Search This Blog

Showing posts with label CONSTITUTION. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CONSTITUTION. Show all posts

Dec 23, 2020

Section 2 Warrant of arrestArt 52 Principle.

Section 2. - Warrant of arrest
Art 52 Principle.

(1) Where a warrant is required by law to be issued by a court before a person is arrested the provisions which follow shall apply.
(2) A warrant of arrest shall be in the form prescribed in the Third Schedule to this Code
(3) A warrant of arrest shall remain in force until executed or cancelled by the court which issued it notwithstanding the death, retirement or replacement of the judge having issued the warrant.
Art. 53 issue of warrant.
(1) A warrant of arrest may be issued on the application of any investigating police officer by any court and shall be addressed to the chief of the police in the Taklay Guezat in which it is issued.
(2) A warrant may be issued at any time and on any day of the year
(3) A warrant of arrest may be executed in any part of the Empire by any member of the police.
Art. 54. When warrant of arrest to be issued.
A warrant of arrest shall only be issued where the attendance of a person before the court is absolutely necessary and cannot otherwise be obtained.
Art. 55 Application for warrant in urgent cases.
(1) In cases of urgency the investigating police officer may apply for a warrant by telephone or telegraph.
(2) In such cases the application to the court in question shall be confirmed in writing within 24 hours.


APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT GIVEN IN DEFAULT


Application to Set Aside Judgment given in Default

Art.197-Court having jurisdiction.

An application to set aside a judgment given in default may be made by the person sentenced in his absence to the court which passed the judgment.

Art.198- Time and form of application.

An application under this Title shall be made within thirty days from the date on which the applicant became aware of the judgment given in his absence and shall contain the reasons on which he bases his application.

Art.199- Grounds for granting application.
No application under this Title shall be granted unless the applicant can show
(a) That he has no received a summons to appear: or

(b) That he was prevented by force majeure from appearing in person or by advocate.

Art.200- Action upon filing of application.

(1) on the filing of the application, a copy thereof shall be sent to the public prosecutor and the applicant and the public prosecutor shall be informed of the hearing date

(2) Where the applicant, having been duly summoned, fails to appear on the hearing date, the application shall be dismissed.
Art-201-Hearing
(1) The applicant or his advocate shall speak in support of the application and the public prosecutor shall reply. The applicant shall have the right to reply.

(2) The court shall then give its decision on the applications


የኢ-አድሎአዊነት መርህ


ከአድልኦ የፀዳ ፍርድ (The rule against bias) የሚለው መርህ በኮመን ሎው አገራት በስፋት የዳበረ መሰረተ ሀሳብ ሲሆን በአጭሩ ሲገለጽ አንድ ሰው በራሱ ጉዳይ ራሱ ከሳሽ ራሱ ዳኛ መሆን የለበትም እንደማለት ነው፡፡ ኢ-አድሎአዊነት አብዛኛውን ጊዜ ራሱን የቻለ የተፈጥሮ ፍትህ መርህ ተደርጐ ቢጠቀስም በተግባር ሲታይ ግን በመሰማት መብት ውስጥ የሚጠቃለል የፍትሐዊ ስነ-ስርዓት አንድ አካል ነው፡፡ አንድ ሰው በአስተዳደር ጉባዔ (Administrative Tribunal) ፊት ቀርቦ የመሰማት እድል ሊሰጠው ይገባል ሲባል በውስጠ ታዋቂነት ፍ/ቤቱ ከአድልኦ የፀዳ እንደሆነ ግምት በመውሰድ ነው፡፡
ፍርደ ገምድል ያልሆነ፤ ያልተዛባ ውሳኔ መኖር ህዝቡ በፍትህ ስርዓቱ ላይ ያለውን አመኔታ የሚያንፀባርቅ እንደመሆኑ ተፈፃሚነቱም /በተለይ በኮመን ሎው አገራት/ እጅግ ጥብቅ ነው፡፡ ከዚህ ጋር በተያያዘ የታወቁት የእንግሊዝ ዳኛ ሎርድ ሄዋርት እንዲህ ብለው ነበር፡፡

ፍትህ መሰራቱ ብቻ በቂ አይደለም፡፡ ፍትህ ሲሰራ ጭምር በማያጠራጥርና ግልጽ በሆነ አኳኋን መታየት መቻል አለበት፡፡

የዳኛው ልጅ ‘ቀማኛ’ ተብሎ በአባቱ ፊት ችሎት ሲቀርብ በእርግጥም በህጉ መሰረት ጥፋተኛ ላይሆን ይችላል፡፡ ጥፋተኛ ካልሆነ መለቀቁ ፍትህ ነው፡፡ ግን ለማንም አይመስልም፡፡ ፍትህ ሲሰራ አይታይምና፡፡ ዋናው ቁም ነገር ዝምድና፤ የገንዘብ ጥቅም ወይም ሌላ ምክንያት በዳኛው ውሳኔ አሰጣጥ ላይ ተጽእኖ አለማድረጉ አይደለም፡፡ እነዚህ ሁኔታዎች እስካሉ ድረስ ዳኛው ምንም ያህል ንፁህና ጻድቅ ሰው ቢሆን እንኳን በችሎት ላይ ተቀምጦ ሲያስችል አመኔታ ያጣል፡፡ የኢ-አድሎአዊነት መርህ ዋና አላማ ውሳኔ ሰጭው አካል የተዛባ ፍርድ እንዳይሰጥ ብቻ ሳይሆን ምናልባትም ራሱም ሳያውቀው እንኳን በንፁህ ህሊናው ላይ ተፅእኖ ሊያደርሱ ከሚችሉ ሁኔታዎች ነጻ ሆኖ ዳኝነት እንዲሰጥ ለማስቻል ነው፡፡

ይህ የኢ-አድሎአዊነት  መርህ በተለይ በመደበኛ ፍ/ቤት፣ በአስተዳደር ጉባኤ እና ዳኝነታዊ ውሳኔ በሚሰጡ የአስተዳደር መ/ቤቶች ጥብቅ ተፈጻሚነት አለው፡፡ ውሳኔ ሰጪው አካል በያዘው ጉዳይ በህሊናው ላይ ተፅእኖ ሊያመጣ የሚችል ሁኔታ መኖሩን በተረዳ ጊዜ ራሱን ከውሳኔ ሰጪነት ማግለል አለበት፡፡ ይህ ባልሆነበት ጊዜ በቂ ጥርጣሬ ያደረበት ወገን አቤቱታ አቅርቦ ዳኛው እንዲቀየርለት ማመልከት ይችላል፡፡ ሁኔታው መኖሩ የታወቀው ውሳኔ ከተሰጠ በኋላ ከሆነ የዛ ውሳኔ እጣ ፈንታ ዋጋ አልባ መሆን ነው፡፡
አድሎአዊ ውሳኔ ተሰጥቷል የሚባለው የውሳኔ ሰጭው ህሊና የተዛባ እንደሆነ ነው፡ ለመሆኑ የሕሊና መዛባት ምን ማለት ነው.

በጥሬ ትርጉሙ ሲታይ ማንኛውም ነገር በቀጥታ ሆነ በተዘዋዋሪ ውሳኔ ሰጭው በነጻ ህሊናው ተመርቶ ሊሰጥ ይችል ከነበረው ውሳኔ በተቃራኒ የተለየ ውሳኔ ላይ ያደረሰ ከሆነ ህሊናው ተዛብቷል ብለን መናገር እንችላለን፡፡ ህሊና ከተዛባ የክርክሩ ውጤት (ማለትም ውሳኔው) ጉዳዩ ከመመርመሩ በፊት ድምዳሜ ተደርሶበታል፡፡ ዳኛው ከከሳሽ ወይም ተከሳሽ ጉቦ ከተቀበለ ፍርዱ ለማን እንደሚሰጥ አስቀድሞ ታውቋል፡፡ በዚህ መልኩ የሚሰጥ ፍርድ በተዛባ ህሊና የተሰጠ አድሎአዊ ፍርድ ነው፡፡

የተዛባ ህሊና ከምንጩ አንፃር በተለያየ መንገድ ይገለጻል፡፡ በዋነኛነት ከሚጠቀሱት መካከል የሚከተሉት ይገኙበታል፡፡

የመሰማት መብት


የመሰማት መብት
በተከሰሰበት ጉዳይ መልስ ሳይሰጥ እንዲሁም ማስረጃውን ሳያሰማ የንግድ ፍቃዱ የተሰረዘበት ነጋዴ፣ የቤት ካርታው የመነከበት ግለሰብ፣ ከዩኒቨርሲቲ የተባረረ ተማሪ… ሁሉም የአስተዳደር በደል ሰለባዎች ናቸው፡፡ የአንድን ግለሰብ መብትና ጥቅም ሊጐዳ የሚችል ማንኛውም አስተዳደራዊ እርምጃ ከመወሰዱ በፊት ግለሰቡ የመሰማት ዕድል ሊያገኝ ይገባል፡፡ የመሰማት መብት በዘፈቀደ በሚወሰድ አስተዳደራዊ እርምጃ የተነሳ ዜጎች ህይወታቸውና ንብረታቸው ለአደጋ እንዳይጋለጥ ይከላከላል፡፡
መሰማት ሲባል ከክስ እስከ ውሳኔ ድረስ ያሉ ዝርዝር የክርክር ሂደቶችን ያቅፋል፡፡ እያንዳንዱ ሂደት በራሱ ካልተሟላ በቂ የመሰማት ዕድል እንዳልተሰጠ ይቆጠራል፡፡ በአስተዳደር ዳኝነት ውስጥ የዚህ መብት ዝርዝር ሂደቶችና አስፈላጊ ቅድመ ሁኔታዎች በዋነኛነት የሚከተሉትን ያካትታል፡፡
ቅድመ-ክስ ማስታወቂያ
የክስ መሰማት ውሳኔ ሰጭው ባለስልጣን ለባለጉዳዩ /ለተከሳሹ/ በሚሰጠው የክስ ማስታወቂያ ይጀመራል፡፡ ማስታወቂያ ተከራካሪው እንዲቀርብ የሚሰጥ መጥሪያ ነው፡፡ በይዘቱ ባለጉዳዩ የቀረበበትን ክስ በሚገባ ተረድቶ መልሱን አዘጋጅቶ እንዲያቀርብ የሚያስችለው በቂ ማስታወቂያ መሆን አለበት፡፡ ተከራካሪው ራሱን ለመከላከል የሚችለው የተከሰሰበትን ጉዳይ በማያሻማ ሁኔታ የተገለጸለት እንደሆነ ነው፡፡a ከዚህ አንጻር የክሱ ዓይነትና ምክንያት ቀጥተኛና ግልጽ በሆነ መንገድ በማስታወቂያው ላይ መስፈር ይኖርበታል፡፡ ለምሳሌ እንዲቀርብ የተጠራው ባለጉዳይ የመንግስት ሰራተኛ ወይም የዩኒቨርሲቲ ተማሪ ከሆነ በደፈናው ‘የዲሲፕሊን ክስ ስለቀረበብህ እንድትቀርብ!’ የሚል መጥሪያ ግልጽነት ይጐድለዋል፡፡ በተጨማሪም ከአንድ በላይ ክስ በቀረበ ጊዜ እያንዳንዱ ክስ በዝርዝር ሊገለጽ ይገባል፡፡ በሌላ መልኩ በክስ ማስታወቂያው ላይ የቀረበው የክስ አይነት ክሱ በሚሰማበት ቀን የተቀየረ እንደሆነ ክሱ እንዳልተገለጸ ወይም በቂ ማስታወቂያ እንዳልተሰጠ ይቆጠራል፡፡ በስርቆት ተከሶ ዲሲፕሊን ኮሚቴ ፊት እንዲቀርብ የተጠራ ተማሪ ክሱ በሚሰማበት ቀን የመጀመሪያው ክስ ተቀይሮ ‘በፈተና ማጭበርበር’ ተከሶ ጥፋተኛ ሆኖ ቢገኝ ተማሪው የተቀጣው በቂ ማስታወቂያ ሳይሰጠው እንደመሆኑ ቅጣቱ መሰረታዊ የሆነውን የመሰማት መብት ይጻረራል፡፡
ክሱ የሚሰማበት ጊዜና ቦታ
‘በቂ’ ሊባል የሚችል የክስ ማስታወቂያ መለኪያ ባለጉዳዩ ራሱን በሚገባ እንዲከላከል በሚያስችል መልኩ በቂ መረጃና ጊዜ የሰጠ እንደሆነ ነው፡፡ ክርክሩን ለማካሄድ ስልጣን የተሰጠው አካል ተከራካሪዎች የሚመቻቸውን ጊዜ በመወሰን ክሱ ስለሚሰማበት ቦታ ትክክለኛ መረጃ እንዲኖራቸው በሚያስችል መልኩ መጥሪያውን መላክ ይጠበቅበታል፡፡ ጊዜው ሲገለጽ ትክክለኛው ሰዓት ጭምር መገለጽ አለበት፡፡ ቦታውም እንዲሁ ትክክለኛ መለያ አድራሻውን በመጥቀስ ለባለጉዳዩ/ለተከሳሹ በግልጽ ማሳወቅ ያስፈልጋል፡፡
ከጊዜ ጋር በተያያዘ መልስ ለማቅረብ የሚሰጠው የዝግጅት ጊዜ እንደክሱ ክብደትና ውስብስብነት ሚዛናዊ የጊዜ መጠን መሆን ይኖርበታል፡፡ ዛሬ ክሱ ተሰጥቶት ለነገ መልስ መጠበቅ በተዘዋዋሪ የመሰማት መብትን እንደመንፈግ ይቆጠራል፡፡ በመጨረሻም ክሱን የሚሰማው አካል ትክክለኛ ማንነት በማስታወቂያው ላይ መመልከት ይኖርበታል፡፡
የክስ ማስታወቂያ በአካል ስለመስጠት
የጥሪ ማስታወቂያው በይዘቱ በቂ ሊባል የሚችል ቢሆንም ለባለጉዳዩ በአግባቡ እስካልዳረሰው ድረስ የመሰማት መብቱ ተጓድሏል፡፡ ባለጉዳዩ በቅርብ የሚገኝ ከሆነ በተቻለ መጠን መጥሪያው ለራሱ በአካል ሊሰጠው ይገባል፡፡ ከተገቢ ጥረት በኋላ ለማግኘት የማይቻል ከሆነ ማስታወቂያውን ቅርብ በሆነ ቦታ ላይ መለጠፍና ለተወሰነ ጊዜ በተለጠፈበት ቦታ እንዲቆይ ማድረግ ያስፈልጋል፡፡ ጉዳዩ በሚሰማበት ቀን አለመቅረብ ክርክሩ በሌለበት እንዲቀጥል የሚያደረግ በመሆኑ የመጥሪያ በአግባቡ መድረስ የመስማት መብት አካል ተደርጐ መቆጠር ይኖርበታል፡፡
ክርክርና ማስረጃ የማቅረብ መብት
ክስ የቀረበበት (ባለጉዳይ) ጉዳዩ በተቀጠረበት ቀን በአካል ወይም በወኪሉ ተገኝቶ ክርክሩን የመከታተል፤ መልስ፣ ክርክርና ማስረጃ የማቅረብ ዕድል ሊያገኝ ይገባል፡፡ ይህ መፈጸሙን ማረጋገጥ ክርክሩን የሚሰማው አካል ግዴታ ነው፡፡ መልሱ የሚቀርብበት መንገድ እንደየሁኔታው በቃል ወይም በጽሑፍ ሊሆን ይችላል፡፡ የሚቀርበው የማስረጃ ዓይነት የቃል (የሰው ምስክር) ወይም የጽሑፍ ማስረጃ ሊሆን ይችላል፡፡ ማስረጃው በ3ኛ ወገን እጅ የሚገኝ ከሆነ ባለጉዳዩ እንዲቀርቡለት በጠየቀ ጊዜ ክርክሩን የሚሰማው አካል እንዲቀርቡ ማድረግ አለበት፡፡
መስቀለኛ ጥያቄ የማቅረብ መብት
ባለጉዳዩ የተቃራኒ ወገን ክስና ማስረጃ በአግባብ ሊደርሰውና ሊመለከተው እንደሚችል ከዚህ በፊት ተገልጿል፡፡ የዚህ ዓላማ በአንድ በኩል ባለጉዳዩ የራሱን መከራከሪያና ማስረጃ በማቅረብ ክሱን በቀጥታ እንዲከላከል ሲሆን በሌላ በኩል የተቆጠረበትን ማስረጃ ማስተባበል እንዲያስችለው ጭምር ነው፡፡
በፍርድ ቤት በሚካሄድ መደበኛ ክርክር መስቀለኛ ጥያቄ የምስክሮችን ተዓማኒነት ለማሳጣትና በአጠቃላይ እውነትን ለማውጣት ውጤታማ መሳሪያ ነው፡፡ ተከሳሹ መስቀለኛ ጥያቄ ለማቅረብ ዕድሉ ተነፍጐት የተሰጠ የምስክርነት ቃል ህጋዊ ብቃቱም አጠያያቂ ነው፡፡ ያም ሆኖ ግን የአስተዳደር ክርክር በዓይነቱና በይዘቱ የፍርድ ቤት ክርክር መልክ ከያዘ ውጤታማ አስተዳደርን ወደ ኋላ መጎተቱ አይቀርም፡፡ ስለሆነም የመስቀለኛ ጥያቄ መቅረት ባለጉዳዩ ውጤታማ መከላከያ እንዳያቀርብ የሚያግደው ካልሆነ በስተቀር ውሳኔ ሰጭው አካል በመብቱ ላይ ገደብ ሊያደርግ ይችላል፡፡b ይሁን እንጂ ምስክርነቱ በቃለ መሀላ ስር የተሰጠ ከሆነ መስቀለኛ ጥያቄ መከልከል አይገባም፡፡ በዚህ ረገድ የ1967ቱ ረቂቅ አዋጅ መስቀለኛ ጥያቄ የማቅርብ መብት ለባለጉዳዩ የሚፈቅድ ግልጽ ድንጋጌ የለውም፡፡ በተቃራኒው የኢ.ፌ.ዲ.ሪ ረቂቅ የአስተዳደር ስነ-ስርዓት አዋጅ (1993) በአንቀጽ 6 (3)(ሐ) ላይ ይህን መብት በግልፅ አካቷል፡፡
በአስተዳደራዊ ክርክሮች ላይ መስቀለኛ ጥያቄ የማቅረብ መብት ከሞላ ጎደል በሁሉም ህጎችቻን ላይ አልተካተተም፡፡ ልዩ ሁኔታ የሚገኘው በፋይናንስ ሪፖርት አዘገጃጀትና አቀራረብ አዋጅ 847/2006 ላይ ነው፡፡ በአንቀጽ 39/2/ እንደተመለከተው የዲሲፕሊን ክስ የቀረበበት ሰው የከሳሽን ምስክሮች መስቀለኛ ጥያቄ የመጠየቅ መብት ይኖረዋል፡፡ የመንግስት ሰራተኞች የዲሲፕሊን ክስ በሚሰማበት ወቅት እንዲሁ ግራ ቀኙ መስቀለኛ ጥያቄ ማቅረብ ተፈቅዶላቸዋል፡፡ በፌደራል መንግስት ሰራተኞች የዲሲፕሊን አፈጻጸምና የቅሬታ አቀራረብ ስነ ስርዓት ደንብ ቁ. 77/1994 አንቀጽ 17/5/ እንደሰፈረው የከሳሽ ምስክሮችን ተከሳሹ፤ የተከሳሽ መከላከያ ምስክሮችን የመንግስት መስሪያ ቤቱ ተወካይ፤ የዲሲፕሊን ኮሚቴው የጠራቸውን ተጨማሪ ምስክሮች ደግሞ ሁለቱም ተከራካሪ ወገኖች መስቀለኛ ጥያቄ መጠየቅ ይችላሉ፡፡
በጠበቃ ተወክሎ የመከራከር መብት
የባለጋራን ክስና ማስረጃ ለማስተባበል የህግ ባለሙያ እገዛ አስፈላጊነቱ አያጠያይቅም፡፡ በተለይ ውስብስብ በሆኑ የአስተዳደር ክርክሮች ተካፋይ የሆነ ወገን ካለባለሙያ እገዛ ራሱን በውጤታማ መንገድ ለመከላከል ያለው ዕድል አነስተኛ ነው፡፡ ሆኖም በጠበቃ መወከል መሰረታዊ የመሰማት መብት አካል ተደርጐ አይቆጠርም፡፡ በመብቱ ላይ የሚጣለው ገደብ የራሱ አሳማኝ ምክንያቶች አሉት፡፡
የአስተዳደራዊ ዳኝነት ክርክር ጥብቅ የሆነ የመደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች ዓይነት የስነ-ስርዓት አካሄድ ሳይከተል በፍጥነት ጉዳዩን ለመቋጨት ያለመ ነው፡፡ የጠበቃ መኖር ክርክሩ የባሰ እንዲወሳሰብና ከተገቢው ጊዜ በላይ እንዲንዛዛ በማድረግ የክርክሩን ኢ-መደበኛ ባህርይ ያጠፋዋል፡፡ በአጠቃላይ አነጋገር በጠበቃ ውክልና ከሚታገዝ ይልቅ ባለጉዳዩ ራሱ የሚከራከርበት አስተዳደራዊ ክርክር በአጭር ጊዜ እልባት ያገኛል፡፡ ያም ሆኖ ግን ክርክር የሚካሄድበት ጉዳይ በባሉጉዳዩ መብትና ጥቅም ላይ ሊኖረው ከሚችለው አሉታዊ ውጤት አንጻር ማለትም የክርክሩን ክብደትና ውስብስነት መሰረት አድርጐ እንደየሁኔታው በጠበቃ የመወከል ጥያቄን ማስተናገድ ያስፈልጋል፡፡
ምክንያታዊ ውሳኔ
ዜጐች በሰውነታቸውና በንብረታቸው ላይ እርምጃ ሲወሰድ ከመንግስት ምክንያት ይሻሉ፡፡ አንዳችም ምክንያት የሌለው ውሳኔ የአስተዳደር በደል መገለጫ ነው፡፡ ኢ-ፍትሐዊነት በሁለት መልኩ ይገለጻል፤ የመጀመሪያው ምክንያት ሳይጠቀስ በደፈናው ውሳኔ ሲሰጥ፣ ሁለተኛው ደግሞ ውሳኔው በራሱ ፍርደገምድል፣ ሚዛናዊነት የጐደለውና በአሳማኝ ምክንያት ያልተደገፈ ሲሆን፡፡
ለውሳኔ ምክንያት መስጠት በአስተዳደር ህግ ውስጥ ጉልህ ስፍራ እያያዘና እያደገ የመጣ መሰረተ ሀሳብ ነው፡፡ ያም ሆኖ ከአሜሪካው የአስተዳደር ስነስርዓት በስተቀር በእንግሊዝ ሆነ በህንድ ምክንያት እንዲሰጥ የሚያስገድድ በሁሉም የአስተዳደር አካላት ተፈጻሚ የሆነ ጠቅላላ ደንብ የለም፡፡ ሆኖም አልፎ አልፎ ማቋቋሚያው አዋጅ ለአስተዳደራዊ ውሳኔ ምክንያት እንዲሰጥ ቅድመ ሁኔታ ያስቀምጣል፡፡
አስተዳደራዊ ውሳኔ ሊኖረው የሚገባውን ይዘትና ቅርጽ በተመለከተ በ1967 ረቂቅ አዋጅ አንቀጽ 13 እንዲሁም በፌደራሉ ረቂቅ አዋጅ (1993 ዓ.ም.) አንቀጽ 32 ላይ ቅድመ ሁኔታዎቹ ተዘርዝረዋል፡፡ በዚሁ መሰረት አስተዳደራዊ ውሳኔ በጽሑፍ መሰጠት ያለበት ሲሆን ውሳኔውም የክርክሩን ፍሬ ነገር፣ የማስረጃዎች ፍሬ ጉዳይና ምንጭ፣ የነገሩን ጭብጥ አወሳሰን እንዲሁም በውሳኔው መሰረት ተመስርቶ ሊወሰድ ስለሚገባው እርምጃ የሚያመለክት መሆን ይኖርበታል፡፡ ምንም እንኳን በረቂቆቹ ላይ ‘ምክንያት’ የሚለው ቃል በግልጽ ባይጠቀስም የውሳኔ ምክንያትን የሚያያቋቁሙ ሁኔታዎች የተካተቱ እንደመሆኑ ምክንያት መስጠት እንደአስገዳጅ ሁኔታ ተቀምጧል ማለት እንችላለን፡፡
በአንዳንድ አዋጆች ላይ ውሳኔን በምክንያት ማስደገፍ አስገዳጅ ቅድመ ሁኔታ ነው፡፡ ለአብነት የሚከተሉት ይጠቀሳሉ፡፡
በንግድ ምዝገባና ፈቃድ አዋጅ ቁ. 980/2008 አንቀጽ 6/2/ የንግድ ምዝገባ ማመልከቻ ውድቅ ከተደረገ መዝጋቢው አካል ምክንያቱን ገልጾ ለአመልካቹ ወዲያውኑ ማሳወቅ አለበት፡፡
ከቀረጥ ዋጋ አወሳሰን ጋር በተያያዘ የገቢዎችና ጉምሩክ ባለስልጣን ተጨማሪ መግለጫ ወይም ሰነድ ከዲክላራሲዮን አቅራቢው ከተቀበለ በኋላ ስለግብይት ዋጋው ትክክለኛነት ያለውን ጥርጣሬ ማስወገድ ካልቻለ ወይም ዲክላራሲዮን አቅራቢው ምላሽ ካልሰጠ በጉምሩክ አዋጅ ቁ. 859/2006 አንቀጽ 90 መሰረት ዋጋውን መወሰን እንዳልተቻለ ይቆጠራል፡፡ በዚሁ መሰረት የቀረበው የቀረጥ ማስከፈያ ዋጋ ተቀባይነት ያላገኘበት ምክንያት በጽሑፍ ለአስመጭው ወይም ለወኪሉ ይገለጽለታል፡፡c
በነዳጅ አቅርቦት ስራ ለመሰማራት የተጠየቀ የብቃት ማረጋገጫ ምስክር ወረቀት ተቀባይነት ካላገኘ ምክንያቱ ለአመልካቹ ይገለጽለታል፡፡d
የስደተኝነት ዕውቅና እንዲሰጥ የሚቀርብ አቤቱታ ተቀባይነት ቢያገኝም ባያገኝም ውሳኔው ለአቅራቢው በጽሑፍ መገለጽ አለበት፡፡e

Popular Posts

DOCUMENTS

Criminal Procedure Code 6/2013 PDF by ሕግ እና ፍትህ on Scribd

Files

የወንጀል ቅጣት አወሳሰን መመሪያ ቁ 2/ 2006 PDF-Revised Federal Supereme Court s No 2/2006 by ሕግ እና ፍትህ on Scribd