Yusuf Ali MOHAMMED is a Doctor of Law (Ph.D.) fellow at Anadolu University, Eskişehir, Turkey. He received his Master of Law Degree (LL.M) in 2021 from Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara/Turkey. He received his Bachelor of Law Degree (LL.B) in 2014 from Dire Dawa University, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia. He is interested and does his research in international water law areas. He is the former legal advisor to the President of Harari P/R/State, Harar, Ethiopia.
Social Science University of Ankara Law Journal, 2022
Considering the conflicting interests of states over their shared basin-wide transboundary water ... more Considering the conflicting interests of states over their shared basin-wide transboundary water resources, various basin states follow different international legal theories of transboundary watercourses. This paper focuses on the aforenamed watercourse theories in light of the practices of the Nile River Basin. In an attempt to correlate the theories of International Transboundary Watercourse vis-à-vis the case of the Nile River basin, this paper addresses whether the Nile riparian countries follow a particular transboundary watercourse theory or not? Whether the upstream and/or downstream countries follow the same or different doctrinal theory or not? Whether the theories they follow have practical significance in showing the origin of where the Nile controversy lies or not? In addressing the aforementioned issues, this paper finally shows the origin of where the Nile River Basin controversies emanated from — as their conflicting and uncompromising attitudes over their international theoretical standing point, lead their practical basin-wide negotiations to a never-ending Nile controversy.
Journal of International Relations and Political Science Studies, 2022
World War II (WWII) coupled with the following international criminal trials were blessingin-disg... more World War II (WWII) coupled with the following international criminal trials were blessingin-disguise for giving birth to the Rome Statute regime, which established the International Criminal Court (ICC). Though most African States were in the first row in acceding to the aforenamed Statute, the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (Ethiopia) does not compose a signatory yet. The recent internal conflict in Ethiopia which grasped the international community's attention signifies the importance of revisiting and scrutinising the ICC vis-à-vis Ethiopia. In this vein, given Ethiopia's nonadherence to the Rome Statute, the article highlights the normative compatibility of the Rome Statute vis-à-vis the Criminal Code of Ethiopia (Criminal Code) coupled with its criminal proceeding practices. At the backdrop of Ethiopia's recent conflict amounting to war crimes and crimes against humanity, the article addresses whether there are feasible scenarios of-Ethiopia referring its case to the ICC,the United Nations Security Council referring Ethiopia's case to the ICC, and/or-Ethiopia joining the Rome Statute or not? While addressing these issues, the article ascertains significant similarities and differences between the Rome Statute and Criminal Code. Apart from these, albeitan assumption of Ethiopia referring its case to the ICC,a high probability of the United Nations Security Council referring Ethiopia's case to the ICC, and/orseveral pushing factors pressuring Ethiopia to join the Rome Statute, the article pins down the unlikely nature of either scenario.
The "Water Security" Principle & its Ramification, 2014
The launch of NBI in May 1999 by the Nile-COM brings hope with the establishment of CFA since it ... more The launch of NBI in May 1999 by the Nile-COM brings hope with the establishment of CFA since it pave a way for equitable and reasonable utilization of Nile water as well as the benefit sharing of its resources by all riparian States. However, the inclusion of Article 3(15) in general and Article 14 in particular in to the Nile Basin CFA under the umbrella of “Water Security” Principle brings a controversy when the down riparian States have entered reservations calling for the replacement of sub-article (b) of Article 14 thereof by a new sub-article (b) which the upper riparian States found unacceptable. These significantly tipped the balance towards the undesirable result of either freezing the status quo in an endless negotiation process or a return back to square one, a déjà vu of a sort. In an attempt to resolve the problem, the paper addresses, what is the phrase “water security” refers to? Whether there is “Water Security” Principle under International Water Law or not? Whether the “Water Security” principle has potential effect on “‘equitable and reasonable” utilization, and has a connection with the ‘status quo’ claim or not? Whether there is a relationship between the “water security” principle and the down riparian States hydro-hegemonic strategy or not? Whether there is a way out as to the reservation/amendment made to Article 14(b) in a way that is beneficial/acceptable by the upper riparian States or not? In addressing these issues, the paper finally shows: 1) the phrase “water security” is ambiguous, indeterminate and potentially disruptive concept which would practically means anything a riparian country wants it to mean that ultimately enable to defend its sovereignty 2) there is no “water security” principle under International water law and it has got no recognition 3) the inclusion of the “Water Security” Principle in to the CFA relates to national security issue of Egypt and tends to be more of political expression than a legal principle which maintain the 1929/1959 Agreement in a way that increase the life span of ‘status quo’ claim, and undermine the “equitable and reasonable” utilization of the Nile water that is very prejudicial to all upper riparian States’ interest in general and Ethiopia’s interest in particular 4) there is no way out in either accepting or rejecting of the reservation/amendment made to Article 14(b) by the upper riparian states as long as the “water security” principle is there in the Nile Basin CFA.
Mersin University Journal of Maritime Faculty, 5 (1), 1-6, 2023
Among the recent cases adjudicated before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the maritime ... more Among the recent cases adjudicated before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the maritime dispute between Kenya and Somalia exhibited in the Indian Ocean is among the forefront one. Though there are several studies dealing with the case at hand, the decision of the aforenamed court has not been comprehensively reviewed. Therefore, having the ICJ's decision, which was rendered on 12 October 2021, this Article exhaustively reviews-not only Somalia's claim and Kenya's submission,-but also ICJ's ruling and decision on major disputed issues. Moreover, the Article provides some scholars critiques attributed to the latter ICJ's decision.
According to Article 47 of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) Constitution, among... more According to Article 47 of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) Constitution, among the nine (now ten) semi-autonomies regional states of Ethiopia, the ‘State of Harari People’ Region is the one. This region is comparatively the smallest, but “the second oldest – after Axum”, with full of historical artifacts and more than 1000 years of tremendous history. Accordingly, the ‘Harari’ people used to self-administer themselves for centuries under their 72 Emirs (Emir – meaning Ruler), until its last Emir Abdullahi was defeated by Menelik II at the battle of ‘Challenko’ in January 6, 1887. After lots of unsuccessful attempts to regain their lost self-administration, lastly, they have got the right to self-administer themselves under the newly structured FDRE alongside other eight regional states. Considering Harari People ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘indigenous’ people, with the aim of balancing the majority rule and minority right, the Regional Constitution incorporates a special legislative representation and voting mechanism, i.e., two-joint councils, namely: the ‘Harari’ People's Council and ‘Harari’ National Council, each with its own specific power and responsibilities. Accordingly, this electoral system has been put into practice for the late last five consecutive national and regional elections. Though there is a nation-wide assumption of consensus to take place national and regional elections in accordance with the already set electoral practices, the Article exposes the wrongfulness of the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) in treating the ‘Harari’ electoral system as an exception.
The world is endowed with so much more trans-boundary water river. Among those, the east Africa’s... more The world is endowed with so much more trans-boundary water river. Among those, the east Africa’s Nile River, which stretches 6,825 km across 11 riparian states all the way to Mediterranean sea, is not only considered the longest river on [earth], but also one of the most contentious one. Throughout the centuries, it was in recent memory that because of the failed most contentious US brokered negotiation over a particular Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), among the most key player of Nile river basin – Ethiopia, Egypt & Sudan –, issue has reached its pick and become the regional security crises. Again, Egypt’s recent move in taking the matter to the US, Arab league, UN Security Council adds a fuel to the existing already burning Nile Basin dispute. Having the latter move, the author tried to analyze the matter from the wider perspective of the Nile Hydro hegemony and its counter Hydro-hegemonic movement in general, and the motive behind the GERD construction alongside its threat over counter Hydro-Hegemonic strategy will be scrutinized in this Article.
THE GUIDING LEGAL REGIME AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT OF TTRANSBOUNDARY WATERCOURSE: A REVIEW, 2022
Among contentious international law issues, the transboundary watercourse management, which is ex... more Among contentious international law issues, the transboundary watercourse management, which is exhibited with a conflicting states interest, is at the center of international law discussion. In order to vividly grasp the very essence behind such conflicting states interest, it is quite important to understand how-the international water law works, and-its institutional platform arrangements are established. Hence, a comprehensive review concerning the guiding legal regime and institutional arrangement of transboundary watercourse is very crucial. In the above vein, at the backdrop of the major theoretical doctrine of transboundary watercourse, this paper reviewed and addressed, customary international watercourse laws and the 1997 UN transboundary watercourses convention coupled with its incorporated principles. Alongside the aforementioned analysis, the paper reviewed major contentious issues relating to the aforesaid customary laws and principles. Moreover, the paper also reviewed and addressed the modelled categorization of institutional arrangement of transboundary watercourse.
Social Science University of Ankara Law Journal, 2022
Considering the conflicting interests of states over their shared basin-wide transboundary water ... more Considering the conflicting interests of states over their shared basin-wide transboundary water resources, various basin states follow different international legal theories of transboundary watercourses. This paper focuses on the aforenamed watercourse theories in light of the practices of the Nile River Basin. In an attempt to correlate the theories of International Transboundary Watercourse vis-à-vis the case of the Nile River basin, this paper addresses whether the Nile riparian countries follow a particular transboundary watercourse theory or not? Whether the upstream and/or downstream countries follow the same or different doctrinal theory or not? Whether the theories they follow have practical significance in showing the origin of where the Nile controversy lies or not? In addressing the aforementioned issues, this paper finally shows the origin of where the Nile River Basin controversies emanated from — as their conflicting and uncompromising attitudes over their international theoretical standing point, lead their practical basin-wide negotiations to a never-ending Nile controversy.
Journal of International Relations and Political Science Studies, 2022
World War II (WWII) coupled with the following international criminal trials were blessingin-disg... more World War II (WWII) coupled with the following international criminal trials were blessingin-disguise for giving birth to the Rome Statute regime, which established the International Criminal Court (ICC). Though most African States were in the first row in acceding to the aforenamed Statute, the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (Ethiopia) does not compose a signatory yet. The recent internal conflict in Ethiopia which grasped the international community's attention signifies the importance of revisiting and scrutinising the ICC vis-à-vis Ethiopia. In this vein, given Ethiopia's nonadherence to the Rome Statute, the article highlights the normative compatibility of the Rome Statute vis-à-vis the Criminal Code of Ethiopia (Criminal Code) coupled with its criminal proceeding practices. At the backdrop of Ethiopia's recent conflict amounting to war crimes and crimes against humanity, the article addresses whether there are feasible scenarios of-Ethiopia referring its case to the ICC,the United Nations Security Council referring Ethiopia's case to the ICC, and/or-Ethiopia joining the Rome Statute or not? While addressing these issues, the article ascertains significant similarities and differences between the Rome Statute and Criminal Code. Apart from these, albeitan assumption of Ethiopia referring its case to the ICC,a high probability of the United Nations Security Council referring Ethiopia's case to the ICC, and/orseveral pushing factors pressuring Ethiopia to join the Rome Statute, the article pins down the unlikely nature of either scenario.
The "Water Security" Principle & its Ramification, 2014
The launch of NBI in May 1999 by the Nile-COM brings hope with the establishment of CFA since it ... more The launch of NBI in May 1999 by the Nile-COM brings hope with the establishment of CFA since it pave a way for equitable and reasonable utilization of Nile water as well as the benefit sharing of its resources by all riparian States. However, the inclusion of Article 3(15) in general and Article 14 in particular in to the Nile Basin CFA under the umbrella of “Water Security” Principle brings a controversy when the down riparian States have entered reservations calling for the replacement of sub-article (b) of Article 14 thereof by a new sub-article (b) which the upper riparian States found unacceptable. These significantly tipped the balance towards the undesirable result of either freezing the status quo in an endless negotiation process or a return back to square one, a déjà vu of a sort. In an attempt to resolve the problem, the paper addresses, what is the phrase “water security” refers to? Whether there is “Water Security” Principle under International Water Law or not? Whether the “Water Security” principle has potential effect on “‘equitable and reasonable” utilization, and has a connection with the ‘status quo’ claim or not? Whether there is a relationship between the “water security” principle and the down riparian States hydro-hegemonic strategy or not? Whether there is a way out as to the reservation/amendment made to Article 14(b) in a way that is beneficial/acceptable by the upper riparian States or not? In addressing these issues, the paper finally shows: 1) the phrase “water security” is ambiguous, indeterminate and potentially disruptive concept which would practically means anything a riparian country wants it to mean that ultimately enable to defend its sovereignty 2) there is no “water security” principle under International water law and it has got no recognition 3) the inclusion of the “Water Security” Principle in to the CFA relates to national security issue of Egypt and tends to be more of political expression than a legal principle which maintain the 1929/1959 Agreement in a way that increase the life span of ‘status quo’ claim, and undermine the “equitable and reasonable” utilization of the Nile water that is very prejudicial to all upper riparian States’ interest in general and Ethiopia’s interest in particular 4) there is no way out in either accepting or rejecting of the reservation/amendment made to Article 14(b) by the upper riparian states as long as the “water security” principle is there in the Nile Basin CFA.
Mersin University Journal of Maritime Faculty, 5 (1), 1-6, 2023
Among the recent cases adjudicated before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the maritime ... more Among the recent cases adjudicated before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the maritime dispute between Kenya and Somalia exhibited in the Indian Ocean is among the forefront one. Though there are several studies dealing with the case at hand, the decision of the aforenamed court has not been comprehensively reviewed. Therefore, having the ICJ's decision, which was rendered on 12 October 2021, this Article exhaustively reviews-not only Somalia's claim and Kenya's submission,-but also ICJ's ruling and decision on major disputed issues. Moreover, the Article provides some scholars critiques attributed to the latter ICJ's decision.
According to Article 47 of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) Constitution, among... more According to Article 47 of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) Constitution, among the nine (now ten) semi-autonomies regional states of Ethiopia, the ‘State of Harari People’ Region is the one. This region is comparatively the smallest, but “the second oldest – after Axum”, with full of historical artifacts and more than 1000 years of tremendous history. Accordingly, the ‘Harari’ people used to self-administer themselves for centuries under their 72 Emirs (Emir – meaning Ruler), until its last Emir Abdullahi was defeated by Menelik II at the battle of ‘Challenko’ in January 6, 1887. After lots of unsuccessful attempts to regain their lost self-administration, lastly, they have got the right to self-administer themselves under the newly structured FDRE alongside other eight regional states. Considering Harari People ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘indigenous’ people, with the aim of balancing the majority rule and minority right, the Regional Constitution incorporates a special legislative representation and voting mechanism, i.e., two-joint councils, namely: the ‘Harari’ People's Council and ‘Harari’ National Council, each with its own specific power and responsibilities. Accordingly, this electoral system has been put into practice for the late last five consecutive national and regional elections. Though there is a nation-wide assumption of consensus to take place national and regional elections in accordance with the already set electoral practices, the Article exposes the wrongfulness of the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) in treating the ‘Harari’ electoral system as an exception.
The world is endowed with so much more trans-boundary water river. Among those, the east Africa’s... more The world is endowed with so much more trans-boundary water river. Among those, the east Africa’s Nile River, which stretches 6,825 km across 11 riparian states all the way to Mediterranean sea, is not only considered the longest river on [earth], but also one of the most contentious one. Throughout the centuries, it was in recent memory that because of the failed most contentious US brokered negotiation over a particular Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), among the most key player of Nile river basin – Ethiopia, Egypt & Sudan –, issue has reached its pick and become the regional security crises. Again, Egypt’s recent move in taking the matter to the US, Arab league, UN Security Council adds a fuel to the existing already burning Nile Basin dispute. Having the latter move, the author tried to analyze the matter from the wider perspective of the Nile Hydro hegemony and its counter Hydro-hegemonic movement in general, and the motive behind the GERD construction alongside its threat over counter Hydro-Hegemonic strategy will be scrutinized in this Article.
THE GUIDING LEGAL REGIME AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT OF TTRANSBOUNDARY WATERCOURSE: A REVIEW, 2022
Among contentious international law issues, the transboundary watercourse management, which is ex... more Among contentious international law issues, the transboundary watercourse management, which is exhibited with a conflicting states interest, is at the center of international law discussion. In order to vividly grasp the very essence behind such conflicting states interest, it is quite important to understand how-the international water law works, and-its institutional platform arrangements are established. Hence, a comprehensive review concerning the guiding legal regime and institutional arrangement of transboundary watercourse is very crucial. In the above vein, at the backdrop of the major theoretical doctrine of transboundary watercourse, this paper reviewed and addressed, customary international watercourse laws and the 1997 UN transboundary watercourses convention coupled with its incorporated principles. Alongside the aforementioned analysis, the paper reviewed major contentious issues relating to the aforesaid customary laws and principles. Moreover, the paper also reviewed and addressed the modelled categorization of institutional arrangement of transboundary watercourse.
Uploads
In an attempt to correlate the theories of International Transboundary Watercourse vis-à-vis the case of the Nile River basin, this paper addresses whether the Nile riparian countries follow a particular transboundary watercourse theory or not? Whether the upstream and/or downstream countries follow the same or different doctrinal theory or not? Whether the theories they follow have practical significance in showing the origin of where the Nile controversy lies or not?
In addressing the aforementioned issues, this paper finally shows the origin of where the Nile River Basin controversies emanated from — as their conflicting and uncompromising attitudes over their international theoretical standing point, lead their practical basin-wide negotiations to a never-ending Nile controversy.
However, the inclusion of Article 3(15) in general and Article 14 in particular in to the Nile Basin CFA under the umbrella of “Water Security” Principle brings a controversy when the down riparian States have entered reservations calling for the replacement of sub-article (b) of Article 14 thereof by a new sub-article (b) which the upper riparian States found unacceptable. These significantly tipped the balance towards the undesirable result of either freezing the status quo in an endless negotiation process or a return back to square one, a déjà vu of a sort.
In an attempt to resolve the problem, the paper addresses, what is the phrase “water security” refers to? Whether there is “Water Security” Principle under International Water Law or not? Whether the “Water Security” principle has potential effect on “‘equitable and reasonable” utilization, and has a connection with the ‘status quo’ claim or not? Whether there is a relationship between the “water security” principle and the down riparian States hydro-hegemonic strategy or not? Whether there is a way out as to the reservation/amendment made to Article 14(b) in a way that is beneficial/acceptable by the upper riparian States or not?
In addressing these issues, the paper finally shows: 1) the phrase “water security” is ambiguous, indeterminate and potentially disruptive concept which would practically means anything a riparian country wants it to mean that ultimately enable to defend its sovereignty 2) there is no “water security” principle under International water law and it has got no recognition 3) the inclusion of the “Water Security” Principle in to the CFA relates to national security issue of Egypt and tends to be more of political expression than a legal principle which maintain the 1929/1959 Agreement in a way that increase the life span of ‘status quo’ claim, and undermine the “equitable and reasonable” utilization of the Nile water that is very prejudicial to all upper riparian States’ interest in general and Ethiopia’s interest in particular 4) there is no way out in either accepting or rejecting of the reservation/amendment made to Article 14(b) by the upper riparian states as long as the “water security” principle is there in the Nile Basin CFA.
In an attempt to correlate the theories of International Transboundary Watercourse vis-à-vis the case of the Nile River basin, this paper addresses whether the Nile riparian countries follow a particular transboundary watercourse theory or not? Whether the upstream and/or downstream countries follow the same or different doctrinal theory or not? Whether the theories they follow have practical significance in showing the origin of where the Nile controversy lies or not?
In addressing the aforementioned issues, this paper finally shows the origin of where the Nile River Basin controversies emanated from — as their conflicting and uncompromising attitudes over their international theoretical standing point, lead their practical basin-wide negotiations to a never-ending Nile controversy.
However, the inclusion of Article 3(15) in general and Article 14 in particular in to the Nile Basin CFA under the umbrella of “Water Security” Principle brings a controversy when the down riparian States have entered reservations calling for the replacement of sub-article (b) of Article 14 thereof by a new sub-article (b) which the upper riparian States found unacceptable. These significantly tipped the balance towards the undesirable result of either freezing the status quo in an endless negotiation process or a return back to square one, a déjà vu of a sort.
In an attempt to resolve the problem, the paper addresses, what is the phrase “water security” refers to? Whether there is “Water Security” Principle under International Water Law or not? Whether the “Water Security” principle has potential effect on “‘equitable and reasonable” utilization, and has a connection with the ‘status quo’ claim or not? Whether there is a relationship between the “water security” principle and the down riparian States hydro-hegemonic strategy or not? Whether there is a way out as to the reservation/amendment made to Article 14(b) in a way that is beneficial/acceptable by the upper riparian States or not?
In addressing these issues, the paper finally shows: 1) the phrase “water security” is ambiguous, indeterminate and potentially disruptive concept which would practically means anything a riparian country wants it to mean that ultimately enable to defend its sovereignty 2) there is no “water security” principle under International water law and it has got no recognition 3) the inclusion of the “Water Security” Principle in to the CFA relates to national security issue of Egypt and tends to be more of political expression than a legal principle which maintain the 1929/1959 Agreement in a way that increase the life span of ‘status quo’ claim, and undermine the “equitable and reasonable” utilization of the Nile water that is very prejudicial to all upper riparian States’ interest in general and Ethiopia’s interest in particular 4) there is no way out in either accepting or rejecting of the reservation/amendment made to Article 14(b) by the upper riparian states as long as the “water security” principle is there in the Nile Basin CFA.