Traditional Justice System Research Articles

MODELOS DE CALIDAD APLICADOS AL SERVICIO DE MEDIACIÓN EN MÉXICO

El presente artículo es una investigación que posee un enfoque meramente cualitativo, parte de un diseño no experimental, bajo un nivel documental-bibliográfico trasversal. Tiene por objetivo general analizar los principales modelos de evaluación de la calidad y definir cuál de ellos ha sido aplicado para evaluar el servicio de mediación en México. Tras la revisión de la literatura y el análisis documental se determinó que: Los principales modelos de calidad de índole nacional e internacional, aún no han sido aplicados para evaluar el servicio mediación, ya que están enfocados en evaluar un contexto general como lo es el sistema de justicia tradicional y otros rubros relacionados a la comercialización de productos y servicios. Sin embargo, se determinó que la calidad del servicio de mediación ha sido evaluada por modelos estandarizados, desarrollados por algunas investigaciones académicas. Se concluye que en México existe la necesidad de implementar modelos rigurosos y estandarizados encargados de evaluar al servicio de mediación, con la finalidad de obtener una certificación nacional e internacional que ratifique a las instituciones que cumplen con los estándares de calidad.

Restorative justice for juvenile offenders in China: Current practices and challenges

ABSTRACT In recent decades, restorative justice has gained considerable recognition worldwide and has become a prominent option for diverting juveniles away from the traditional criminal justice system as well as delivering fair and just outcomes in the justice process. This paper provides an overview of how the criminal justice system operates for juvenile offenders in the People’s Republic of China (hereafter, China). Based on a sophisticated literature review of recent Chinese academic journal articles on restorative justice for juveniles, the paper presents an analysis of the characteristics and operational procedures of current practices. Deficits and potential future developments pertaining to Chinese restorative practices for delinquents are also discussed.

Ethnography of Panchayat: Cases of Khula from Mandi Baha-Ud-Din

Panchayat is the epicenter of local Politiology that serves as a traditional and indigenous system of conflict resolution at the village level in Pakistan. Khula (divorce) is one of the social issues that are mostly handled by the panchayat besides the presence of a legal system: both institutions stay anonymous to each other. The study is conducted in Mandi Baha Uddin to understand the significance of Panchayat as a local level trusted institution meant for arbitration using qualitative approach. The methodology of the study was descriptive where case study and in-depth interview methods were used. The study findings endorse that Panchayat is an indigenous powerful political institution that can adjoin with the development sector in providing justice about agriculture, forestry, and welfare projects. It can serve more efficiently with the support from the legal justice system. Execution of decisions by the traditional justice system can only be effective once streamlined for better and owned decisions at the community level politics.

Gender Identity and the Issues of Acceptance in Pakistani Community

irga is a unique traditional justice system, the word “JIRGA” in Shina (local language) means Arbitration in English. Its employees a process of dispute settlement with the intervention of notables of the society followed by the free consent of the disputing parties. This study was carried out to study the structure and functioning of Jirga system. Researcher adopted the purposive sampling technique and collects the data from 36 respondents; area of the study was Haramosh Gilgit-Baltistan. Study focus the Jirga system and its implications; researcher designed the questioner to investigate the validity and accountability of Jirga system. Study defines the merits and demerits of Jirga system.

A Sociological Study of Jirga System in Haramosh Gilgit Baltistan

irga is a unique traditional justice system, the word “JIRGA” in Shina (local language) means Arbitration in English. Its employees a process of dispute settlement with the intervention of notables of the society followed by the free consent of the disputing parties. This study was carried out to study the structure and functioning of Jirga system. Researcher adopted the purposive sampling technique and collects the data from 36 respondents; area of the study was Haramosh Gilgit-Baltistan. Study focus the Jirga system and its implications; researcher designed the questioner to investigate the validity and accountability of Jirga system. Study defines the merits and demerits of Jirga system.

Protecting Traditional Knowledge in Kenya: Traditional Justice Systems As Appropriate Sui Generis Systems

Protecting Traditional Knowledge in Kenya: Traditional Justice Systems As Appropriate Sui Generis Systems

Navajo peacemaking: the revival of a traditional justice system

En janvier 2010, le gouvernement navajo (à la tête de la plus vaste nation amérindienne aux États-Unis) a autorisé la construction de trois nouvelles prisons, beaucoup plus importantes que celles déjà présentes sur leur territoire. Cet article analyse comment la construction de ces prisons peut être vue comme un instrument d'exercice du pouvoir par les autorités navajos, au sein d'une société dans une situation (post)coloniale (en éclairant par là le rapport avec l'État fédéral). Depuis 1982, le gouvernement navajo a intégré au système juridique en place un mode de résolution des conflits basé sur la conciliation et désigné comme plus « traditionnel » : le peacemaking (Hózhóji Naat’aah). Face à une justice tribale jusqu’ici calquée sur le modèle étasunien et dans ce contexte d’expansion carcérale, nous montrerons comment la revendication d’un mode navajo de résolution des conflits, constitue un véritable enjeu pour les acteurs impliqués dans le peacemaking.

SISTEM MEDIASI DALAM PERADILAN ADAT ACEH

Adat as a traditional justice system, is one way to resolve disputes in the communitypeacefully ou tside the court, through a process of mediation or peace. The tradition which isIndonesian wisdom continues to live and develop. But in its implementation it often facesvarious problems, suchas, obstacles to the recognition of customary court decisions by lawenforcement, as well as synchronization between judicial institutions. The mediation systemthrough customary justice if properly functioned, will solve various problems quickly, cheaplyand fairly. Various problems that occur, related to customary justice, can be resolved, if there aregood wishes between state institutions

Alternative to Dispute Resolution: Ṣàngó and Amadioha and the Nigerian Criminal Justice System

Sango and Amadioha, the Yoruba and Igbo god of thunder and lightning are the administrators of justice within their domiciled cultural spaces. Before the advent of colonialism which introduces the British common law, African values and custom checkmated corruption and other forms of lawlessness. The adoption of the British legal system as the Nigerian legal system jettisons the African traditional justice system which manages disputes and conflicts within the African socio-cultural space through deities like Sango and Amadioha. The jettison of the African methods of conflict resolutions leads to some of the ambiguities and inconsistencies in the adjudication and delivery of justice experience today in Nigeria. The paper interrogated the modern methods of adjudication which takes its cue from the British common law in contradistinction with African traditional justice system governed by Sango and Amadioha through various texts and argues that the gods, Sango and Amadioha, are purveyors of justice and the standards of their adjudication are premised on the virtues of truth and impartiality; therefore should be adopted as an alternative to dispute resolution. Key Words: African traditional justice, Amadioha, British common law, Sango

Neither boat nor barbeque: in search of new language to unleash the transformative possibility of restorative justice

ABSTRACTRestorative justice (RJ) has emerged as a justice approach designed to address some of the perceived inequity and marginalization engendered by traditional retributive justice systems. However, grounding restorative justice philosophy and practice in linguistic and discursive formulations of ‘justice’ cannot be disentangled from historical actions, systems, and narratives that use such language to simultaneously produce and exacerbate marginalization, oppression, and exclusion. Drawing on J.L. Austin’s classic theory of language and Ferdinand de Saussure’s concept of semiotics, this article argues that the current linguistic environment of RJ may prevent it from accomplishing true societal transformation as a social movement. Using the linguistic examples of ‘boat’ and ‘barbeque’ to help elucidate the limiting aspects of restorative justice language, we then introduce the concepts of linguistic abstractions and conversational domains as pathways to liberate restorative justice from the limiting constraints of its languaging. By introducing three central questions, we provide an inquiry framework that offers related concepts of public health, permaculture, racecraft, and satyagraha to demonstrate how alternative languaging may be needed to fully achieve the aspirational possibilities of ‘restorative justice.’

COMMUNITY-DRIVEN MODELS FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE

AbstractThe U.S. criminal justice system is defined and fueled by foundations and principles that uphold harmful power dynamics such as white supremacy, further destabilizing communities that face intersecting structural barriers. This paternalistic system is characterized by the imposition of punishments—including fees, fines, penalties, and deprivation of freedom and even life—that are meted out disproportionally to people of color and people living in poverty. More often than not, policymakers and justice practitioners fail to solicit the views, experiences, and expertise of community members and justice system-involved individuals, leading to policies and practices crafted under the auspices of promoting safety that undermine community stability instead. Consistent with Square One ’s charge to “reimagine how we create justice,” this paper describes approaches that communities around the country employ to craft, lead, and participate in their own public safety strategies. The paper will offer examples of crime prevention work, investment and divestment efforts, and policy reform initiatives developed and guided by people most likely to experience crime and the heavy hammer of the traditional justice system. This paper will explore the promises, strengths, and challenges associated with each approach, presenting a range of creative strategies for residents—in partnership with the broader community of advocates, activists, and researchers—to adapt, own, and implement.

Beyond personal reform: Adolescent drug-law offenders and the desistance process

While much research on desistance addresses processes of change for repeat offenders during and after imprisonment, this article applies insights from desistance studies to novice offenders outside the traditional justice system. In Norway, increasing numbers of adolescent drug-law offenders have been diverted to alternative justice systems over the last decade. Based on in-depth interviews with youth enrolled in programmes to help them refrain from drug use, the article seeks to identify how the early-stage desistance process is understood by would-be desisters. Rather than ascribing the rehabilitative programmes’ direct impact on their behaviour and thinking, the adolescents emphasised the importance of restoring relationships with parents and overcoming legal barriers. Accordingly, the analysis shows how concerns with personal reform were outweighed by (i) social and (ii) legal concerns. While the precedence of external concerns over personal reform may reflect the participants’ age and level of criminal involvement, it also reflects a particular culture of intervention.

(Re) Configuring ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution’ as ‘Appropriate Dispute Resolution’: Some Wayside Reflections

The discourse on alternative dispute resolution systems has been characterised by two misconceptions that this paper will seek to unpack; Mischaracterization of ADR as alternative, and the failure by its supporters and critics to give it a jurisprudential foundation. In the absence of a jurisprudential foundation and proper characterization, ADR has been mistaken to be an ad hoc and secondary means of resolving conflict whenever parties find the courts to be inappropriate, expensive, cumbersome or unable to arrive at a proper outcome in a legal dispute. However as will be demonstrated in later sections of this paper, what is christened as ADR is actually the normal and mainstream response to disputes .In fact in some instances, courts resort to ADR when they realize that the dispute at hand has underlying socio-cultural and psychological factors that are outside the domain of law. For conceptual clarity, this article excludes all court sanctioned forms of ADR such as court annexed mediation and arbitration. To this end it is anchored upon informal forms of ADR such as mediation, conciliation negotiation and traditional justice systems.

The third time a charm? Traditional Courts Bill 2017

This article discusses the latest version of the Traditional Courts Bill introduced by Parliament in 2017. It examines several fundamental objections to previous versions of the Bill to explain the progress that has thus far been made. In a much-welcomed improvement, the 2017 Bill provides a mechanism for individuals to opt out of the traditional justice system. Nonetheless, the recognition of the old apartheid homeland boundaries is perpetuated, as only courts convened by a traditional leader, whose power and jurisdiction are based on the old tribal boundaries, are recognised. A notable change is that there are no longer appeals to the magistrates’ courts. Parties may appeal a decision to a higher customary court or apply for a review of a decision to the high court. This calls into question the accessibility and affordability of appeals, and essentially locks people into the traditional justice system after the commencement of proceedings. The bar on legal representation continues under the 2017 Bill, which remains objectionable given that traditional courts may still deal with criminal matters. However, the powers of traditional courts in granting sanctions have been significantly circumscribed and regulated. Thus, while the 2017 Bill represents a significant development of previous versions of the Bill, there is still room for improvement.

The third time a charm? Traditional Courts Bill 2017

This article discusses the latest version of the Traditional Courts Bill introduced by Parliament in 2017. It examines several fundamental objections to previous versions of the Bill to explain the progress that has thus far been made. In a much-welcomed improvement, the 2017 Bill provides a mechanism for individuals to opt out of the traditional justice system. Nonetheless, the recognition of the old apartheid homeland boundaries is perpetuated, as only courts convened by a traditional leader, whose power and jurisdiction are based on the old tribal boundaries, are recognised. A notable change is that there are no longer appeals to the magistrates’ courts. Parties may appeal a decision to a higher customary court or apply for a review of a decision to the high court. This calls into question the accessibility and affordability of appeals, and essentially locks people into the traditional justice system after the commencement of proceedings. The bar on legal representation continues under the 2017 Bill, which remains objectionable given that traditional courts may still deal with criminal matters. However, the powers of traditional courts in granting sanctions have been significantly circumscribed and regulated. Thus, while the 2017 Bill represents a significant development of previous versions of the Bill, there is still room for improvement.

Remembering West African indigenous knowledges and practices in citizenship education research

Democratic citizenship education is of key concern in many societies, particularly with the adoption of global citizenship education in the United Nations’ Education First Initiative. There have been particular critiques that current frameworks for understanding citizenship fail to account for civic understandings and practices in both African and African Diasporic societies. In this paper I share examples of indigenous civic knowledges and practices from societies within West Africa, the main nexus of the African diaspora. To illustrate the rich contexts societies have related to rights and political participation, I examine Adinkra symbols from the Akan in Ghana, and the Mande Charter of 1222, from what is now Mali. I then illustrate including indigenous knowledges in empirical research via a study of citizenship education in Liberia that included questions about traditional justice in a survey instrument, demonstrating varying access to traditional justice systems by gender.

The Constitutional Divide of Postapartheid South Africa in the Jurisdiction of the Traditional Justice System

The exclusive jurisdiction of the traditional justice system – which in effect is based on racial classification – has been the subject of debate in South Africa since the attainment of democracy in 1994. The debate is drawn from the Constitution, which recognises the general system of customary law, and limits its application to the people who observe it. The debate is further fuelled by the non-explicit recognition of the customary court system within the judicial structure of the Republic. These courts are inferred from the concept of ‘any other courts’ in the Constitution. The inference of customary courts from ‘any other courts’, compromises the legitimate status of these courts in the resolution of disputes that arise from the system of customary law – in line with the ideals of the new constitutional dispensation. This considered, this article critically reviews the constitutional status of the customary court system in South Africa. The objective is to examine the effect of its exclusive jurisdiction in the application of the principles of traditional justice. It is also limited to the review of South Africa’s constitutional perspective on the protection of customary law relating to the advancement of the traditional justice system. It is argued, therefore, that the exclusive jurisdiction of the traditional justice system is a direct racial classification under the guise of the foundational values of the new democratic dispensation. Equally, the status given to customary courts – which is inferred from the concepts of ‘any other’ – constitutes a manifestation of the historic divide that compromises the legitimacy of these courts in the application of traditional justice. The extent, to which the exclusive jurisdiction can move towards a system that inclusively reflects the values of the new democratic dispensation, is also reviewed in general.

Justice and Post LRA War in Northern Uganda: ICC Versus Acholi Traditional Justice System

Justice and Post LRA War in Northern Uganda: ICC Versus Acholi Traditional Justice System

A Qualitative Study of the Crime-control Potency of Traditional Justice System in Oshogbo

A Qualitative Study of the Crime-control Potency of Traditional Justice System in Oshogbo

Reclaiming a restorative understanding of the victim–offender dichotomy

In this paper I examine the skepticism about the victim-offender dichotomy advanced in a number of papers in this special issue. I argue that, from being a relic of the traditional justice system, ...