NCJ Number
87772
Date Published
1982
Length
20 pages
Annotation
Establishment of village courts in Papua New Guinea in the postcolonial period constituted a shift from consensual to authoritarian types of dispute settlement but a continuation of types of settlement, all based on conserving the communal mode of production.
Abstract
In the precolonial period, the stateless, rural societies used mediation processes based on consensus and containing the main elements of legality. Although the colonial period introduced the capitalist mode of production, State action and local economics served to conserve the communal mode in order to exploit it more effectively. In this period, colonial field officers operated low-level courts as part of a coercive and authoritarian regime of native administration. Communal dispute settlement was officially seen as illegal or, at best, outside of the law. However, communal dispute settlement continued unabated due to the weakness of the colonial State. Establishment of the village courts in the postcolonial period represented an effort both to recognize communal dispute settlement and to regulate it. However, the courts' actual operations are contrary to the communal type of settlement they were supposed to maintain. The courts are characterized by excessive formality and use adjudication as the main mode of dispute resolution. Despite the immediate success of the village court system, its long-term prospects are limited. Communal production remain dominant at the local level, and people in some areas are perceiving the court as an instrument of the elite and as a method of control and coercion by the State. No references are cited.