Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to examine the Federal government amnesty law in line with
victims’ rights and Ethiopia’s international obligation to prosecute serious violation of human
rights and egregious international crimes. Moreover, the study seeks to determine the extent to
which amnesty law program could be compatible to States international obligation, highlights the
States duty to prosecute and ensure victims’ rights, and identify the implications to Ethiopia’s
amnesty law. Based on international laws, jurisprudence, published literatures and other sources,
the study identifies that States cannot have exempted from its obligation to protect victims’ rights
and prosecution of gross violations of individual rights and freedoms. Nevertheless, due to
societal interest or resource constraints in divided societies, the study identified that States have a
room to prioritize to prosecute the more responsible whilst granting amnesty to less responsible
conditionally that can send strong message that all offenders are held accountable under the
criminal justice systems. Further the study discovered that Ethiopia’s amnesty law failed to
ensure victims’ rights and Ethiopia’s obligation to prosecute, and are thus can evades the
intended purpose of amnesty law to secure peace and reconciliations. Therefore, the adoption of
amnesty as tool of achieving its rational can be justified when such a minimum standard
particularly with the worst crimes and their particular class of more responsible offenders takes
the form of prohibition against amnesty so as to prosecute them in criminal trial. Whilst with
others benefiting from amnesty that takes into account the aspiration underlying prosecution, and
provided that victims right ensured and investigation of all crimes thoroughly conducted are
legitimate at list from view of victims and obligation to prosecution.
