194. The CRM learnt from its interactive sessions with diverse stakeholders that empowering regional administrative units at the State and lower levels has so enabled previously neglected areas to advance dramatically over the past decade that they are commonly referred to as “emerging regions”. For example, the State of Benshangul/Gumuz, one of the emerging States where schools were previously available only in towns, currently boasts of at least one primary school in every village. Through that power sharing, citizens at the different levels participate in development planning and implementation. 195. In most countries, the power to resolve any constitutional dispute involving interpretation of the Constitution is vested in the courts but, under Article 83 of the Ethiopian Constitution, that function is reserved for the HoF. Such a dispute may pertain to whether any federal or state law contravenes or is inconsistent with the Constitution, or whether any act or omission is unconstitutional. A constitutional issue may be referred by a court when it arises in proceedings before that court, or by any interested party. 196. The CRM was informed during one of the interactive sessions that the rationale for vesting that power in the HoF is that making and understanding the Constitution mainly entails political considerations. For this reason a political organ, rather than a judicial one, is better suited to resolve constitutional issues, taking into account political considerations. This rationale may well be logical and pragmatic. However, the arrangement portends a possible difficulty. In a dispute that is, or is perceived to be, related to partisan politics, an impartial judicial decision would be more readily accepted and respected than one by a single-party-dominated HoF which would be seen as a judge in its own cause contrary to the cardinal principle of natural justice. 197. In resolving constitutional disputes, the HoF is assisted by the Council of Constitutional Inquiry, established by the Constitution with the mandate of investigating such disputes and making recommendations thereon. If, upon consideration of the dispute, the Council finds it necessary to interpret the constitution, the dispute - with its recommendation thereon – is submitted to the HoF for a final decision. Where the Council finds that there is no need for constitutional interpretation, it may return the case to the courts. 198. The composition of the Council of Constitutional Inquiry is noteworthy. The Federal Supreme Court President and Vice-President serve respectively, as President and Vice-President of the Council. Other members are: (a) six legal experts of proven professional competence and high moral standing, appointed by the President of the Republic on recommendation of the HoPR; and, (b) three persons designated by the HoF from among its members. - 98 -