Ignorance Defense and Unpublished Administrative Rules in Ethiopia Domestic Practice Vis-À-Vis the International Jurisprudence

Abstract

The maxim ignorance of law is no excuse might work where crimes were acts that every human conscience considers taboo. In the era of proliferating regulatory offences, it may risk punishing those who violate the law without any hint that what they did may be offensive. To decrease this risk, there is the duty of the state to make the law known. This article examines criminal liability based on unpublicized administrative rules. To this end, an examination is made to relevant literature, comparative experience, laws and cases. Although agency directives do not create crimes by themselves, their violation may lead to prosecution based on the higher laws that enable their enactment. The author argues that in cases of criminal charges based on unpublicized agency directives, the prosecution should be required to prove whether the accused knew the directive she is accused of having violated. Failing this, courts should presume the accused commits the offence due to ignorance of law and choose between acquitting the accused and convicting her but imposing no penalty. If acquittal is found to be unwarranted for whatever reason courts may see, conviction serves the primary goal of criminal law, i.e., notice.