The aim of this article is to critically examine the conflict of the Karrayu Oromo’s with other neighboring communities and/or ethnic groups, where by the conflict may be characterized as intra or inter-ethnic group conflict, in light with the analytical framework. The paper will focus on the causes of conflict at different dimensions and will give attention to the dynamics, intensity and impact of the strife.

Semantically, in most pastoral and semi pastoral areas and communities of Ethiopia, it is vividly rampant to observe frequent clashes. Similarly, as the area where Karrayu Oromo groups have been resides in pastoralist areas, it is common to exhibit frequent clashes by different causes such as economic, cultural and environmental etc.  Especially, the need for free access to grazing land and water source for their cattle’s leads them to fierce  competitions and territorial encroachments, where the latter is more of a spatial factor.  As known, most of the pastoralist areas are arid and vulnerable for drought; which in turn faces severe decline in the availability of resources, conflicts are mostly aggravated and results in armed clashes, especially in areas where Karrayu Oromo’s resides. On the top of that, the prevalent intra and inter-ethnic conflict has taken on added intensity and fresh dimensions following the socio-political phenomena.

Using the short explanation hinted above with other detail analysis’s, we will find an inter and intra ethnic relationships and conflicts of the Karrayu Oromo’s with their immediate neighbors’ with a primary focus on the complexities and interfaces of the various causes of conflict, the dynamics, intensity and impact of the strife.

2.    General overview on conflicts in pastoralist areas

Pastoralist, as a form of survival in the arid and drought prone areas of Ethiopia, has increasingly been influenced by multi dimensional conflicts.  Most pastoral communities have had mobile experience whereby in their history, they couldn’t reside in a constant place. As Markakis (1993 and 1998) elucidates the African pastoral experience, pastoral communities in the region have had to face a novel experience since the late 19th and early 20th centuries as the colonial and post colonial states embarked on the imposition of central governance over their customary systems of local self governance.  Unlike this African experience, most of the Ethiopian pastoralist communities face a system of modern governance in recent years especially since 1974. These developments which are strange and unprecedented in the history of the pastoralists were bound to entail a wide range of far reaching consequences both for the local communities and their respective governments.  Measures adopted by the central states to supersede pastoral self rule institutions with centralized governance have undermined a traditional autonomy, resource use systems, cultural livelihoods and patters of transhumance of the herding populations.

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to examine the key issues with regard rule of law in a narrower sense with the view and in comparable of rule of compromise in non-western societies where the latter focuses in African nation. The issues of Awramba’s is peculiar to this paper. Asserting that this phenomenon is replicable, the paper underpins the various arguments highlighting the incorporation extent of the rule of law on indigenous traditions under the broader umbrella of rule of compromise. Further, the paper addresses the necessity of reconciliation and restoration of harmony even in African continent when its children breach the laws than adjudicate by outsider’s law. In doing so, a little show on the Awramba’s experience of rule of compromise and its footages in promoting development and  stability will be reflected.

Introduction

Recently, due to the new politico-legal order in Ethiopia, the federative arrangement emphasizes cultural and legal pluralism and accommodates diversity in a plural democratic federal setting. Relegating the history of Ethiopian legal system before 1930’s, along with the enactment of the criminal code of 1930 and the proclamation of Administrative Justice of 1942, the state courts were established (shack et al 1966:163). The law adopted a foreign system of justice and borrowed many elements from western legal system (Abera 1998). This prevents the new law from conducting a serious investigation of local customary laws and safeguards the traditional values and thereby attaches the profound sentiments of the peoples with the code (Allott et al 1969:32). As Rene (1963:193) noted in his article that Ethiopia tends to modify its structures completely to the way of life of the people and consequently the citizens didn’t expect the new code to be a work of consolidation, the methodological and clear statement of actual customary rules, they wish it to be a program envisaging a total transformation of a society and they demand that for the most part of it set out new rules appropriate for the society they wish to create.

የኢትዮጵያ የህግ ስርዓት በተለያዩ የመንግስት የአስተዳደር ስርዓት ውስጥ በልዩ ልዩ ጉዳዮች ላይ ልዩነቶች ሲታዩበት የነበረ ቢሆንም አደረጃጀቱም የዚያኑ ያክል ተለዋዋጭነት የነበረው መሆኑ ግልፅ ነው፡፡ በተለይም ከያዝነው ርዕስ ጋር በተያያዘ የፍርድ ቤቶች አደረጃጀትና በጉዳዮች ላይ የመጨረሻ ውሰኔ የመስጠት ሂደት በተለያዩ ስርዓቶች የተለያየ ሂደት ሲኖረው ተስተውሏል፡፡ ከ1980ዎቹ አጋማሽ በፊት የነበሩት ስርዓቶች የአህዳዊ ስርዓትን የሚከተሉ ከመሆናቸው አንፃር የፍርድ ቤቶች አደረጃጀት በዚሁ አይነት አተያይ የተቀረፀ ነበር፡፡

በዘውዳዊው ስርዓት የነበረውን የፍርድ ቤቶች አደረጃጀት ስናይ በተሻሻለው ህገ መንግስት አዋጅ ቁጥር 149/1948 ምዕራፍ  6 ስለ ዳኝነት በሚዘረዝረው ስር  አንቀፅ 108 እና አንቀፅ 109 ስር የዳኝነት ስልጣን በህግ ለተቋቋሙ ፍርድ ቤቶች የተሰጠ እንደሆነ እና የጠቅላይ የንጉሰ ነገስት ፍርድ ቤትና እንዲሁም በህግ እንደሚወሰን ወይም እንደሚፈቀደው ሌሎች ፍርድ ቤት እንደሚኖሩ ይደነግጋል፡፡ ከዚህ ድንጋጌ አንፃር በሐገሪቱ አንድ ማዕከላዊ ጠቅላይ ፍርድ ቤት እንደሚኖርና ይህም በሐገሪቱ ለሚነሱ ጉዳዮች የመጨረሻ ውሳኔ እንደሚሰጥ እንዲሁም በ1966 ዓ.ም የተዘጋጀው የኢትዮጵያ ህገ መንግስት ረቂቅ አንቀፅ 120 መሰረት ጠቅላይ ፍርድ ቤት የሐገሪቷ የመጨረሻ ፍርድ ቤት እንደሆነና ይህም ህገ መንግስትን ጭምር የመተርጎም ስልጣን እንዳለው ይደነግጋል፡፡ ከዚህም በተጨማሪ የይግባኝ ፍርድ ቤቶችና የመጀመሪያ ደረጃ ፍርድ ቤቶች እንደሚኖሩ አስቀምፀጧል፡፡

በሌላ በኩል የኢትዬጵያ ጊዜያዊ ወታደራዊ መንግስትን ለማቋቋም በወጣው አዋጅ ቁጥር 1/1967 ምዕራፍ 14 አንቀፅ 102 (1፣2) በህዝባዊ ዲሞክራሲያዊ ሪፐብሊኩ የበላይ የዳኝነት አካል ጠቅላይ ፍርድ ቤት እንደሆነና ይህም በሐገሪቱ ፍርድ ቤቶች ሁሉ የሚከናወኑ የዳኝነት ተግባሮች የመቆጣጠር ስልጣን ያለው መሆኑን ያስቀምጣል፡፡

ከእነዚህ  የሁለት ህገ መንግስት ድጋጌዎችና ጊዜያዊ ወታደራዊ መንግስትን ለማቋቋም ከወጣው አዋጅ ለመረዳት እንደሚቻለው በአህዳዊ ስርዓት ውስጥ አንድ የጠቅላይ ፍርድ ቤት እንደሚኖር እና ፍርድ ቤቱም የመጨረሻ ውሳኔ እንደሚሰጥ ያስረዳናል፡፡