Superior Responsibility for International Crimes in Ethiopian Criminal Law
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2023-01
Authors
Ezedin Fedlu
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Addis Ababa University
Abstract
This paper aimed to assess the status of Superior/command responsibility in Ethiopian criminal
law. For this purpose the international criminal law on the issue of SR, comparative criminal
law, international as well as domestic cases and the Ethiopian criminal law are assessed. The
study employed a doctrinal as well as qualitative approach. The qualitative approach has been
employed to better understand the practice of SR in Ethiopian courts and its application as
customary international law (if any). Therefore the researcher administered interviews with
judges, prosecutors and lawyers at the federal high court Lideta bench for international crimes
are seen in this bench. The assessments of the study show that: SR is a form of criminal
responsibility that addresses the culpability of superiors who fail to prevent or punish their
subordinates committing international crimes. It has been developed through CIL especially in
cases after the Second World War (WWII) and in domestic jurisdictions. The justification for the
development of SR in international criminal law was that low-level officials or military
personnel often commit crimes because their superiors failed to prevent or repress them. The
doctrine aimed at promoting compliance with IHL by obligating Superiors to curb the criminal
acts of subordinates. This in turn promotes effective and merit based leadership for the principle
of SR entails criminal liability for failure of effective control while they could do it, superiors do
not be eager to take positions above their capacity. Accordingly, taking superior position will be
a burden but not a means of generating income as main objective. However, the doctrine of SR is
not established in Ethiopian criminal law. It is not also practiced as CIL despite cases having
the nature of SR are usually charged with article 240 and the following of the FDRE Criminal
Code. As to indirect responsibility, though the Ethiopian criminal Code has recognized criminal
liability by way of omission in its general part, there is no any special provision that provide a
military commander or civilian superior shall be criminally responsible for his failure to prevent
his subordinate from committing an offence. The absence of the doctrine of SR in the Ethiopian
criminal law, cosseted the country a lot because while violation of human rights and commission
of international crimes has been witnessed, no superior has been held criminally responsible
based on the principles and elements of SR. All in all, as the study show, in the case of Ethiopia
there is a legal gap on the issue of SR.