decisions of the House of Federation on matters submitted to it are final and all concerned parties are required to observe and execute them.”53 68. From the foregoing, it is apparent that despite being a second chamber of a state organ called “parliament”, the House of Federation is a sui generis dispute settlement body on constitutional issues. Notably, it does not take part in the law making process, which is the preserve of the House of Peoples’ Representatives.54 The House of Federation’s dispute settlement competence specifically includes cases where federal or state law or government decisions are contested as unconstitutional through the procedure of constitutional review. This jurisdiction is exclusive to the House of Federation. Unlike in other jurisdictions, regular courts do not have such competence. The fact that the House of Federation is not a court of law does not obviate its suitability to handle constitutional review as a remedy. Moreover in all the other cases in which the Commission insisted on judicial remedies before courts of law, it was the case, or at least assumed that such domestic courts have the jurisdiction to deal with the complaints in question. This is clearly not the case for constitutional review as a remedy in the Respondent State’s legal system. 69. Further, the Complainants’ assertion that the jurisdiction and power of the House of Federation is discretionary and that it has no obligation to decide cases according to legal principles can hardly be sustained. In the Commission’s view, the House of Federation’s power is of a legal nature and not pure political discretion. Particularly, the House of Federation is mandated to decide constitutional issues in accordance with: (a) the norms in the FDRE Constitution which include fundamental human rights, (b) legal principles of constitutional interpretation specifically developed for that purpose. Further, the decisions are required to conform to the principles of the UDHR and other international human rights treaties which the Respondent State has adopted. 70. Moreover the House of Federation is also assisted by the CCI, a technical advisory body comprised of two senior judges of the apex regular court (the President and Deputy President of the Federal Supreme Court), six jurists of note, and a paltry three members from the House of Federation itself. The CCI itself is also required to examine constitutional disputes and make recommendations that conform to the same principles Proclamation 251/2001, Art. 56. To the extent that the House of Federation does not participate in law-making it would not be in a position of conflict of interest when it sits to review the Constitutionality of laws passed by the House of Peoples’ Representatives. 53 54 21 | P a g e