scholarly journals COVID-19 and elections in Ethiopia: exploring constitutional interpretation by the House of the Federation as an exit strategy

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Legesse Tigabu Mengie

ABSTRACT Over 60 countries have postponed their elections due to COVID-19. As an election is the primary means by which government power is assumed in constitutional democracies, the postponement of elections has posed this question: what exit mechanisms do constitutional systems have to address a power vacuum caused by unforeseen circumstances like COVID-19? In other words, how can a legitimate government that adheres to the rule of law, a constitution more specifically, be ensured when elections cannot be held? While some countries held elections amid COVID-19 with precautions, others postponed them. Ethiopia is one of those countries which have postponed their elections. The postponement of Ethiopia's general elections sparked a debate about how the power vacuum caused by the pandemic should be addressed. After deliberating on the matter, Ethiopia's lower house approved constitutional interpretation by the upper house as the best solution. The upper house, through interpreting the Constitution, extended the term limits of the federal and regional governments. This article intends to address the question posed above by examining constitutional interpretation by the upper house as an exit strategy. It explores constitutional interpretation by this house and its implications for the rule of law and legitimacy of government. I conclude that comprehensive understanding of the Constitution offers an answer to the conundrum. The upper house has adopted a holistic interpretation approach and that is commendable. However, the ruling that allows the government to stay in power for an unknown time and the partiality inherent in the house compromise the merit of its interpretation. Keywords: COVID-19; election; constitution; the rule of law; legitimacy; Ethiopia.

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-54
Author(s):  
Adhitya Widya Kartika

Abstract The rule of law and democracy carries the consequence that the actions of the government in administering the government system must be in accordance with or limited to laws and regulations and include the community as well as in the village government system. Democracy is manifested in the implementation of village head elections. Election of Village Heads is different from general elections (in general) this is seen from several things. In addition there is the dynamics of legislation related to the election of village heads so the government and the community are bound and obey the laws and regulations. Therefore it is important if the village government and the village community understand the regulation, so socialization is needed so that the same understanding occurs. Likewise with the election of village heads inVillage Prasung, Buduran District, Sidoarjo Regency, East Java Province should be in accordance with the laws and regulations that have been enacted.  However, there is a dispute related to the statutory provisions governing the election of village heads, namely the prohibition of candidates who are sentenced to imprisonment based on a court decision that has the legal force fixed for a minimum of 5 (five) years or more to nominate as a candidate for village head. However, there are exceptions when completed and announced in connection with the conviction. Therefore, there are several results of the analysis that then arise, among others, it is correct that the organizer of the election of the village head if the implementation of compliance with applicable regulations, there is less explicit meaning of the exclusion in the terms of the prohibition of the convicted or after serving a crime. Keywords: Socialization, Village Head Election, Rule of Law, Democracy, Village


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sudha N. Setty

Published: Sudha Setty, Surveillance, Secrecy, and the Search for Meaningful Accountability, 51 STAN. J. INT'L L. 69 (2015). One of the most intractable problems in the debate around maintaining the rule of law while combating the threat of terrorism is the question of secrecy and transparency. In peacetime, important tenets to the rule of law include transparency of the law, limits on government power, and consistency of the law as applied to individuals in the policy. Yet the post-9/11 decision-making by the Bush and Obama administrations is characterized with excessive secrecy that stymies most efforts to hold the government accountable for its abuses. Executive branch policy with regard to detention, interrogation, targeted killing and surveillance are kept secret, and that secrecy has been largely validated by a compliant judiciary that has dismissed almost all suits challenging human and civil rights abuses resulting from counterterrorism programs. Efforts by Congress to engage in meaningful oversight have met with mixed results; in the area of government surveillance, such efforts have been fruitless without the benefit of leaked information on warrantless surveillance by government insiders, since the executive branch has generally refused to make public vital aspects of its surveillance programs in ways that could give oversight efforts more muscle. At the same time, the executive branch has consistently defended the legality and efficacy of these surveillance programs. This paper considers the nature and effect of the warrantless surveillance infrastructure constructed in the United States since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and discusses surveillance-related powers and accountability measures in the United Kingdom and India as comparative examples. Through this analysis, this paper questions whether accountability over government abuses in this area exists in an effective form, or if governments have constructed a post-9/11 legal architecture with regard to surveillance that engenders excessive secrecy and renders accountability mechanisms largely meaningless.


2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-377
Author(s):  
Lydia A. Nkansah ◽  
Delali A. Gawu

There have been seven general elections, under Ghana's Fourth Republic, to elect presidents and members of parliament. There are laws regulating the electoral process and election results have generally been accepted and, in a few cases, challenged through the laid-down process. Elections in Ghana are nonetheless reportedly flawed with irregularities tainting the outcome and creating tensions and sometimes pockets of violence. This article examines the electoral process under Ghana's Fourth Republic, namely the adoption of regulations for each electoral cycle, voters’ registration and the voters’ register, nomination of aspirants, voting, counting of votes and declaration of the results. To ensure the integrity of the electoral process, the laws regulating elections should comply with the dictates of the procedural requirements of the rule of law and the Electoral Commission's actions must be consistent with these laws.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-104
Author(s):  
Rustam Magun Pikahulan

Abstract: The Plato's conception of the rule of law states that good governance is based on good law. The organization also spreads to the world of Supreme Court justices, the election caused a decadence to the institutional status of the House of Representatives as a people's representative in the government whose implementation was not in line with the decision of the Constitutional Court. Based on the decision of the Constitutional Court No.27/PUU-XI/2013 explains that the House of Representatives no longer has the authority to conduct due diligence and suitability (elect) to prospective Supreme Judges proposed by the Judicial Commission. The House of Representatives can only approve or disapprove candidates for Supreme Court Justices that have been submitted by the Judicial Commission. In addition, the proportion of proposed Supreme Court Justices from the judicial commission to the House of Representatives (DPR) has changed, whereas previously the Judicial Commission had to propose 3 (three) of each vacancy for the Justices, now it is only one of each vacant for Supreme Court Judges. by the Supreme Court. The House of Representatives no longer has the authority to conduct due diligence and suitability (elect) to prospective Supreme Judges proposed by the Judicial Commission. The House of Representatives can only "approve" or "disagree" the Supreme Judge candidates nominated by the Judicial Commission.


Politeia ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mbekezeli Comfort Mkhize ◽  
Kongko Louis Makau

This article argues that the 2015 xenophobic violence was allowed to spread due to persistent inaction by state officials. While the utterances of King Goodwill Zwelithini have in part fuelled the attacks, officials tend to perceive acts of xenophobia as ordinary crimes. This perception has resulted in ill-advised responses from the authorities, allowing this kind of hate crime against foreign nationals to engulf the whole country. In comparison with similar attacks in 2008, the violent spree in 2015 is characterised by a stronger surge in criminal activities. The militancy showcased fed a sense of insecurity amongst foreigners, creating a situation inconsistent with the country’s vaunted respect for human rights and the rule of law. Investors lost confidence in the country’s outlook, owing in part to determined denialism in government circles regarding the targeting of foreigners. While drawing from existing debates, the article’s principal objective is to critically examine the structural problems that enable xenophobia to proliferate and the (in)effectiveness of responses to the militancy involved in the 2015 attacks. Of particular interest are the suggested responses that could be effective in curbing future violence. The article concludes that xenophobia is systemic in post-apartheid South Africa. Strong cooperation between the government, national and international organisations could provide the basis for successful anti-xenophobia measures. The article further argues that the country is obliged to find a sustainable solution to the predicament for humanitarian reasons firstly, and in recognition of the support South Africans received from its African counterparts during the liberation struggle.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 142
Author(s):  
Saiful Kholik ◽  
Imas Khaeriyah

Inconsistency Regional Regulation No.14 of 2006 about marine conservation area of the island of Biawak, Gososng, which Cendekian provides protection but in fact failed to provide protection as evidenced by dredging island sandbar and cendekian conducted PT.Pertamina UP VI Balongan INDRAMAYU. The problem in this research How Formulation Policy Act No. 10 Year 2009 on the Indonesian Tourism with the Indramayu Regional Regulation No. 14 of 2006 regarding marine conservation area of the island of Biawak, Gososng, Cendekian And How Harmonization Act No. 10 of 2009 with the Indramayu Regional Regulation No. 14 of 2006 regarding formulation Act No. 10 Year 2009 on the Indonesian Tourism with the Indramayu Regional Regulation No. 14 of 2006 about marine conservation area of the island of Biawak, Gososng, Cendekian, the purpose of this research to understand and analyze the extent to which policy The findings of the community or field of law local governments about the environmental damage done by companies or individuals are not equal accordance with regional regulations in force, nor the Law in force so that the function of law in society indramayu not fit the mandate to establish a change and justice based Formulation public corporate criminal liability.Inskonsitensi happens to local regulation No.14 of 2006 makes no harmonized with the regulations of each other so that the impact of this inskonsistensi makes the sector particularly environmental law enforcement get uncertainties that result in coastal communities Indramayau.Conclusion Harmonization of regulations of the center and regions delivering the policy formulation of the rule of law area to comply with the regulations above in order to avoid inconsistency, the occurrence of this inconsistency resulted in the rule of law and justice for the indramayu, suggestion that the government should was nearly revise regulations related area, especially the government must dare to take action to give effect to the perpetrator deterrent effect rule-based running as well as possible.


Author(s):  
Michael C. Dorf ◽  
Michael S. Chu

Lawyers played a key role in challenging the Trump administration’s Travel Ban on entry into the United States of nationals from various majority-Muslim nations. Responding to calls from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), which were amplified by social media, lawyers responded to the Travel Ban’s chaotic rollout by providing assistance to foreign travelers at airports. Their efforts led to initial court victories, which in turn led the government to soften the Ban somewhat in two superseding executive actions. The lawyers’ work also contributed to the broader resistance to the Trump administration by dramatizing its bigotry, callousness, cruelty, and lawlessness. The efficacy of the lawyers’ resistance to the Travel Ban shows that, contrary to strong claims about the limits of court action, litigation can promote social change. General lessons about lawyer activism in ordinary times are difficult to draw, however, because of the extraordinary threat Trump poses to civil rights and the rule of law.


Yuridika ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 663
Author(s):  
Iwan Satriawan ◽  
Devi Seviyana

The research aims to analyze the power and limit of the state and whether Indonesia has properly adopted the concept of powers and limits during state emergency of COVID-19 pandemic. The method of the research was normative legal research which used statute and case approach were employed for data analysis. The result shows that a state may apply some types of power in an emergency condition. However, in using its powers, the government must consider principle of limits in a state of emergency. In fact, Indonesia does not properly adopt the balance of power and limit in the state of emergency during COVID-19 pandemic. It is true that the government may take actions to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the State cannot exceed the limitations of using powers in accordance with state emergency principle. There was a tendency to exceed the limits by the State during the pandemic. The State has violated some state of emergency principles during COVID-19 pandemic such as temporary, the rule of law, necessity, proportionally, intangibility, constitutionalism, harmony, and supervision. The research recommends that the Government and the House of Representatives (the DPR) in the future should obey the state of emergency principles, particularly in terms of state power limits to respect constitutional principles and rule of law. In addition, individuals, groups of people, or organizations may submit judicial review of laws or regulations that violate the state of emergency principles in handling pandemic in the light of protecting the fundamental rights of citizens.


Author(s):  
Marharyta Butsan

In the article the concept of state functions, realizing which the state carries out a targeted management impact on various spheres of a public life. They show that the government should do to achieve and implement the goals and tasks that lie before him in a certain historical period. Purposes of the functions of the state are the results that must be obtained in implementing the functions, goals can be immediate, intermediate, ultimate. On one stage of historical development, priority may be given to economic, the other political or socio-cultural functions, the third function of defense, etc. At the beginning of its inception, the state played a very small list of functions. The contents of most of them was of a pronounced class character. The functions manifest national characteristics of the country, because the state is obliged to provide the geopolitical interests of the ethnic group, to support the development of national culture, language, and the like. The contents and the list of functions to a large extent depend on the nature of the state, its social purpose in public life. The main duty of the state to maintain a level of social organization that would ensure not only the preservation of the integrity and prosperity of society as a whole, but also the needs of individuals. The article studies scientific approaches with respect to interpretation of the concept of functions, given the existing classification of state functions: the areas of activities of the state, duration and the like. The analysis of existing functions in Ukraine. The human rights function is currently the most relevant. Advocacy function has the expression in activities that are aimed at protecting the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, the rule of law and the rule of law in all spheres of public and political life. The peculiarities of exercise of the functions of the state are divided into legal and organizational. The legal form is a homogenous activity of state bodies related to the adoption of legal acts. Organizational form is a homogenous activity of the state aimed at creating organizational conditions to ensure functions of the state. In Ukraine there are three main forms of implementation of the activities of the state depending on types of activities: legislative, Executive, judicial. The basis for this separation is the provision of the Constitution of Ukraine, which is highlighted in these branches of government. In the implementation of all main functions of the state are actively involved all types of public power in Ukraine.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-190
Author(s):  
Moh Hudi

The Government system greatly determines the position and responsibility of the president. Even in the same system of government, the president’s position and responsibility may change, depending  on   The  Rule  of   Law  in a particular country. The position and responsibility of the president in the presidential system in Indonesia has change several times. This can be seen before and after the amandement. President in presidential   System   as  Head  of  Government  and   Head  of   State. So that the president has broad authority. The president is not responsible to the parliament, because institutionally the parliament is not higher than the president as the chief executive, but is responsible to the people as voters.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document