Affirmative action and reservation policies under the federal systems of ethiopia and india: descriptive constitutional perspectives

Generally speaking, India and Ethiopia are known to have reservation and affirmative action policies under their respective constitutions. The Indian Constitution recognizes the three major categories of beneficiaries of reservation policies such as scheduled castes (SCs) and scheduled tribes (STs) and other backward classes (OBC) who have historically been excluded and marginalized from Indian society. Similarly, the principle of affirmative action is one of the innovative features of the constitution of Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. For instance article 54(3) provides that out of the maximum number of 550 seats in the House of People's Representatives, a minimum of 20 seats are reserved for 'minority nationalities and peoples of the country. In conclusion this work has tried to assess and describe available constitutional safeguards to historically, marginalized and disadvantaged sections of societies in India and Ethiopia. It has been indicated that both the constitution of India and the Constitution of Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, make some key especial provisions regarding affirmative rights and protections to disadvantaged sections of societies based on their respective national context. Inter alia, Both countries have adapted Federal system of government which is believed to be the most suitable instrument for the realization of this end. In this regard, constitution of India is far more inclusive and comprehensive. Because, it attaches special and detailed clauses which obliged state take specific and measurable remedial stapes. so that they can ride of marginalization and wrongs that had been done against them. From a comparative perspective, at the level of constitutional protection, the two counties are similar in that both have constitutionally guaranteed or endorsed measures of affirmative action or reservation policies in response to historical in justices. The constitutional recognition of affirmative action of the two countries differs in two crucial aspects: there are three categories of beneficiaries in case if India- such as scheduled casts and scheduled tribes and other backward communities. While in case of Ethiopia, affirmative action is provided as wider and general constitutional solution or direction without specifying the exact beneficiaries except women. It simply says affirmative for all historically marginalized and disadvantaged sections of an Ethiopian society in general. In conclusion, constitutional commitment is fairly clear both in case of India and Ethiopia but still much have to be done to put these noble constitutional principles into practice through further enforcing legislations. And particularly in Ethiopia implementation has to be backed by strong an enforcing legislations as well as institutional frameworks. Unlike the Ethiopia, India has enacted plenty of an advanced and strong legislative protections and institutional framework to monitor proper implementation reservations in general.