Article Sidebar
DOI:
10.4314/mlr.v11i1.9Keywords:
Article Details
a) Copyright of the content of the articles shall be retained by the author subject to the condition that it cannot be republished in another journal. The reproduction of the article as book chapter requires the acknowledgement of its prior publication in Mizan Law Review.
b) An author is entitled to deposit her/his published article in any Open Access repository subject to the condition that the format and layout shall not be changed. Depositing a post-publication version in any repository requires acknowledgement of the earlier version by indicating the Volume, Issue and page numbers of the version published in Mizan Law Review.
c) Articles published in Mizan Law Review are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND)
Privacy Statement
a) Where the Editorial Team deems it necessary, the editors may remove precise reference to names of individuals in case comments.
b) The names and email addresses submitted to and published in Mizan Law Review shall not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.
Disclaimer
Opinions expressed in articles, comments, case comments and sharing thoughts do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Team, or the publisher of the journal, i.e., Center for Law in Sustainable Development, St. Mary’s University.
Main Article Content
Comment: The standards in admitting expert evidence in Ethiopia: some practical discrepancies
Abstract
Judges render justice based on the presented evidence justifying their decisions. In criminal cases, these decisions can have ramifications on an individual’s right to liberty, life and property. Correctness of conviction much depends on the evidence presented to the courtroom and the interpretation of the evidence by judges. Expert evidence is particularly important because certain issues are beyond the expertise of judges in the current era of specialization and due to ever-expanding advances in technology. Expert evidence has to be used very cautiously based on a set of objective criteria that judges can use. This comment looks at the experience of other countries in relation to admission of expert evidence. It then assesses the current practice in Ethiopia by looking at a few cases and concludes that there is wide variation in admitting expert evidence and regarding the weight given to it by different courts.
Keywords: Expert Evidence, admission, weight of evidence, criminal justice administration, Ethiopia
