Feasibility of Rule of Law: Comparative Analysis of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopian Constitution and the OromooGadaa Governance

Abstract

Coming into effect as of the 21stof August 1995, the FDRE Constitution marked historical gulf between the outgoing regime and the incoming incumbent. The episode heralded new threshold and afresh popular hope for replacing military warfare by democratic welfare. The democratic guarantees (articles 27-29) and popular sovereignty prescribed in the article 8 established source of power and sketched out revolutionary political move. The articles 50 and12 avow mandate and responsibility of the government. Albeit, international credit drilled from the article 10, UDHR, into article 13, FDRE, however, many issues remained debatable and even put interpretative mandate vested in the article 62 into question.This article, therefore, firstly, addresses controversial split of the article 10 into separate sections and thereby identifies barriers bottling up the borderline between human and democratic rights. Secondly, it highlights potential misuse and quotable abuses of Human Rights which precludes rule of the law. Thirdly, it discusses the domestic standoff between the Gadaa system and the constitutional supremacy. The article finds out that the judiciary infallibility and constitutional irreversibility of the article 9 keep Gadaa system at bay (emphasis on morality consideration and Gender treatment). The Qaalluu institution in the Gadaa system indicates that God is neither neutral nor an optional but heavenly councilor and impartial involver. Hence, the Gadaa government blends political imbue of humanity with ethical gist of responsibility while the article 11 of FDRE constitution (secularism), ostensibly advocate “Politics of Human for the Humans without Divine intervention” Finally, this article calls for critical negotiation between the Gadaa system and state Constitution in order to develop holistic creed and political doctrine that has to be learned and acted upon.