Resource information
This paper provides an analysis of the effectiveness and equitability of West African judicial, legal and administrative institutions for:providing accessible dispute resolutionprotecting the security of the urban and rural poor to hold and use land.The authors compare legislation of customary and non-state regulatory institutions in Ghana, with the greater Pluralism of Côte d’Ivoire. They also pose the question as to whether the revival of customary systems or the introduction of local Alternative Dispute Resolution Systems (ADRS) can offer protection against uncertainty and arbitrary dispossession.A series of policy implications are drawn from the research findings. For Ghana’s state court’s, these include:the magistrate’s courts are the key ‘front-line’ institutions at local and rural levels there is potential for state-supported and enforced Alternative Dispute Resolution Systems (ADRS).For the Côte d’Ivoire court system, policy implications include:courts are an alternative to political conflict as they could satisfy demands for impartial justice, provided enforcement was effectiveADRS will be difficult to develop but could be considered.The overall conclusion is that state courts serve a real need for authoritative remedies and should be enhanced and supported. The introduction of ADRS also needs state support. Customary or traditional justice systems have played a key role in protecting land rights where they have been legalised by the state, as in Ghana.
