Legal pluralism, conflict resolution, and human rights an exploration of the traditional conflict resolution approach of the Nabdam of Ghana

Abstract

This study sought to examine how the Nabdam traditional approach to conflict resolution using chiefs and elders protects and or abuses the human rights of disputants when they are employing it to resolve their interpersonal conflicts. The study was anchored on the social interpretivist/constructivist philosophical viewpoint and the qualitative research paradigm. The design was a case study and involved a sample of thirty (30) persons consisting of five (5) chiefs, ten (10) elders, and fifteen (15) disputants drawn from five traditional areas in the Nabdam District employing the census, lottery, convenient, and purposive sampling methods. The instruments of structured interview, focused-group discussion, group discussion and observation were employed to gather the needed data from the respondents. The data obtained from the administration of the instruments was analyzed thematically in line with the research questions. Some key findings from the study included that the Nabdam traditional approach to conflict resolution; has a well-structured procedure, is administered by only males, greatly protects and respects the human rights of disputants, and has prospects into the future due to geographical and financial accessibilities as well as familiarity reasons. A major conclusion drawn from the study was that the Nabdam area is a legal pluralistic society but with a higher inclination to the traditional approach to conflicts resolution for their interpersonal conflict settlement even in a modern era. It was therefore recommended that various measures should be put in place by governmental institutions and agencies as well as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) to make the Nabdam traditional approach to conflict resolution adequately protect the rights of disputants.