Constitutional interpretation in Ethiopia.

In the Ethiopian context, constitutional interpretation refers to explaining and applying the FDRE Constitution (1995)—the supreme law of the land—to legal and political issues. It is essential in Ethiopia due to its unique features, including the right to self-determination up to secession (Article 39), ethnic federalism, and the decisive role of regions (called “nations, nationalities, and peoples”).

Who Interprets the Constitution in Ethiopia?

Unlike many countries where the Supreme Court or Constitutional Court interprets the constitution, in Ethiopia:

The House of the Federation (HoF), the upper house of Parliament, is responsible for constitutional interpretation.

The Council of Constitutional Inquiry (CCI) investigates and advises the HoF on constitutional matters

The Process:

1. A case or dispute involves constitutional interpretation (e.g., rights, power conflicts, identity issues).

2. The issue is sent to the Council of Constitutional Inquiry (CCI).

3. The CCI studies it and makes recommendations.

4. The House of the Federation makes the final decision.

Why Is This Significant?

Ethiopia’s constitutional interpretation is political in nature because the HoF is a political body composed of representatives of ethnic groups—not judges.

This can lead to debates about impartiality, especially in ethnic or political tension.

Controversial Issues Often Involve:

Article 39: Right to secession

Federal vs regional power disputes

Language and cultural rights

Religious freedom

Questions around election delays, state of emergency, etc.

 The postponement of Ethiopia’s 2020 national elections and how it raised a major constitutional interpretation issue.

---

Background:

The Ethiopian national elections were initially scheduled for August 2020. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) postponed the elections for public health reasons.

This led to a significant constitutional crisis because:

• The FDRE Constitution (Article 58/3) states that the House of Peoples' Representatives term is five years, and elections must be held before that term ends.
• Parliament’s term ended in October 2020, but no election was held.
• The Constitution did not provide a clear answer on what to do if an election couldn’t be held on time.

---

The Constitutional Question:

What happens when elections cannot be held before Parliament's five-year term ends?
Can the government legally stay in power beyond that term?

---

How It Was Handled:

1. The government referred the issue to the Council of Constitutional Inquiry (CCI).
2. The CCI deliberated and submitted its recommendation to the House of the Federation (HoF).
3. The HoF ruled that the current government could remain in power until the next election was held after the pandemic situation improved.

---

Why It Was Controversial:

• Some political parties and regions, notably the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF), rejected the decision.
• The TPLF argued that the federal government had no legal mandate after October 2020.
• In defiance, Tigray held its own regional elections, calling the federal government illegitimate—which contributed to the political tension that led to the Tigray conflict.

---

What This Shows About Ethiopia’s System:

• The Ethiopian constitutional interpretation process is deeply intertwined with politics.
• Since the House of the Federation (not an independent court) has the final say, decisions can be influenced by the ruling party or political interests.
• The lack of precise constitutional mechanisms for crisis situations (like pandemics or wars) creates legal grey areas.

 Article 39 of the Ethiopian Constitution—one of the most unique and controversial parts of the 1995 FDRE Constitution.

What Is Article 39?

Article 39 grants Ethiopia's “Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples” the right to self-determination, including secession from the federal state.

Here are the key points:

1. Every Nation, Nationality, and People in Ethiopia has the unconditional right to self-determination, including the right to form an independent state.

2. They also have the right to:

Develop and promote their culture, language, and history

Administer their own affairs within their region

Establish autonomous governments

The Process for Secession (as stated in Article 39):

1. A regional council votes in favour of secession by a two-thirds majority.

2. A referendum must then be held within three years.

3. If the majority of voters choose secession, the group can form an independent country

Why Is Article 39 Controversial?

Ethiopia is one of the only countries in the world whose constitution gives a legal right to secede.

Critics say it weakens national unity and encourages ethnic fragmentation.

Supporters argue it protects oppressed groups and acknowledges Ethiopia’s diversity.

Real-World Example: Tigray & Article 39

In 2020–2021, the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) invoked Article 39 as part of its resistance against the federal government. Here's what happened:

1. The Tigray regional government held elections in defiance of the federal government.

2. As tensions escalated and conflict broke out, the TPLF increasingly referred to their right to self-determination under Article 39.

3. There were discussions and signals that Tigray might pursue secession, though no official referendum was held.

While the House of the Federation did not formally interpret Article 39 in this case, the events raised significant legal and political questions about how this right is exercised and who can stop it.

The Legal Dilemma:

Who decides if the process is being followed correctly?

What if the federal government refuses to allow a referendum?

Can secession be blocked for national security or political reasons?

These are the kinds of questions that constitutional interpretation in Ethiopia must address, often under intense political pressure.