A. Introduction
Freedom of religion should be of constitutional concern is not surprising. However, how a government can proceed with its legislative as well as executive plans for social benefits and yet remain ‘secular’ is of great concern for countries whose prevalent population is in need of much intervention with the government side for their socio-economic betterment. This article tries to identify such challenges and seeks to address them although it is not and can not be exhaustive.So, looking into the experience of India that is one of the most religiously diverse country, with society whose culture is based on religious principles, that adopted the concept of secularism with its own ground reality and managed to strike balance between religious and secular interests would present best example to a country like Ethiopia, with young constitution and without any developed tradition with respect to constitutional values in general and fundamental rights, freedom of religion included, in particular, who shares common characteristics, that is Ethiopia too have diversified society with different culture and religions within Federal form of government structure alike India.
B. Secularism
The wikitionary[2] defines secularism as: one as “A position that religious belief and practice should be kept in the private” and as ‘The related political belief in the separation of church and state.”
However, the notion of secularism differs from country to country. For example in the former communist Russia besides state’s abstinence from sponsoring any religion the state actively encourages anti-religious beliefs. Though religion is tolerated there was no freedom to propagate one’s religion. And except considerations of practicability and policy there is nothing in the constitution to prevent the state from altogether abolishing religion.[3] The term secularism, though, is not employed in the US constitution the concept of state-secularism presents a significantly different pattern, based on the principle of freedom for the individual in the exercise of religion as a segment of general scheme of individual liberty.[4] It is customary in the constitutions of many countries guaranteeing freedom of religion to specify two aspects of this liberty- freedom of conscience and freedom of religious practice. The term ‘freedom of conscience’ when used in the context of constitutional provision connotes much more than the mere act of individual belief in an abstract sense. It implies an individual’s right which has a corresponding duty on other ‘person’, primarily the Sate. This corresponding duty on the state constitutes the frame of relationship between the state and religion. And this relationship involves the principle of secularism. Thus, for understanding the implications of secularism as envisaged by the Indian constitution, it provides for three essential conditions; namely, one, the state shall have no religion;[5] two, there shall be no discrimination on the grounds of religion;[6] and three, the individual shall have freedom to practice, profess, and propagate religion. It did not provide for strict separation between the state and church as is found in the secular constitutions, particularly the constitutions of the United States and the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia.
When we analyze the constitution of Ethiopia against the above three essential conditions of secularism;
The state shall have no religion (Art. 27 of the Indian constitutional par provision under the Ethiopian constitution is Art. 11, on top of the non-existence of state religion it declares further that state and religion are separate and one won’t interfere into another’s affair and such makes the Ethiopian concept of secularism different in relation with separation of sate and religion because unlike in Ethiopia in India there is no such a wall.
