DC Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Kiros, Simeneh | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-12-13T08:47:39Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-12-13T08:47:39Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2020-09 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/mlr.v14i1.4 | - |
dc.description.abstract | The criminal law is adopted as a means of achieving the common good; it is
interpreted and applied by the court. The judge chooses the type of legal theory
and method to employ in the interpretation and application of the criminal law.
Such theories may be acquired from higher norms or from the decision of the
Supreme Court. Because such choice of theory and method determines the
outcome of the case, the judge is also expected to be guided by the doctrines in
criminal law inspired by the values of rule of law and respect for fundamental
rights, enshrined in the Constitution. This article examines how courts harmonise
the application of the positive criminal law with the non-positivist theories of
higher norms. After reviewing various criminal rules and their judicial
application, it finds that the court applies the criminal law as it is written in
disregard of the non-positivist theories of higher norms, at times in contradiction
to the basic doctrines of the criminal law itself. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | St.Mary's University | en_US |
dc.subject | Non-positivism · Criminal law · Judicial method · Theory of law · Higher norms· Judicial formalism | en_US |
dc.title | Vol. 14 No.1:Non-Positivist ‘Higher Norms’ and ‘Formal’ Positivism: Interpretation of the Ethiopian Criminal Law | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Mizan Law Review
|