Constitutional interpretation refers to examining the actions of the legislative, judiciary,rnexecutive, and administrative arms of the government and to ensure that such actions conform tornthe provisions of the constitution. It refers to the task of safeguarding the supremacy of arnconstitution and keeping laws and actions of the government within the constitutional limits.rnConstitutional interpretation has been considered as one of the main mechanisms to protectrnfundamental rights enshrined in constitutions from the actions of governments.rnThis study examines the practice of constitutional interpretation in Ethiopia. Specifically, thernstudy attempts to investigate the methods of Constitutional interpretation the Council ofrnConstitutional Inquiry (CCI) and the House of Federation (HoF) practically employ in resolvingrnconstitutional disputes. To address these issues, the study employed a mixed researchrnmethodology comprising quantitative and qualitative inquiry. Cases decided by CCI and HoFrnhave been analyzed. Moreover, interviews were made with key persons relevant in providingrninformation that helps to answer the research questions.rnThe findings of the study demonstrate that CCI and HoF mainly employ textual, purposive, andrnholistic methods in resolving constitutional disputes. However, CCI and HoF lacked principlesrnof constitutional interpretation. The study also reveals that the CCI and HoF have failed torndecide cases within a short time as promised in the constitution.