In Ethiopia’s complex federal system, the status of the capital city has become a flashpoint for competing visions of identity, rights, and constitutional interpretation

FINFINNE, ETHIOPIA — A provocative statement by Dr. Tsegaye Ararssa has reignited debate over the status of Finfinne (Addis Ababa) and the rights of its residents, challenging what he describes as “baseless” calls for the city’s self-determination while affirming the constitutional framework that places it within Oromia.

“Finfinne is one of the cities of Oromia” , Dr. Tsegaye asserts, grounding his argument in Ethiopia’s federal constitution and the regional constitution of Oromia . The statement has drawn both support and criticism in a country where the status of the capital city remains a sensitive political issue.

A City of Many Peoples

Finfinne, with its population estimated at between 3 and 4 million, is a microcosm of Ethiopia’s remarkable diversity. People from all regions of the country have made the city their home, bringing with them their languages, cultures, and traditions .

“Their coming is a blessing. Their presence is beautiful. It is beauty itself,” Dr. Tsegaye writes, acknowledging the contributions of migrants who have enriched the capital’s social and cultural fabric.

These residents, he emphasizes, are full rights-bearing citizens of both the country and the region. Their rights are guaranteed under Ethiopia’s constitution (Chapter 3), the Oromia constitution, and other relevant laws. State and regional governments are constitutionally obligated to protect and fulfill these rights .

Residents, Not a Nation

Despite the rich diversity of its population, Dr. Tsegaye draws a sharp legal distinction: “The residents of Finfinne are residents, citizens—not a nation.”

While each individual citizen retains their ethnic identity—with many having ties to their regions of origin—the residents of Finfinne collectively do not constitute a “nation” as defined under Ethiopia’s constitutional framework .

The Ethiopian constitution grants the right to self-determination to “nations, nationalities, and peoples,” defined in Article 39(5) as groups with shared culture, language, identity, and a sense of common history . Residents of Finfinne, however diverse, do not meet these criteria as a collective group.

Individual Rights vs. Collective Rights

Dr. Tsegaye draws a crucial distinction between two types of rights:

Individual rights that accrue to all citizens—including the right to education in one’s language, cultural expression, religious freedom, and preservation of identity—are fully guaranteed to residents of Finfinne .

Collective rights—specifically, the right of a group to self-determination—are reserved for groups that constitute “nations” under Ethiopian law. Such groups must meet the constitutional criteria defined in Article 39(5) .

According to Dr. Tsegaye, residents of Finfinne do not meet this constitutional threshold. They are not a “nation” but rather a diverse collection of individuals from various nations. Therefore, any movement seeking self-determination for the city of Finfinne as a collective entity is constitutionally baseless .

As he states, “If they were to be properly settled according to this criterion, they would be Oromo, and their region would be Oromia.”

The Call for Self-Determination

The debate over Finfinne’s status is not merely academic. In recent years, some voices have called for the city to exercise self-determination, either as an independent federal city or through other arrangements.

Dr. Tsegaye characterizes these calls as “baseless and anti-Oromo” . The phrase “anti-Oromo” likely reflects the perspective that these efforts threaten Oromo rights and the territorial integrity of Oromia.

However, the debate cuts multiple ways. Those advocating for Finfinne’s self-determination argue that the city’s residents have distinct interests that may not be fully represented by either the federal or regional government.

The Constitutional Framework

The Ethiopian constitution is one of the few in Africa that explicitly recognizes the right of nations, nationalities, and peoples to self-determination, including the right to secession .

The constitution also establishes Finfinne (Addis Ababa) as a special city, with its status and boundaries determined by the federal government. This has been a source of tension between the federal government and Oromia, with some Oromo nationalists arguing that the city rightfully belongs to Oromia.

Dr. Tsegaye’s argument is grounded in the constitutional text as he interprets it, but the constitution’s provisions on Finfinne’s status have been subject to multiple interpretations.

A Citizen, Not a Nation

The heart of Dr. Tsegaye’s argument is that Ethiopian citizenship must be distinguished from nationality. All Ethiopians are citizens, but they belong to nations, nationalities, or peoples as defined in the constitution. Residents of Finfinne are citizens first, and their ethnic identity is separate from their status as residents of the capital .

In a country where ethnic federalism is both a constitutional principle and a political reality, the distinction matters. It shapes access to resources, political representation, and even legal status.

His final counsel to residents of Finfinne is clear: “Leave this ‘Addis Ababa should determine its own destiny’ noise, and protect your citizenship rights. It is counsel” .

Conclusion

Dr. Tsegaye Ararssa’s intervention enters a contentious and evolving debate with significant political and legal implications. His emphasis on the constitutional text, the distinction between individual and collective rights, and the specific status of Finfinne as a city within Oromia reflects one interpretation of Ethiopia’s complex federal framework.

Yet the status of Finfinne remains one of the most sensitive and unresolved issues in Ethiopian politics. The debate over whether the city is the capital of Ethiopia, the seat of the Oromo people, or something else entirely continues to shape political discourse.

“The residents of Finfinne are residents, citizens—not a nation.”