Undermining Ethiopia’s Constitutional Order: From Parliamentary System to Authoritarian Executive Power

Undermining Ethiopia’s Constitutional Order: From Parliamentary System to Authoritarian Executive Power

Ethiopia has a parliamentary system (at least constitutionally), where the Prime Minister is the chief executive. The 1995 Constitution of Ethiopia established a Federal State with parliamentary system of government giving the Prime Minister a Chief Executive and Head of Government role with ceremonial president as head of state. Compared to presidential systems, parliamentary systems are typically more restrained, with stronger legislative oversight.

The adoption of a parliamentary federal system in the 1995 FDRE Constitution was a response to the centralized dictatorship of the Derg regime and its predecessor monarchs. It aimed to:

• Establish two layered shared rules at Federal level and self-rule at regional state level.

• Promote collective executive leadership through the Council of Ministers

• Ensure executive accountability to parliament 

Powers and Functions of the Prime Minister (Article 74)

1. Chief Executive Role: Serves as the Chief Executive, Chair of the Council of Ministers, and Commander-in-Chief of the National Defense Forces.

2. Cabinet Appointments: Nominates ministers for approval by the House of Peoples’ Representatives (HoPR).

3. Policy Implementation: Ensures implementation of laws, policies, and decisions passed by the HoPR.

4. Council Leadership: Leads and coordinates the Council of Ministers and represents it.

5. Supervision of Executive Policies: Oversees execution of regulations and decisions adopted by the Council of Ministers.

6. Foreign Policy Oversight: Directs and monitors the implementation of foreign policy.

7. High-Level Appointments: Nominates Commissioners, Supreme Court President and Vice-President, and Auditor General for HoPR approval.

8. Administrative Oversight: Supervises federal administration and enforces corrective measures for efficiency.

9. Civil Appointments: Appoints senior federal officials not covered in items 2 and 7.

10. National Honors: Recommends candidates for national awards and honors, as permitted by law or HoPR decision.

11. Reporting to Parliament: Presents regular reports to the HoPR on executive performance, plans, and policy proposals.

Key Powers and Functions of the Council of Ministers (Article 77):

1. Law Implementation: Ensures execution of laws and decisions made by the House of Peoples’ Representatives (HoPR).

2. Government Structure: Determines the organization of ministries and federal institutions under its authority and provides leadership and coordination.

3. Federal Budget: Prepares the annual federal budget and implements it upon approval by the HoPR.

4. Financial Oversight: Manages financial and monetary policies, oversees the National Bank, printing of currency, foreign exchange, and borrowing.

5. Intellectual Property Protection: Safeguards patents and copyrights.

6. Policy Formulation: Designs and implements economic, social, and development policies.

7. Standardization: Sets national standards for measurements and calendar use.

8. Foreign Policy: Formulates the country's foreign policy and supervises its implementation.

9. Law and Order: Ensures public security and the rule of law.

10. State of Emergency: May declare a state of emergency, subject to timely approval by the HoPR.

11. Legislative Proposals: Submits draft laws to the HoPR, including laws related to declaring war.

12. Assigned Duties: Executes tasks delegated by the HoPR or the Prime Minister.

13. Regulation-Making: Issues regulations based on authority granted by the HoPR. Certainly. 

The regime has made at least two clear attempts to restructure the state and government along the lines of the pre-1991 order. These include the following two moves:

I. De Facto Repeal of the Constitution Through Executive Practice

Despite assuming office within the constitutional framework, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has gradually undermined the federal and parliamentary system by centralizing power and bypassing legal and institutional checks. Key indicators include:

• Subversion of the Parliamentary System:

  • Although the Constitution provides for a parliamentary system with collective decision-making by the Council of Ministers, the PM is ruling in a de facto presidential manner, sidelining the Cabinet.

  • The Council of Ministers and the House of Peoples’ Representatives are reduced to symbolic roles, often bypassed in major decisions. For instance both of them have no say about the construction of Chaka House Palace by 15 Billion USD (Approximately 1.5 Trilliion ETB) 

• Marginalization of Regional States:

  • Federalism and regional autonomy, as guaranteed under the Constitution, are being ignored. Every regional President is an appointee of the PM. 

  • Regional states are subjected to unilateral federal intervention, military presence, or control via unelected proxy officials.

• Replacing National Symbols and Institutions:

  • National symbols rooted in the federal identity are being altered or removed.

  • State-building narratives increasingly center on unitary, imperial nostalgia instead of constitutional federalism.

• Vanity Projects and Cult of Personality:

  • Use of state resources for personal legacy projects: "Corridor development," massive resort constructions, parks, and statues.

  • These projects serve more as instruments of personal glorification and political symbolism than development needs.

• Normalization of an Imperial-Style Executive:

• The Prime Minister is being portrayed and behaving more like a head of state in a presidential system, blurring constitutional boundaries.

• No real accountability to parliament, judiciary, or federal structure.

• Blurring Lines Between Parliamentary and Presidential Traits: First Lady Role

• Under Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, his wife, First Lady Zinash Tayachew, has maintained a visible role, often promoting charitable and religious activities. This reflects a growing personalization of power—blurring lines between parliamentary and presidential traits, where symbolic power is used to cultivate a quasi-presidential image of the executive office.

• In a presidential system, the First Lady is often a nationally prominent figure, sometimes taking leadership in social initiatives (e.g., Michelle Obama’s health programs in the U.S.).

• In a parliamentary system, the role is typically symbolic, with much less public expectation or institutional structure.

II. Parallel Undermining of the Constitution Through the National Dialogue Process

While the government rhetorically upholds constitutional values, a parallel process seeks to entirely rewrite or abolish the current constitutional order:

• National Dialogue Commission as a Trojan Horse:

  • Established without inclusive consultation, it excludes key political stakeholders and marginalized nations like the Oromo and Sidama.

  • Its actual aim appears to be dismantling the multinational federal system, rather than reforming it democratically.

• Unconstitutional Geographic Reconfiguration:

  • Aiming to redraw internal borders, disband existing regional states, and weaken ethno-linguistic identities.

  • This violates the right to self-determination enshrined in Articles 39 and 46 of the Constitution.

• Privatization of Land Against Constitutional Mandate:

  • The Constitution (Article 40) protects land as a public property under communal and state custodianship.

  • The current regime is moving toward full land commodification—treating it as private property, often pre-allocating large hectares to elites and foreign investors.

  • This paves the way for dispossession of indigenous communities, especially in Oromia, Benishangul-Gumuz, and the South.

• Elite Capture and Resource Grab:

• Strategic land and resource zones are being secured by political elites, military-linked businesses, and foreign entities under the guise of investment.

• Constitutional protections for rural landholders and pastoralists are being quietly dismantled.

Why States Choose Parliamentary or Presidential Systems

The choice between parliamentary and presidential systems depends on historical, cultural, and institutional factors. Countries with a history of monarchy or colonial-era parliamentary institutions (such as the UK, India, or Ethiopia) often adopt parliamentary systems due to their emphasis on collective governance, legislative oversight, and adaptability. These systems work well in diverse societies with robust political parties and a need for coalition governance.

In contrast, presidential systems appeal to states seeking strong, centralized leadership and clear separation of powers, particularly in post-conflict or post-authoritarian contexts where a unifying national figurehead is desirable. 

---

We conclude by summarizing the fundamental distinctions between parliamentary and presidential systems:

• Source of Power
  Parliamentary: The executive derives its authority from the legislature.
  Presidential: The executive is elected independently by the public.

• Mechanism of Accountability
  Parliamentary: The Prime Minister is directly accountable to the legislature and can be removed through a vote of no confidence.
  Presidential: The President serves a fixed term and is more difficult to remove from office.

• Approach to Governance
  Parliamentary: Prioritizes collective leadership through the Council of Ministers.
  Presidential: Centers on individual executive authority vested in the President.