Mereja Forum

[Naga Tuma]

When democracy is abused, it finds a way to be used, or so it seems.

Isn't that how it got from "we the people" to the "For the People Act" legislative proposal?

What is the difference of concept between the two phrases (we the people and for the people?)

Well, when we are reminded of the phrase "government of the people, by the people, for the people," a little bit of the difference might become apparent.

"We the people" suggests that the people are the source of government. Yes, the concept may have been originally written by a few men that had their own flaws. But they got the concept correct.

On the other hand, doesn't "for the people" suggest an existence of a third party from whom whatever is for the people being demanded? It sure sounds like that. I am not being an armchair critic here of the advocates of the act. Not at all.

I am sensing that even that naming suggests how much democracy has been abused and is being demanded to be given back to the people. If it weren't, "The People's Act" would have been a perfect jibe with "We the people."

The people mandate their elected delegates. If they mandate their elected delegates to filibuster, the delegates perform in accordance with their mandates. If the people haven't mandated their elected delegates to filibuster, doing so is an unauthorized performance by the delegates.

I am sure that there are well-meaning delegates that think that bringing legislators together to work with one another is part of their mandate and that filibuster is a mechanism to achieving that. The presumption may be right or not. It doesn't prove that it is the most effective mechanism to bring the people together. The People's Act needs no preaching to those who swear in the name of "We the people."

These are just bits of ideas that may serve as an exhibit for Ethiopia's emerging or renewed democractic process, according to news of the latest election.