity in Ethiopia: A comparative Study. Revised ed. Addis Ababa: Artistic Printing Enterprise. P. 16

⁶ Alemante, G., 2011. Federalism, Human Rights and the EPRDF Constitution: The Bad, the Ugly, and the Evil. Ethiopian news and information update (world press), P.11

⁷ Zemelak, A., 2011. Law democracy and development: Local governments in Ethiopia: still an apparatus of control? Volume 15, p. 4.

⁸ Zemelak, A., 2011. Law democracy and development: Local governments in Ethiopia: still an apparatus of control? Volume 15, p. 6.

⁹ Zemelak, A., 2011. Law democracy and development: Local governments in Ethiopia: still an apparatus of control? Volume 15, p. 6.

¹⁰ Zemelak, A., 2011. Law democracy and development: Local governments in Ethiopia: still an apparatus of control? Volume 15, p. 6.

¹¹ Lahra, S., 2008. the politics of contemporary language policy in Ethiopia. journal of Developing societies , 13(2), p. 208.

¹² Lahra, S., 2008. the politics of contemporary language policy in Ethiopia. journal of Developing societies , 13(2), p. 208.

¹³ Tsegaye, R., 2004. State constitutions in Federal Ethiopia: A preliminary observation. A summery for the Bellagio, 22-23 March .p. 9.

¹⁴ Tsegaye, R., 2004. State constitutions in Federal Ethiopia: A preliminary observation. A summery for the Bellagio, 22-23 March .p. 9.

¹⁵ Mengie, L., 2010. Federalism for Unity and Minorities’' protection :( A comparative study on Constitutional Principles and their practical Implications: US, India and Ethiopia). November .p. 12.

¹⁶ Yonatan Tesfaye and Van Der Beken., 2013. Ethnic Federalism and Internal Minorities’: The Legal Protection of Internal Minorities’ in Ethiopia. African Journal of International and Comparative Law, p. 37. “For example, the decision to coincide regional boundaries with ethnic groups in Proclamation No. 7/1992 of 14 January 1992 states that: - With the view to implement an ethnic-based decentralization program, the law established fourteen regions. Furthermore, the law listed more than sixty ethnic groups and linked each one of them to one (or in case of the Oromo to two) of the regions. Hence, the law localized the traditional territory of the ethnic groups in one of the fourteen regions. To put it differently, all ethnic groups were considered to be indigenous in one of the fourteen regions. Indigenous internal minorities can claim a wide range of rights based on federal as well as regional constitutions. This is related to the fact that the federal constitution provides for a broad spectrum of rights that are relevant for the protection of both individuals that belong to indigenous internal minorities and to the minorities as groups”.

¹⁷ The Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. 21 August 1995 Article 39(3)

¹⁸ Beza, D., 2013. The right of minorities to political participation under the Ethiopian Electoral System. Mizan Law, Volume 7. No.1, p. 34.

¹⁹ Article 38 0f the FDRE constitutions stipulates that:- Every Ethiopian national, without any discrimination based on colour, race, nation, nationality, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion or other status, has the following rights:
(a) To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly and through freely chosen representatives;
(b) On the attainment of 18 years of age, to vote in accordance with law;

²⁰ Proclamation No. 532/2007 the Amended electoral law of Ethiopia proclamation Article 45 (1(b))). For example, Withstanding from this Article, the NEB decided on Benishangul-Gumuz election case that those non-indigenous people had not the right to inter in electoral contestation because just they did not speak one of the indigenous languages of the region. However, because the non-indigenous people of the region can speak the working language of the region i.e. Amharic, the decision of the NEB was reverted by the House of Federation.

²¹ Yonatan Tesfaye and Van Der Beken., 2013. Ethnic Federalism and Internal minorities: The Legal Protection of Internal Minorities in Ethiopia. African Journal of International and Comparative Law, p. 42.

²² Historical minorities are those group of people who are not exercise and enjoy their rights in before because they are abrogated from their right to participate in political, social and other matters just because simply they differs in language, custom religion, tradition or culture from the rest dominant groups of people.( see Yonatan Tesfaye and Christophe Van Der Beken, Ethnic Federalism and internal minorities: the legal protection of internal Minorities in Ethiopia, 2013)

²³ Non-native residents are people who are internal migrate from their ‘home regional state’ to the other ‘host region’ and did not politically and normatively recognized as people of the region.

²⁴ For example, The Amhara regional state constitution (article 73 (1) established three special Zones (or Nationality Administrations) for the three native group of people (i.e., the Agew Himra, Awi and Oromo); similarly article 74 Benishangul-Gumuz constitution and Benishangul-Gumuz regional Proclamation No. 73/2008, Lissane Hig Gazeta, 1 November 2008, establishes one special woreda namely Mao-Komo. other regions like Tigray regional state constitution Article 47(3) and Gambela regional state constitution Article 39 (2) states the right of minorities to establish their own Woreda and Kebele for example Upo and Komo in Gambella and Kunama in Tigray have their own Kebele.

²⁵ Getachew A., 2011. Federalism and legal pluralism in Ethiopia: preliminary observations on their impacts on the protection of human rights. East African journal of peace and human rights, Volume 17:1, p. 8.

²⁶ Yonatan Tesfaye and Van Der Beken., 2013. Ethnic Federalism and Internal minorities: The legal Protection of Internal Minorities in Ethiopia. African Journal of International and comparative Law, p. 42.

²⁷ Central Statistical Agency, 2007. National population and housing Census , Addis Ababa: CSA ( until the data collection and the dead time of the submission of this paper, the only latest population census with ethnic composition of the local administrative unites of the country is the 2007 population census, Sintayehu Tefera, Co-worker of Ethiopian CSA)

²⁸ Vander, B., 2007. Ethiopia: Constitutional protection of Ethnic Minorities at Regional level. African Focus, Volume 2:1, p. 95.

²⁹ Yonatan Tesfaye and Van Der Beken., 2013. Ethnic Federalism and Internal Minorities: The Legal Protection of Internal minorities in Ethiopia. African Journal of International and Comparative Law, p.5.

³⁰ World Council of Indigenous people, Draft covenant, 1984

³¹ Benishangul-Gumuz Regions State Revised Constitution Approval Proclamation No. 31/2002, Article 3

³² Mesfine, G., 2011. Federalism and conflict management in Ethiopia: case study of Benishangul-Gumuz regional state. Department of peace studies, September, P. 139.

³³ Alemante, G., 2011. Federalism, Human Rights and the EPRDF Constitution: The Bad, the Ugly, and the Evil. Ethiopian news and information update (world press), November, p. 8.

³⁴ Frank, M., 2009. Effects of Ethnic federalism in Ethiopia: Holding together or splitting apart? University of Toronto, p. 19.

³⁵ Frank, M., 2009. Effects of Ethnic federalism in Ethiopia: Holding together or splitting apart? University of Toronto, p. 19.

³⁶ Frank, M., 2009. Effects of Ethnic federalism in Ethiopia: Holding together or splitting apart? University of Toronto, p. 19.

³⁷ Getachew, A., 2011. Federalism and legal pluralism in Ethiopia: preliminary observations on their impacts on the protection of human rights. East African journal of peace and human rights, Volume 17.1, p. 15.

³⁸ Beken, V., 2007. Ethiopian Constitutional protection of Ethnic minorities at regional level. African Focus, 2(1), p. 45, Mengie, L., 2010. Federalism for Unity and Minorities Protection: (A comparative study on constitutional principles and their practical implications: US, India and Ethiopia). November .p. 104 and Getachew, A., 2011. Federalism and legal pluralism in Ethiopia: preliminary observations on their impacts on the protection of human rights. East African journal of peace and human rights, Volume 17.1, p. 21.

³⁹ Beken, V., 2007. Ethiopian Constitutional protection of Ethnic minorities at regional level. African Focus , 2(1),p. 95

⁴⁰ ‘Homeland’ is the territorial area, it may be region, woreda, Kebele levele, in which assigned for people or group of people legally and politically as their land. For example, Oromia region is the home region of Oromos and Afar region for Afars, Amhara region for Amhara, Agew and Oromo, Benishangul-Gumuz region for Berta, Gumuz, Shinsha and Mao-komo etc. are home regional states.

⁴¹ Mengie, L., 2010. Federalism for Unity and Minorities Protection: (A comparative study on constitutional principles and their practical implications: US, India and Ethiopia). November .p. 105.

⁴² Anon., 1994. A hand book on the legal, technical and human rights aspects of election, "human right and election" Professional Training Series No. 2. United Nations New York and Geneva: s.n.,p. 12

⁴³ Human Rights Committee, General Comment 25 (57), General Comments under article 40, paragraph 4, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Adopted by the Committee at its 1510th meeting, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7 (1996).

⁴⁴ Beken, V., 2007. Ethiopian Constitutional protection of Ethnic minorities at regional level. African Focus, 2(1), p. 45.

⁴⁵ Beken, V., 2007. Ethiopian Constitutional protection of Ethnic minorities at regional level. African Focus, 2(1), p. 45.

⁴⁶ Beza, D., 2013. The right of Minorities to political participation under the Ethiopian Electoral system. Mizan law, Volume 7.1, p. 28.

⁴⁷ Mengie, L., 2010. Federalism for Unity and Minorities Protection: (A comparative study on constitutional principles and their practical implications: US, India and Ethiopia)... November .p. 105.

⁴⁸ Tsegaye, R., 2004. State constitutions in federal Ethiopia: A preliminary observation. A summery for the Bellagio conference. Addis Ababa, s.n

⁴⁹ Tsegaye, R., 2004. State constitutions in federal Ethiopia: A preliminary observation. A summery for the Bellagio conference. Addis Ababa, s.n P. 11

⁵⁰ Benishangul-Gumuz woreda power decentralization administration establishment proclamation No. 86/2002 article 9 (1)

⁵¹ Benishangul-Gumuz woreda power decentralization administration establishment proclamation No. 86/2002 article 9 (1)

⁵² Mesfine, G., 2011. Federalism and conflict management in Ethiopia: case study of Benishangul-Gumuz regional state. Department of peace studies, September, P. 78.

⁵³ Mesfine, G., 2011. Federalism and conflict management in Ethiopia: case study of Benishangul-Gumuz regional state. Department of peace studies, September, p. 89

⁵⁴ The introduction of ‘non-indigenous’ and ‘indigenous’ group of people and their respective rights under the Benishangul-Gumuz regional constitution (Art. 3) and the “founder nation” in Gambella constitution (Art.46 (1)) to convey the same meaning.

⁵⁵ Historically Ethnic groups in the country have a hostile relation in which some argues that there where an ethnic cleavage and dominance of one over the other in the political history of the country as well as a force full subjugation and assimilation of different ethnic groups in the then time makes the history of the country unfaithful.

⁵⁶ Mesfin, G., 2011. Federalism and conflict management in Ethiopia: case study of Benishangul-Gumuz regional state. Department of peace studies, September, P. 78.

⁵⁷ Centerla Statistical Agency , 2007. National population and housing Census , Addis Ababa: CSA 13

⁵⁸ Ian, V. D., 1996. A conceptual map of political participation. Journal of American Institute, p. 4.

⁵⁹ Ian, V. D., 1996. A conceptual map of political participation. Journal of American Institute, p. 4.

⁶⁰ Ian, V. D., 1996. A conceptual map of political participation. Journal of American Institute, p. 4.

⁶¹ Hans, K., 2005. The right to political participation and the information society, associate Professor of public policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta (USA), P. 1&2

⁶² Julie, B., 2004. The implementation of Quotas, African Exper ience. Sweden, s.n., p. 125 and Shimelis, S., 2011. Electoral participation as a fundamental political right of persons with disability in Ethiopia: critical examination of the law and the practice... School of law and governance , p. 41

⁶³ Hans, K., 2005. The right to political participation and the information society. Associate professor of public policy, Gorgia Institute of Technology, pp. 1-2.

⁶⁴ The ICCPR article 25 and UDHR article 21

⁶⁵ The UDHR article 21 (1&3)

⁶⁶ The ICCPR article 25

⁶⁷ Human Rights Committee, General Comment 25 (57), General Comments under article 40, paragraph 4, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Adopted by the Committee at its 1510th meeting, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7 (1996).

⁶⁸ Human Rights Committee, General Comment 25 (57), General Comments under article 40, paragraph 4, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Adopted by the Committee at its 1510th meeting, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7 (1996).

⁶⁹ Jan, V. D., 1996. A conceptual map of political participation. Journal of American Institute, p. 4.

⁷⁰ Human Rights Committee, General Comment 25 (57), General Comments under article 40, paragraph 4, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Adopted by the Committee at its 1510th meeting, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7 (1996).

⁷¹ Anon., 1994. A hand book on the legal, technical and human rights aspects of election, "human right and election" Professional Training Series No. 2. United Nations New York and Geneva: s.n.,p.78

⁷² Jan, V. D., 1996. A conceptual map of political participation. Journal of American Institute, p. 4.

⁷³ UDHR article 21(3)

⁷⁴ ICCPR article 25 (b)

⁷⁵ Anon., 1994. A hand book on the legal, technical and human rights aspects of election, "human right and election" Professional Training Series No. 2. United Nations New York and Geneva: s.n., pp. 68-88

⁷⁶ Anon., 1994. A hand book on the legal, technical and human rights aspects of election, "human right and election" Professional Training Series No. 2. United Nations New York and Geneva: s.n., p. 72

⁷⁷ Anon., 1994. A hand book on the legal, technical and human rights aspects of election, "human right and election" Professional Training Series No. 2. United Nations New York and Geneva: s.n., p.79

⁷⁸ Anon., 1994. A hand book on the legal, technical and human rights aspects of election, "human right and election" Professional Training Series No. 2. United Nations New York and Geneva: s.n., p. 83

⁷⁹ Human Rights Committee, General Comment 25 (57), General Comments under article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Adopted by the Committee at its 1510th meeting, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7

⁸⁰ Human Rights Committee, General Comment 25 (57), General Comments under article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Adopted by the Committee at its 1510th meeting, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7

⁸¹ Human Rights Committee, General Comment 25 (57), General Comments under article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Adopted by the Committee at its 1510th meeting, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7

⁸² Anon., 2000. Good practice hand book, Public participation in decision making local environmental Decision making, the. Newcastle : s.n.p.5

⁸³ Klein, H., 2005. "The right to political participation and the information society". pp. 1-2., Ian, V. D., 1996. A conceptual map of political participation. Journal of American Institute, p. 16.

⁸⁴ The ICCPR article 25 (a&C)

⁸⁵ Human Rights Committee, General Comment 25 (57), General Comments under article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Adopted by the Committee at its 1510th meeting, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7 (1996)

⁸⁶ Renee A. Irvin and John Stansbury, 1996. Citizen participation in decision making: is it Worth the Effect? p. 6.

⁸⁷ Renee A. Irvin and John Stansbury, 1996. Citizen participation in decision making: is it Worth the Effect? p. 2.

⁸⁸ Renee A. Irvin and John Stansbury, 1996. Citizen participation in decision making: is it Worth the Effect? p. 2.

⁸⁹ UDHR article 21 (1)

⁹⁰ ICCPR article 25 (a)

⁹¹ Human Rights Committee, General Comment 25 (57), General Comments under article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Adopted by the Committee at its 1510th meeting, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7 (1996)

⁹² Karen, B., 2003. The political representation of women and ethnic minorities in established Democracies. p. 4.

⁹³ Karen, B., 2003. The political representation of women and ethnic minorities in established Democracies. p. 4.

⁹⁴ Kymlicka, W., 1995. Multi-cultural citizenship. pp. 10-33.

⁹⁵ Klein, H., 2005. "The right to political participation and the information society". pp. 1-2., Deth, J. V., 1996. A conceptual map of political participation. Journal of American institute, p. 16. And Shimelis, S., 2011. Electoral participation as a fundamental political rights of persons with disability in Ethiopia: critical examination of the law and practice. p. 43.

⁹⁶ Klein, H., 2005. "The right to political participation and the information society". pp. 1-2., Deth, J. V., 1996. A conceptual map of political participation. Journal of American institute, p. 16. And Shimelis, S., 2011. Electoral participation as a fundamental political rights of persons with disability in Ethiopia: critical examination of the law and practice. p. 43.

⁹⁷ Klein, H., 2005. "The right to political participation and the information society". pp. 1-2.

⁹⁸ Shimelis, S., 2011. Electoral participation as a fundamental political rights of persons with disability in Ethiopia: critical examination of the law and practice. p. 43.

⁹⁹ Klein, H., 2005. "The right to political participation and the information society". pp. 1-2., Deth, J. V., 1996. A conceptual map of political participation. Journal of American institute, p. 16. And Shimelis, S., 2011. Electoral participation as a fundamental political rights of persons with disability in Ethiopia: critical examination of the law and practice. p. 43.

¹⁰⁰ Anaya, S. J., 2010. The Evolution of the Concept of Indigenous People and Its Contemporary Dimensions. In: D. Solomon, ed. Perspectives on the rights of minorities and indigenous People in Africa. Cape Town: Pretoria University Law Press PULP. Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 78. Timo, M., 2000. Identity, Difference and Otherness, The concepts of 'people', 'Indigenous People' and 'Minority' in International Law. 1st ed. Helsinki: University of Helsinki .p.111

¹⁰¹ Anaya, S. J., 2010. The Evolution of the Concept of Indigenous People and Its Contemporary Dimensions. In: D. Solomon, ed. Perspectives on the rights of minorities and indigenous People in Africa. Cape Town: Pretoria University Law Press PULP. Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 78. Timo, M., 2000. Identity, Difference and Otherness, The concepts of 'people', 'Indigenous People' and 'Minority' in International Law. 1st ed. Helsinki: University of Helsinki .p.111

¹⁰² Anaya, S. J., 2010. The Evolution of the Concept of Indigenous People and Its Contemporary Dimensions. In: D. Solomon, ed. Perspectives on the rights of minorities and indigenous People in Africa. Cape Town: Pretoria University Law Press PULP, p. 23. , Timo, M., 2000. Identity, Difference and Otherness, The concepts of 'people', 'Indigenous People' and 'Minority' in International Law. 1st ed. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, P. 115 and Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 78.

¹⁰³ Timo, M., 2000. Identity, Difference and Otherness, The concepts of 'people', 'Indigenous People' and 'Minority' in International Law. 1st ed. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, p. 110.

¹⁰⁴ Timo, M., 2000. Identity, Difference and Otherness, The concepts of 'people', 'Indigenous People' and 'Minority' in International Law. 1st ed. Helsinki: University of Helsinki .p.110 and Webster’s third new international Dictionary (1976), P. 1151.

¹⁰⁵ Anaya, S. J., 2010. The Evolution of the Concept of Indigenous People and Its Contemporary Dimensions. In: D. Solomon, ed. Perspectives on the rights of minorities and indigenous People in Africa. Cape Town: Pretoria University Law Press PULP, p. 23. , Timo, M., 2000. Identity, Difference and Otherness, The concepts of 'people', 'Indigenous People' and 'Minority' in International Law. 1st ed. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, P. 115 and Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 78.

¹⁰⁶ Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 78 and Anaya, S. J., 2010. The Evolution of the Concept of Indigenous People and Its Contemporary Dimensions. In: D. Solomon, ed. Perspectives on the rights of minorities and indigenous People in Africa. Cape Town: Pretoria University Law Press PULP, p. 23.

¹⁰⁷ Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 79.

¹⁰⁸ Anaya, S. J., 2010. The Evolution of the Concept of Indigenous People and Its Contemporary Dimensions. In: D. Solomon, ed. Perspectives on the rights of minorities and indigenous People in Africa. Cape Town: Pretoria University Law Press PULP, p. 23.

¹⁰⁹ Anaya, S. J., 2010. The Evolution of the Concept of Indigenous People and Its Contemporary Dimensions. In: D. Solomon, ed. Perspectives on the rights of minorities and indigenous People in Africa. Cape Town: Pretoria University Law Press PULP, P. 81

¹¹⁰ Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 81.

¹¹¹ Anaya, S. J., 2010. The Evolution of the Concept of Indigenous People and Its Contemporary Dimensions. In: D. Solomon, ed. Perspectives on the rights of minorities and indigenous People in Africa. Cape Town: Pretoria University Law Press PULP, p. 23 and Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 81.

¹¹² Timo, M., 2000. Identity, Difference and Otherness, The concepts of 'people', 'Indigenous People' and 'Minority' in International Law. 1st ed. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, P. 115 and Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 81.

¹¹³ Timo, M., 2000. Identity, Difference and Otherness, The concepts of 'people', 'Indigenous People' and 'Minority' in International Law. 1st ed. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, P. 129 and Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 86.

¹¹⁴ Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 87.

¹¹⁵ Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous? ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethno nationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 13 8, 9(1), p. 88.

¹¹⁶ Article 1, ILO convention 169, 1989, ‘concerning indigenous and tribal people in independent countries’. Timo, M., 2000. Identity, Difference and Otherness, The concepts of 'people', 'Indigenous People' and 'Minority' in International Law. 1st ed. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, P. 113 and Corntassel, J., 2003. Who is Indigenous?