29. Regarding Article 56(5) of the Charter on exhaustion of local remedies, the Complainants refer to the steps taken at domestic level as stated at paragraphs 8 – 11 above, and contend that all local remedies available in the Respondent State were exhausted as there is no further forum to refer the complaint to. 30. In light of the foregoing submissions, the Complainants request that this Communication should be admitted for consideration on the merits. The Respondent State’s observations 31. The Respondent State avers that the CSO Proclamation and related regulations were promulgated to govern societies and charities, replacing the regime under the 1960 Civil Code of Ethiopia. The latter law had become incompatible with the developments in the sector. Among others factors, civil society organisations operated unchecked and there was public outcry about massive financial mismanagement which meant that funds collected by these organisations were not being applied for the amelioration of the intended beneficiaries. There was also a need to enhance and regulate the roles of Non-Governmental Organisations and other Civil Society Actors in the development and governance of the Ethiopian peoples. The new legal framework ensures citizen’s realisation of freedom of association as enshrined in its Constitution. It also ensures that civil society organisations operate in a transparent and accountable manner so that the work of these organisations and the resources they collect truly benefit the peoples of Ethiopia. 32. Regarding admissibility, the Respondent State submits that the Communication does not comply with Article 56(5) of the Charter. It states that adequate and effective remedies are available within its legal system and the Complainants have not exhausted such remedies. In terms of the law, the rights alleged to have been violated are guaranteed in its laws including the Constitution. It states that the Charter and other international human rights instruments which it has ratified are part of its domestic law by virtue of Article 9(4) of its Constitution.3 33. Further, the Respondent State affirms that under its constitutional arrangement, courts of law have no power to interpret the Constitution. Instead, it is the House of Federation that is vested with the judicial power to interpret the Constitution. The House of Federation is assisted in its judicial mandate by a Council of Constitutional Section 9(4) of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia provides that “all international agreements ratified by Ethiopia are an integral part of the law of the land.” 3 8|Page