Examine Laws of Ethiopia,
Contradictory Theories and Practices
and Execution Regarding Capital
Punishment
Course: Criminal Law
Group: [Group number / members by class ref]
Submission Date: November 15, 2025
Abstract
This paper provides an in-depth examination of capital punishment in the Federal
Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. It addresses the constitutional and statutory framework,
analyses doctrinal debates (retributive, deterrent, utilitarian, and abolitionist theories),
presents data on sentencing and executions, describes procedural safeguards and
shortfalls in practice, and offers recommendations for legal and policy reform. The study
synthesizes primary legal texts, jurisprudence, governmental policy, and reports from
international human rights organizations to provide a comprehensive perspective.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Historical Background
3. Constitutional Framework
4. Criminal Code and Statutory Provisions
5. Jurisprudence and Case Law Analysis
6. Doctrinal Theories and Debates
7. Sentencing Practice and Death Row
8. Procedural Safeguards and Practical Shortcomings
9. Comparative and International Perspectives
10. Critical Analysis: Contradictions and Tensions
11. Policy Recommendations
12. Conclusion
13. Bibliography
14. Appendices (Selected legal texts and case excerpts)
1. Introduction
Capital punishment remains one of the most contested legal measures in contemporary
criminal justice. In Ethiopia, capital punishment is retained by statute but its practical use,
legal safeguards, and policy trajectory show complex and sometimes contradictory
features. This paper explores these complexities with an emphasis on statutory
interpretation, constitutional constraints, empirical practice, and normative arguments for
and against retention.
2. Historical Background of Capital Punishment in Ethiopia
Ethiopia's use of capital punishment predates modern codification. Traditional legal
practices and customary law frequently sanctioned death for perceived grave offences.
With modernization and codification of Penal Law during the imperial era and
subsequent regimes (notably during the Derg period), capital punishment was used for a
wide range of crimes, including political offences.
The 1994 Constitution (FDRE) created a new framework for fundamental rights and
constrained the exercise of the state’s punitive powers. Nevertheless, the later Criminal
Code (Proclamation No.414/2004) explicitly preserved death as a possible sentence for
the most serious crimes as defined by statute. Over time, debates within Ethiopia and
among international partners have pressured the government to reassess the breadth and
application of capital punishment.
In recent decades, political, security, and human rights developments—such as the anti-
terrorism legislative responses, internal armed conflict episodes, and international human
rights advocacy—have influenced how, and how often, capital sentences are imposed and
executed. An episodic pattern emerges: periods of intense securitization and conflict
often coincide with increased use of harsh penalties, while political openings or executive
clemency periods show reductions in actual executions.
3. Constitutional Framework
The 1994 FDRE Constitution recognizes the right to life as fundamental. Article 15 states
that every person has the right to life, and no person may be deprived of life except as a
punishment for a serious criminal offence determined by law. This clause both permits
capital punishment (by reference to acts provided in law) and limits it to serious crimes as
determined through statute. (See: FDRE Constitution, Art. 15).
The Constitution also includes guarantees of due process, rights to counsel, fair trial
standards, and powers of the Head of State concerning clemency and commutation. These
provisions mean that any imposition of the death penalty must be reconciled with broader
constitutional protections, including protections against retroactive criminal law,
guarantees of equality before the law, and the right to appeal.
Constitutional adjudication in Ethiopia, while developing, has yet to move the country
decisively toward abolition. Instead, constitutional law has primarily operated to place
procedural constraints on capital sentencing and to ensure executive oversight (clemency)
as a last safeguard.
4. Criminal Code and Statutory Provisions
The Federal Criminal Code (Proclamation No. 414/2004, entered into force 2005) lists
and defines offences for which severe penalties, up to and including the death penalty,
may be prescribed. Relevant articles include those dealing with murder, aggravated
homicide, crimes against the state (such as treason), certain terrorism-related offences,
and grave crimes under international law (e.g., genocide and war crimes).
Key statutory rules include procedural protections and limitations on carrying out death
sentences. For example, Article 119 of the Criminal Code sets out situations where
execution of a death sentence may be suspended—such as when the convicted person is
partially irresponsible or seriously ill. The Code further contemplates mechanisms for
commutation and clemency.
The Code also structures sentencing by specifying aggravating and mitigating
circumstances, the role of evidence in establishing culpability, and appellate review
pathways. The statutory design aims to reserve capital punishment for the gravest
offences while requiring that sentencing be informed by a rigorous assessment of
culpability.
5. Jurisprudence and Case Law Analysis
Ethiopian courts—from the federal High Court to the Supreme Court—have handled
capital cases with attention to procedural formalities, but the body of published
jurisprudence is relatively limited compared to jurisdictions with larger caseloads.
Appellate decisions often address evidentiary issues, the sufficiency of the record
supporting aggravating factors, and proportionality at sentencing.
Case law reveals recurring themes: scrutiny of confession admissibility, the need for
corroboration, the role of forensic evidence, and the weight given to mitigating
circumstances such as lack of prior criminal history or diminished responsibility. Courts
have sometimes reversed or reduced death sentences where procedural flaws or
evidentiary gaps emerge during appellate review.
However, inconsistent application across regions and differing levels of access to
competent defense counsel have contributed to uneven sentencing outcomes. In some
conflict-affected areas, expedited processes and security concerns have led to concerns
about the robustness of legal protections in capital trials.
6. Doctrinal Theories and Debates
The debate over capital punishment draws on multiple theoretical frameworks.
Retributive theory argues that punishment should be proportionate to the moral gravity of
the wrongdoing; in extreme cases, death is seen as proportional for intentional murder or
betrayal of the state. This view finds currency among those who prioritize moral desert
and victims' families' sense of justice.
Deterrence theory claims that the death penalty prevents future crimes by increasing the
expected cost to potential offenders. Empirical studies globally provide mixed evidence
on the marginal deterrent effect of capital punishment compared to life imprisonment
without parole. In Ethiopia, rigorous empirical research isolating the death penalty’s
deterrent effect from broader social factors remains scarce.
Utilitarian perspectives assess the death penalty in terms of aggregate social welfare: does
it reduce crime, lower costs, or promote stability? Opponents argue that the high costs of
capital trials, appeals, and risks of executing the innocent undercut utilitarian
justification.
Abolitionist and human-rights arguments emphasize the inviolability of life, the risk of
irrevocable error, discriminatory application, and international trends toward abolition.
These perspectives highlight normative commitments under instruments like the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and regional human-rights
frameworks.
The Ethiopian context reflects a complex mixture of these theories: policymakers and
some segments of the public weigh retributive impulses against human rights obligations
and operational constraints in the justice system.
7. Sentencing Practice and Death Row
Although the Criminal Code authorizes death sentences, execution practice has varied.
Several human rights reports document that courts continue to impose death sentences,
yet executions are not consistently carried out. Periodic commutations, presidential
pardons, and lengthy periods of appellate review have resulted in many prisoners
remaining on death row for prolonged periods.
Conditions on death row raise concerns. Overcrowding, limited access to medical care,
and psychological impacts of prolonged uncertainty are commonly reported in
international monitoring. Lack of consistent legal aid services exacerbates vulnerabilities
faced by capital defendants, especially those from marginalized groups.
Statistical transparency is limited. Publicly available data on the number of people
sentenced to death, executed, or released is often incomplete or outdated, making precise
empirical analysis difficult. Civil society organizations have repeatedly called for
improved data publication and oversight.
8. Procedural Safeguards and Practical Shortcomings
Ethiopian law contains procedural safeguards: rights to counsel, the presumption of
innocence, rules on evidence, and appellate review. The Constitution and criminal
procedure laws provide avenues for defense and appeal.
In practice, however, several shortcomings undermine these safeguards. Challenges
include delayed or absent legal representation during critical stages, limited forensic
capacity (which weakens evidentiary certainty), problems with access to appeals in
remote or conflict-affected regions, and the use of pre-trial detention that hampers
preparation of defense.
The use of anti-terror legislation in some contexts has been linked to holding suspects
incommunicado or using military justice frameworks, raising concerns about
compatibility with fair trial rights. Multilateral bodies and NGOs have highlighted these
issues in monitoring reports.
9. Comparative and International Perspectives
Internationally, there is a clear trend toward abolition: many countries have either
abolished the death penalty in law, abolished it in practice (moratorium), or limited its
application to very narrow circumstances. Ethiopia sits within the retentionist group
legally, though in practice has shown periods of restraint.
Regional human rights institutions and treaties encourage limiting the death penalty to the
'most serious crimes' and ensuring stringent safeguards. Commitments under the ICCPR
and recommendations from UN treaty bodies have urged Ethiopia to narrow the scope of
capital offences and ensure due process protections.
Comparative policy lessons suggest that phased approaches—such as imposing official
moratoria, narrowing statutory scope, enhancing procedural guarantees, and eventually
moving toward abolition—can balance transitional justice needs while protecting human
rights.
10. Critical Analysis: Contradictions and Tensions
Several tensions characterize Ethiopia's handling of capital punishment:
- Legal retention vs. sporadic enforcement: the law authorizes death while executions are
irregular. This creates legal uncertainty and leaves individuals on prolonged death row.
- Constitutional protections vs. implementation gaps: formal rights exist, but disparities in
representation and forensic capacity create practical risks of wrongful conviction.
- Security concerns vs. human rights obligations: in times of conflict or heightened
security threats, authorities may prioritize punitive measures over due process, leading to
accelerated trials or expanded use of severe penalties.
- International obligations vs. domestic policy: Ethiopia’s retentionist status contrasts
with international recommendations, placing it under scrutiny from human-rights bodies.
11. Policy Recommendations
1. Narrow statutory scope: Amend the Criminal Code to limit capital punishment strictly
to the gravest intentional crimes with direct lethal consequences and align statutory
language with the 'most serious crimes' standard under international law.
2. Establish an official moratorium: A formal, public moratorium on executions (pending
legislative reform) would prevent irreversible outcomes while allowing deliberation.
3. Strengthen procedural safeguards: Guarantee effective legal counsel at all critical
stages, bolster forensic and investigatory capacities, ensure timely appeals, and provide
independent oversight for capital cases.
4. Improve transparency: Publish comprehensive statistics on capital cases, death
sentences, clemency decisions, and prison conditions to permit accountability and
research.
5. Promote restorative justice alternatives: For certain categories of crime, consider
victim-centered restorative approaches that address harms without resorting to execution.
6. Public education and dialogue: Facilitate national discussions, including victim groups,
legal scholars, lawmakers, and civil society, to build consensus and legitimacy for
reform.
7. Gradual abolition pathway: If political consensus emerges, adopt a phased abolition
model with commutation clauses for existing death sentences and support programs for
victims' families.
12. Conclusion
Ethiopia’s retention of the death penalty in law while exercising restraint in execution
practice creates a paradox: the state preserves the ultimate punitive option without
consistent application. This legal- practical dissonance raises careful normative and
policy questions.
Reform should prioritize procedural fairness, transparency, and a clear statutory
definition of when (if at all) the death penalty may apply. National debate and alignment
with international human-rights standards would strengthen legitimacy and reduce the
risk of irrevocable errors.
13. Bibliography
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Constitution (1994).
Proclamation No. 414/2004, The Criminal Code of the Federal Democratic Republic of
Ethiopia.
Amnesty International, 'Death Sentences and Executions 2023/2024' (Global Reports).
Human Rights Watch, 'World Reports' on Ethiopia (2022-2024).
The Advocates for Human Rights, 'The Death Penalty in Ethiopia' (report).
Scholarly articles on the death penalty in Ethiopia and comparative analyses.
14. Appendices
Appendix A: Selected Constitutional provisions (Article 15 - Right to Life).
Appendix B: Selected Criminal Code provisions on capital punishment (Articles 117-
120, 539, etc.).
Appendix C: Excerpts from major human-rights reports on Ethiopia and the death
penalty.
