Article Sidebar
Published:
Dec 31, 2019DOI:
10.4314/mlr.v13i3.4Keywords:
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
The Jurisprudence and Approaches of Constitutional Interpretation by the House of Federation in Ethiopia
Anchinesh Shiferaw Mulu
Abstract
This article examines the jurisprudence of the Council of Constitutional Inquiry (CCI) and the House of Federation (HoF) in resolving constitutional disputes with a view to identifying the principles/approaches utilized in their decisions and its human rights implication. These organs are entrusted with the power to interpret the Constitution upon application by private parties or court referral of cases. The article also examines patterns in the judiciary’s referral of cases for constitutional interpretation, and it discusses the methods and principles used by CCI/HoF in constitutional interpretation. Although the CCI/HoF has not expressly adopted distinct principles/approaches of constitutional interpretation, they can be inferred from the jurisprudence of the CCI and the HoF. I argue that there is inconsistent application of principles of constitutional interpretation. This is related with the incoherence observed in the constitutional interpretation of fundamental human rights recognized under the FDRE Constitution and ratified international human rights conventions. This shows that the HoF –which is a political body– has failed to protect basic human rights through its decisions that involve politically sensitive cases. There is thus the need to develop and adopt rules of procedure and principles of constitutional interpretation that can ensure predictability, consistency and coherence in HOF/CCI decisions towards the protection of human rights.
Key terms
Human rights, Constitutional interpretation, House of Federation, Council of Constitutional Inquiry
