Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Ethnic Federalism and Conflict in Ethiopia: What Lessons Can Other Jurisdictions Draw?

Ethnic Federalism and Conflict in Ethiopia: What Lessons Can Other Jurisdictions Draw? I. Introduction Though there is no universally accepted definition to the notion of federalism, for the concept is dynamic and has changed its nature through time, it has become an important instrument to serve diverse and common interests in a given nation, establishing a union to discharge common functions and regional governments to accommodate diverse interests. Federal systems have taken deviating forms in different jurisdictions because they are meant to serve and reflect the prevailing social, political and economic contexts of the respective federations. Hence, there is no ideal or perfect federalism that is suitable for all essentially federal societies: this is why federations adopt different forms of federalism to manage their own unique internal problems. Despite such disparity and lack of consensus on the concept of federalism as a form of government, one still may describe it and make a distinction between federalism, on one hand, and other forms of government, on the other. Malcolm M. Feeley has explained this: A political entity that is governed by a single central government making all significant decisions cannot be described as federal entity without abandoning the ordinary meaning of the term; the same is true for a group of http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png African Journal of International and Comparative Law Edinburgh University Press

Ethnic Federalism and Conflict in Ethiopia: What Lessons Can Other Jurisdictions Draw?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/edinburgh-university-press/ethnic-federalism-and-conflict-in-ethiopia-what-lessons-can-other-ExcoFhpeRZ
Publisher
Edinburgh University Press
Copyright
© Edinburgh University Press 2015
Subject
Articles; African Studies
ISSN
0954-8890
eISSN
1755-1609
DOI
10.3366/ajicl.2015.0131
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

I. Introduction Though there is no universally accepted definition to the notion of federalism, for the concept is dynamic and has changed its nature through time, it has become an important instrument to serve diverse and common interests in a given nation, establishing a union to discharge common functions and regional governments to accommodate diverse interests. Federal systems have taken deviating forms in different jurisdictions because they are meant to serve and reflect the prevailing social, political and economic contexts of the respective federations. Hence, there is no ideal or perfect federalism that is suitable for all essentially federal societies: this is why federations adopt different forms of federalism to manage their own unique internal problems. Despite such disparity and lack of consensus on the concept of federalism as a form of government, one still may describe it and make a distinction between federalism, on one hand, and other forms of government, on the other. Malcolm M. Feeley has explained this: A political entity that is governed by a single central government making all significant decisions cannot be described as federal entity without abandoning the ordinary meaning of the term; the same is true for a group of

Journal

African Journal of International and Comparative LawEdinburgh University Press

Published: Oct 1, 2015

There are no references for this article.