| Summary: | AbstractThe global spread of conflict is unimaginable, and Africa is especially plagued with this conundrum. In the West African sub-region, traditional and formal (inherited/western) adjudicatory institutions operate independently of each other in the same environment irrespective of the fact that both institutions function to create an ordered society for the same group of persons. Evidence shows that efforts made over the years to integrate the operations of the two institutions in the context of conflict resolution in Ghana have proven unsuccessful. The aim of this paper is to proffer an appropriate framework that could enable the traditional and western adjudicatory institutions to build synergies to resolve conflicts. Data was collected using in-depth interviews with key informants and FGDs. Using a qualitative research design approach, 27 respondents including chiefs, tengandem (earth priests), and technocrats (practicing lawyers, court administrators, Commission of Human Rights and Administrative Justice) working in western adjudicatory institutions were contacted and interviewed. The thematic analytical approach was used to analyse data. The results revealed that the traditional and western adjudicatory institutions have not been able to build synergies to resolve conflicts due to mistrust, lack of capacity and recognition of traditional actors, and the power play between the two adjudicatory institutions. The study concludes by recommending a hybrid regime where the two adjudicatory institutions could come together to resolve conflicts.
|
|---|