Access to Justice: Why Do Most Africans Rely on Informal Legal Systems?

In the dusty streets of Kafue, a town on the outskirts of Lusaka, Zambia, two women sit beneath a tree, arbitrating a land dispute that has quietly brewed for three years. There is no judge, no courtroom, no gown or gavel—just wisdom, trust, and deep-rooted custom. In a continent where over 70% of legal disputes are resolved outside formal courtrooms, this scene is not unusual. It is the norm.

Across Africa, millions of people rely on informal legal systems—traditional leaders, family elders, religious mediators, and community-based structures—to resolve disputes. But why? Why, in a time of constitutional democracies and international legal treaties, do Africans still turn to these ancestral frameworks for justice?

This paper seeks to uncover the truth behind this quiet preference, drawing from historical roots, modern realities, and real-time stories that paint a more accurate picture of Africa’s justice landscape.

Historical Context: Justice Before the Gavel

Before colonization carved modern legal systems into African soil, indigenous communities had their own methods of resolving disputes. In Ghana, chiefs and elders held “palaver sessions” to mediate land or family disputes. In Ethiopia, the Shimglina system—a council of wise elders—still commands respect. In Nigeria, the Igbo and Hausa communities each have unique and rich justice traditions deeply embedded in their governance.

Colonial rule often sidelined these systems, branding them primitive. Yet they endured. Why? Because they spoke the language of the people—culturally, socially, and literally. Unlike foreign courts, these systems understood not only what happened, but why it happened, and how to restore harmony rather than assign blame.

The Modern Landscape: What the Numbers Say

A 2023 World Bank and UNDP report revealed that in countries like Uganda, Kenya, and Sierra Leone, over 80% of citizens rely on informal mechanisms to resolve legal disputes. These mechanisms address everything from land and inheritance conflicts to domestic violence, debt, and community offenses.

• In Uganda, 90% of justice seekers rely on traditional and informal systems.

• In Ghana, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) estimates that less than 30% of citizens access courts for civil matters.

• In Sierra Leone, local chiefs resolve up to 85% of all community-level disputes.

DON’T MISS THIS : Illegally obtained evidence

Real Stories: Justice That Feels Like Home

1. A Widow’s Land Dispute – Malawi

When Agness Tembo’s husband died, her in-laws seized her farmland, claiming it belonged to the family. With no money to hire a lawyer or even pay for transport to the nearest magistrate court 80km away, she turned to the village headman. In three weeks, her case was heard in a community gathering, and a verdict was given restoring her land. “He spoke to both sides. He listened. He prayed with us. That was justice,” she told Legal Africa.

2. Street Justice in Nairobi – Kenya

In the Korogocho slum of Nairobi, where police rarely respond to non-violent crimes, local youth leaders and religious figures have created what they call “justice tents.” These informal gatherings are often the only legal help residents can access. “Courts are too far, too expensive, and too slow. Here, we solve problems and keep the peace,” said David Wainaina, a local peace mediator.

3. The Alkalos of The Gambia

In The Gambia, local village leaders called Alkalos still wield the most influence in dispute resolution. The National Council of Elders works hand-in-hand with the government to administer a hybrid model of traditional and statutory justice. “We don’t throw people in jail; we restore families,” one elder told us.

Why Africans Rely on Informal Systems

1. Accessibility
   Most rural communities are miles away from the nearest courthouse. Transport costs, court fees, and procedural complexity make formal systems inaccessible for the average person.

2. Affordability
   Hiring a lawyer is a luxury. Informal justice is often free or costs significantly less.

3. Speed
   Cases that would take months or years in formal courts can be resolved in days through traditional mediation.

4. Cultural Relevance
   Traditional systems use local languages, reflect community values, and focus on reconciliation over punishment.

5. Trust
   Many citizens see formal courts as corrupt, alien, and intimidating. Informal systems are familiar and rooted in community trust.

Challenges and Criticisms

However, informal systems are not without flaws.

• Gender bias is rampant in some communities where patriarchal norms still dominate. Women often face discrimination in inheritance and domestic violence cases.

• Inconsistency in rulings and lack of legal training among arbitrators can lead to injustices.

• Lack of legal recognition makes it difficult to enforce some decisions or escalate cases to formal systems.

Bridging the Divide: A Call for Integration

Rather than choosing one system over the other, several African countries are now exploring hybrid justice models:

• Rwanda’s Gacaca courts, used after the genocide, blended traditional values with state oversight to deliver justice to millions.

• Kenya’s 2010 Constitution recognizes traditional dispute resolution mechanisms under Article 159.

• South Africa’s Traditional Courts Bill, though controversial, attempts to formalize customary dispute resolution within a legal framework.

These hybrid systems offer an opportunity to ensure that justice is not only accessible but also accountable.

Final Thought: Justice Must Make Sense to the People

The preference for informal legal systems is not merely a rejection of modernity. It is a call for justice that speaks the language of the people, reflects their values, and is within their reach. The question, then, is not whether traditional systems should exist—but how we can make them work better for everyone.

To achieve true access to justice in Africa, we must invest in reforming and integrating informal systems, training local mediators, protecting vulnerable groups, and creating legal pathways between traditional and formal courts.

Justice, after all, should not just be heard—it should be felt.