The Interplay of Court Contempt and Freedom of Media in Ethiopia

A Quest for Regulation

Abstract

Court contempt involves actions or publication of information that interfere with the fair administration of justice in ongoing cases. On the other hand, freedom of expression encompasses the rights to disseminate and access information as recognized by national and international human rights instruments. Media often shares information about pending cases especially those of a sensitive or political nature. Such pre-trial publicity may jeopardize the impartiality of judges and the fair trial rights of suspects, thereby constituting court contempt. This paper examines the tension between court contempt and freedom of expression and the existing legislative gaps in Ethiopia. Utilizing qualitative doctrinal legal research Methodology, the study argues that media coverage of ongoing cases significantly undermines judicial independence, the right to fair trial, and public confidence in the justice system. Ethiopia has not enacted a stand-alone court contempt law that strikes balance with in these competing interests. The author concludes that Freedom of expression is subject to restriction only when it satisfies the three part test: the principles of legality, legitimacy, and proportionality. Thus, pre-trial publicity should be restricted as a form of court contempt, to curb its adverse impacts on the administration of justice and the right to a fair trial. This position is substantiated by the application of the three-part test, anchored in the principles of legality, legitimacy, and proportionality, which necessitates the enactment of precise and balanced regulatory measures to preserve judicial integrity in the face of potentially prejudicial media dissemination.