Inter-Regional State Boundary Friction Resolution Mechanism Under Federal Constitution of Ethiopia: Principles and Institutions

Abstract

Federalism presupposes the existence a stable territorial boundary of units/ states that exercise their constitutional power and territorial autonomy. Inter-state boundary friction is a kind of contests over territory between two or more states assert sovereign power over one or the same territory; that is an apparent problem in Ethiopia. Boundary contest and misunderstanding is a serious political and human rights issue in federations where territory is potential identity-builders for ethnicities and is viewed as having high inherent values. Similarly, the boundary issue in Ethiopia is characterized by clashes between regional police and security forces and ethnically identified attack and violence between ethnic groups that has also resulted mass killings and person’s displacement in contested boundary areas. Federal Constitution is an important legal framework to regulate the behaviors and actions of the disputed parties and determine the policies and procedures of inter-state border claim and friction resolution. In other words, federal constitution supplants international law and military power and serve as mechanism for interstate coordination and dispute settlement. The purpose of this study was to identify the effective inter-regional boundary friction resolution mechanisms under Federal Constitution of Ethiopia. The study has employed doctrinal legal research using secondary data and revealed the following. First, the study has found eight (8) constitutional principles support peaceful boundary friction resolution in Ethiopia Viz. primacy of federal union, cooperation and dispute settlement, codependence and disablement, federal oversight, sanctity of human rights, inclusive human rights invocation, peaceful coexistence, and rule of law. Ironically, in Ethiopia these constitutionally stipulated principles are not given due emphasis or are ignored and border conflicts are not adequately handled. Second, the study has revealed the need of a comprehensive legislation that proactively determine the nature inter-state border claim and friction resolution procedures and regulate the behaviors and actions of the parties that involve in the process. In this regard, the Federal Government has Legislative power under FDRE constitution. Third, the House of Federation and Administrative Boundaries and identity question Commission are the two inter-state boundary disputes resolution institutions in Ethiopia. However, both of these institutions have limitations in handling boundary disputes effectively- impartially. Finally, the study recommends that the Federal Government to enact comprehensive legislation based on the aforementioned eight principles. Besides, the federal legislator has to reconsider the composition, accountability, transparency of the Administrative Boundaries and Identity Question Commission.