Historically, in many traditional African societies,
individual identities were derived from larger group identities such as clans,
tribes, villages, and different social classifications. These groups emphasized rectitude and good behavior,
and that influenced their judicial system, which favored harmony among the
people. Disputes were mainly settled between individuals.
I am careful not to present Africa as one homogenous
community, cognizant of the fact that the continent is often misrepresented as
one big country, with one culture.
However, I can safely say that Africans are extremely
involved in the social life of their communities, a trend that is very evident
among African immigrants in the United States, who replicate African
Communities, form clusters of vibrant groups of people and exhibit a strong
sense of community.
Historically, the communities have been involved in
the decentralized justice processes. The
traditional authority systems encourage the community to take an active role in
resolving the conflicts and fixing the harm done. It is common for people to approach justice
through a restorative lens by making the victim central and focusing on their
needs and how they can be met, while maintaining the unity of the community,
clan or village.
In the past, it was normal to witness ritual feasting as the
outcome of a process of reconciliation.
This is possibly due to the fact that in many African
societies, neighbors, relatives and friends depended on each other. They raised
each other’s children, harvested on each other’s farms, contributed to each other’s
social events, and so it was only natural that they resolved conflicts
together, through neighborhood “courts”. They focused on resolving conflicts
through mediation, as opposed to pronouncing judgement, characteristic of their
strong sense of community.
The approach to these cases was:
§ Involve dialogue and the community (Mediation and
adjudication)
§ Promote individual and societal healing, through
reconciliation. This sometimes ended with a meal or feast to confirm the start
of the reconciliation process.
§ Emphasize harm & resulting obligations
§ Keep victims’ needs and interests central
§ Encourage offenders to understand and
take responsibility
for harm
Despite the weakening of pre-colonial indigenous
restorative justice mechanisms by colonization, it is still evident to date.
For example, my mother, was, until recently, a chairperson of the Local
council, a village level administration of the country’s very decentralized
structure, and when people in our “village” had disputes within the family or
with neighbors, they came to our house to present their cases, hoping for a
dispute resolution and some form of reconciliation. As a family, we offered refreshments or food
to the victim and the offender, as needed, depending on the timing of their
cases at our home.
The community I grew up in rarely opted for
retributive justice.
There were many cases of retributive justice in the African
societies too, but today, when we look at retribution, we agree that it worsens
wounds because it separates justice from healing.
In modern East Africa, cultural and
decentralized restorative forms of justice have played a big role in reconstructing
social order in some post-conflict societies in Rwanda, Uganda, South Africa,
and others. Rwanda’s Gacaca restorative process, after the 1994 genocide,
played a significant role in curbing the retaliatory feeling of
those who lost their loved ones. Uganda adopted an agreement on grass-roots reconciliation
with the former Lord’s Resistance Army rebels. These are transitional processes
of healing from very serious crimes like genocide that have negatively impacted
the lives of people in these communities.
Vivian Kobusingye Birchall
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment!