Classifying and Regulating Renewed Hostilities in Northern Ethiopia beyond the Pretoria Agreement

Purpose: This study examines how renewed hostilities in northern Ethiopia should be classified and regulated while the 2022 Pretoria Agreement between the Government of Ethiopia and the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) remains formally operative. Research Methodology: The study adopts a qualitative documentary and doctrinal research design. It analyzes the Pretoria Agreement, African Union (AU) instruments, international humanitarian law, international human rights law, United Nations documentation, and peer reviewed scholarship, interpreted through Legal Pluralism Theory and Conflict Transformation Theory. Results: A peace agreement cannot by itself determine the legal classification of subsequent violence. Classification must be assessed independently on the facts, particularly the intensity of violence, the organization of armed actors, the continuity or emergence of armed groups, and the involvement of foreign forces. Where the threshold of a noninternational armed conflict is met, Common Article 3, Additional Protocol II, and customary international humanitarian law apply notwithstanding Pretoria, and the participation of foreign states may raise questions of international armed conflict. Conclusions: Northern Ethiopia requires a dual track framework in which Pretoria governs political cessation and peace implementation while international humanitarian and human rights law regulate conduct during renewed violence, supported by stronger AU monitoring, accountability, and preventive diplomacy. Limitations: The study relies on documentary sources, cannot verify facts on the ground, and does not reach a definitive classification of specific incidents. Contributions: The study clarifies the relationship between peace agreements and the law of armed conflict, offers a scenario based classification matrix, and proposes four institutional recommendations.