Individual assignment on

Customary conflict
resolution Mechanism
 Introduction
 Conflict refers to some form of friction, or discord arising within a group when
the beliefs or actions of one or more members of the group are either resisted
by or unacceptable to one or more members of another group.

 Conflict can arise between members of the same group, known as

intra group conflict, or it can occur between members of two or

more groups, and involve violence, interpersonal discord conflict.
 Conflict exists at all levels and may arise due to the desire for political,
economic and social advantages, greed, ego-related problems, injustice,
inequitable distribution of resources and plain mischief. Conflict is a normal,
inescapable part of life, which can be occurred in any relationship at any time,
and it gives opportunity to understand opposing preferences and values
(Peters,2006).
 Cause Of Conflict
 Historically, individuals, social groups and societies have disputed and
competed against one another over scarce commodities and resources - land,
money, political power, and ideology.
 They have even fought one another and resentfully required the elimination
and/or subjugation of rivals, in order to control these resources and
commodities.
 Different scholars categorizes cause of conflicts in to Real and Pseudo.

 The real cause of conflict includes cultural diversity, traditional hostility and
growing of uneven development.
 The pseudo cause of conflict emphasis on backwardness, social segregation
and mass demand for change.
 But at the same time, human societies and groups have found their own ways
 The existing body of literature confirms that the nature and causes of
Continue
conflicts and the mechanisms for resolving them are deeply rooted in
the culture and history of every society; they are in many important
ways unique to them. (Baxi and Gallanter 1979; Moore 1985; Carter
and Connor1989; Elphinstone, 1992; Olesen 1995; Gletzer, 1998).
 These comparative social facts would seem to support the
philosophical position of cultural relativists who have long argued
that the nature of all social phenomena, including conflicts and their
resolution, are relative and culturally specific (Harris, 1968; Spiro,
1986).
• Conflicts must be understood in their social context,
involving “values and beliefs, fears and suspicions,
interests and needs, attitudes and actions, relationships
and networks…” (Brock–Utne, 2001: 6).
• Thus, the root causes of conflicts must be explored to
emphasize shared understandings of the past and present.
• As they are responsible groups for the arisement of
conflict, they have also responsible for the settlement of
resolutions mechanisms.
 Conflict resolution mechanisms
• Conflict resolution mechanism is a process that done on to mend the broken or damaged
relationship, rectify wrongs, and restore justice (Brock-Utne, 2001:9).

• Major aim is to ensure the full integration of parties into their societies again, and to adopt
the mood of co-operation. The effectiveness of the process and sustainability of the
outcomes, generally, are attributed to such factors as simplicity, participatory nature,
adaptable flexibility, complete relevance, and comprehensiveness (Brock–Utne, 2001).
• The objective of conflict resolution is to move away “from accusations and counter
accusations, to settle hurt feelings and to reach a compromise that may help improve future
relationship”. In the current global age, a period of greater cooperation and inter-dependence
at all levels of society, a peaceful and sustainable conflict resolution process is very essential
(Okrah, 2003).
• The goals of conflict resolution may be classified as preventive or
corrective. Preventive goal deals with convincing individuals and groups
“to choose to negotiate rather than resort to rancor/resentment/ betterment
in all matters of disagreement; thereby increasing the level of peaceful
existence…”Corrective goal, however, focuses on measures to resolve
existing conflicts “with less violence and more understanding of human
nature” (Okrah, 2003:1).
• Societies resolve their conflicts through internal and external social
controls. The internal social controls use processes of deterrence such as
personal shame and fear of supernatural powers. External controls rely on
sanctions associated with actions taken by others in relation to behaviors
that may be approved or disapproved(Okrah, 2003),
• Conflict resolution can be processed through either the courts, (western judiciary
model), or the indigenous system through the customary process and it deals with
settlement of conflicts that may exist.

• The process of customary conflict resolution has to do with how indigenous

structures and systems ensure action in bringing peace at the individual and
community level relationships. In this respect conflict resolution procedures are
generated from general cultural life and daily experiences of living. In this context,
indigenous “refers to the structures and the units of organization in a community
and encompasses also the norms, values, beliefs and Customs that guide social
interaction’’ (Kendie and Guri, 2006:333).

• Traditional leaders play a vital role in local and grassroots communities in relations
and are part of the cultural heritage of the people. Here below we focus on the
customary mechanisms of conflict resolution in Africa as well as in Ethiopia.
African Traditional way of Conflict Resolution mechanisms
• According to archeological evidence, Africa is the cradle of humanity.
It therefore stands to reason that Africa had, from time immemorial,
evolved its own mechanisms and institutions for managing and
resolving disputes and conflicts in ways that preserved the fabric of
society and encouraged peaceful co-existence.
• In spite of the effect of modernization, the existing traditional
institutions are yet serving to keep harmonies (Zartman, 2000) and
solidarities among people of a certain society.
• Although sufficient attention is not given to the traditional institutions
even in the post-independence era, however, there are to a little extent
tendencies to incline to use them applying in the contemporary issues.
• An exemplary step to be mentioned in this regard is the application

of gacaca to resolve “modern” conflicts in Rwanda.

The Rwandan society conflict resolution Mechanism

• The Rwandan societies have been using gacaca traditionally for so

long years at a grass root level to handle any sort of conflicts

and/or disputes. The Rwandan government has also recently been

able to apply it in dealing with the most deadly and worst crisis of

1994 which had eventually led to genocide reportedly claimed near

to a million people. Gacaca refers to a traditional Rwandan method

of conflict resolution at a village level.

• In cases of conflict in a Rwanda Community, such as dispute over
land, property damage, material issues, or inheritance rights,
meetings were convened between
aggrieved parties, and presided over by community leaders. The
meetings not only were meant to sanction the
violators of the village norms, but also ensure that those
accused, and found guilty, were again fully accepted as members
of the community. Reconciliation between violators
and their communities was at the core of the traditional Gacaca
system (Ibid:466).
 Ghana- Resolving conflict in Adaboya Traditional Area

These traditional conflict resolutions mechanisms are applicable at Gahana

traditional area. Ghana and the Northern regions in particular have

witnessed the worse forms of intra/inter-ethnic violence. Efforts of

resolving contemporary Ghanaian conflicts are proving futile. This is

because, the efforts are largely top-down and conventional in nature. The

applications of locally traditional knowledge and procedures in conflict

resolution have been very minimal as many prefer the modern law court

system. Conflicts such as dispute over land, marital disputes and witch-craft

accusation exist in Adaboya and the mechanisms of resolving these disputes

are mainly two: Kima and Posiga systems.

The Kima System
• This system is the dominant component of the customary mechanisms of conflict
resolution in Adaboya traditional area. The Kima system is a hierarchical system
made of old people that bear economic, political, and a socio-cultural responsibility
within the community and this system foresees a peaceful and mutual settlement of
disputes between individuals and groups. The Kima encompasses three sub-
divisions of selected elders that oversee a peaceful resolution of conflict. These
divisions include the Yidanduma (landlords), Kinduma and the Naba (Chief).
Depending on what form of conflict, the Yidanduma starts the resolution process,
and if they are unable to settle the dispute, it then moves to the Kinduma for
settlement. The Naba is the last and final authority to settle the dispute when the
Kinduma fails to address it. One elder named Adongo indicated that 'Adaboya has a
chief who administer justice and reins over the land. Also, the family heads are very
important and it is when they failed to resolve family/clan level conflicts that the
• When people go to resolve their problems in the Naba's Palace, they
are often asking to share their grievances. Those who are found guilty
sometimes are asked to pay nothing, and to apologize and allow the
matter to end. Also, some offenders who are poor and cannot pay for
compensation are sometimes set to go home free”. (Source: Field
survey, 2012).
Steps in resolving conflict in Adaboya traditional Area
Posiga systems

• Posiga is a spiritual mechanism that serves as an

alternative and a partner to dispute settlement.
Posiga is used only when disputants refused to obey
the verdict of the Kima particularly the Naba.
There are also many customary conflict resolution mechanism in our world.

For example :- Panchayat in India (Baxi and Gallanter 1979; Moore 1985),

Mediation Committees in China (Li 1978; Clark 1989), and jirga in

Afghanistan (Carter and Connor1989; Elphinstone 1992; Olesen 1995;

Gletzer 1998) that operate as informal mechanisms of conflict resolution

differ from one another significantly. More importantly, all these traditional

forms of conflict resolution are fundamentally different from the ways

conflicts are resolved in much of the Western world (Reichel 1998).

• Generally, customary conflict resolution is a community process
involving the identification of the root cause of the problem, and
bringing all parties involved to address the underlying issues.
This usually ends with the guilty accepting wrong doing, leading to
reconciliation which may include compensation or just forgiveness
(Brock-Utne, 2001; Murthi, 2006).
• In our continent there are as many as possible customary conflict
resolution mechanisms. But we cannot light all of them.
The Ethiopian customary conflict resolution mechanisms

The customary dispute resolution mechanisms are traditional practices

used to resolve conflicts and maintain peace and stability in the
community.
In other words, the customary dispute resolution mechanisms of
Ethiopia function on the basis of local customary practices or cultural
norms. However, due to the multi-ethnic composition of the country, the
customary laws of Ethiopia are different from ethnic group to ethnic
group and as a result they do not have uniform application all over the
country.
 Mode of operation of the customary dispute resolution
mechanisms

The customary dispute/conflict resolution mechanisms of

Ethiopia are handled by elders, non-specialized specialists
to use the words of ”Nils Christie,” who are well known and
respected members of the community and may comprise
religious leaders, wise men and other community leaders
(Fiseha et al. 2011:27). However, their composition,
number, and the procedure they follow may vary from
ethnic group to ethnic group depending on specific local
customs and practices.
To that end, the customary dispute resolution mechanisms involve
different stages which are discussed below.
 Kambata
For instance, the traditional/indigenous/ conflict resolution mechanisms of Ethiopia, are the

Kambata society in the South nations, nationalities and peoples region. This indigenous

institution as to Yacob Arsano (2002) is known as seera. Seera is everything to the kambata

society. It is everything such that it serves as a basis for the political administration, social

interaction and means of conflict resolution within the territory of the society. Yacob (2002)

explains it more comprehensively as: … Seera refers to the code of conduct practiced and

internalized among the Kambata. Relations between individuals, tribes and territorial units are

regulated by seera. It is alternatively known as Marietta, which means commitment to truth. Love

affairs, marriage and family relations, peer group association, work and entertainment parties,

games and sports, hunting bands, etc. Are all bound by seera relevant to the specific activity.

Childcare, socialization of the young, circumcision, initiation and rites of passage are handled as

seera requires. Elders in this regard, according to the rule of seera, are considered to have the

most esteemed and graceful status. It is believed that it is with the lifelong experiences and
 Oromo
• Gada is also the most known political, social and judicial
traditional institution widely practiced among the Oromo people.
Much is said and written in different sources about the democratic
nature of the Gada system. Hamdesa (2000) and Assefa (2005) also
have written that it is an effective institutional system to manage
any source of conflicts among the Oromo so that harmony,
peaceful co-existence and smooth relations would be maintained in
the society. As to Hamdesa (2000), there are thirteen steps on the
way to the whole process of conflict resolution through the use of
the Gada system to finally arrive at reconciliation.
• According to the Gada age-grade system, individuals in the age range
of 40-48 are called Luba and are elders with a social responsibility of
keeping peace and stability within the local community.
• In Borana tradition, natural resources management and conflict
resolution are combined; and as a result of the great respect it receives
from the local communities, this institution is the best institution to
deal with the operation and management aspects of natural resources.
Such conflicts are usually settled by the local elders using the
principles of the Gada System.
• Limited understanding of the role played by the Gada system by the state
has diminished the efficacy and relevance of this customary institution in
conflict management in Oromia in general and in Borana in particular.
• In Borana, the customary laws are often more important than statutory
laws and are relied upon in deciding access rights to natural resources
and in resolving conflicts.
• Neglect of these norms and laws may have negative consequences for
development policy of the nation in general and the local community
who rely on them in particular.

• However, enforcing the statutory rules on the local community

without due consideration for their indigenous norms and values may
have negative consequences.
The following are indigenous conflict resolution mechanism institutions in Sidama
society:
• 1. “Woma” (Hamlet level institution)
• 2. “Gaanna” (Sub-clan institution)
• 3. “Karichcha” (Clan level institution)
• 4. “Garo” (General assemble of clan level institution)
Woma” (Hamlet level institution)

 This institution is organized from the lowest level of society, this is the sum total of
certain families who are frequently interacted with one another and are highly
related by kinship system. Their kinship type is mainly by blood relation. They have
many things in common and their ancestor or older members form organized group
to lead their members.

 The basic duty and responsibility for “Woma” institution is seeing the case of

conflict arise in members, giving train how to speak, listening skills for the young

members, teaching young member such as norms what is right and wrong in

culture, which is allowed and which is not etc In addition to this, “Woma”

institution can settle conflicts among the society such as conflict between wife and

husband, destruction of garden by livestock and quarrel over boundaries of two or

more neighboring members.

“Gaanna” (Sub-clan institution)

• This institution is a little bit wider, more complex, better organized

than “Woma” institution. This institution shared at least same
mythical ancestor and the relation between the members more or less
blood based
• The basic task or responsibilities for “Gaanna” institution are
 Seeing or receiving the appeals
 The issue of rape
 Case of theft and borrowed money
 “Karicha” (Clan level institution)

 “Karicha” institution is wider in scope, more complex in organization,

highly institutionalized, and well formalized. The collection of “Gaanna”
institution formed wider clans’ level institution. Like that of “Gaanna”
Karicha institution shared same mythical ancestor. The only difference is
distance or remoteness of common ancestor. It is possible to form and bring
member of Karichcha institution through marriage ties as well as blood
ties.

 The chief executive for “Karichcha” instituition is “Qara Karichcha”. The

position of chief executive also determined by his orator qualities, ability
of handling problems and making decisions. The place where “Karichcha”
usually held assembles to see the case called “Ayidda ahara” or House of
The basic responsibility for Karichcha institution is:
• a. Religious and administrative matters are deals with.
• b. Issue of murder, any conflict which resulted to death.
• c. Others matter which are difficult for lower levels institutional are
discussed by Karichcha institution.
Like that of “Gaanna” “karichcha” has its own distinguishing quality called “Ayiddu
seera” meaning customary law of clan. It is the law imposed for those individuals who
refuse to accept final decision by proposing un convincing reasons. These legal sanctions
isolated for those individuals to become a member in institutions and any other social
activities. Finally the person remained a social and ritual out caste. This means whatever
difficulty and problem has faced to him, no one is willing to help him. He will not able to
participate on burial ceremonies, his wife is not allowed to borrow anything even fire
from near villages and no one help him for constructing house. Only the means to inter in
to membership is possible through accepting his mistakes and paying cattle for his wrong
activity, preparing invitation, drinking with great deal of expenditure.
“Garo” tribe based institution

• “Garo” institution is highest Supreme Court; highly organized,

institutionalized and well formalized. Marriage relation and blood ties
don’t make the matter but being Sidama is only requirement to belong
to this institution.
• The basic duties and responsibilities for Garo are receiving appeals
from dissatisfied claimants by lower institutions, pray GOD their
forefather sprits on issues concerning weather conditions of the time,
peace, drought, epidemic etc. and Murder case is also the highest
matter to be discussed there.
• The process of seeing the case of murder in this institution is long and
time consuming and it follows the following procedures:
• if someone kill a man, shortly after the incident, elders from the
institution just go directly to the victims family and the elected elders
beg them not to go the court and assured them will solve the problem
with in the traditional institution. Even the family of the victim not
willing to do so, they can’t response negative answer for these
respected elders. Then after, elders took any responsibility to punish
criminals according to their customary law.
After a long period of discussion and appointment on the issue, the
elders bring the criminal and his family to the victim’s house and they
wash both families by cold water. This washing symbolize that there will
be no more revenge took place between them for future. But if there is
no river nearby there, the sister of the murderer will hold a honey and
spray it with a leaf of plant on the victim’s family. This is because in
Sidama culture women is not considered as criminal and enemy. After all
these process, the murderer forced to give money for the victim’s family
and additionally the families give a cow called “Cincote adde” cow of
patience. Also families of the criminal should give money to the council
as a punishment for wrong doing.
• Generally, even those sidaman indigenous conflict resolution
institutions have great role for peace and stability of society
but, in Nowadays, Sidama indigenous institutions are facing

different problem due to modernization/globalization/.

• In the past, such institutions were the center of peace and
security. They were served as schools to gain the value, norm,
belief of the Society. But at this time, the core values of
indigenous/traditional/ institutions are changing due to the above
mentioned factors especially among the young generation.
• There are also many other traditional conflict resolution

institutions in each and every nations, nationalities and ethnic

groups of Ethiopia. These, among others, may include, to list at

least some, as Gereb in Wajerat (Tigray) and Mablo in Ab.ala

of Afar (Kelemework, 2000); Abagar in Southern Wollo

(Netsanet, 2006), Michu in Metekel (Tsega, 2002), Awassia in

Walyta (Mellesse 2008), Afocha in Harar (Biruk and Jira,

2008), Jarsumma and Haffi Hamee in Oromo (Assefa, 2005),

Guma in Waliso Oromo (Dejene, 2007) and so on and so forth.

 Setting customary conflict resolution mechanisms in motion

The customary dispute resolution processes of Ethiopia are set in motion by the

offender him/herself, by his/her family or close relatives; and in some minor

crimes by the victim or his/her family (Regassa et al. 2008:66). When a crime is

committed, the perpetrator, the victim, their respective families, or any third

party observers run to and ask elders to help the settlement of the

conflict (Regassa et al. 2008:66). The community elders will then call the

parties to some public place or in the case of a serious crime, go to the victim’s

and/or his/her family’s home to persuade them into resolving the matter

peacefully. In serious crimes, such as homicide, the victim’s family may not

initially be willing to engage in the customary dispute resolution processes and

may demand retaliation against the victim or his/her relatives.

In almost all of the Ethiopian societies, revenge is a culturally accepted instrument

for redressing injury, and the men of the victim’s side are duty bound to take

vengeance against the killer or one of the killer’s close relatives (Zeleke 2010:73).

Since killing one’s family member is regarded as challenging the dignity of the

whole family or relatives, the victim’s relatives should prove their wondinet

(manhood), and restore their dignity by taking vengeance (Zeleke 2010:73). This

cultural duty to take revenge is aggravated by praising a person who kills the killer

or one of the killer’s family members as hero, for he/she restores the dignity of

his/her family; and by belittling and insulting those who did not take avenging

action as cowards (Zeleke 2010:73).

Consequently, the victim’s family may not easily submit to

the customary dispute resolution mechanisms in the first

instance. However, the elders insist and pressurize them to

come to the process, and mostly do not leave without

getting their consent to come to the peaceful settlement

(Kebede 2012). Once the victim or his/her family agrees to

engage in the process of the customary dispute resolution,

the actual deliberation and reconciliation stage will start.

 strength

• As we discussed above CCRM have great role in

maintaining peace and keeping the stability of society.
• Supporting the modern justices system.

• It provide felling of obedience to the society.

• restoring the previous peaceful relationship within the

community as well as maintaining their future peaceful
relationships by avoiding the culturally accepted practices
of revenge.
 Shortcomings
• Though the customary dispute resolution mechanisms are useful
tools for administering justice in Ethiopia as discussed above, they
are not without shortcomings.
• limited legal recognition

• The limitations are mainly related to the non-compliance with

human rights standards, and particularly to the unequal treatment
of women and men.
• Limited gender and youth involvement, and mostly women and
youths play ancillary roles due to patriarchy.
• Limited awareness as customary conflict resolution looked upon
• By and large, customary conflict resolutions are
playing a very significant role in resolving conflict.
In a state which cannot provide justice at the
grassroots level due to lack of capacity – resulting
from a lack of legal officials and funds, as well as
other reasons – the role of the traditional institutions
is very significant. The customary institutions in
many parts of the world have responded to this