Chapter Four: State, Government and Citizenship

4.1. Understanding state

4.1.1 MEANING OF STATE
 The term state‘ has been used to refer to a confusing
range of things: a collection of institutions, a
territorial unit, a philosophical idea, an instrument of
coercion or oppression, and so on.
 This confusion stems, in part, from the fact that the
state has been understood in four quite different ways:
 from an idealist perspective, a functionalist
perspective, an organizational perspective and an
international perspective.
A. The idealist approach to the state : is most clearly
reflected in the writings of Hegel.
 Hegel conceived of the state as an ethical
community underpinned by mutual sympathy –
‗universal altruism‘.
 The drawback of idealism, however, is that it fosters
an uncritical reverence for the state and, by defining
the state in ethical terms, fails to distinguish clearly
between institutions that are part of the state and
those that are outside the state.
B. Functionalist approaches to the state:
 The central function of the state is invariably seen
as the maintenance of social order , the state being
defined as that set of institutions that uphold order
and deliver social stability.
 The weakness of the functionalist view of the state,
however, is that it tends to associate any institution
that maintains order (such as the family, mass
media, trade unions and the church) with the state
itself.
C. The organizational view:
 defines the state as the apparatus of government in its broadest
sense.
 The virtue of this definition is that it distinguishes clearly
between the state and civil society.
 The state comprises the various institutions of government: the
bureaucracy, the military, the police, the courts, and the social
security system and so on; it can be identified with the entire
‗body politic‘. The organizational approach allows us to talk
about ‗rolling forward‘ or ‗rolling back‘ the state, in the sense
of expanding or contracting the responsibilities of the state, and
enlarging or diminishing its institutional machinery.
D. The international approach to the state:
 views state as an actor on the world stage; indeed, as the basic
‗unit‘ of international politics.
 This highlights the dualistic structure of the state; the fact that it
has two faces, one looking outwards and the other looking
inwards.
 Whereas the previous definitions are concerned with the state‘s
inward-looking face, its relations with the individuals and groups
that live within its borders, and its ability to maintain domestic
order, the international view deals with the state‘s outward-
looking face, its relations with other states and, therefore, its
ability to provide protection against external attack.
 4.1.2. attributes/elements of state
 The classic definition of the state in international
law is found in the Montevideo Convention on
the Rights and Duties of the State (1933).
 According to Article 1 of the Montevideo
Convention, the state has four features: a defined
territory, permanent population, an effective
government and sovereignty.
 Let us now discuss details of the above-
mentioned attributes as follows:
 A. Population
 Since state is a human association, the first essential element that
constitutes it is the people.
 How much people constitute state? No exact number can be given to
such a question.
 There are states with a population of greater than 1 billion like that of
China and India, and with a constituency of few thousand people like
Vatican and San Marino.
 Should the population of a state be homogenous?
 It is good that population of a state is homogeneous, because it makes
the task of national integration easy.
 But it is not a must, because most of the states have a population
marked by diversity in respect of race, religion, language, culture, etc.
 B. Defined Territory
 There can be no state without a territory of its own.
 The territory of a state includes land, water, and airspace; it has
maritime jurisdiction extending up to a distance of three miles,
though some states contend for a distance of up to 20 miles.
 The territorial authority of a state also extends to ships on high
seas under its flag as well as its embassies and
legations/diplomat‘s residence in foreign lands.
 it should be noted that the size of a state‘s territory cannot be
fixed.
 There are as large states as China and Russia and as small states
of Fiji and Mauritius in respect of their territorial make-up.
 C. Government
 The government of a state should be so organized that
it enforces law so as to maintain the conditions of
peace and security.
 The form of government may be monarchical,
aristocratic, oligarchic, democratic, or dictatorial and
the like,
 It is the instrumentality through which the sovereign
will of the state finds concrete expression.
 A state without government is inconceivable, for the
state will and acts through the government.
 D. Sovereignty:
 It is the highest power of the state that distinguishes it from all other
associations of human beings.
 Sovereignty, in its simplest sense, is the principle of absolute and
unlimited power.
 It has two aspects - Internal and External.
 Internal Sovereignty implies that inside the state there can be no other
authority that may claim equality with it.
 The state is the final source of all laws internally.
 On the other hand, External sovereignty implies that the state should
be free from foreign control of any kind.
 It is universally accepted that a sovereign state is legally competent to
issue any command that is binding on all citizens and their
associations.
 E. Recognition
 In addition to the essential attributes of the state agreed in
the 1933, the contemporary political theorists and the UN
considered recognition as the fifth essential attribute of the
state.
 It is to mean that for a state to be legal actor in the
international stage; other actors (such as other states,
international intergovernmental and non-governmental
organizations… etc.) must recognize it as a state.
 Likewise, for a government of a state to be formally to act
on its behalf, the government must be recognized as
legitimate government of the state by other governments.
 4.1.3. Rival Theories of state
 There are various rival theories of the state, each of
which offers a different account of its origins,
development and impact on society.
 Indeed, controversy about the nature of state power has
increasingly dominated modern political analysis and
goes to the heart of ideological and theoretical
disagreements in the discipline.
 These relate to questions about whether, for example,
the state is autonomous and independent of society, or
whether it is essentially a product of society, a reflection
of the broader distribution of power or resources.
 Moreover, does the state serve the common or
collective good, or is it biased in favor of
privileged groups or a dominant class?
 Andrew Heywood (2013) classified the rival
theories of state into four: the pluralist state,
the capitalist state, the leviathan state and the
patriarchal state.
 A. The pluralist state
 The pluralist theory of the state has a very clear liberal
lineage.
 It stems from the belief that the state acts as an mediator‘
or ‗referee‘ in society.
 This view has also dominated mainstream political
analysis, accounting for a tendency, at least within
Anglo-American thought, to discount the state and state
organizations and focus instead on ‗government‘.
 The state can be ignored only because it is seen as an
impartial arbiter or referee that can be bent to the will of
the government of the day
 The origins of this view of the state can be traced back to the
social-contract theories of thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes and
John Locke.
 They argued that the state had arisen out of a voluntary
agreement, or social contract, made by individuals who
recognized that only the establishment of a sovereign power
could safeguard them from the insecurity, disorder and brutality
of the state of nature.
 Without a state, individuals abuse, exploit and enslave one
another; with a state, order and civilized existence are
guaranteed and liberty is protected.
 As Locke put it, where there is no law there is no freedom.
 In liberal theory, the state is thus seen as a neutral arbiter
amongst the competing groups and individuals in society;
it is an ‗umpire‘ or ‗referee‘ that is capable of protecting
each citizen from the encroachments of fellow citizens.
 The neutrality of the state reflects the fact that the state
acts in the interests of all citizens, and therefore represents
the common good or public interest.
 In Hobbes‘ view, stability and order could be secured only
through the establishment of an absolute and unlimited
state, with power that could be neither challenged, nor
questioned.
 Locke, on the other hand, developed a more typically
liberal defense of the limited state.
 In his view, the purpose of the state is very specific: it is
restricted to the defense of a set of natural‘ or God-given
individual rights; namely, life, liberty and property.
 This establishes a clear distinction between the
responsibilities of the state (essentially, the maintenance
of domestic order and the protection of property) and the
responsibilities of individual citizens (usually seen as the
realm of civil society).
 These ideas were developed in the twentieth
century into the pluralist theory of the state.
 As a theory of the state, pluralism holds that the
state is neutral, insofar as it is susceptible to the
influence of various groups and interests, and all
social classes.
 The state is not biased in favor of any particular
interest or group, and it does not have an interest
of its own that is separate from those of society.
 Modern pluralists, however, have often adopted a
more critical view of the state, termed the neo-pluralist
theory of the state.
 Theorists such as Robert Dahl and Charles Lindblom
(1953) have come to accept that modern industrialized
states are both more complex and less responsive to
popular pressures than classical pluralism suggested.
 Neo-pluralists, for instance, have acknowledged that
business enjoys a privileged position‘ in relation to
government that other groups clearly cannot rival.
 Moreover, neo-pluralists have accepted that
the state can, and does, forge its own sectional
interests.
 In this way, a state elite, composed of senior
civil servants, judges, police chiefs, military
leaders and so on, may be seen to pursue either
the bureaucratic interests of their sector of the
state, or the interests of client groups
 B. The Capitalist State
 This view has usually been understood in terms of the classic
formulation that the state is nothing but an instrument of class
oppression: the state emerges out of, and in a sense reflects, the
class system.
 the state was originated from the split of society into two classes
with sharp and polarized/antagonistic economic interests:
bourgeoisie/capitalist (they own the means of production and
purchase the labor power of others) and proletariat(working
class, sell their labor and do not own any means of production).
 Means of production includes instruments of labor(tools,
factories, infrastructures etc. ) and subject of labor (natural
resources and raw materials).
 In a general sense, Marx believed that the state is part of a
superstructure‘ that is determined or conditioned by the
economic base‘, which can be seen as the real foundation of
social life.
 However, the precise relationship between the base and the
superstructure, and in this case that between the state and the
capitalist mode of production, is unclear.
 Two theories of the state can be identified in Marx‘s writings.
 the state is entirely dependent on its economically dominant
class, which in capitalism is the bourgeoisie.
 Lenin thus described the state starkly as an instrument for the
oppression of the exploited class.
 the state cannot be understood except in a
context of unequal class power, and that the
state arises out of, and reflects, capitalist
society, by acting either as an instrument of
oppression wielded by the dominant class, or,
more subtly, as a mechanism through which
class antagonisms are ameliorated.
 Nevertheless, Marx‘s attitude towards the state
was not entirely negative.
 While the bourgeoisie want maximize profit, the
proletariat want maximize their wages
 The rise of the state with its agent, the government
established to make laws is directly reacted with the
urgency of private property and the need to safeguard it.
 According to Marx, state in its function is a partisan
political organization that stands for the interest of the
rich against the poor and reflects the value of its
dominant classes and that the government of a rich state,
therefore, only acts to perpetuate the interests of these
classes.
 The proponents of the Marxist theory believe
that with the historical process of
disappearance of private property and
antagonistic social class, the state will wither
away
 meaning that Since the state emerged out of
the class system, once the class system had
been abolished, the state, quite simply, loses its
reason for existence.
 C. The Leviathan State
 The image of the state as a ‗leviathan is one associated
in modern politics with the New Right.
 Such a view is rooted in early or classical liberalism
and, in particular, a commitment to a radical form of
individualism.
 The New Right, or at least its neoliberal wing, is
distinguished by a strong antipathy towards state
intervention in economic and social life, born out of the
belief that the state is parasitic growth that threatens
both individual liberty and economic security.
 In this view, the state, instead of being, as pluralists suggest, an
impartial umpire or arbiter, is an overbearing ‗nanny‘, desperate
to interfere or meddle in every aspect of human existence.
 The central feature of this view is that the state pursues interests
that are separate from those of society (setting it apart from
Marxism), and that those interests demand an unrelenting
growth in the role or responsibilities of the state itself.
 New Right thinkers therefore argue that the twentieth century
tendency towards state intervention reflected not popular
pressure for economic and social security, or the need to
stabilize capitalism by ameliorating class tensions but, rather,
the internal dynamics of the state.
 While Marxists argue that the state reflects broader class and
other social interests, the New Right portrays the state as an
independent or autonomous entity that pursues its own
interests.
 In this view, bureaucratic self-interest invariably supports big‘
government and state intervention, because this leads to an
enlargement of the bureaucracy itself, which helps to ensure
job security, improve pay, open up promotion prospects and
enhance the status of public officials.
 This image of self-seeking bureaucrats is plainly at odds with
the pluralist notion of a state machine imbued with an ethic of
public service and firmly subject to political control.
 D. The Patriarchal State
 Modern thinking about the state must, finally, take account
of the implications of feminist theory.
 Moreover, feminists have usually not regarded the nature of
state power as a central political issue, preferring instead to
concentrate on the deeper structure of male power centered
on institutions such as the family and the economic system.
 Some feminists, indeed, may question conventional
definitions of the state, arguing, for instance, that the idea
that the state exercises a monopoly of legitimate violence is
compromised by the routine use of violence and
intimidation in family and domestic life.
 Liberal feminists, who believe that sexual or gender
equality can be brought about through incremental
reform, have tended to accept an essentially pluralist
view of the state.
 They recognize that, if women are denied legal and
political equality, and especially the right to vote, the
state is biased in favor of men.
 In this sense, liberal feminists believe that all groups
(including women) have potentially equal access to state
power, and that this can be used impartially to promote
justice and the common good.
 Liberal feminists have therefore usually viewed the state
in positive terms, seeing state intervention as a means of
redressing gender inequality and enhancing the role of
women.
 This can be seen in campaigns for equal-pay legislation,
the legalization of abortion, the provision of child-care
facilities, the extension of welfare benefits, and so on.
 Nevertheless, a more critical and negative view of the
state has been developed by radical feminists, who argue
that state power reflects a deeper structure of oppression
in the form of patriarchy.
 There are a number of similarities between Marxist and
radical feminist views of state power.
 Both groups, for example, deny that the state is an
autonomous entity bent on the pursuit of its own interests
 Instead, the state is understood, and its biases are
explained, by reference to a ‗deep structure‘ of power in
society at large.
 Whereas Marxists place the state in an economic context,
radical feminists place it in a context of gender
inequality, and insist that it is essentially an institution of
male power.
 In common with Marxism, distinctive instrumentalist and
structuralist versions of this feminist position have been
developed.
 The instrumentalist argument views the state as little more
than an agent or ‗tool‘ used by men to defend their own
interests and uphold the structures of patriarchy.
 This line of argument draws on the core feminist belief that
patriarchy is rooted in the division of society into distinct
public‘ and private‘ spheres of life, men dominating the
former while women are confined to the later.
 Quite simply, in this view, the state is run by men, and for
men.
 Whereas instrumentalist arguments focus on the personnel
of the state, and particularly the state elite, structuralist
arguments tend to emphasize the degree to which state
institutions are embedded in a wider patriarchal system.
 Modern radical feminists have paid particular attention to
the emergence of the welfare state, seeing it as the
expression of a new kind of patriarchal power.
 state services (such as childcare institutions, nursery
education and social work) and as employees, particularly
in the so-called ‗caring‘ professions (such as nursing,
social work and education).
 4.1.4. The Role of the State
 there is profound disagreement about the exact role the state
should play, and therefore about the proper balance between
the state and civil society.
 Among the different state forms that have developed are the
following:
1. Minimal states
2. Developmental states
3. Social-democratic states
4. Collectivized states
5. Totalitarian states
6. Religious states
 1. Minimal States

 The state is merely a protective body, its core function

being to provide a framework of peace and social order
within which citizens can conduct their lives as they think
best.
 This nevertheless leaves the minimal‘ or night watchman‘
state with three core functions.
A. First and foremost, the state exists to maintain domestic
order.
B. Second, it ensures that contracts or voluntary agreements
made between private citizens are enforced, and
C. third it provides protection against external attack.
 The institutional apparatus of a minimal state
is thus limited to a police force, a court system
and a military of some kind.
 Economic, social, cultural, moral and other
responsibilities belong to the individual, and
are therefore firmly part of civil society.
 2. Developmental States
 A developmental state is one that intervenes in
economic life with the specific purpose of
promoting industrial growth and economic
development.
 This does not amount to an attempt to replace the
market with a ‗socialist‘ system of planning and
control but, rather, to an attempt to construct a
partnership between the state and major economic
interests, often underpinned by conservative and
nationalist priorities.
 The classic example of a developmental state is Japan
 At the end of WWII, Japan focused on making the economy self-
sufficient and advancement of technology in order to catching up
with the West
 In the pre–WW II years, this ambition meant building a strong
army and becoming an industrial power.
 Since its disastrous defeat in World War II, however, Japan has
abandoned militarism and has focused on becoming a powerful
industrial and technological nation
 the national economic policy involves state assistance,
regulation, and protection of specific industrial sectors in order to
increase their international competitiveness
 3. Social Democratic (Welfare) States
 Whereas developmental states practice interventionism
in order to stimulate economic progress, social-
democratic states intervene with a view to bringing
about broader social restructuring, usually in accordance
with principles such as fairness, equality and social
justice.
 In countries such as Austria and Sweden, state
intervention has been guided by both developmental and
social democratic priorities.
 Nevertheless, developmentalism and social democracy
do not always go hand-in-hand.
 As Marquand (1988) pointed out, although the UK state
was significantly extended in the period immediately after
World War II along social-democratic lines, it failed to
evolve into a developmental state.
 The key to understanding the social-democratic state is
that there is a shift from a ‗negative‘ view of the state,
which sees it as little more than a necessary evil, to a
positive view of the state, in which it is seen as a means of
enlarging liberty and promoting justice.
 The social-democratic state is thus the ideal of both
modern liberals and democratic socialists.
 Rather than merely laying down the conditions
of orderly existence, the social-democratic state
is an active participant; helping to rectify the
imbalances and injustices of a market economy.
 It therefore tends to focus less upon the
generation of wealth and more upon what is seen
as the equitable or just distribution of wealth.
 In practice, this boils down to an attempt to
eradicate poverty and reduce social inequality.
 The twin features of a social democratic state are therefore
Keynesianism and social welfare.
 The aim of Keynesian economic policies is to manage‘ or
regulate‘ capitalism with a view to promoting growth and
maintaining full employment
 The adoption of welfare policies has led to the emergence of
so called welfare states‘, whose responsibilities have
extended to the promotion of social well-being amongst their
citizens.
 In this sense, the social-democratic state is an enabling state‘,
dedicated to the principle of individual empowerment.
 4. Collectivized States
 While developmental and social-democratic states intervene in
economic life with a view to guiding or supporting a largely
private economy, collectivized states bring the entirety of
economic life under state control.
 The best examples of such states were in orthodox communist
countries such as the USSR and throughout Eastern Europe.
 These sought to abolish private enterprise altogether, and set up
centrally planned economies administered by a network of
economic ministries and planning committees.
 The justification for state collectivization stems from a
fundamental socialist preference for common ownership over
private property.
 5. Totalitarian States

 The most extreme and extensive form of interventionism is

found in totalitarian states.
 The essence of totalitarianism is the construction of an all-
embracing state, the influence of which penetrates every
aspect of human existence.
 The state brings not only the economy, but also education,
culture, religion, family life and so on under direct state
control.
 The best examples of totalitarian states are Hitler‘s Germany
and Stalin‘s USSR, although modern regimes such as
Saddam Hussein‘s Iraq arguably have similar characteristics.
 The central pillars of such regimes are a
comprehensive process of surveillance and
terroristic policing, and a pervasive system of
ideological manipulation and control.
 In this sense, totalitarian states effectively
extinguish civil society and abolish the private
sphere of life altogether.
 This is a goal that only fascists, who wish to
dissolve individual identity within the social whole,
are prepared openly to endorse.
 6. Religious state
 the religious state, developed after 1980s , have the tendency
within religious fundamentalism to reject the public/private
divide and to view religion as the basis of politics.
 regards political realm as inherently corrupt, fundamentalist
movements have typically looked to seize control of the
state and to use it as an instrument of moral and spiritual
regeneration.
 This was evident, for instance, in the process of
‗Islamization‘ introduced in Pakistan after 1978, the
establishment of an ‗Islamic state‘ in Iran as a result of the
1979 revolution
 4.2. Understanding Government

4.2.1. Meaning of Government

 government is the most essential component and administrative
wing of the state
 Refers to some particular set of institutions and organs that
make laws (the legislative body), implements public policies
(executive body) and law interpreting body (the judiciary
body).
 As such, a government is a group of people within the state
who have the ultimate authority to act on behalf of the state
 Refers to the institutional processes through which collective
and usually binding laws and decisions are made through its
various branches of organs
 Any form of government, to be stable and effective, must
possess two essential attributes: authority and legitimacy.
A. Authority:
 In politics, the word authority implies the ability to compel
obedience.
 It can simply be defined as legitimate power.
 While power is the ability to influence the behavior of others,
authority is the right to do so.
 Authority is therefore, based on an acknowledged duty to obey
rather than on any form of coercion or manipulation.
 Thus, authority is the legitimacy, justification and right to
exercise that power.
B. Legitimacy:
 The term legitimacy broadly means rightfulness.
 legitimacy is the popular acceptance of a governing regime
as an authority.
 Legitimacy is considered as a basic condition to rule;
without at least a minimal amount of legitimacy, a
government will deadlock or collapse.
 The concept legitimacy differs from legality in the sense
that the term legality does not necessarily guarantee that a
government is respected or that its citizens acknowledge a
duty of obedience.
 4.2.2Major Function of Government

The government of any state as a minimum duties

perform the following duties.
A. Self-preservation
 as their first and primary purpose and function,
governments are responsible to prevail order,
predictability, internal security, and external
defense
B. Distribution and Regulation of Resources
C. Supervision and Resolution of Conflict
D. Protection of political and social rights
E. Provision of goods and services
F. Protection of Property
G. Implementations of Moral Conditions: Some
governments‘ attempts to improve the moral
conditions of their citizens that is why, in all
countries, laws and institutions are designed to
shape citizens character in accordance with some
standard of morality
 4.3. Understanding Citizenship
4.3.1. Defining Citizenship
 One has to clearly understand the concept of citizen to better
understand citizenship
 citizen refers to the person who is a legal member of a particular
State and one who enjoys certain privileges and is expected
discharge obligations
 citizenship simply denotes to the network of relationships
between the State and the citizen.
 As such, citizenship refers to the rules regulating the
legal/formal relations between the State and the individual with
respect to the acquisition and loss of a given country‘s
nationality.
 Generally, the concept of citizenship varies from society to
society, depending on the place, the historical moment and
political organization.
 Although differences may exist, there are common elements
such as rights, duties, belonging, identity and participation
one can find in definitions of the term.
i) Citizenship as a Status of Rights:
 The mere fact of being a citizen makes the person a creditor
of a series of rights.
 Marshall (1998), distinguishes three types of rights: civil
rights, political rights and social rights.
ii) Membership and Identity:
 Citizenship is associated with membership of a political
community, which implies integration into that community with a
specific identity that is common to all members who belongs to it.
 The criteria for membership have been linked to shared territory,
common culture, ethnic characteristics, history, etc.
iii) Participation:
 Participation occupies a key position in citizenship.
 Nonetheless, individuals differ in what approaches they find
important
 some citizens actively participate while others do not.
iv) Inclusion and Exclusion:
 All individuals living in a particular state do not necessary
mean that all are citizens.
 For instance, there are non-citizens visiting, working and living
in Ethiopia branded as foreigners/aliens.
 There are some political and economic rights that are reserved
to and duties to be discharged by citizens only.
 For instance, an Ethiopian citizen has the right to get access to
land, vote and to be elected and get Ethiopian passport.
 Likewise, defending the constitution as well as Ethiopia territory
from foreign aggressors are solely the duty of Ethiopian
citizens.
4.3.2. Ways of Acquiring and Loosing Citizenship

4.3.2.1. Ways of Acquiring Citizenship

i) Citizenship from birth/of Origin:
 There are two ways of obtaining citizenship by birth
A. Jus soli(law of the soil): .
 people whose birth takes place within territorial limits of
a state acquire the nationality of that state.
 The United Kingdom, the United State and many states
of Latin America follow the principle of jus soli.
 Children are citizens of the nation in which they are
born, no matter what the parents’ nationalities are
 However, jus soli could not apply to children
born from diplomats and refugees live in a
host State.
 Children born from diplomats in a host State
where jus soli is allowed do not have the right
to claim citizenship status of the host country
because of two special principles (international
diplomatic immunities): extraterritoriality and
inviolability principles.
B. Jus sanguinis( law of the blood; by dissent)
 According to this principle, children take their
parents nationality regardless of where they are
born .
 For example, a child born to Ethiopian parents in
France is a citizen of Ethiopia.
 Germany, France, and Ethiopia confer nationality on
the basis of this principle
 Note that many states recognize the principle of jus
soli as well as the principle of jus sanguins
ii. Citizenship by Naturalization.
 This is a process of acquiring citizenship when one
fulfills certain political, social economic and other
preconditions
 The common sub-principles of acquiring citizenship
through naturalization are the following.
 Political case (secession, merger and subjugation),
marriage, adoption, restoration etc.
 Let us now discuss the remaining ways of acquiring
citizenship vis-à-vis to Ethiopia
 The Modes of Acquiring Ethiopian
Citizenship
 Before the 1930, there wasn‘t officially inscribed legal document
that deals with citizenship.
 But in 1930 Ethiopia adopted a legal document named as
―Ethiopian Nationality Law
 Recently, this nationality law has replaced by another legal
document called ―Ethiopian Nationality Proclamation NO.
378/2003‖ which was adopted in 2003 by the House of People‘s
Representatives.
 This proclamation is enacted in accordance to article 6 and 33 of the
1995 FDRE constitution and affirmed that a person can acquire
Ethiopian citizenship either by birth or naturalization.
 Now, let‘s discuss the modes of acquiring Ethiopian citizenship
included in the 2003 nationality proclamation.
1) Acquisition by Descent:
 the 1930 Ethiopian nationality law asserted that ―any person born in
Ethiopia or abroad, whose father or mother is Ethiopian, is an Ethiopian
subject.
 In its Article 6(1), the 1995 FDRE constitution stated that ―any person of
either sex shall be an Ethiopian national where both or either parent is
Ethiopian.
 In line with this, Article 3 of the 2003 nationality proclamation ascribed
two principles under the acquisition of Ethiopian citizenship by decent.
 First, any person shall be an Ethiopian national by descent where both or
either of his/her parent is Ethiopian;
 second, an infant who is found abandoned in Ethiopia shall, unless proved
to have a foreign nationality, be deemed to have been born to an Ethiopian
parent and shall acquire Ethiopian nationality.
2) Acquisition by Law (Naturalization):
 Article 6(2) of the 1995 FDRE constitution also
avers that aliens can get Ethiopian citizenship.
 Under naturalization, there are various ways of
acquiring Ethiopian citizenship in accordance with
of the amended Ethiopian nationality proclamation
of 2003 recognized by the provisions of Articles 5
to 12 of the 2003 nationality proclamation.
 These are:
A. Grant on Application (registration):
 happens when an alien requests a host state to be
granted citizenship status of the country in question
upon fulfilling certain preconditions which include
applicant‘s age, length of residence in the host country,
criminal conviction, income and moral character.
 But the criteria vary from country to country.
 For instance, according to Article 5 of the 2003
Ethiopian nationality proclamation, an applicant shall
get Ethiopian nationality if, and only if, he/she:
A. reach the age of majority, 18 years;
B. lived in Ethiopia for a total of at least four years;
C. has sufficient and lawful source of income (economically self-
reliant);
D. is able to communicate in any of the indigenous languages spoken
in Ethiopia;
E. has a good character;
F. has not recorded criminal conviction;
G. has been released from his/her previous nationality
H. takes the oath of allegiance : I-----, solemnly affirm that I will be
a loyal national of the federal democratic republic of Ethiopia and
be faithful to its constitution.
B. Cases of Marriage:
 an alien who is married to an Ethiopian
citizen have the possibility of acquiring
Ethiopian citizenship.
 Yet, there are certain preconditions set in
Article 6 of the proclamation in which the
marriage and the alien married to an Ethiopian
citizen must fulfill just to allow the foreigner
acquire Ethiopian nationality by law.
A. One, the marriage shall be concluded in accordance
with the laws of Ethiopia or the State where the
marriage is contracted;
B. second, the marriage shall lapse at least for two years;
C. third, the alien married to an Ethiopian citizen have to
live in Ethiopian for at least one year preceding the
submission of the application; and
D. fourth, the alien have to reach the age of majority, be
a morally good person, and lastly take the oath of
allegiance stated under Article 12 of the proclamation
C. Cases of Adoption (Legitimating):
 this process whereby an illegitimate child get citizenship status of his/her
caretaker‘s nationality.
 In this case, Article 7 of the nationality proclamation asserts that a child
adopted by and grown under the caretaker of Ethiopian citizen has the
right to acquire Ethiopian citizenship.
 But, the child could get Ethiopian citizenship if the adopted child has not
attained the age of majority; lives in Ethiopia together with his/her
adopting parent; and has been released from his/her previous nationality or
the possibility of obtaining such a release upon the acquisition of
Ethiopian nationality or that he/she is a stateless person.
 However, where one of his/her adopting parents is a foreigner, in writing,
such a parent has to express his/her agreement that his/her adopted child
gain Ethiopian nationality.
 Dual Citizenship

 Dual citizenship is the condition of being a citizen of two states

 Of course, a person may acquire more than two States which is called
multiple citizenship.
 Duality/multiplicity arises because of the clash among the Jus Soli, Jus
Sanguini and naturalization.
 For example, a baby born to a French family visiting the United States
would acquire U.S. citizenship by Jus Soli and French citizenship by Jus
Sanguinis.
 A child born from a mother and father of two different countries could
acquire dual citizenship through decent. Besides, on the one hand, a State
may allow its naturalized citizens to keep their original citizenship, an on
the other, a State may refuse its citizen to revoke his/her citizenship for
various reasons which are cause for dual/multiple citizenship.
 People who declared that they no longer were citizens of such a
country and became naturalized in another still would be
claimed as citizens by the original nation
 Today just under half of all African countries still prohibit dual
citizenship on paper—though in many cases the rules are not
enforced, so that a citizen can acquire another citizenship
without facing adverse consequences in practice.
 Ethiopia prohibits its citizens to have dual citizenship.
 Article 20(1) of the 2003 nationality proclamation assert that
―any Ethiopian who voluntarily acquires another nationality
shall be deemed to have voluntarily renounced his Ethiopian
nationality.
 However, a person who retains another country‘s citizenship
or voluntary renounces his Ethiopian nationality may not be
allowed to release his/her Ethiopian citizenship if he/she
hasn‘t discharged his/her outstanding national obligations
and/or has been acquitted or served the penalty for the crime
he/she accused of or convicted (see Article 19(4) of the 2003
Ethiopian nationality proclamation).
 Therefore, under this condition which is called indelible
allegiance, the person would remain dual/multiple citizen, an
Ethiopian and the country he/she acquires citizenship
through law (see also Article 20(4) of the 2003 nationality
proclamation).
D. Citizenship by Special Cases:
 as it is labeled in Article 8, an alien who has made an
outstanding contribution in the interest of Ethiopia may
be conferred with Ethiopian nationality by law without
undergoing the pre-conditions stated in Article 5 (sub-
articles 2 and 3) of the 2003 Ethiopian nationality
proclamation.
 That is, he/she is not required to live in Ethiopia for a
total of four years and may lack the ability to
communicate in any of the languages spoken in Ethiopia.
E. Re-Admission to Ethiopian Nationality
(Reintegration/Restoration):
 this is a process by which a person acquires his/her lost
citizenship.
 According to the 2003 Ethiopian nationality proclamation,
a person who has lost Ethiopian citizenship status may get it
back upon fulfilling certain requirements ,which include:
A. application to the Security, Immigration and Refugee
Affairs Authority for re-admission.
B. he/she has returned and domiciled in Ethiopia and
C. renounces his foreign nationality
• Examining and Deciding upon an Application to acquire Ethiopian Citizenship
• An application to obtain Ethiopian nationality by law shall be accompanied
with relevant documents and shall be submitted to the Security, Immigration
and Refugee Affairs Authority (Article 10 of the proclamation). Then, the
application shall be examined by the Nationality Affairs Committee (Article 11
and 23 of the proclamation), a committee comprises five members, namely;
(i) a representative of the Security, Immigration and Refugee Affairs Authority
(chairperson); (ii) a representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
(member); (iii) a representative of the Ministry of Justice (member); (iv) a
representative of the Federal Police Commission (member); and (v) a
representative of the Authority (member and secretary). The Committee has
to submit its recommendation to the Security, Immigration and Refugee
Affairs Authority. If the committee‘s recommendation got approval of the
Authority, the applicant shall take the oath of allegiance (see
 4.3.2.2.Ways of Loosing Citizenship

Person may lose the nationality of a state in

many ways. They are presented as follows:
A. Release:
 some countries give their citizens the right to
ask to be released from their nationality.
 Release occurs only when an application is
made to that effect and if it has been accepted
by the country concerned
B. By Deprivation:
 when one commits serious crimes against
state(treason)
 For instance, collaborating with enemy in
times of war, providing secret government
information to enemy or foreign country,
participating in economic, diplomatic and
other intelligence activities
C. Lapse/expiration
 is another way of losing citizenship which is not
applicable to Ethiopia.
 Lapse is a mode whereby a person loses his/her
citizenship because of his/her permanent residence or
long term residence abroad beyond the number of years
permitted by the country in question.
 For example, if an Indian citizen stays outside his/her
country continuously for more than seven years, he/she
automatically loses his/her Indian nationality by the
principle of lapse.
D. Renunciation
 is the voluntary way of losing citizenship.
 Loss of citizenship is voluntary only if it is intended and initiated by
the individual concerned.
 An Ethiopian national has the full right to renounce his/her Ethiopian
nationality if he/she wishes according to Article 33(3) of the FDRE
constitution and Article 19 of the 2003 Ethiopian nationality
proclamations.
 However, the person who has renounced a country‘s nationality may
not be actually released from that status until he/she has discharged
his/her obligations towards that particular State or accused of a crime.
 This situation is called indelible allegiance.
According to Article 19(4) of the 2003 Nationality Proclamation, an
Ethiopian who has declared to renounce Ethiopian nationality may
not be released until: (i) the citizen has discharged his/her
outstanding national obligations or until he/she has served the
penalty for the crime he/she has accused of or convicted.
E. Substitution:
 citizenship may be lost when the original citizenship is substituted
by another state, where it is acquired through naturalization.
 On the other side, this may also take place when a particular
territory is annexed by another state; the inhabitants‘ citizenship
within the annexed territory will be replaced by the citizenship of
the subjugator.
 Statelessness
 Statelessness is the condition of having citizenship of any
country and with no government from which to ask protection.
 According to the international law, stateless person is a person
who is not considered as a national by any state under the
operation of its law.
 Statelessness almost always results when state failure leads
people to flee – be it due to invasion and conquest by another
state, civil war, famine, or an oppressive regime – from their
home country.
 Individuals could also become stateless persons because of
deprivation and when renouncing their citizenship without
gaining nationality in another State