violate the rights under the Charter. To determine the present Communication on the merits, the Commission would undertake the same exercise as the one that would have been undertaken by the relevant domestic body: interpreting the rights guaranteed under the Charter alleged to have been violated and assessing whether the impugned provisions of domestic law and the measures taken under them are consistent with the rights so interpreted. 55. To make the point vivid, a “constitutional review” would have entailed determining a constitutional dispute. In terms of domestic law, a constitutional dispute arises when a federal or state law, or a decision rendered by any government organ or official is contested as contradictory to the Constitution.18 A constitutional challenge could thus have canvassed the measures taken against the first Complainant as well as the impugned provisions of the CSO Proclamation. 56. It is apt to highlight that the Charter rights referenced in the present Communication are also guaranteed under the FDRE Constitution. Specifically, Article 7(1) of the Charter on the right to have one’s cause heard is guaranteed, among others, as a right of access to justice under Article 37 of the Constitution. Article 9(1) and (2) of the Charter guaranteeing the rights to receive information, and express and disseminate opinions are also protected under Article 29(2) of the Constitution. Similarly, Article 10 of the Charter on freedom of assembly is also guaranteed under Article 31 of the Constitution. Further, Article 15 which guarantees labour rights finds its equivalent in Article 42 of the Constitution. Even the general obligation under Article 1 of the Charter has its near equivalent in Article 13(1) of the Constitution. Additionally, Article 40 of the Constitution is the counterpart of Article 14 of the Charter guaranteeing the right to property. 57. In light of the above considerations, the Commission cannot accept that challenging the constitutionality of the measures adopted against the first Complainant On this, Art. 83(1) of the Constitution provides that “All constitutional disputes shall be decided by the House of Federation.” In terms of Art. 84(2) of the Constitution and Art. 6(2) of Proclamation 250/2001 establishing the Council of Constitutional Inquiry (CCI), a constitutional dispute arises “Where any Federal or State law is contested as being unconstitutional”. Art. 17(1) of Proclamation 250/2001 vests the power to investigate constitutional issues in the CCI. In terms of Art. 17(2) of the same Proclamation, constitutional issues arise “where any law or decision given by any government organ or official is alleged to be contradictory to the Constitution…” 18 15 | P a g e