DC Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Kebede, Henok | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-12-13T11:57:26Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-12-13T11:57:26Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2021-09 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/mlr.v15i1.2 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Constitutions represent social contracts that accommodate subjective interests
of groups within the framework of impersonal shared interests among citizens
of the society at large. This article examines the contemporary social contract
theory in relation to the constitutional making process in Ethiopia. The
lawmaking process of Ethiopia’s 1995 Constitution does not fulfil the
procedural legitimacy of social contract because important sections of the
society were neglected. The institutions created by the FDRE Constitution
denote the subjectivist approaches to social contract theory thereby ignoring the
impersonal interests of the society. To accommodate both the subjective ends
and impersonal interests of the society, the Constitution should be reconstructed
in light of the dualist contemporary social contract theory. This article argues
that Ethiopia's contracting actors should consider both the subjective and
impersonal interests of society. The article examines the conditions that make
constitution a social contract. It also discusses the controversies concerning
Ethiopia's Constitution in light of the theory of social contract, and tries to show
what the Constitution should fulfil as a social contract in contemporary
Ethiopia. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | St.Mary's University | en_US |
dc.subject | Social Contract · Constitutional Making · Subjectivist · Objectivist · Dualist | en_US |
dc.title | Vol. 15 No.1:Constitution as Social Contract in Contemporary Ethiopia: The Need to Re-construct Political Arrangements | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Mizan Law Review
|