DEBRE BERHAN UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF LAW

ADMINSTRATIVE LAW
INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT

name id no

Abreham bekele ---------------------------------------------------- 2388

5TH YEAR LAW STUDENT
SEC-B

Submitted to: instructor Muluken Y.

Submission date: 22/04/.2016 E.C

SHORT NOTE ABOUT THE OVER ALL PROVISIONS OF THE FEDERAL ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEDURE PROCLAMATION NO. 1183/2020

The Federal Administrative Procedure Proclamation No. 1183/2020 was enacted in order to
fill a gap which existed for a long time in the body of Ethiopian laws. Previously, aside from
a few constitutional principles requiring the Government to be transparent and public officials
to be held accountable for their actions, there was never any predictable, coherently
organized and clear legislative regime governing the actions of the executive in the
performance of its day-to-day activities (i.e. dispensing decisions and issuing rules that affect
the rights and interests of citizens). Likewise, there was never in place any clear law on
judicial review of directives and administrative decisions. that this country severely and very
visibly suffered from the lack of legal means to ensure that its administrators act predictably,
consistently, lawfully and fairly.

The Administrative Procedure Proclamation is designed to fill this gap; and it clearly states
that it was enacted with the objective of protecting individual’s rights and interests from
violation by administrative agencies. This has in reality been an important area of concern in
Ethiopia, where, in particular, courts have been witnessed to have been very reluctant to
check and control executive actions and excesses. Neither has the Federal Supreme Court,
which is the nation’s highest-ranking court with the power to issue binding decisions, been so
decisively pro-judicial review, even though it is a known fact that there have been few and
sporadic attempts by some courts to check and control administrative actions.

Essentially, the new Proclamation is intended to regulate the manner by which administrative
agencies give decisions on matters they are required to decide on and exercise their rule-
making powers delegated to them by law, it states under article (4).

The Proclamation’s scope is limited to the executive organs of the Federal Government
including executive organs of the city administration accountable to the Federal Government.
The Proclamation however excludes the regular and usual activities of defence and security
establishments such as the Federal Police and the Federal Military as well as the prosecutorial
activities of the Attorney General’s Office. It also excludes the National Bank when it enacts
directives concerning exchange rate, interest rate and other similar secret issues (article3)

Further, regional executive organs are also excluded from the application of this
Proclamation as the power to issue such laws is within the realm of the regional legislatures
to issue similar laws. Understandably too, the exercise of the Council of Ministers’ powers in
enacting Regulations does not come within the scope of the Proclamation.

The Proclamation outlines a number of procedures administrative agencies must follow as

they exercise their law-making powers. Any legislative document issued by an administrative
agency in the exercise of its delegated powers that has the potential to affect an individual’s
rights is deemed a directive subject to the regulation of the Proclamation. Based on the
Proclamation, administrative agencies are required to notify stakeholders to solicit comments
and hold public hearings before they issue directives. Requirement to provide notice of
directives before its adoption extends to publishing the relevant information about the
directive intended to be adopted on a newspaper of wide circulation, the relevant
administrative agency’s website and other media outlets. Administrative agencies are also
required to keep records of information about the directives they adopt. Exceptionally,
administrative agencies may be exempted from these procedural requirements where there
are emergencies, where issuance of advance notice may be contrary to public interest, or
where issuance of advance notice may undermine the implementation of the directive. In
these instances, the administrative agencies have to keep records of their justification for the
exemption.

Before ratification of directives, an administrative agency is required to fairly consider

comments submitted on the draft. The Administrative agency may then amend the draft
accordingly or provide a justification for rejecting comments. Further, also before ratification,
the administrative agency is required to send a draft of the directive to the Federal Attorney
General to get its opinion, which is required to be given within fifteen (15) days. In outlining
these procedural requirements, the Proclamation provides an important safeguard as it forbids
administrative agencies from adopting directives which are substantially different from their
drafts publicized through notice.

Directives adopted by administrative agencies are required to be prepared in a clear and

precise manner and be issued both in English and Amharic language. As a way of insuring
accessibility, directives should be posted on the relevant administrative agency’s website and
filed to the Federal Attorney General, which is also required to post the directive on its own
website.

In addition to providing these extensive procedural requirements, the Proclamation requires

timely issuance of directives whenever required by law. The Proclamation, in addition to
allowing individuals to lodge petition for adoption of directives, grants individuals the right
to obtain administrative decisions even in cases where administrative agencies have not
adopted a relevant directive.

The Proclamation, in line with its objectives, also regulates administrative decisions by
administrative agencies. According to the Proclamation, administrative decisions are
decisions issued by administrative agencies in relation to the rights and interests of
individuals in their daily functions. As a matter of principle,

1. The Proclamation grants individuals the right to request an administrative decision with
regard to matters which affect their rights or interests.
2. The Proclamation outlines a number of principles which administrative agencies must
follow in making administrative decisions. These enumerated principles include balancing
public and individual interests, making reasoned decisions, making timely and predictable
decisions, and making decisions in good faith.
3. Administrative agencies are also required to establish a complaint handling body which
hears complaints against administrative decisions.

As a judicial check on executive acts, the Proclamation asserts that individuals are allowed to
apply to the Federal High Court for judicial review of directives and administrative decisions.
the decision of the Court will be final. But a decision of the High Court directive may be
appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.The Proclamation further supports individuals’
right to judicial review by mandating the Federal High Court to establish special benches
which review administrative acts. Courts may revoke directives by administrative agencies
where procedural rules were not followed during issuance, directives amount to ultra-viruses,
or where directives are contrary to higher hierarchy laws. On the other hand, administrative
decisions are revoked by courts where principles under the Proclamation have not been
followed during their dispensation. Naturally, remedies within the administrative agencies
are required to be exhausted before judicial review of administrative acts. During judicial
review, courts are required to render decisions in the shortest possible amount of time and
execute these decisions immediately. Moreover, individuals who have incurred damage due
to fault in issuance of directives or administrative decisions are entitled seek compensation
from the relevant administrative agencies.

To conclude, the Administrative Procedure Proclamation, which was issued recently, has
been a result of the on-going reforms in Ethiopia. These requirements imposed on
administrative agencies by the Proclamation are very significant in ensuring they enact laws
and make decisions in a fair and timely manner. Administrative agencies are mainly charged
with serving the public and how administrative agencies serve the public is just as important
as the results they obtain in serving the public. While matters related practical application of
this law remain to be seen, the Proclamation goes a long way towards addressing the
legislative lacuna which existed regarding the regulation of administrative acts. The
Proclamation is truly an important step.

The importance and function of Federal Administrative Procedure Proclamation No.

1183/2020.
Federal Administrative Procedure Proclamation No. 1183/2020 is of significant importance
as it introduces a comprehensive framework for the administrative procedures in Ethiopia.
The proclamation outlines the rules and guidelines for administrative decision-making
processes, ensuring transparency, accountability, and fairness in the actions of government
agencies and officials. This proclamation is crucial for several reasons:
1. Enhancing Good Governance: The proclamation aims to promote good governance by
establishing clear procedures for administrative actions, including rule-making, licensing,
enforcement, and adjudication. By providing a structured framework, it helps prevent
arbitrary decision-making and promotes consistency and predictability in administrative
processes.
2. Safeguarding Rights of Citizens and Businesses: The proclamation seeks to protect the
rights of individuals and organizations by ensuring that administrative decisions are made in
accordance with the law and are subject to review and appeal. This contributes to the rule of
law and protects citizens from abuse of power by public authorities.
3. Promoting Investment and Economic Development: Clear and predictable administrative
procedures are essential for creating a conducive environment for investment and economic
development. By establishing transparent and efficient processes, the proclamation can help
attract domestic and foreign investment by providing assurance to businesses and investors.
4. Strengthening Accountability and Oversight: The proclamation introduces mechanisms for
accountability and oversight of administrative actions, including requirements for reporting,
review, and appeals. This helps prevent corruption and misuse of authority by public
officials.
5. Aligning with International Standards: The proclamation reflects Ethiopia's commitment to
aligning its administrative procedures with international best practices, contributing to the
country's integration into the global community and adherence to international standards of
governance.
In conclusion, Federal Administrative Procedure Proclamation No. 1183/2020 holds
significant importance for Ethiopia as it establishes a legal framework that promotes good
governance, protects rights, supports economic development, strengthens accountability, and
aligns with international standards. Its implementation has the potential to bring about
positive changes in administrative practices and contribute to the overall development of the
country.
The effectiveness of Federal Administrative Procedure Proclamation No. 1183/2020, by
comparing from early government decisions before this proclamation
The effectiveness of Federal Administrative Procedure Proclamation No. 1183/2020 can be
evaluated by comparing government decisions made before and after the implementation of
the proclamation. Here are some potential areas where the effectiveness of the proclamation
can be assessed:
1. Transparency and Accountability: The proclamation aims to promote transparency and
accountability in administrative decision-making processes. By comparing early government
decisions made without the proclamation to those made after its implementation, one can
assess whether there has been an improvement in the transparency of administrative actions
and whether public officials are being held more accountable for their decisions.
2. Protection of Rights: The proclamation seeks to safeguard the rights of citizens and
businesses by ensuring that administrative decisions are made in accordance with the law.
Assessing the effectiveness of the proclamation would involve examining whether
individuals and organizations are experiencing greater protection of their rights in
administrative processes.
3. Efficiency and Predictability: The proclamation aims to establish clear procedures for
administrative actions, contributing to efficiency and predictability in decision-making
processes. A comparison of early government decisions without the proclamation to those
made under its framework can help determine whether there has been an improvement in the
efficiency and predictability of administrative procedures.
4. Investment and Economic Development: The proclamation is intended to create a
conducive environment for investment and economic development by providing assurance to
businesses and investors. Evaluating its effectiveness would involve assessing whether the
proclamation has contributed to an increase in investment and economic activity due to
improved administrative procedures.
5. Compliance with International Standards: The proclamation reflects Ethiopia's
commitment to aligning its administrative procedures with international best practices. Its
effectiveness can be evaluated by examining whether it has helped Ethiopia meet
international standards of governance and improve its integration into the global community.
By comparing early government decisions made without the provisions of Proclamation No.
1183/2020 to those made after its implementation, it will be possible to assess the extent to
which the proclamation has contributed to positive changes in administrative practices,
governance, and helps to regulate Administrative Agencies to refrain there intervention
against people Rights and Interests and guarantee administrative justice by promoting a
culture of transparency and accountability through legally establishing a system of judicial
review for persons who might be aggrieved by acts of administrative agencies, in their rule-
making and decision-making capacities.

Cons and loopholes of Federal Administrative Procedure Proclamation No. 1183/2020,

1. Potential for increased bureaucracy: Depending on the specifics of the proclamation, there
may be a risk of creating additional bureaucratic hurdles and red tape.
2. Implementation challenges: The successful implementation of administrative procedure
proclamations may require significant resources, coordination, and training.
3. Resistance to change: Government agencies and officials may resist changes to established
administrative procedures, leading to implementation challenges.
4. Unintended consequences: Changes to administrative procedures could have unintended
negative effects on certain stakeholders or processes.
5. Lack of specificity: Some proclamations may lack specific details or fail to address all
relevant issues, leading to ambiguity or incomplete solutions.
Generally, some potential cones and loopholes could be the need for clarity and consistency
in the implementation of the proclamation across different government agencies and regions.
Additionally, there may be challenges related to the capacity of administrative bodies to
effectively carry out the new procedures and meet the prescribed timelines. Another potential
loophole could be the possibility of bureaucratic resistance or lack of adherence to the
procedural requirements, leading to delays or inconsistent application of the law.
Furthermore, there may be a need for further clarification on certain provisions to ensure that
they are not misinterpreted or misused. Overall, while the proclamation represents a
significant step towards administrative reform, addressing these potential issues will be
crucial for its effective implementation and impact.