Bridging the gap between traditional, modern conflict resolutions in Africa

Currently Africa is confronted with the increasing number of states that have to deal with social conflicts. The weak institutions in these states may not be able to deal with the demands that arise from conflicts. It is in this context that the relationship between traditional and modern state institutions is being observed. Experts stress that the continuous role and influence of traditional leadership in modern Africa is difficult to avoid. However, the relationship between the state and traditional institutions may not be taken for granted as it is filled with socio-political complexities.

The traditional social institutions are deeply rooted in the culture and history of African countries, including Ethiopia. The modern state imposes a huge influence on these traditional institutions. In a few cases these institutions are involved in politics and have turned into instruments of propagating state ideology. These institutions had been used by the previous Ethiopian governments for disseminating state policies and programs.

In cases where African people express dissent with the ruling party through the traditional institutions, they have often been undermined by the government. However, the distinctiveness of traditional institutions, because of their locality and use of local persons, has enabled them to resist the local authorities. These traditional institutions, also known as local conflict resolution mechanisms have continued to show their relevance in post-conflict situations. This has been true in weak states that have been overwhelmed with state-building activities. There is, therefore, no consistently applicable formula regarding the relationships between the state and traditional institutions.

Yet, a relationship exists between the state and the traditional institutions as revealed in Ethiopia. Experts think that understanding this relationship may be crucial in the promotion of sustainable peace in post-conflict Africa. Thus, the major means of understanding the relationship between the two entities is to examine the influence and impacts of traditional systems on modern structures of governance and conflict resolution.

Experts are of the opinion that it is natural for scholars, politicians, and policy makers to think about the relevance of traditional conflict resolution in Africa. The common people of the continent are confronted with conflicts the causes of which they may not know. Even analysts of traditional conflict resolution are not able to derive the real causes and effects of conflicts from the people embroiled in them.

The studies also refer to the traditional conflict resolution mechanisms as institutions and processes that are inward looking and secretive. They seem to have existed in a political and structural vacuum. Some studies have focused on the hybrid nature of the relationships between state structures and traditional institutions. These institutions are fully involved in governance, justice and conflict resolution within the Ethiopian society. There are unique patterns of interactions between authorities and local traditional institutions of conflict resolution. They deserve particular attention in view of their relevance the pre and post-conflict phases.

Studies focus on the role of traditional institutions that continued to be relevant for conflict resolution. The traditional institutions can play varied roles in preventing and resolving conflicts as mentioned earlier. Studies that focused on the Horn of Africa, highlighted the disputes that precipitated by the struggle of states to become more viable and democratic. These studies pointed out the resilience of traditional institutions of governance continued to challenge the judicial institutions in Africa.

Experts have examined how some traditional leaders have practiced ceremonies and customary practices with modern judicial processes. These experts have attributed some of these changes to the introduction and of western legal systems and judicial processes in the Horn countries, including Ethiopia. They developed mechanisms for comparing the traditional peace keeping methods with the modern ones. They discussed the interactions between the modern, formal court systems and how the state supports the operations of the traditional ones.

The traditional conflict mediation and resolution systems existed in the pre- and post-colonial era and governments deliberately re-instituted traditional mediation through statutory instruments. This gave the traditional institutions multiple advantages and effects. Experts have identified the complexities that are associated with combining a cultural and modern conflict resolution processes that are mandated by the governments in some of the Horn countries.

However, the attention given to the benefits of the traditional conflict resolution at village levels has localized justice. This has been a major concern for the governments of the Horn, making them wary of local level judicial processes. This is one of the side effects of combining modern and traditional processes in handling conflicts at the local levels. This seems to be real in a situation where the extent of traditional conflict resolution is extended widely. Experts argued that traditional institutions in the Horn region, especially elders, play a critical role in resolving conflicts between clans and sub-clans as practices in Ethiopia.

The experts have underlined the cultural fusions between the state and local traditional structures by discussing how the state administrations rely upon the peace committees composed of elders. These elders monitor conflict and promote peace building mechanisms. However, there may be inherent contradictions that define the interactions between the state at the national level and the traditional leaders at the local level. These challenges include the duplication of duties of the formal state and traditional institutions.

In other words, when the same individuals play “dual role” and occupy different offices, they are bound to create confusion due to duplication of duties. Also, the question of accountability arises when the same individual reports to two entities: the state and the traditional institution. In some of the Horn countries, including Ethiopia, the state pays attention to the role of the traditional legal system in addressing lower level offences. These are offenses that were committed during conflict, skirmishes, clashes and quarrels.

Some of the governments of the Horn countries respect the grassroots system of arbitration that focuses on reconciliation and the restoration. This system maintains the social relationships in the communities, including Ethiopian neighborhoods, localities and districts. Experts have argued that the local arbitration system would enable these communities to find justice near their residence. This system is considered “restorative, conciliatory and community-based” that encourages building the peace in communities engaged in conflicts.

Experts also emphasize the relevance of the traditional reconciliation system to the current modern judicial system with its emphasis on “restoration with compensation” for losses or damages incurred due to conflicts. Relying on the application of the traditional system of justice, experts concluded that it is possible to maintain peace and justice in African countries, including Ethiopia, in post-war period.

Experts have explored the role of indigenous techniques on maintaining peace within rural communities. They have investigated the traditional techniques of conflict resolution of farmer and pastoralist disputes. Experts also examined the traditional processes which are used to address environmental and resource related conflicts in the Horn countries, including Ethiopia. They draw attention to the nature and practice of conflicts that change at various levels. These may be including community leaders, elders and government officials, depending on the nature of the disputes.

In this regard, the experts have proposed the need to consider using community leaders to resolve larger-scale tribal conflicts in the Horn area. The customary mediation and how these conflicts are addressed by these methods are major challenges. However, the traditional institutions of conflict resolution have demonstrated their resilience and utility in the twenty-first century in “post-colonial and post-conflict” Africa.

These traditional institutions are likely to serve in the resolution of political conflicts in Africa. Experts debate over the connections between traditional and modern structures of governance and conflict resolution in the continent. Readers will also emerge with questions and perhaps ideas for further research on how to use these connections. Social researches are conducted on traditional conflict resolution mechanisms with the objective of maintaining peace and stability. To realize this objective, experts have utilized case-study approaches based on data collection, observation, interview, focused-group discussion and document analysis. These experts analyzed and interpreted the implications of data collected from the traditional institutions. According to the data collected from the interview and focus group discussion, traditional conflict resolution mechanism has several advantages over the laws of the governments in the Horn region.

The studies reflect a few of the advantages, including restoration of peace and stability based on revelation of facts about conflicts. The researchers discovered that there has been no standardized mechanism to fix penalties or compensation for various conflicts. Moreover, there has been lack of supportive measures from the governments to the local elders handling social conflicts. This is one of the major weaknesses of the institution as the information obtained from key informants.

Therefore, it is recommended that all the stakeholders should be responsible to solve the weakness of traditional conflict resolution mechanisms in the Horn region. Official and legal support should be given to these traditional institutions as they are respected and accepted by the African societies. They may need material and financial support, including offices with fixed working days and hours. The experience of Ethiopia where traditional conflict resolution methods are merged with modern ones is useful for conflict resolution in Africa. It may be used with modern diplomacy in AU mediated peace processes.

BY GETACHEW MINAS

THE ETHIOPIAN HERALD WEDNESDAY 4 JUNE 2025

Recommended For You