The House of Federation recently issued a final decision on June 25, 2015, regarding the legal status of agricultural land ownership and the validity of land transfers through gift or sale. The case originated from a dispute in the Oromia National Regional State, West Arsi Zone, specifically within the Nenebo Wereda. The matter was subsequently communicated to the Federal Supreme Court and the Oromia Regional State Supreme Court on July 3, 2015, to ensure the enforcement of the ruling.
The facts of the case involve an applicant, Ato Aliyi Dawe, who had originally granted his son, Mohammed Aliyi, the use of his agricultural land. Following the death of his son, a third party, Ato Muhe Adyim, took possession of the land. The applicant sought to reclaim the property, arguing that the land should revert to him. However, the Wereda Court ruled that because the land had been transferred to the son as a gift and subsequently moved to the respondent, the original owner could no longer claim it. This judgment was upheld by both the Oromia Supreme Court Cassation Division and the Federal Supreme Court Cassation Division.
Upon review, the Constitutional Inquiry Commission identified a fundamental discrepancy between these judicial decisions and the constitutional framework. The Commission noted that the lower courts had treated the agricultural land as private property capable of being transferred via gift or sale. This interpretation was found to be in direct conflict with Article 40(3) of the Constitution, which defines land as the common property of the Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples of Ethiopia, explicitly stating that land is not subject to sale or exchange.
Furthermore, the Commission argued that the courts’ decisions violated the protections afforded to farmers under Article 40(4) of the Constitution, which guarantees that farmers shall not be evicted from their land. The House of Federation adopted these recommendations, concluding that any legal argument or judicial decision suggesting that agricultural land can be permanently transferred between individuals through sale or similar means lacks a constitutional basis.
The House of Federation ultimately invoked Article 9(1) of the Constitution, which dictates that any law or decision contradicting the Constitution remains inapplicable. Consequently, the previous rulings made by the Nenebo Wereda Court, the Oromia Supreme Court Cassation Division, and the Federal Supreme Court Cassation Division were unanimously overturned. The final order restores the applicant’s constitutional right to the possession and use of the land, reinforcing the principle that agricultural land rights are protected from unauthorized commercial or private transfers.