Ethiopia's constitutional reform: What does it mean — especially for Abiy?
Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed stands to benefit from a planned constitutional reform in the country. A new presidential system would reshape political power — and could give him a more powerful mandate in office.
Since 2018, Ethiopia's Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has been the most influential figure in Ethiopian politics, navigating the country through significant trials such as the Tigray war and Eritrea peace negotiations. In the coming months, Ethiopia's political system could undergo a transformation that could see the offices of prime minister and president potentially merged, centralizing political power within the presidency.
Although the specifics of this proposed restructuring remain unclear, the consultations have reportedly resulted in a recommendation for a stronger presidential system.
Abiy, who did not participate in these discussions, stands to gain substantially from the endorsement of a presidential system. His party secured a substantial majority in the recent parliamentary elections, providing a strong foundation for advocating the reform. Proponents of a stronger presidency argue it could unify Ethiopia's ethnically and regionally diverse society by having a president serving as a representative for all, fostering a unified national identity.
Supporters of this reform believe it could strengthen democratic processes, as a directly elected president would need broader support from various ethnic and religious groups. However, critics warn that presidential systems could potentially lead to dictatorship. Abiy already possesses immense power, having consolidated it through his Prosperity Party's creation in 2019, limiting the role of opposition parties. The military and security apparatus also remain under his control.
The proposed reform raises questions about democratic processes, specifically whether concentrating power can be considered the will of the people enacted through parliamentary procedures or if a plebiscite is necessary. Civil rights activist Befeqadu Hailu underscores the distinction between procedural and popular legitimacy, stating that while Ethiopia's political institutions may have procedural legitimacy to enact changes, they lack broad popular legitimacy due to the ongoing issues with democratic elections.
The composition of the national dialogue, which recommended the constitutional reform, is another concern, as opposition parties boycotted the process, and influential armed groups were not represented. This raises doubts about the inclusion of groups feeling alienated by the current system, and Hailu suggests that the dialogue might have been a "rubber-stamping exercise" aimed at implementing the Prosperity Party's vision.
Written by urgent.news from DW News's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
This story
This is one outlet's version. Read the fullest account.
