CEU Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2019
| Author | Sete, Teguadda Alebachew |
|---|---|
| Title | Mechanism of Implementation of Constitutional Review Decisions: A Comparative Study of Ethiopia, Germany and Benin |
| Summary | In Ethiopia, constitutional review is the task of the House of Federation (HoF)-the upper house of the Parliament. The Council of Constitutional inquiry (CCI), which is predominantly composed of legal experts, offer professional assistance to the HoF while interpreting the Constitution. The number of cases flowing to the CCI/HoF has increased over time. Until June 2018, a total of 3350 constitutional petitions has been filed to the CCI/HoF. Despite the raise on the flows of cases, resistance to implement the rulings of the House has, however, lately become an emerging problem. In relation to this, this paper is interested in finding out the mechanism of implementation of constitutional review decisions in Ethiopia. It is specifically interested to find out how and who executes such decision and whether the House has a role in this regard. In answering these questions, the paper has employed a comparative research methodology. The paper has consulted the experience of two countries which have strong Constitutional Court and constitutional review system: Germany and Benin, in order to see if they have better system and experience in relation to the implementation of constitutional review decisions. Accordingly, the finding suggests that in Ethiopia, both the Constitution and other relevant laws lacks provisions regulating the modalities of enforcement of decision of the House. A coercive system of enforcement which would force the recipient to comply or implement the decision of the House is also absent. Even though the House has powers to resolve constitutional disputes arising from all acts of the state, the type and nature of decision the House offers is very limited. The House does not issue directions, guidelines or remedies in its decision. As a result, the House has a limited role in controlling the fate of the execution of its decision. The experience of Germany and Benin also suggest that implementation challenge with regard to constitutional review decisions is not peculiar to Ethiopia. The execution of constitutional review decision has been resisted by state bodies at a serval occasion in both countries. While, in both countries, a full-fledged mechanism of enforcement for constitutional review decisions is absent, in Germany- the Constitutional Court Act -provides some relevant provisions in this regard. Besides, the German Constitutional Court has been progressive in expanding its influence and control over the execution of its decision. In Benin, mechanism of enforcement is also unstated both in the Constitution and the Organic Law of the Constitutional Court. The Court, on the other hand, has had a self-restrained position to progressively expand its role in the enforcements of its decision. However, later it changed its viewpoint and started issuing a more engaging and commanding decision that further its influence and control in the enforcement of its decision. The experience of the two countries suggest that the House need to adopt a progressive approach in expanding its influence over the execution of its decision pending the enactment of a law that regulates the mechanism of implementation. Sooner or later, it is important that Ethiopia enacts a law that regulates modalities of execution of constitutional review decision. |
| Supervisor | Markus Bockenforde |
| Department | Legal Studies LLM |
| Full text | https://www.etd.ceu.edu/2019/sete_teguadda.pdf |
Visit the CEU Library.
© 2007-2021, Central European University