Mana Murtii Aadaa: Consent, Individual Autonomy and Self-determination

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to critically engage the consent requirement and its implications in legitimizing the recently established Mana Murtii Aadaa (Customary Courts) in Oromia Regional State of Ethiopia. The paper explored the liberal and communitarian perspectives on consent and shed light on the paradox of absolute individual autonomy and the rights of self-determination. The consensual customary judicial jurisdiction enshrined in the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) Constitution contradicts the relational/communitarian perspective the constitution is built on. This paper utilized primary data sources generated through Key Informants Interviews (KIIs) with eight customary court elders, three senior judges of Oromia Supreme Court and three Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) consisting of four members each, totaling twenty-three research participants. Moreover, analyzing primary authorities such as the FDRE Constitution, Oromia Customary Court Establishment Proclamation 240/2021, Oromia Customary Court Regulation 10/2021, and the Federal Customary Court Draft Model Law. This paper finds that the implementation of the requirement of consent in the aftermath of the establishment of Mana Murtii Aadaa has become a challenging enterprise. Part of the problem is the lack of comprehensive understanding among the customary law scholars and practitioners. Accordingly, this paper comprehensively laid a ground on how the notion of consent shall be understood in customary court context. Lastly, it calls for further studies and revisiting the constitutions and relevant laws to balance parties’ autonomy and the principle of self-determination.