Individual Corruption

Several sources suggest that the Ethiopian judiciary is tainted with corruption. For instance, according to Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, at lower levels, corruption and incompetence are rife, while at higher levels political interference is the rule rather that the exception. In addition, despite some improvements with regard to competencies and coverage, the judicial system is still very weak. Furthermore, the judicial system lacks experienced staff, which sometimes makes the application of laws unpredictable, as emphasised by the US Department of State 2010.

Business Corruption

Investors involved in commercial disputes in Ethiopia have expressed a lack of confidence in the judiciary to objectively assess and resolve disputes, according to the US Department of State 2011. The underlying reason behind this distrust is the fact that Ethiopia's judicial system is weak, overburdened, poorly staffed and prone to corruption. This further explains that whenever cases are related to government entities or higher-level public officials, there is significant government influence and intervention into legal proceedings. However, on a better note, the report states that a separate court has been created specifically to speed up the processing of commercial cases, nevertheless, arbitration still remains the most efficient means of resolving disputes.  

Political Corruption

Bertelsmann Foundation 2010 indicates that the Ethiopian judicial system lacks independence and operates under close orders from the executive. The independence of the judiciary is further hampered by the fact that the executive can appoint and dismiss court officials at will, while judges who voice opinions contrary to the executive have been dismissed or passed over for promotion, as reported by Global Integrity 2008. Although the courts show some independence in less prominent cases, the judiciary often acts only after very long delays due primarily to the workload of the system. There is a severe lack of well-educated judges and other judicial personnel, which often result in long delays in trial proceedings. Corruption in the system is also reported as one of the constraints, according to Bertelsmann Foundation 2010.

In November 2009, the Supreme Court sentenced Judge Girma Tiku, former head of the First Instance Court for Urban Affairs of Lideta Subcity, to seven years in prison and a fine of USD 80 on charges of corruption, as indicated by the US Department of State 2010.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2012:
- It requires 37 procedures and takes 620 days to enforce a commercial contract through the judiciary at a cost of 15.2% of the claim.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012:
- Business executives give the Ethiopian judiciary's level of independence from influences of government, citizens, or companies a score of 3.1 on a 7-point scale (1 'heavily influenced' and 7 'entirely independent').

- Business executives give the efficiency of the legal framework for private companies to settle disputes and to challenge the legality of government actions and/or regulations a score of 3.8 and 3.6 respectively on a 7-point scale (1 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'highly efficient').

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- Only 24% of the companies surveyed believe that the court system is fair, impartial and uncorrupted.

UNECA: African Governance Report 2005:
- 60% reported that the judiciary is hardly or not at all independent of other branches of government.

- 31% of respondents in the household survey expect public prosecutors to demand bribes.

- 35% of respondents in the household survey expect judges to demand bribes.