29 | P age b national law for their application by the domestic courts. According to Woldemariam, the first approach appears the FDRE constitutions preference, despite no clear provision to this effect. 136 Because he has stated that article 9 (4) of the constitution make treaties parts of law of the land, thus self-executing nature of the treaties. Besides, there has been no declaration, in practice, made by the government which supports otherwise. 137 Thus international treaties ratified by Ethiopia in general and UNCAT in particular are merely incorporated into domestic law by ratification and can be applied by domestic courts without any further enabling legislation. However, some treaties by their nature require an implementing legislation for the treaty to be applied by domestic courts. This is particularly the case for criminalization of torture based on the UNCAT. Ethiopia as a member of UNCAT bears obligation to criminalize torture. For the mere fact that Ethiopia is party to UNCAT does necessarily implies that domestic courts can apply the UNCAT directly to punish torture. The following arguments propounded to support this assertion. First, as a general rule, international laws that criminalize certain acts are non-self- executing. 138 Second, the provisions of UNCAT which criminalize torture did not provide appropriate range of penalty, and, thus it is non-self-executing (needs enabling legislation). 139 This position is also held by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) Appellate Chamber in its interlocutory decision referred by the trail chamber to it. The court concurred that being a party to an international law which criminalize a certain act does not confer state to directly apply the treaties without enacting domestic criminal law for the punishment of the act under the treaty. The court stated that This provision does not necessarily entail, however, that the authorities of a state party to the ICCPR may try and convict a person fora crime that is provided for in international law but not yet codified in the domestic legal order in criminal matters, international law cannot substitute itself for national legislation in other words, international criminalization alone is not sufficient for domestic legal orders to punish that conduct GA. Woldemariam., note 131, 76-77. ibid. 138 El Sayed Jemil v prosecutor (Interlocutory Decision on the Applicable Law Terrorism, Conspiracy, Homicide, Perpetration, Cumulative Charging) STL-11-01/I- AC (16 February 2011) Para ibid. 140 El Sayed Jemil v prosecutor, note 138, Paras 132-133.
