Most federal constitutions invoke the concept of separation of powers into executive, legislative and judicial in each level of the federal system, and provide for "checks and balances" between the three branches of government to bring about cooperation between the branches and preservation of the general interest of the public. The checks and balances require the consent of two branches for an action taken by the third branch, thereby preventing misuse and abuse of authority in the government. For instance, the legislative branch of the federal government passes laws that require the signature of the President who is the head of the executive branch; the President, on the other hand, appoints judges and secretaries (ministers) for the various federal departments (agencies) that require the approval of the senate; and the judicial branch headed by the supreme court interprets the constitution and may rule that a certain law passed by the legislative body and signed into law by the president as unconstitutional; while the legislative body and the states can amend the constitution that the judicial system of government relay upon on their ruling. These overlaps of authority within the federal system of government may appear inefficient on the surface, but is designed by choice, not by accident, to provide the necessary "checks and balances" between the three branches of the federal government to impede the work of other branch of government if at least one branch has a reason to believe that the outcome of the work done by that branch of government will violate the rights of the citizens in the federal union. This design of the federal constitution is believed to be significantly vital in all cases, but especially in multicultural, multilingual and multiethnic societies such as ours, where the potential for tyranny, and rule with an iron feast is greater than in a homogenous federal nation. The federal system of government may appear inefficient or laborious at a first glance, but in reality is an efficient and fair system of government that takes into account the interest of the entire nation as a whole. The federal constitution therefore, empowers every individual branch of government to prevent actions by other branches of government and induces cooperation, power sharing and consent thereby promoting tolerance, equality, unity of cultures and traditions to create the necessary conditions for dialogue, and respects of rights that lead into development and prosperity for all the citizens of a nation.

It was Aristotle who recognized the weakness of unitary governmental models resembled in monarchies, aristocracies, and singular democracies dominated by sectors of a society. He recognized that none of those systems were ideally suitable as a democratic system of governance but contained some positive elements that can be integrated into a new form of government, or made into a mixture of the best aspects of all unsuitable models of governments to serve the public at all times. Then it was James Harrington who improved the work of Aristotle when he suggested separation of power in 1656, in his Oceana. Then it was John Locke, who further proposed the separation of power into legislative and executive, followed by significant refinement by Montesquieu in 1748 in his writing about the French monarchy, where he proposed separation of power into three branches code named executive, legislative and judicial branches. Today, many federal systems of governance provide a constitutionally mandated separation of powers and promotion of sharing of power between all citizens of a nation that is composed of ethnic, religious, and social groups, so as to offer equal representation in an upper house of the legislation, and proportional representation in a lower house of the legislation, a separate and independent judicial system, and a separate and effective executive branch of government that is elected democratically.

The argument against federalism in Eritrea as being too complicated type of a system for multiethnic, multireligious and multisocial societies advocated by some ill informed characters is therefore, weak and unsubstantiated, and cannot justify the search for any other less democratic systems. Arguments against federalism in Eritrea based on merits alone can easily be counter argued and defeated because they are not based on facts but on illusions and cover-ups for other undisclosed agendas of the opponents. Federalism has been tested and retested for hundreds of years by many nations of different cultures, and found to be impressively reliable and fair system of governance. It is a system based on sharing of responsibilities of governance for a nation composed of separate but related cultures and traditions that can coexist successfully and managed properly and fairly by a system that is mature and transparent, a system that is capable of accommodating different but legitimate concerns and interests of the various segments of a nation. It is a system that respects and promotes human rights of all people, their languages, traditions, religions and value systems. The Eritrean groups who seem to be resisting, at least on the surface, the federal proposal, may not be familiar with the intricacies and delicacies and power of the federal structure, or they may be bargaining in their limited ways for some tangible benefits for their specific groups or they may think they are entitled to some privileges under an alternative system. The federal system is a flexible system and may accommodate some of their concerns, but it is not a system of favoritism and selective support of issues.  The federal system is a clear, well structured, respectable, and durable system of governance that will solve the crisis of power struggle, assimilations and forceful domination of cultures in our nation. Federalism is the most flexible system of all, but the FRAMEWORK of the federal system, three or more levels of government with independent legislative, judicial and executive branches, is not subject to compromise, because it is the characteristic that allows for power sharing and coexistence and that forms the fundamental pillars of the consensual federal democratic system. 

It appears to me that one of the underlying motivations for resisting the federal system is the hope that some are placing on the status of a majority. But let us be clear with this regard. Those who are counting on achieving more control over the destiny of the nation based on shear numbers will be shockingly, and brilliantly surprised as their worst nightmares come true. This is due to the following fact: the oppressed, the disenfranchised, the suppressed and abused people of today in the Eritrean nation are and will remain for the foreseeable future, the majority by all available statistically means. Therefore, that plan will not work and will backfire on the opponents of federalism. Further, the immigration policies of the future Eritrean nation will be looked at and scrutinized with attention to detail to prevent forgery and illegal immigration to boost not existent numerical advantage based on new illegal immigrants. Therefore, it is to the benefit of the opponents of federalism to reconsider their positions and support federalism, because it will benefit them by protecting their lands, supporting their languages, their tribal or ethnic codes of land ownership, their cultural heritages, by the same fair laws that will protect the oppressed people of today, thereby promoting cooperation, collaboration and unity of the peoples, and enforcing the constitution to realize peace and justice for all.

The checks and balances of the federal system of government are there to protect and defend the rights of all ethnic and social groups. They are there to promote justice, fairness, respect of law, equal opportunity, integrity and transparency of officials, and ensure that liberty and freedom shines at all times. As the final meeting of the opposition groups closes in, we call upon the opposition groups to side with reason, not fear and emotions, side with facts, not imaginations and fictions, side with justice and equal rights for all, side with your clear conscious, not contaminated minds, side with the people, not the special interest groups, side with stability and peace in your nation, side with unity and solidarity with your fellow citizens, and override and defeat the fear and hate mongers, the instigators with shadowy background who are known to be anti unity and peace, defeat those short sighted elements by courageously and proudly signing the charter , the organizational structure, and other documents immediately and with confidence, thereby moving into the stage of responsible leadership that you will then earn, and thus contribute to the alleviation of burden, oppression and sectarianism off the Eritrean people. Federalists will be on hand to help, assist, and guide those who need and wish their services for achieving the common goal of peace and justice for all under a federal democratic system of governance.

Yussif Yassin

Peace  

The views expressed in articles published on Arkokabay.com are those of the authors alone. They do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Arakokabay.com or its Editorial Board

ما ينشر من مقالات في موقع عركوكباي.كوم  يعبر عن رأي صاحبه ولا يعبر بالضرورة عن رأي الموقع والقائمين عليه.

Send mail to Arkokabay  with questions, comments, opinions and/or articles

2006-05-24 21:33 :Copyright © 2005 Last modified