State Media Coverage of Highly Publicized Criminal Cases in Ethiopia and the Fair Trial Rights of the Accused

Abstract

The precise role of Ethiopian state media in the administration of justice,
particularly their coverage of highly publicized criminal cases, raises serious
concerns on the fair trial rights of the accused. Under the guise of freedom of
expression and informing the public, the media is at times taking over the sole
responsibility of courts of determining the guilt or innocence of persons accused of
committing crime, by releasing publications of highly prejudicial nature in
violation of the fair trial guarantees of presumption of innocence, privilege against
self-incrimination and the right to be tried by an impartial court. Here the
important question would be how the media could exercise its freedom without
infringing the fair trial rights of the accused. In other words, what the media can
and cannot do in reporting criminal cases. The answer to this question is not
simple and it requires trading a delicate balance between freedom of expression and
the right to fair trial both of which are guaranteed under the FDRE constitution.
Yet, the FDRE constitution does not clearly indicate how the two sets of rights
could co-exist without one threatening the existence of the other. Thus, this article
tries to elaborate or point out the bounds of media freedom in covering criminal
cases under FDRE constitution by examining standards developed by other
countries and international jurisprudence on the matter. It also assesses the current
practice of Ethiopian state media coverage of highly publicized criminal cases in
light of these standards by taking some (in)famous broadcasts of the Ethiopian
National Television (ETV) currently renamed as Ethiopian Broadcast Corporation
(EBC) as an example. Finally, the mechanisms of controlling and remedying
irresponsible media reportage of criminal cases under Ethiopian law as well as their
adequacy is also dealt in this article