Ethiopian Anti-terrorism Law And Human Rights Nexus An Appraisal

The advent of counter-terrorism as a major international objective after 9/11 and subsequent proliferationrnof new anti-terrorism laws by states brought a new challenge to human rights, especially civil andrnpolitical rights. The analyses of certain countries‟ Anti-Terrorism Laws especially in developing countriesrnshow two major impacts of Anti-Terrorism Law on human rights. The first impact is the post Septemberrn11 Anti-Terrorism Laws become broad and give discretionary power to police and security forces whichrnin turn lead to arbitrary violation of the fundamental rights of suspects of terrorist acts. The second andrnmost worrying aspect is some developing countries are using Anti-Terrorism Law as a cover to controlrnpolitical dissent, civil society, media and individual activists critical of government.rnThe objective of this thesis is to identify and assess the impacts of the 2009 Ethiopian Anti-TerrorismrnLaw has had on the promotion and protection of human rights. For the purpose of this research qualitativernmethodology is used. Both secondary and primary data were collected. As far as secondary sources werernconcerned; books, journal articles, newspapers, government enactments, legal instruments, organizationalrnreports and official documents were used. To substantiate secondary sources with primary sources keyrninformants interviews were done with 20 persons. For this purpose the research tried to answer thernquestion whether or how the 2009 Ethiopian Anti-Terrorism Law put challenges to human rights.rnAs the analysis of data shows, the 2009 Ethiopian Anti-Terrorism Law impairs the promotion andrnprotection of human rights. The proclamation represents a broad and vaguely defined government powerrnto investigate, detain and prosecute individuals at the expense of due process, judicial overseeing andrnpublic transparency. It empowers police with absolute power of arrest, search and seizure. It grants thernpolice to make arrest without warrant, as long as the police reasonably suspects that a person isrncommitting or has committed terrorist acts. Also the reduction of procedural requirements has led policernto detain first and find evidence later. Moreover, the proclamation gives legal cover for the admissibilityrnof evidence obtained through torture. Thus, its ambiguous and vague definitions can provide arngovernment a tool of infringing basic human rights like liberty, privacy, prohibition of torture, prohibitionrnof arbitrary detention, freedom of expression, association, demonstration and assembly.rnFurthermore, the 2009 Ethiopian Anti-Terrorism Law has had far reaching impacts on political pluralismrnand promotion and protection of human rights in the country. The proclamation provides the governmentrnwith the tools to justify its intimidation of opposition political parties, CSOs, media and individualrnactivists critical to government. As the analysis shows, the new Anti-Terrorism Law has been used tornsilence critics and punish political dissents, HRD and media‟s critical of government. The expanded lawrnenforcement power‟s allowed incumbent government to apply the label to any groups or individuals. Thernvague and ambiguous definitions of terrorist acts in the proclamation led to the criminalization of act ofrnpolitical dissent such as public demonstrations, non-violent movements and minor acts of violencerncommitted in the contexts of political activism. The provision which criminalizes „encouragement ofrnterrorism‟ is also ambiguous and highly affects journalists and their sources including surveillance and itrnhighly forced to provide selected information. This is evident that, in Ethiopia, most of detainees of suspected and convicted under the 2009 Ethiopian Anti-Terrorism Law were journalists, HRD, opposition political parties‟ members and leaders and CSOs critical of government

Get Full Work

Report copyright infringement or plagiarism