Article Sidebar
Published:
Sep 30, 2021DOI:
10.4314/mlr.v15i1.3Keywords:
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
Cybercrime Lawmaking and Human Rights in Ethiopia
Kinfe Micheal Yilma
Abstract
Ethiopia has embarked upon an ambitious project of revising a number of laws with a view to entrench human rights and democratic governance. Part of this legal reform program has been the revision of Computer Crime Proclamation No 958/2016. This article examines key aspects of the Draft Computer Crime Proclamation prepared by the Media Law Working Group from a human rights perspective. As it shall be shown in this article, making the cybercrime legal regime human rights friendly has been the overarching objective of the revision project. Most human rights concerns associated with the current cybercrime legislation are, as a result, rectified in the cybercrime Bill. However, the Bill goes overboard in embracing themes that go well beyond the scope of cybercrime legislation. With respect to the overall revision process, the article submits that the process has not been sufficiently inclusive.
