Seerrii yakkaa meeshaa dudhaalee hawaasa tokko (adda addaa) kan calaqisiisuu fi tarkaanfachiisuu dha. Yakkii yeroo kamiyyuu hawaasa keessatti uummamuu kan danda’u waan ta’eef kanaan wal-qabate adabbii yakkamtoota irratti fudhatamuun isaa waan haafu miti. Kana taanaan akkaata murtiin adabbii ittiin murtaa’u waliin wal qabatee qabxiilee ka’uu qaban keessaa kaayyoon seera yakka nageenyafi tasgabbii hawaasa eeguuf akka meeshatti kan gargaaru ta’uu isaati. Hawaasicha kan eeguus yakkii akka hin raawwatamne ittisuun yoo ta’uu, kanas karaa ittin galmaan gahu keessaa tokko adabbiidha. Raawwattoonni yakka adabamuun isaanii, yakka biraa raawwachuu irraa akka of qusatan kan isaan taasisuu yommuu ta’u, darbees namoota yakka raawwataniifis akeekkachiisa ta’a.

Gama yakkoota muraasaatiin adabbiin hidhaa yookiin du’aa kan raawwatamu yoo ta’es yaadni inni duraa balleessitoonni yeroodhaaf ykn itti fufinsaan hawaasa irratti yakka akka hin raawwanne ittisuudha.  Akkas yommuu ta’us, adabbii du’aa irraa kan hafe balleessitoonni adabbiin hidhaa umurii guutuu itti murta’e yoo ta’anillee adabbii isaanii otoo hin fixiin korooraan gadi lakkifamuu ni danda’u. Gama yakkoota tokko tokkootiinis murtiin adabbii otoo hin kennamiin yookiin adabbiin yoo murta’es otoo hin raawwatamiin balleessitoonni daangaadhaan gadi lakkifamu ni danda’u. Kunis balleessitoonni jireenya nagaa akka gaggeessan kan taasisu yoo ta’uu; seerrii yakkiichaa balleessitoonni badii isaaniirraa akka barataniif iddoo ol’aanaa kennuu isaa agarsiisa.

Seeronni yakkaa biyyoota adda addaa adabbiilee gocha yakkaa rawwatamu hordofani dhufan kan of-keessatti kaa’an yoo ta’ellee adabbii hangam, gochafi yakkamaa akkamiitiif murtaa’u akka qabu jalamuranii hin kaa’ani. Seeronni yakka kun Abbootii Seeraatiif aangoo adabbii murtessuu bal’aa ta’ee kan kennaan waan ta’eef gochaafi yakkamaa wal-fakkaatu irratti adabbii gara garaa yeroo murtaa’u qabatamaan mul’achaa turera.  

Rakkoo kanarraa kan ka’ee adabbii yakkamtoota irratti kennamu sirrii fi kan wal-fakkaatu gochuudhaaf /dhimmoota walfakkaatan irratti adabbii walfakkaata karaa itti murteessan mijeessuuf/ Manni Murtii Waliigalaa Federaalaa Qajeelfama Adabbii Itoophiyaa 1/2002 baasudhaan Caamsaa Bara 2002 irraa ka’ee hojiitti galamee jira. Haata’u malee qajeelfamni kun rakkoo adda addaatiif kan saaxilamee ta’uu isaa hojii keessatti waan hubatameef gama tokkoon rakkoolee qabatamaan mul’atan kana furuudhaaf, karaa biraatiin immoo yakkoota muraasa sadarkaa fi gulantaa hin baaneef sadarkaa fi gulantaa baasuun barbaachiisaa ta’uun isaa waan itti amanameef qajeelfamni dur ture fooya’ee akka bahu taasifameera.  Kaayyyoon moojuuli kun qabus qajeelfama adabbii haaraa bahe kana beeksiisun hojii irraa olmaa isaatiif deegarsa barabaachisu hunda gochuudha.

Caasseffamni moojulii kanaa boqonnaa Sadiitti kan qoqqoodame yoo ta’uu boqonnaa tokkoffaa keessatti waa’ee adabbii akka waliigalaatti kan ilaalamu ta’e walitti dhufeenya adabbii fi bulchiinsii sirna haqaa qaban, murtessuu adabbii bu’aa qabeessa gochuudhaaf seeroota fi imaammata biyya keenya keessatti diriiran ni ilaalamu. Kanamalees adabbii murtessuu wajjiin wal-qabatee muuxannoowwan biyyoota adda addaa maal akka fakkaatu ni ilaalamu. Boqonnaa Lamaffaa keessatti qajeeltoowwan adabbii seera yakka Itoophiyaa, rakkowwaan qajeelfama adabbii Itoophiyaa 1/2002 keessatti mul’atan fi dhimootni waligalaa qajeelfama adabbii isaa haaraa keessatti hammataman kan ilaalaman ta’a. Kanamalees yakkoota qajeelfama adabbii kanaan sadarkaa fi gulantaan baheef keessaa kanneen qajeelfama adabbii 1/2002 keessatti sadarkaan baheef qajeelfama isa haaraa keessatti akka fooyya’an taasifaman boqonnaa kana jalatti haammatamaniiru. Boqonnaa sadaffaan guutumaan guutuutti yakkoota haaraa sadarkaan isaaniif qopha’ee irratti kan xiyeefate yommuu ta’u, waa’ee sababoota adabbii cimsaniifi salphisan boqonnaa kana jalatti gadifageenyaan xiinxalameera.Kunis leenjifamtoonni yakkoota sadarkaan baheefi hin banee addaan baasuun bu’uura qajeelfamiichaatiin akkamitti gara hojiitti jijjiru akka danda’amu hubannoo guutuu ta’e akka horatan ni taasisa.

የኦሮሞ ፌዴራላዊ ዴሞክራሲያዊ ንቅናቄ (ኦፌዴን) ምክትል ሊቀመንበርና የኢትዮጵያ ፌደራላዊ ዴሞክራሲያዊ መድረክ ስራ አስፈፃሚ የነበሩት “ህጋዊ የፖለቲካ ፓርቲን ሽፋን በማድረግ  የአሸባሪ ቡድን የሆነው ኦነግ አባል ሆነዋል” በሚል ክስ ተመስርቶባቸው የ8 ዓመት እሥር የተበየነባቸው ሲሆን፤ ይግባኝ ጠይቀው እስሩ ወደ 5 ዓመት ዝቅ ተደርጎላቸዋል፡፡

ከ5 ዓመቱ የእስር ጊዜ ውስጥም 3ቱን ዓመት በመጨረሳቸው በአመክሮ ይፈቱ ዘንድ ለማረሚያ ቤቱ ያመለከቱ ሲሆን ማረሚያ ቤቱም ‹አመክሮ መስጠትም አለመስጠትም መብታችን ነው›  በማለት እስከአሁን ሊፈታቸው አልቻለም፡፡ ይህም ብዙ ጥያቄዎችን አስነስቷል፡፡

አንዳንድ ህጋዊ ሁኔታዎች ስለጉዳዩ፡

አመክሮ ምንደር ነው?

ሌላውን ትርጉም ትተን የኢትዮጵያ የወንጀል ሕግ ‹በተወሰነ ጊዜ በአመክሮ መፈታት› በሚለው ክፍል በተለይም በአንቀፅ 202 እንደደነገገው፡

"ተቀጭው ከተወሰነበት የእስራት ጊዜ ከሶስት እጅ ሁለቱን እጅ ወይም ፍርዱ የእድሜ ልክ እስራት ሲሆን ሀያ ዓመት በፈፀመ ጊዜ አግባብ ባለው አካል ወይም በጥፋተኛው አሳሳቢነት ጥፋተኛውን ከቅጣቱ ነፃ ያወጣዋል፡፡"

ይህም ማለት አመክሮ 2/3ኛውን የቅጣት ጊዜውን የጨረሰ ታራሚ ከእስር የሚፈታበት አሰራር ነው፡፡ 

አመክሮ ለማግኝት ምን መስፈርት ማሟላት ያስፈልጋል?

የኢትዮጵያ የወንጀል ሕግ ከላይ በጠቀስነው አንቀፅ 202 ላይ አመክሮ ለማግኝት አንድ እስረኛ ማሟላት የሚያስፈልገውን መስፈርቶች ይዘረዝራል፡፡ ይህም፡

- ‹ታራሚው በስራ ጠባዩ የተረጋገጠ መሻሻል አሳይቶ እንደሆነ…›

- ‹ካሳ የመክፈል ግዴታ ተጥሎበት ከነበረና ካሳውን መክፈሉ የተረጋገጠ እንደሆነ…›

- ‹አመሉና ጠባዩ መልካም አኗኗር ለመኖር የሚያስችለውና በአመክሮ መፈታቱ መልካም ውጤት ሊያስገኝ ይችላል ተብሎ የታመነ እንደሆነ..›

ነው ብሎ ይደነግጋል፡፡

ማረሚያ ቤት ወይስ ፍርድ ቤት?

ታራሚን በአመክሮ የመልቀቅ የመጨረሻው ስልጣን የፍርድ ቤት፡፡ ነገር ግን ጉዳዩን ማረሚያ ቤቱ በራሱ ተነሳሽነት ወይም በታራሚው አሳሳቢነት ለፍርድ ቤት ሲያቀርብ ነው ፍርድ ቤቱ ውሳኔ የሚሰጠው፡፡ እዚህ ላይ ማረሚያ ቤቱ ትልቁን ስልጣን ይዞ እናገኛለን፡፡ ማረሚያ ቤቱ ለፍርድ ቤት ማቅረብ ካልፈለገ ሊተወው የሚችልበት አግባብ አለ ማለት ነው፡፡ ነገር ግን ማረሚያ ቤቱ በሕግ ስር ያለ አካል እንደመሆኑ መጠን በወንጀል ሕጉ አንቀፅ 202 ላይ የተቀመጡ መስፈርቶችን ላሟላ ታራሚ አመክሮ ሊከለክል አይችልም - የታራሚው መብት ነውና!

በቀለ ገርባስ?

አቶ በቀለ ገርባ ከተፈረደባቸው የአምስት ዓመት እስር ውስጥ 2/3ኛውን ወይም 3 ዓመት የሚሆነውን ጨርሰው የአመክሮ ጥያቄያቸው በማረሚያ ቤቱ በኩል ለፍርድ ቤት እንዲቀርብላቸው ቢጠይቁም ማረሚያ ቤቱ  ‹አመክሮ መስጠትም አለመስጠትም መብታችን ነው› የሚል መልስ እንደሰጣቸው ተሰምቷል፡፡ 

1ኛ. አመክሮ መስጠት የማረሚያ ቤት መብት ሳይሆን ግዴታም ጭምር ነው፡፡ መስፈርቱን ያሟላ ታራሚ አመክሮ የማግኝት መብት ያለው መሆኑ በሌላ በኩል አመክሮ ሰጭውን አካል ላይ ግዴታ ይጥላልና፡፡

2ኛ ሌላው አቶ በቀለ ገርባ መስፈርቱን አሟልተዋል ወይስ አላሟሉም የሚለው ጥያቄ ነው፡፡ 2/3ኛውን የእስር ጊዜ መጨረስ የሚለውን Objective መስፈርት እንዳሟሉ ግልፅ ሲሆን፡፡ ችግሩ የተፈጠረው Subjective መስፈርቱ ጋር በተያያዘ ነው፡፡ ይህም ማለት በእስር ወቅት መልካም ፀባይ አሳይተዋል ወይስ አላሳዩም የሚለው ጥያቄ ነው፡፡ አንድ ታራሚ በእስር ወቅት ለመልካም ፀባይ ተቃራኒ የሆኑ ነገሮችን ካሳየ የቅጣት ማስጠንቀቂያ ከመፃፍ እስከ ብቻውን ማሰር (Solitary Confinement) ድረስ ያሉ እርምጃዎች በማረሚያ ቤቱ ሊወሰዱበት ይችላሉ፡፡

 አቶ በቀለ ገርባ ከፀባያቸው ጋር በተያያዘ ምንም አይነት ቅጣት ያልተወሰደባቸው ከመሆኑም ሌላ መልካም ፀባይ እንዳሳዩ ከማረሚያ ቤቱ እንደተነገራቸው ራሳቸው ገልፀዋል፡፡ በቀለ ገርባ ምም መስፈር አሟልተዋል ማለት ነው፡፡ ታዲያ ምን ይሆን አቶ በቀለን በአመክሮ ከመፈታት ያገዳቸው?

አንዳንድ ነገሮች...

ባለው አካሄድ አብዛኛው ታራሚዎች በአመክሮ ይፈታል፡፡ ከሌባ እስከ ሙሰኛ፡፡ High Profile በሆኑ ክሶች የተከሰሱ ሰዎች ሳይቀሩ በአመክሮ ሲፈቱ እንደነበር እናስታውሳለን ለምሳሌ ቴዲ አፍሮ 24 ወራት ተፈርዶበት 16 ወራትን ጨርሶ በአመክሮ ተፈቷል፡፡ አቶ አሰፋ አብርሃ 9 ዓመት ተፈርዶባቸው ሰባት ዓመታት ታስረው ከብዙ ውዝግብ በኋላ በአመክሮ ተፈተዋል፡፡ በሌላ በኩል በቅንጅት ክስ ስር ተከሰው የነበሩት አቶ ዳንኤል በቀለና አቶ ነፃነት ደምሴ 30 ወራት የተፈረደባቸው ሲሆን 20 ወራትን በእስር አሳልፈው አመክሮ ቢጠይቁም ማረሚያ ቤቱ ‹ፍርዳችሁን ጨርሳችሁ ውጡ› በሚል ምክንያት አመክሮ ከልክሏቸው ነበር፡፡ 

እንግዲህ አቶ በቀለ ገርባ በሕጉ የተቀመጠውን መስፈርት አሟልተው እያለ በአመክሮ የመፈታት መብታቸው አልተከበረም ወይም ማረሚያ ቤቱ ግዴታውን ሊወጣ አልፈለገም!

Seenaa adabbii yakka yoo ilaalle, adabbiin balleessaa adda addaa hordofuun kennamaa ture baay’ee suukaneessaa fi kaayyoo sirna haqaa yakka hammayyaa irraa kan fagaate ture. Adabbiin haala akkasiin kennamaa ture qajeeltoowwanii fi ulaagaalee seera yakka, mirga dhala namaa fi bulchiinsa sirna haqaa yakka kan hin hordofnee fi gonkumaa sirnaa fi qajeeltoo ittiin hogganamu kan hin qabne ture. Haata’u malee, guddina sirna seeraa adda addaa fi dagaagina gaaffii mirga dhala namaa wajjin qajeeltoowwan seera yakkaa fi adabbiin yakkaas guddachaa dhufaniiru.Seerotni adabbii yakkaas adeemsaan boca qabachaa fi qajeeltoowwan bu’uuraa ittiin hogganaman uummachaa deemuun yeroo ammaa kana adabbiin yakkaa haala kabaja mirga namummaa yakkamtootaa hin tuqneen, galma fi kaayyoo seera yakkaa fi bulchiinsa sirna haqaa yakka galmeessisuu danda’utti qophaa’ee fi diriiree jira, raawwiin isaa rakkoo haa qabaatuyyuu malee.

Bulchiinsa sirna haqaa yakka keessatti murtiin adabbii yakkaa fi tarkaanfileen biroo fudhataman akkaataa qajeeltoowwan seera yakkaa fi adabbiitiin hojiirra oolfamuu yoo batan bu’aan argamu haqa hawaasaa, miidhamtootaa fi sirreeffamtoota seeraa irratti rakkoo guddaa uuma. Adabbii fi tarkaanfileen biroo murtii balleessummaa hordofuun fudhataman hundumtuu kaayyoo seera yakkaa fi keessumaa kaayyoo adabbii yakkaa biyya tokkoo ilaalcha keessa galchuun kan hin raawwatamne yoo ta’e, bulchiinsi sirna haqaa yakkaa biyyattii galma gahuu hin danda’u. Kanaafuu, adabbiin yakkamtoota irratti murtaa’u gochaa yakka isaan raawwatan wajjin kan wal-madaaluu, walfakkina kan qabu, gama hundaan tilmaamamuu kan danda’uu fi qaamolee murtii kennan irratti itti gaafatamummaa kan hordofsiisu ta’uu qaba.

Adabbii fi tarkaanfiiwwan biroo dhimma yakkaa ilaalchisee goosota yakka irratti hunda’udhaan akkamitti murta’uu akka qaban seera yakka keenya jalatti yoo ka’amees seera irraa dabuun hogguu murta’an fi raawwataman ni mul’ata. Kanaaf tumaaleen seera yakka adabbii fi tarkaaniiwwan biroo ilaallatan gama kanaan maal akka fakkaatan, rakkoowwan seeraa fi hojimaata manneen murtii keessa jiran xiinxaluun, mariin gabbisuun kallattii fuulduraa kaa’uun barbaachisaa ta’ee mul’ata.

Akka waliigalaatti kaayyoon moojulii kanaa S/Y keessatti tumaalee adabbii fi tarkaanfiiwwan biroo ilaallatan hunda irratti hubannoo kennuu osoo hin ta’in, rakkoowwan yaada seeraa, akkaataa itti hiikaman fi raawwii tumaalee muraasa kanneeniin walqabatan fi baay’inaan mul’atan addaan baasuun kallattii furmaata kaa’uu dha. Leenjiin kun yeroo murtii adabbii fi tarkaanfiiwwan biroo kennamu dhimmoota akkamii irratti hundaa’uu akka qabuu fi  rakkoolee hojii irratti mul’achaa jiran xiinxaluun furmaata (kallattii) gara fuulduraa maal ta’uu akka qabu agarsiisuun fooyya’iinsa sirna haqaa Naannoo keenyaatiif  kan kaayyeffate dha. 

Caasseffamni moojuulii kanaa boqonnaa sadiitti kan qoqqoodame yoo ta’u boqonnaan jalqabaa yaada waliigala adabbii fi tarkaanfiiwwan biroo kan ibsu ta’ee seenaa guddina adabbii fi qajeeltoowwan bu’uraa adabbii yakka yeroo har’aa kana bal’inaan argaman maal akka fakkaatan; akkasumas, kaayyoon adabbii qabu maalfaa akka ta’an ni ilaala.

In a business world, business persons boldly strive to get the patronage or custom of consumers to survive and amassed the hefty of benefit in the market. As the business environment exposed to stiff and harsh competition market actors conclude various types of arrangements or agreement to be successful in the market. Among those business arrangements which business persons routinely entered, merger is the one.

Merger is a business arrangement entered between two or more legally registered independent companies or business organizations and which helps those companies to establish another fused and combined company or business organization. In effect, one business company would be swallowed by another company hence rights and obligations of two or more independent companies or business organizations would be transferred to the newly merged company. 

Merger arrangement could be carried out in different forms. Generally, merger could be materialized between companies who may have different line of relationship or companies who does not have any line relationship, what so ever. For example merger arrangement can be carried out when companies which are on the same production line, which is called horizontal integration, can merged and establish the new companies or it may be materialized among companies who are on different production line, which is called vertical integration. These ways of merger arrangement is streamlined between companies who are producing substitute goods or among input producing and input demanding companies. Other form of merger arrangement can be materialized when companies which do not have any any relation, which is called conglomerate, merged.

Merger arrangements have some identifiable benefits. Companies who produce substitutable goods could merge to enhance their market power and in effect could help merged company to decrease the production costs and realize the economy of scale. Hence, one of the benefits of competition,  which is called production efficiency, could easily be realized. Secondly, merger arrangement between input producing and output producing also enhances the merged company to carry out its production activity in a seamless way.

The Ethiopian law of tax enforcement experienced a drastic change following the tax reforms of the 2002. Introduction of self-executing tax enforcement mechanisms was among the grand shifts in the country’s tax system. Previously, the only means of ensuring prompt and certain collection of delinquent taxes was through the time taking judicial proceeding. The disapproved judicial means of enforcing delinquent taxes is now replaced by a self-executing enforcement scheme called ‘tax foreclosure.’

Tax foreclosure is by and large an out of court means of recovering delinquent taxes by seizing and selling the asset of delinquent taxpayers’ property. It involves a series of legally inscribed condition precedents that need to be followed in the foreclosure processes. In this article, an attempt is made to closely look at the legal regime governing tax foreclosure in Ethiopia.

Owing to its novelty in the Ethiopian tax system, this article seeks to shed light on the rules governing the foreclosure processes in Ethiopia slightly informed by comparative law. In this respect, the US practice is selected on account of considerable commonalities with the Ethiopian law of tax enforcement.

The very fact that tax foreclosure is a self-executing enforcement scheme could also be a legitimate reason to write about it as both the judge and the enforcer is the tax authority. Undoubtedly, there might be some interest of taxpayers that may be mishandled in the course of foreclosure processes. In this context, the article will draw attention to some lacunas in the foreclosure rules that might be areas of concern. The other aim of this article is to question the constitutionality of tax foreclosure in Ethiopia with respect to some constitutional rights of taxpayers. Since the practice of foreclosing delinquent taxpayer’s property is yet undeveloped, the article is unfortunate to review the implementation of the tax foreclosure regime on the ground.

Accordingly, the article is categorized into five sections. The first section is an introductory part that introduces the various forms of foreclosure followed by a brief discussion on the meaning and nature of tax foreclosure in the second section. In the third section, it will discuss the series of procedures that are involved in tax foreclosure proceedings. The Last section of the article will endeavor to test the constitutionality of the tax foreclosure regime. Finally, a brief conclusion and recommendations will ensue.

A free market economic system has been taken as a paradigm exposition for organizing and streamlining the relationship between state, private property owners and the community. Taking markets as a panacea to some of the gigantic problems that have bound the communities, such as production and distribution problems of goods and services to the community and consumers, the system got its apogee and acclamation after World War II. Before that, the theoretical base related with free market economic system was laid, in 18th century America.

Adam Smith, often called "the Father of Modern Economics", elucidated his economic thoughts in his seminal book - "An Inquiry Into The Nature And Causes Of The Wealth Of Nations". Here, he said that competition between the market actors is a driving force for harvesting the bounty of free market economic systems.

As such, the system is grounded on the simple rule - the demand and supply of goods and service is Pareto efficient enough to determine the price, quality and quantity of goods. Hence, competition between producers, wholesalers and retailers of goods and service has a huge force for determining the benefit accrued to the consumers. That is why some intellectuals enunciated the fact that 'as constitution is a sin qua non to the democratic state, competition between market actors is a magna carta to a free market economic system'.

The EPRDF-led government, after taking on some soul-searching endevours, has made some policy and strategic decisions related to the type of economic line it wants to follow, after 1991. The main theme of the economic journey that the government took is to have a vibrant and robust market-oriented economic system.

To do this, fiscal and monetary policy of the state has been reshuffled in a way that achieves that same objective. Among fiscal and economic policies and strategies that a government took were devaluing the currency, liberalising the market, lifting custom duties and so on.

It is generally agreed amongst the international community, at least in principle, that liberalization of trade and allowing the free movement of goods, services and people, among countries that share common geographic boundaries and states situated at different poles of the earth, is a must.

In order to make the liberalization of trade a reality and to ensure the free flow of goods and services, states initiate various types of structures. The Common Market for Eastern & Southern Africa (COMESA) is Africa's largest economic community. COMESA was established by a treaty agreed in 1993 by 15 east and southern African states. Before this, some east and southern African states had tried to develop other structures. These include the sub-regional Preferential Trade Area (PTA) in 1978 and later the establishment of a Preferential Trade Area for Eastern & Southern Africa, in 1981. The latter became a stepping stone for the inauguration of COMESA.

This economic community embraces states with very differing economic, political and social experiences and legacies. Countries ranging from those with a large population size, such as Ethiopia, to countries with very small number of people, like Swaziland or Lesotho, are all members of this block.

Moreover, this block encompasses countries colonized by various European powers, such as Great Britain and France. This continues to test the vitality and stamina of African states to establish structures able enough to quench the interest of African minds and hearts. Hence, the difference of interests among member states of the common market makes the forum special.

Of course, the block is vital, in that its success or failure would help to test the capacity of African states to establish alliances ready to accommodate the differing interests of various states.

“The great American word is freedom, and in particular freedom of thought, speech and assembly.” Robert M. Hutchins

All freedoms are a single freedom- one and indivisible, although people consider one freedom as more important than the others. The above quote from Robert Hutchins is the sole spirit of the First Amendment to the American constitution. This First Amendment lumps together the freedom of religion, of speech and the press, of assembly, and of petition. Many people consider the freedom of speech as the most important strand. “It includes not just the words that come out of a person’s mouth but the freedom to think the thoughts behind the words, and the freedom to put them down on paper or to express them in some other way”. This is why the Americans put a higher value on their Constitution and all of its Amendments – because it is the document that guarantees the respect of their fundamental rights and freedoms.

One needs to keep this kind of document “where children do not reach”. Nothing should contravene the constitution and if it does, it will be of no effect in the cases of most constitutions, if not all. If, in the course of time, something new and something unforeseeable and fundamental to the well being and good of the people happened, any constitution goes through amendment. “The Constitution was intended to ‘keep step with the march of the age’ and should not hamper social or economic experimentation”. This is why the US constitution went through more than 25 amendments. However, if any other law, customary practice or decision of an organ of state or public official contravenes the constitution without keeping the proper procedure of constitutional amendment, it implies gross unconstitutionality.

We are not new for unconstitutional legislation, albeit multitude of reasons and justifications are given to legitimize them. But however, we are new to see the highest government officials of the country contravene the constitution blatantly. Having three Deputy Prime Ministers while the constitution clearly provides one Prime Minister and one Deputy Prime Minister is not a good sign of constitutionality. This is bad, even if we take out the precedential effect of it. This is bad even for our country. Something is wrong when the organ who is bestowed with the duty to ensure the observance of the constitution and at the same time the duty to obey it disregards his duty.

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes (1841-1935), a.k.a “The Great Dissenter” was a very devoted champion of the freedom of speech and of expression in the American history. This man felt strongly that Americans needed to be reminded of the importance of the First Amendment and he once said, “We have grown so accustomed to the enjoyments of these rights that we forget they had to be fought for and may have to be fought for again.”

Ethiopia, embracing Federal system of governmental structure with the objective of creating a country of equal Nations, Nationalities and peoples and to put an end to authoritarian rule by democratizing the Ethiopian state and society as a whole, this being a precondition for durable peace and development. The constitution of Ethiopia explicitly acknowledges that the federal government and the states shall have the three governmental organ of legislative, executive and judiciary (Article 50(2)). The Ethiopian Constitution mandated the second chamber – the House of the Federation, a non-legislative house – with the authority to interpret the constitution (Article 62, 83 and 84). Comparatively speaking the mandate given to the House of the Federation in Ethiopia is exercised by the courts in general and of the Supreme Court in particular in case of United States and India, in case of Germany, this task is exercised by a special Constitutional Court. “In Switzerland the power of interpreting the Constitution is divided between the federal tribunal and the people. The former is empowered to decide the constitutionality of the laws of cantons, while the latter decide the constitutionality of the federal laws”. 

This paper will try to assess an overview of Ethiopian constitutional adjudication on a bird’s eye view and will continue to look at in to other countries model in relation with federal system of governmental structure alike to Ethiopia and provide an explanation and detail analysis of the mandate and function of the House of the Federation – a second chamber responsible to interpret constitution and solve disputes happen between states. Finally I will conclude by summarizing the whole idea of this paper and recommending my point of analysis.

2.1. AN OVERVIEW OF ADJUDICATION OF FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF EHTIOPIA’S CONSTITUTION

Human rights are to be respected and protected by States through all appropriate measures, so goes the rhetoric.  States must also make solutions available at domestic level to any citizen who claims his/her rights were violated. Individual victims of human rights violation also have the right to seek justice from regional or international institutions. In some countries such violations are committed grossly & systematically that the normal procedures through domestic justice appear to be not enough to address them.

Mostly, such systematic & gross violations of human rights are committed at state level for perceived end causes of, say, crushing opposition, sustaining absolute power and maintaining territorial integrity that involves cross border wars, although less common nowadays. The systematic genocide in Chile during the regime of Augusto Pinochet, in Uganda during the Id Amine regime, in South Africa during the Apartheid regime, and in Ethiopia during the Dergue regime were all orchestrated and executed at state levels.

One of the most significant developments made in the direction of dealing with mass grave human rights violations & fighting impunity was the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) pursuant to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which was adopted at a conference in Rome, on 17 July 1998. The Statute, entered in to force on 1 July 2002, resulted in the formation of the Court which is based in The Hague, Netherlands. Today a total of 121 countries are states parties to the Rome Statute. Out of them 33 are African states.