A Legal Analysis of the Ethiopian Government's Establishment of the Muslim Council: A Violation of Constitutional Principles

A Legal Analysis of the Ethiopian Government's Establishment of the Muslim Council: A Violation of Constitutional Principles

The Ethiopian Government's Proclamation No. 1207/2020, which establishes the Ethiopian Islamic Affairs General Council, raises significant legal concerns. This move appears to violate the country's constitutional principles, specifically the separation of state and religion (Article 11) and the right to equality (Article 25).

Firstly, the establishment of a religious council by the state contravenes the constitutional principle of separation of state and religion. By creating a legal entity for Islamic affairs, the government is effectively interfering in religious matters, which is prohibited by Article 11. This move blurs the line between state and religion, potentially leading to further entanglement and favoritism towards one religion over others.

Secondly, the Proclamation grants legal personality to Muslim institutions, organizations, and societies without requiring special registration. This preferential treatment violates the right to equality enshrined in Article 25. By granting exclusive legal status to Islamic entities, the government is discriminating against other religious groups, which are not afforded the same privileges. This move undermines the constitutional guarantee of equal protection under the law, regardless of religion or belief.

Furthermore, this Proclamation sets a dangerous legal precedent, potentially leading to the establishment of similar religious councils by the state. This could result in a hierarchical system where certain religions are favored over others, contradicting the principles of secularism and equal treatment.

In conclusion, the Ethiopian Government's establishment of the Muslim Council through Proclamation No. 1207/2020 violates the country's constitutional principles of separation of state and religion and the right to equality. This move has significant legal implications and raises concerns about the government's commitment to upholding the Constitution and protecting the rights of all citizens, regardless of their religious beliefs.

Proclamation

 

Proclamation No.1207-2020 

A proclamation to provide Legal personality for Ethiopian Islamic Affairs General Council

FEDERAL NEGARIT GAZETTE

OF THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA

ADDlS ABABA 4th July, 2020

Proclamation No.1207/2020

A proclamation to provide Legal personality for Ethiopian Islamic Affairs General Council

WHEREAS, it has become necessary to provide legal personality on the national institution organized by Ethiopian Muslims in accordance with the right to establish citizens’ rights to religious administration institutions based on Article 27(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia.

 WHEREAS, it has become necessary to provide legal personality to Ethiopian Islamic Affairs General Council which is a public institution that has a defacto recognition and that represents a large number of Muslim community in relation to the government as well as internationally.

NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with Article 55(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. it is hereby proclaimed as Follows: 

 

1. Short Title

This Proclamation may be cited as “A proclamation to provide Legal personality to Ethiopian Islamic Affairs General Council No.1207/2020″.

2. Legal Personality

In accordance with this Proclamation Ethiopian Islamic Affairs General Council and religious institutions, organizations and Societies established and to be established under it shall have legal personality without requirement of especial registration.

3. Heading

The institution may be cited with its full name “Ethiopian Islamic Affairs General Council” and may also be referred to using an abbreviation for convenience of usage in emblems or official seal or stamps as may be necessary.

4. Budget

The budget of the Council shall be covered by gifts obtained from in and out of the country, Contributions collected from Muslim communities, service fees and donations allowed by the religion.

Without prejudice to the provision of Sub-Article (1) of this Article the Council can engage in additional income generating and development activities pursuant to other tax and commercial administration laws of the country.

The Council shall establish a clear and transparent Financial Administration system.

5. Working Language

The working language of the Council shall be determined by bylaws taking into account the Federal and Regional working languages.

6. Transitory Provisions

All properties, obligations and rights obtained before the effective date of this proclamation by all organs of the Ethiopian Islamic Affairs General Council (Mejlis) remain valid.

The General Council may issue Regulation for its internal activity and organization.

This Proclamation shall not affect the rights of other religious institutions established by Ethiopian Muslims either at the Federal or Regional level or their right to organize and be registered in the future.

7. Effective Date

This Proclamation shall enter into force on the date of publication in the Federal Negarit Gazette.

 

Done at Addis Ababa, on this 4th day of July, 2020.

SAHELWORK ZEWDE

PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERA DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA

Contact Us

info@ethiopianmajlis.org.et+251123456789Tor Hayloch, Next to Netherlands Embassy

 

  

Grok

Habtamu Nini Abino is a fascinating figure with a diverse background. He's a former Secretary General of the House of Federation in Ethiopia, a position that involved working on constitutional matters and ensuring the smooth functioning of the legislative body. He also served as the Secretary of the Interparliamentary Group of Ethiopia (IPU), which is a forum for parliamentarians to exchange ideas and foster international cooperation.

Beyond his political and parliamentary career, Habtamu Nini Abino is a member of the Liberal Party of Canada and currently resides in Ottawa, Canada. He has a keen interest in global politics and has written extensively on the "no limits" partnership between Russia and China, and its implications for Africa and poor South-South countries.

In addition to his political and academic pursuits, Habtamu Nini Abino has authored several books, including "The Second Republic and the Politics of Article 39 in Ethiopia" and "Liberal Democracy and The Ethiopian Constitution of 1994, Users Hand Book". These works reflect his deep understanding of Ethiopian politics and his commitment to fostering a better understanding of liberal democracy.

So, in a nutshell, Habtamu Nini Abino is a multifaceted individual with a rich background in politics, law, and international relations. He's a man of many talents, and his work has contributed significantly to our understanding of the complexities of Ethiopian politics and the global geopolitical landscape

Ethiopianism, Nationalism and the tale of two views.

 

Introduction:

The term "Ethiopianism" can be a source of confusion, as it encompasses two vastly different ideologies. On one hand, there is the ethno-religious ideology of fascism, which promotes a narrow and exclusive definition of Ethiopian identity, intolerant of diversity and dissent. On the other hand, there is the constitutional Ethiopianism, which embodies the principles of unity in diversity, democracy, and inclusivity, recognizing the rich cultural and religious tapestry that defines Ethiopia. It is essential to discern which version of Ethiopianism is being advocated for, as the two ideologies have vastly different implications for the country's social cohesion, political stability, and democratic progress. By understanding the underlying rationales and values, we can engage in informed discussions and promote a more inclusive and equitable society for all Ethiopians.

A / The True Meaning of Ethiopianism: Unity in Diversity

Ethiopianism, as enshrined in the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, is a beacon of hope and unity for a diverse nation. It embodies the principles of democracy, equality, and inclusivity, recognizing the rich cultural and religious tapestry that defines Ethiopia.

At its core, Ethiopianism celebrates the unity of Ethiopians as citizens, transcending ethnic, religious, and cultural boundaries. It acknowledges the country's multination federal structure, where diverse groups coexist and contribute to the nation's rich heritage.

The Constitution enshrines democratic values, ensuring equal rights and opportunities for all citizens. Ethiopianism embraces this democracy, promoting active participation, free expression, and the rule of law.

One of the cornerstones of Ethiopianism is the equality of religions. It recognizes the freedom to practice one's faith without fear of persecution or discrimination, fostering a climate of mutual respect and understanding.

Ethiopianism also celebrates the diversity of cultures and views, acknowledging the unique traditions and perspectives that enrich the nation. It encourages the preservation and promotion of local customs, languages, and beliefs, while promoting a shared sense of national identity.

The concept of "Unity in Diversity" is at the heart of Ethiopianism. It recognizes that Ethiopia's strength lies in its ability to bring together people from different backgrounds, cultures, and beliefs, united in their shared humanity and citizenship.

In conclusion, Ethiopianism, as defined in the Constitution, is a powerful symbol of unity, democracy, and inclusivity. It celebrates the diversity that makes Ethiopia strong, while promoting a shared sense of purpose and belonging. By embracing these principles, Ethiopians can build a brighter future, where all citizens can thrive and contribute to the nation's prosperity.

B/ The Dangerous Rise of Ethiopianism: An Ideology of Exclusion and Intolerance

Ethiopianism, a relatively new term, has been gaining traction in recent years, particularly among certain groups in Ethiopia and its diaspora. On the surface, it may seem like a harmless expression of national pride and unity. However, beneath its veneer lies a dangerous ideology that promotes a toxic form of fascism, intolerance, and exclusion.

At its core, Ethiopianism is an ethno-religious ideology that advocates for the assimilation of all Ethiopians into a single, homogeneous entity. It demands absolute loyalty to one religion, one ideology, and one nation, leaving no room for diversity, pluralism, or dissent. This ideology is rooted in a distorted interpretation of Ethiopian history and culture, which is used to justify its extreme views.

One of the most alarming aspects of Ethiopianism is its blatant rejection of pluralism in all its forms. It seeks to erase the rich cultural, linguistic, and religious diversity that has long been a hallmark of Ethiopian society. Minorities, already vulnerable and marginalized, are particularly at risk under this ideology, as it denies their very existence and legitimacy.

Ethiopianism's fascist tendencies are also evident in its glorification of authoritarianism and militarism. It promotes a cult of personality around its leaders, who are seen as infallible and divine. This has led to a culture of fear, intimidation, and violence, where dissent is brutally suppressed and opposition is labeled as treasonous.

Furthermore, Ethiopianism's fixation on a single, monolithic identity ignores the complex and multifaceted nature of Ethiopian society. It dismisses the country's history of cultural exchange, migration, and diversity, which has shaped its very fabric. By imposing a narrow, exclusionary definition of Ethiopian-ness, this ideology risks tearing the country apart, rather than uniting it.

In conclusion, Ethiopianism is a dangerous ideology that promotes intolerance, exclusion, and fascism. Its rejection of pluralism, glorification of authoritarianism, and fixation on a single identity pose a significant threat to Ethiopia's social cohesion, stability, and democratic progress. It is essential to recognize and reject this ideology, instead embracing the rich diversity and inclusivity that have long defined Ethiopian society.

C/ Democratic Nationalism vs Narrow Nationalism: Building Democracy or Undermining It?

Nationalism, a political ideology that emphasizes the importance of a nation's culture, language, and identity, can take different forms. Two distinct types of nationalism are Democratic Nationalism and Narrow Nationalism. Understanding the differences between these two concepts is crucial, especially in the context of Ethiopia's political landscape.

Democratic Nationalism:

Democratic Nationalism prioritizes the well-being and inclusivity of all citizens within a nation. It promotes democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, recognizing the diversity of cultures and identities within a nation. This ideology encourages open borders, international cooperation, and global citizenship. Democratic Nationalism fosters a sense of shared citizenship and belonging, rather than exclusionary ethnic or religious identities.

Narrow Nationalism:

Narrow Nationalism, on the other hand, focuses on the dominance of a single ethnic or religious group within a nation. It often leads to exclusionary policies, xenophobia, and chauvinism. This ideology can result in discrimination against minorities, suppression of dissenting voices, and even violence. Narrow Nationalism can undermine democracy and human rights, prioritizing the interests of a single group over the well-being of all citizens.

Building Democracy or Undermining It?

Democratic Nationalism can indeed contribute to building democracy by promoting inclusivity, diversity, and human rights. It recognizes the value of diverse perspectives and cultures, fostering a sense of shared citizenship and belonging. In contrast, Narrow Nationalism can undermine democracy by promoting exclusionary policies and suppressing minority voices.

Ethiopian People's Democratic Front (EPDF) and Federalism:

The EPDF, a former political coalition in Ethiopia, professed Democratic Nationalism as its ideology. However, its implementation was often criticized for being closer to Narrow Nationalism, prioritizing the interests of a single ethnic group over others. Federalism, a system of government that divides power between a central authority and regional entities, can be compatible with Democratic Nationalism. Federalism recognizes the diversity of cultures and identities within a nation, providing autonomy to regional entities while maintaining a unified national framework.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, Democratic Nationalism and Narrow Nationalism have distinct approaches to nation-building. While Democratic Nationalism promotes inclusivity, diversity, and human rights, Narrow Nationalism often leads to exclusionary policies and suppression of minority voices. Ethiopia's experience with the EPDF highlights the importance of genuinely implementing Democratic Nationalism, recognizing the diversity of cultures and identities within the nation. Federalism can be a suitable framework for accommodating this diversity, promoting democracy and human rights for all citizens.

D/Conclusion:

Ethiopianism is a complex and multifaceted concept that has evolved over time, encompassing various ideologies and interpretations. Two dominant forms of Ethiopianism have emerged: narrow nationalism and democratic nationalism. The former promotes an exclusive, ethno-religious, and linguistic identity, often perpetuating racism and fascism. In contrast, democratic nationalism advocates for an inclusive, diverse, and democratic Ethiopia, where all citizens enjoy equal rights and opportunities.

Ethiopianism as an ideology of ethno-religious and linguistic racism and fascism is a harmful and exclusionary narrative that has been used to justify discrimination, violence, and oppression. This ideology must be rejected and replaced with a democratic and inclusive understanding of Ethiopianism, which values diversity, promotes equality, and fosters a sense of belonging among all citizens.

In defining these concepts, we must recognize the historical and cultural contexts that have shaped Ethiopianism. We must also acknowledge the power dynamics and political interests that have influenced its evolution. By promoting a democratic and inclusive understanding of Ethiopianism, we can work towards a more just and equitable society, where all citizens can thrive and contribute to the country's rich cultural heritage.

Definitions:

- Narrow Nationalism: An exclusive and restrictive form of nationalism that prioritizes a single ethnic, religious, or linguistic group, often perpetuating racism, fascism, and discrimination.

- Democratic Nationalism: An inclusive and diverse form of nationalism that values the equality and rights of all citizens, promoting democracy, diversity, and social justice.

- Ethiopianism: A complex and multifaceted concept that encompasses various ideologies and interpretations, including narrow nationalism and democratic nationalism, with a focus on Ethiopian identity, culture, and politics.

Abolishing ethnic homelands is the way forward for Ethiopia : Ethiopia Insight

Moges Zewdu Teshome

Moges is a doctoral candidate in Interdisciplinary International Studies at the Vienna School of International Studies. He is also the host of the Buffet of Ideas-የሀሳብ ገበታ podcast.

Jawar has reformed himself—now let’s reform our divisive constitution

         21 May, 2024

 Moges Zewdu Teshome

  

In his recent longform Addis Standard interview, Jawar Mohammad raised some crucial issues pertaining to Ethiopia’s contemporary politics and its history. As usual, Jawar, commendably, did not shy away from forthright and nuanced discussion of important, controversial, thorny subjects such as multinational federation, nation- and/or state-building, and the need to tame both ethno-nationalism and Ethio-nationalism.

While it was a constructive contribution, some of the issues raised and arguments he made call for a deeper treatment and some for a critical response.

Jawar has made strategic shifts as a person and politician, becoming more accommodating of his opponents and a less strident advocate of Oromo nationalism. Earlier in his career, he did not reflect critically on the philosophical underpinnings of Ethiopia’s ethnic federation, even though he advocated for democratization of the multinational federation all along.

These shifts may be due to, inter alia, his period of introspection in prison, a painful realization of the danger emanating from the untethered horse of ethnic nationalism, the rise of a formidable Amhara nationalism which posed a security dilemma, and the ‘cognitive punch’ caused by a series of civil wars.

I believe these events have had a profound impact on his understanding of the complexities of Ethiopian politics and the need for a more accommodating approach.

Still, though Jawar is clearly grappling these days with Ethiopia’s most fundamental political dilemmas, he perpetuates confusion surrounding the concepts of multinational and multicultural federalism, is plain wrong about prioritising democratization of a deformed mode of federalism, and his notion of “progressive patriotism” needs debate and definition.

Three Decades of Ethnic Politics

This year marks the 30th anniversary of the institutionalization of ethnic federalism or, as many proponents call it, multinational federalism. With the dawn of the new constitutional order, the ethnonationalists declared victory, not so much over the ancien régime but over traditional Ethiopian nationalism, and hoped to foreclose any debate henceforth.

Ever since, we have witnessed a further entrenchment of ethnic politics in areas where it existed before and the birth of Amhara nationalism. Thus, after three decades, the discourse and practice of ethnic politics has become—quite unfortunately, but unsurprisingly—the main organizing political principle.

After all, a radical departure from the past through a new constitutional order meant the creation of a new generation that takes pride in such an order. Through institutional and ideological engineering, a new generation of ethnic federalists was created, and ethnicity became an increasingly prominent feature in all aspects of society.

But that is only part of the story.

The reality is that equality, justice, and fraternity among ethno-linguistic groups has not prevailed. The promised strong political community has not emerged. We are instead mired in endless political crises, ethnic conflicts, displacement, and an estranged society.

It is almost as if national integration was never intended.

This quick glance of our political experiment indicates that, on the one hand, ethnic politics will stay with us for the foreseeable future and, on the other, that there is a need to revisit our perilous journey and intervene in the mid-life crisis of our ethnic constitutional order.

Misguided Conflation

In this regard, I agree with Jawar that “we must also be careful not to take ethnicity as the alpha and omega of politics.” I take issue, however, with his conflation of federalism with multinational federalism and of multicultural federalism with a unitary nation-state.

Jawar´s conceptualization of federalism is misguided. He writes: “To analyze the ruling party’s alleged shift of state-building strategy from ‘multinational federalism’ to a ‘multicultural nation-state’, we need to go back and examine what has been attempted in the past and how it fared.”

This suggest that he thinks an attempt to create a multicultural federal state is an attempt to create a multicultural nation-state. However, that is not the case. A nation-state is formed by a cultural community that shares the same language, traditions, and history.

Federalism is a type of government primarily defined by the tenet of co-existing self-rule and shared rule. Multinational federalism is just one form; multicultural federalism another.

The essence of multicultural federalism is official recognition of cultural and linguistic communities within the state and empowering them to nurture their culture, language, religion, and interests.

Multicultural federalism is perhaps the most common institutional design in the world. India is as diverse (if not more so) as Ethiopia, and has adopted a multicultural federalism without becoming a nation-state. Closer to home, Nigeria also instituted multicultural federalism without existing as a nation-state.

The key aspect that India and Nigeria have in common is the sovereignty of “we the people”, the lack of a secession clause, and the absence of de jure ethnic homelands, the essential—and most divisive—element of multinational federalism.

It is misleading and unhelpful of Jawar to blur the lines between a multicultural federation and a nation-state—especially when we need one but not the other.

Divisive Framing

Similarly, I found Jawar’s discussion of multinational and multicultural federalism empirically unconvincing. Jawar asserts: “…they [Prosperity Party] aimed to carve out alternative support bases from unitarist constituencies and urban cultural, economic, and media elites.”

However, my empirical finding is that almost every organized political actor in Ethiopia is federalist not unitarist, including Prosperity Party, Ezema, Balderas, National Movement of Amhara, Enat Party, Equality and Justice Party, Hibir Ethiopia, Ethiopian Democratic Party and the new incarnation of Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Party.

In the case of the ruling party, the party’s manifesto supports “ህብረ-ብሄራዊ ፌዴራሊዝም”—“multinational federalism”. Surveys of public opinion have also found strong support for federalism, including Afrobarometer findings this year.

Jawar is not alone in this dangerous false framing. Recall that the Tigray People’s Liberation Front and its supporters accused the Prosperity Party regime of being unitarist as they prepared for war. Not only does the false federalist vs unitarist dichotomy breed division, it deflects from engagement with critical issues and undermines those sincerely concerned about the trajectory of our political order and call for revisiting a flawed constitutional design.

We must engage with real and consequential issues instead of shrouding them in mist.

Flawed by Design

Federalism is not inherently divisive, but ethnic federalism is. The common adage goes that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. In the Ethiopian case, even this is not befitting because the journey started with bad faith.

That bad faith lies in the flawed design that, for all legal and practical purposes, aimed at the eventual unmaking of the Ethiopian polity and making of independent nations, should the marriage of convenience turn out to be inconvenient.

To use Prof. Adeno Addis´s words from a previous Ethiopia Insight commentary, Ethiopia’s 1994 constitution created “strangers and served as a suicidal pact.” Well, where are we today? Indeed, a time bomb has, from time to time, exploded, and we have already attempted suicide, the latest example being the war in and around Tigray.

WE’RE AN INDEPENDENT MEDIA. HELP AMPLIFY OUR WORK!

Jawar repeatedly talks about democratizing the multinational federation as a midcourse correction. It is true that the practice of federalism and authoritarianism are strange bedfellows. But the democratization process can only make a difference if the design is not flawed from its inception. Structural problems need structural policy interventions head-on.

The structural problem is the design of the constitutional order itself. Whether the form of government is democratic or not, though important, is not the main culprit in the Ethiopian context. Jawar argues, “In the long run, EPRDF ideologues hoped that multinationalism would positively contribute to the state-building project by promoting social cohesion and solidifying its legitimacy.”

That is not the case, precisely because the constitutional design is flawed for it fails to craft a sense of “We, the people.” When the constituent elements are wilfully and shortsightedly disenfranchised, you cannot mend it through second-order fixes.

What is flawed by design cannot and should not be addressed by democratic practice. From the outset, democracy is dead in the kingdom of ethnic homelands. As Donald Horowitz succinctly remarked, “Democracy is about inclusion and exclusion, access to power, the privileges that go with inclusion, and the penalties that accompany exclusion. In severely divided societies, ethnic identity provides clear lines to determine who will be included and who will be excluded.”

This is the story of present-day Ethiopia: separate ethnic homelands, social fragmentation, political polarization, permanent exclusion of minorities, and other societal scars. Across the federation, individuals do not feels included in the political community unless they submit to the will of the homeland owners.

There is no democracy among strangers. Ethnic federation cannot be democratic; it is a fallacy of the highest order to expect otherwise. Without a sense of belongingness within a given political community, there is no democracy but instead the seeds of ethnic cleansing covered in a discourse of self-determination, multinational federation, and, theoretically, democracy.

The current structure is unsustainable, and all that has kept the lid on the ethnic homelands diverging more from each other was the centralized party system and the strong leader, the Marshall Tito of Ethiopia, late Meles Zenawi. As we have witnessed, with both gone, the center has barely held.

“Progressive Patriotism”?

As part of his call to meet in the middle, Jawar proposed a notion of “progressive patriotism”. But what and how much of each element, i.e., a progressive approach and patriot allegiance to the state, should feature? As usual, the devil lies in the details, but suffice to say finding the golden mean hinges on defining a national identity based on shared cultures and civic values.

It is a pity that we pride ourselves on having one of the oldest states in the world, on the one hand, and still in search of our national identity, on the other. Since what remained of disoriented revolutions and devastating civil wars was then severely battered by the unbridled practice of competing ethnic nationalism, the very conception of citizenship has become thin in contemporary Ethiopia.

So, within this context, what is the core minimum that hangs progressiveness and patriotism together? Part of the answer lies in defining and redefining the constituent element of the political order: “We, the people of Ethiopia.” In this regard, Jawar should have reflected more on how the order fared in building a national identity rather than primarily focusing on the state-building efforts of the EPRDF. The process and policies of forging a strong sense of belonging among Ethiopians are critically important in the current Ethiopian context.

As a starting point, the people can be defined in terms of thin cultural community and thick political community.

A thin cultural community refers to the parallel co-existence of diverse cultural groups and state identity built on civic nationalism.

A thick political community encapsulates integrating mechanisms such as inclusive biographical narratives, the de-ethnicization of political participation, minority protection schemes, the introduction of more official languages and a second language in each regional state, trimming the size of regions such that they will not threat the very existence of the state, the re-introduction of national volunteer service, all underpinned by economic integration.

It is hoped that an ever-thicker cultural community will eventually emerge, if things go well.

National Soul-Searching

It is encouraging that prominent people like Jawar are keeping the political discourse in motion. We cannot solve our perennial problems by downplaying them or, even worse, shying away from engaging with them. Pointing out the virtues and vices of the current constitutional order with objectivity has no substitution. The constitutional order is flawed by design and sustained by practice.

As we look ahead, the starting point in our soul-searching endeavor should be determining who we are and what we envision for the future. To this end, overhauling the constitution is non-negotiable.

But before that process even begins, we must change the practices that sustain the current political order. For that to occur, we “need to find room for compromise to begin a serious deliberation that will not leave any group feeling disenfranchised,” as Jawar himself suggested.

 

This is the author’s viewpoint. However, Ethiopia Insight will correct clear factual errors.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Moges Zewdu Teshome

Moges is a doctoral candidate in Interdisciplinary International Studies at the Vienna School of International Studies. He is also the host of thie Buffet of Ideas-የሀሳብ ገበታ podcast.

 

The "No Limits" Partnership: Consequences for Africa and Poor South-South Countries

Title: The "No Limits" Partnership: Consequences for Africa and Poor South-South Countries

The deepening strategic partnership between Russia and China, dubbed the "no limits" partnership, has far-reaching implications for Africa and poor South-South countries. As the Western world grapples with the consequences of this new era in Sino-Russian relations, it's essential to consider the potential impact on vulnerable nations.

For Africa, the partnership may mean:

- Increased economic competition: China's economic influence in Africa may intensify, potentially squeezing out other investors and limiting economic opportunities for African nations.

- Political alignment: Russia and China may seek to expand their political influence in Africa, potentially undermining democratic values and human rights.

- Security implications: The partnership may lead to increased military cooperation, potentially destabilizing regional security and exacerbating conflicts.

For poor South-South countries, the consequences may include:

- Economic marginalization: The "no limits" partnership may further marginalize vulnerable economies, limiting their access to global markets and resources.

- Political isolation: These countries may face increased pressure to align with either the Western world or the Sino-Russian bloc, potentially threatening their independence and sovereignty.

- Developmental setbacks: The partnership may divert global attention and resources away from development priorities, hindering progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals.

In conclusion, the "no limits" partnership between Russia and China has significant implications for Africa and poor South-South countries. As the geopolitical landscape evolves, it's crucial for these nations to prioritize their interests, foster regional cooperation, and engage in strategic diplomacy to mitigate potential negative consequences and capitalize on emerging opportunities.

Title: The Global Consequences of Putin and Xi Jinping's "No Limits" Partnership

Title: The Global Consequences of Putin and Xi Jinping's "No Limits" Partnership

The deepening strategic partnership between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping has sent shockwaves throughout the Western world, leaving the UK, United States, and European Union to grapple with the far-reaching implications of this new era in Sino-Russian relations.

For the UK, this partnership presents a delicate balancing act. On one hand, they must maintain their "special relationship" with the US, while on the other hand, they cannot ignore the economic opportunities that come with closer ties to China. This dilemma is akin to choosing between two cherished traditions – tea and crumpets or dim sum and dumplings – both have their unique charm, but embracing both comes with the risk of ruffling feathers.

The United States, meanwhile, is faced with the uncomfortable reality of watching its former strategic partner (Russia) and its current arch-nemesis (China) join forces. This "no limits" partnership challenges America's position as the world's superpower, forcing a reassessment of its global influence and strategic partnerships. It's akin to watching a former star player and a bitter rival team up against you – a tough pill to swallow.

The European Union finds itself caught in the middle of this geopolitical love triangle, struggling to maintain unity and independence while dealing with the potential consequences of the Sino-Russian partnership. This is akin to being the referee in a game where the rules are constantly changing – a delicate balancing act.

The "no limits" partnership between Putin and Xi Jinping is a game of chess, with each move having the potential to reshape the geopolitical landscape. The Western world must adapt and respond to this new era in Sino-Russian relations, as the stakes have never been higher. It's a brave new world, and only time will tell how this high-stakes game will play out.

In conclusion, the global consequences of Putin and Xi Jinping's "no limits" partnership are far-reaching and profound. As the Western world navigates this new era in Sino-Russian relations, it must be prepared to adapt, respond, and potentially redefine its role in the global landscape. The game of chess has begun, and the world watches with bated breath.

Canadian Parliamentary System

Canadian Parliamentary System

Introduction

Canada is a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy, founded on the rule of law and respect for rights and freedoms. The government acts in the name of the Crown but derives its authority from the Canadian people.

Canada’s parliamentary system stems from the British, or “Westminster”, tradition. Parliament consists of the Crown, the Senate, and the House of Commons, and laws are enacted once they are agreed to by all three parts. Since Canada is a federal state, responsibility for lawmaking is shared among one federal, ten provincial and three territorial governments. The judiciary is responsible for the interpretation and application of the law and the Constitution and for giving impartial judgments.

The Canadian Constitution

Canada’s Constitution sets forth the system of fundamental laws and principles that outline the nature, functions, and limits of Canada’s system of government, both federal and provincial. It prescribes which powers—legislative, executive and judicial—may be exercised by which level of government, and it sets limits on those powers. It also lays out the powers and authorities of the office of the Governor General, as well as those of the Senate and the House of Commons.

The Constitution involves more than a single document. The Constitution Act, 1867 brought Canada into being with a constitution similar in principle to that of the United Kingdom. The Constitution Act, 1982 contains the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the procedure for amending the Constitution. Some of Canada’s most important rules are not matters of law but are conventions or practices.

The Crown

Head of State represented in Canada by the Governor General

Executive Branch

Government

Prime Minister and Cabinet

Legislative Branch

(Parliament)

Senate

Upper Chamber of 105 Senators appointed by the Governor General to represent regions of the country

House of Commons

Lower Chamber of 338 members elected to represent the people from their electoral district

The Crown and the Governor General

In Canada, executive authority is formally vested in the Crown (the Sovereign), and it is exercised in its name by the Governor General, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister and the cabinet. The Constitution reserves certain prerogatives of government for the Crown, including the powers to:

give royal recommendation to bills that propose to spend government revenues;

give royal assent to bill passed by the Senate and the House of Commons so that they become law;

appoint holders of many important offices (e.g., judicial and diplomatic);

dissolve Parliament before elections, and to open and close parliamentary sessions (at the beginning of each parliamentary session, the Governor General reads the Speech from the Throne, prepared by the Prime Minister, outlining the Government’s objectives for the upcoming session); and

choose the Prime Minister (by convention, the leader of the party with the most seats in the House of Commons following a general election).

The Governor General is appointed by the Sovereign on the recommendation of the Prime Minister for a tenure of usually five years which may be extended at the discretion of the Sovereign. As the Sovereign’s representative, the Governor General is the Commander-in-Chief of the Canadian Armed Forces, performs several ceremonial functions, and represents Canada in state visits and in other international events.

The Legislative Branch (Parliament)

Parliament is Canada’s legislature, the federal institution with the power to make laws, to raise taxes, and to authorize government spending. The Parliament of Canada is “bicameral”, meaning it has two chambers: the Senate and the House of Commons.

Proposed government legislation is introduced in one of the two chambers, usually the House of Commons, by a minister. Bills calling for the spending of public revenues or for the imposing of taxes must originate in the House of Commons. Once introduced, a bill is subjected to a detailed process of review, debate, examination and amendment through both Houses before it is ready to receive final approval. The House of Commons also considers items of Private Members’ Business, that is, bills and motions proposed by members who are not cabinet ministers.

To become law, all legislation must be adopted by both Houses in identical form and receive royal assent. For more information, see the Our Procedure article about legislative process.

The Senate

The House of Commons

The Executive Branch

In Canada, executive authority is vested in the Crown and carried out by the Governor in Council—the Prime Minister and cabinet.

Once appointed, the Prime Minister selects a number of confidential advisers, usually from among the elected members of Parliament belonging to the governing party, who are made members of the Privy Council and then sworn in as ministers. Collectively, they are known as cabinet and are each responsible for individual portfolios or departments, usually assisted by other members of Parliament who have been appointed as parliamentary secretaries.

Cabinet is the key decision-making forum in the Canadian government. It leads and directs the executive branch of government. Cabinet acts as an executive council that develops policies to govern the country and introduces bills to transform these policies into law.

Responsible Government and Ministerial Responsibility

The Confidence Convention

Political Parties in Canada

Political parties are organizations that bring together a group of people committed to a particular approach to governing and who pursue shared goals bases on a common vision. This approach is expressed through policies. Parties seek political power to be able to implement their policies.

Most members of Parliament belong to a political party. Members of the House of Commons – and, typically, Senators – belonging to the same political party are collectively referred to as that party’s parliamentary caucus. Members may also be independent of any party affiliation.

According to the Parliament of Canada Act, a political party must have at least 12 elected members to be a “recognized party” in the House of Commons. Recognized parties receive additional financial allowances and are entitled to funding for their research groups.

The Role of Opposition Parties in Canada

For More Information:

House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, 2017

Chapter 1, Parliamentary Institutions

Chapter 2, Parliaments and Ministries

For questions about parliamentary procedure, contact the Table Research Branch

 613-996-3611

 trbdrb@parl.gc.ca

Senate

Library of Parliament

Parliamentary Protective Service

Employment at Parliament

Follow Us