The Influence Of Culture On Mediation In The African Context

How to cite this journal: Author, Date of the post, WMO Conflict Insight, Title of the post, ISSN: 2628 6998, https://worldmediation.org/journal/

ABSTRACT *

This article examines why mediation succeeds in traditional African settings, arguing that its acceptance rests on familiarity rather than on any external introduction of the method. The author describes how disputes are customarily handled: within a family by the family head, between families by the village head or traditional ruler, and between communities by senior figures from both. After setting out what mediation involves and the roles a mediator performs, the article identifies seven conditions that account for its effectiveness in this setting: the recognised hierarchy through which a mediator’s authority is established, the sense of oneness within an extended community, the moderation that early intervention produces, the ownership that comes from participation, the priority given to repairing relationships, the speed the process allows where agricultural seasons cannot wait, and the social consequences of failing to honour a settlement. The author closes by noting that outside intervention is more readily accepted where traditional authorities are included, and that armed conflict requires more than these arrangements can supply.

KEYWORDS *

Mediation, African tradition, customary dispute resolution, traditional authority, community, confidentiality, ownership, reconciliation, Yoruba, Nigeria, social sanction, legitimacy

INTRODUCTION

The nature of our society and the values we embrace are all a function of choices that we decide upon. What works or does not work for us depends on our response to our choices. Familiarity with any concept makes it more acceptable than a less familiar option; in essence, we deal more favourably with views or options that are not strange to us. We will take the comfort line when presented with options because it provides security and safety.

In the African setting, mediation has traditionally been a dispute-resolution method. Usually, in a dispute, if it is between family members, the matter will be referred to the family head, who is often the oldest male member of the extended family. He is responsible for ensuring that the family unit remains tight and family values are maintained. Once the matter is brought to his knowledge, he is responsible for inviting the parties concerned and listening objectively to both sides. Where necessary, other senior family members may also be invited to the meeting, particularly if they can influence the parties’ decisions. Both parties must strictly comply with whatever is decided; otherwise, they risk being regarded as outcasts.

Where the dispute is communal, if it is between two families within a village or town, the village head or the traditional ruler in the community is tasked with the role of mediator. If the dispute is between two neighbouring cities or villages, then senior members of both towns will be invited to facilitate the dispute resolution. What triggers resistance sometimes is the fear of change or distortion of what one is already used to. Mediation is a known practice in the traditional African setting and has, over the years, transitioned in various ways. This paper will examine the benefits of mediation and its influence on African culture.

MAIN CORPUS

Mediation

Mediation is a process through which a third-party facilitator attempts to work through a dispute with disputing parties, assisting them in resolving it. The mediation process is party-driven, and the role of the facilitator or mediator is to get parties to view the situation differently, causing them to reconsider their perspectives and positions while working toward a settlement. The focus of a mediator is to bring parties to a point where they can propose solutions to their situation. Mediation can also be defined as a mode of negotiation in which parties to the dispute are helped by a third party to find a solution to their dispute, which they could not see themselves.

Mediation is dynamic in that the facilitator finds the most suitable way to assist the parties in resolving their dispute, depending on the particular circumstances of the parties. What is essential is that the mediator finds what is suitable for the parties and is not constrained to assist the parties in any particular way. There are guidelines to follow in mediation, however.

The mediation process takes on the features of the mediator; because the mediator drives the process, the tempo and flow of the mediation are likely to reflect the mediator’s disposition. The mediator, however, plays several roles. One of the most critical is to facilitate communication between parties. A mediator might be the one to open a communication channel among the parties, such that the mediator provides an avenue for parties who have refused to engage in any form of discussion to start a conversation that will lead to a resolution.

The mediator can also be the one who helps parties see the rights of others in the dispute and who should be involved in the negotiation. The mediator is also the one who, by procedure or suggestion, takes the initiative to move the progress of the talks. The mediator helps parties explore problems from various viewpoints and allows them to expand their resources. The mediator is also responsible for assisting the parties in evaluating their options and comparing them to their best alternative to a negotiated agreement.

How mediation played out in the traditional African setting

As humans, we are largely a product of our habitat; what we do and believe in is influenced by our experiences and environment. Our culture shapes us; it goes beyond our dress and food; it is who we are. It flows from generation to generation, leaving marks and traces that run through the times. Situations and circumstances change us; what we do and how we view the situations around us are shaped by our cultural beliefs, and our values are built on them.

It is a community that strives to maintain peace among its people, believing people can talk through their differences. The Yoruba of Nigeria have a saying which means that asking the party that offends one for an explanation is the medicine that sustains friendship.

A vital characteristic of mediation is confidentiality, and as such the facilitator cannot disclose what transpired during the process to a third party, except where the parties to the process permit. Confidentiality can be deemed necessary in relationships where parties might not otherwise share information, and where furthering the relationship, activity, or service is important to society. There are circumstances, though, in which the duty of confidentiality does not apply and privilege does not protect communications; the mediator must make this clear to the parties.

Some of these settlement meetings might not be completely confidential, as other persons of standing may be present. For instance, if the meeting takes place in the palace of the community head, the palace scribe will be present to record the deliberations and document what is agreed upon. Although the traditional leader is more like an authority-based mediator, the parties still make their own decisions and are bound by whatever they agree upon.

Some reasons for mediation’s success in traditional African society

The hierarchical nature. A successful mediation process must recognise this and include the necessary hierarchy in the mediation process. There are leaders and community heads in a typical African cultural setting. There are also family heads, who are the oldest male members of the family, whether extended or nuclear.

Oneness. A belief in the societal bond where everyone is your brother or sister, where differences can be settled without losing the relationship, produces a willingness to mediate alongside a desire not to lose or concede what is yours.

Moderation. Inviting parties to mediation early enough avoids escalation and extreme behaviour. Parties exercise self-restraint because the mediation process presents hope to them. Because the process is facilitated by an authority that they acknowledge, or because such authority is present at the process, parties are willing to work towards a peaceful resolution. Sometimes the other party only wants to be heard, and mediation makes this possible.

Inclusion. Being part of the dispute resolution process gives the parties a sense of control and ownership of whatever agreement is arrived at, which will in turn make the parties committed to executing it. Since the process is party-driven, parties have a sense of ownership of whatever is decided.

Rift mending. Although not often articulated, much of the time retaining the shared relationship is of great importance to parties in a conflict. African society greatly values extended communal living; people identify as brothers simply because they come from the same town. As such, peaceful resolution of disputes is essential and highly valued, and mediation provides the avenue through which rifts in relationships can be mended.

Timing and timelines. Mediation as a dispute resolution mechanism saves time, and parties can decide on the flow of the process. Often, disputes might concern farmland, and the next planting season might be approaching. It is not the time for parties to enter endless processes about resolving the situation. Mediation through their traditional leader helps them move on quickly, making concessions and resolving the issues. What is essential to the disputants is the ability to work the farms without losing time.

Effectiveness. Mediation is highly effective in the traditional African setting because parties are more disposed to resolve disputes and adhere to the settlement terms, knowing that acting otherwise will make them an outcast in the community. Since the community is regarded as an extended family unit, not abiding by the terms of settlement is considered a sign of disrespect to the other party and also to the leadership system, and disrespect is not taken lightly, except where the party chooses to leave the community, which will not be easy.

What is of much relevance to the mediation process is the level of commitment of parties to their community and to one another. Community members can hold each other accountable for progress, so one person who refuses to concede or agree to specific terms can be seen as trying to jeopardize the progress of another. Women meet in the marketplaces, and anyone considered to oppose the peace of society is likely to be excluded from everyday transactions and social meetings.

SUMMARY *

The article’s central observation is that the effectiveness of customary mediation rests on conditions external to the process itself. The mediator’s authority does not derive from appointment or expertise but from a position the parties already recognise. Compliance is secured not by enforcement but by the cost of being seen not to comply, in a community whose members meet daily in the market and whose approval is not easily replaced. Speed is possible because the dispute is embedded in a calendar that will not wait. Read this way, the seven reasons the author gives are not features of a technique but a description of a social setting in which agreements hold, and the article’s closing caution follows from this: where those conditions do not obtain, as in armed conflict, the same procedure does not produce the same result.

CONCLUSION

International figures can seem like an intrusion into this cultural and traditional space. If communities are persuaded to believe that such persons bring expertise in the area, they will want to know that their traditional rulers or elders are included in the process. They listen to and follow suggestions from these leaders because they risk censure when they do not cooperate with the process, and may even face penalties.

What is instructive for the traditional African party to a dispute, depending of course on the nature of the dispute, is being able to trust the other party at the end of whatever intervention is provided. Trust and goodwill are essential. What is of paramount interest is the kind of relationship the parties can still maintain after the dispute.

Mediation as a form of dispute resolution stands a great chance of success in the traditional African setting because it is not a process that is alien to the people. It is a system used by their forefathers and is still being used as an efficient form of dispute resolution. It fosters unity within the community, because parties can sit and talk through the dispute; it gives room for understanding, builds trust, and promotes unity. It creates peace for the future because, with mediation, there is no feeling of victor versus vanquished; internal harmony within the community is strengthened.

However, in situations of armed conflict, a great deal more will be required for effectiveness and resolution.

POTENTIAL SOLUTION *

The article identifies something the field has often missed, and it can be pressed further. Mediation as taught in professional training rests on the mediator being an outsider without authority, whose usefulness lies precisely in having no stake and no power. What the author describes inverts both: the mediator is an insider with standing, and it is the standing that makes the process work. That is not a lesser form of mediation but a different one, and the comparative literature calls it insider partial mediation. Recognising it as a distinct practice with its own logic, rather than as an informal approximation of the professional model, is the first useful step.

Two features of that logic deserve naming because they are what makes transfer difficult. Enforcement here is social rather than institutional: what binds a party is the prospect of exclusion from the market, from ceremonies, from the ordinary reciprocities of a place they cannot easily leave. That mechanism is powerful and it weakens exactly where mobility increases, which is why customary settlement holds in a village and frequently does not in a city where the parties need not meet again. And the process is public rather than confidential in the professional sense, which is a strength, since a settlement witnessed by the community is guaranteed by it, and simultaneously a limitation, since matters a party would not raise before their neighbours will not be raised at all.

That limitation points to the question the article raises and does not resolve, which concerns who is served by these arrangements. Where the mediator is the oldest male of the lineage and the parties are a husband and a wife, or a young man and an elder, the authority that makes the settlement stick is the same authority that determines what counts as a reasonable outcome. Customary systems have been criticised on precisely this ground, and the response that has proved most workable is neither to defend nor to replace them but to build in what they lack: participation by women’s associations and youth groups in the deliberation, and a route to formal courts that remains available and is not treated as a betrayal of the community. Several jurisdictions have legislated for exactly this relationship, and the arrangement generally works better where the customary forum retains genuine authority than where it is reduced to a preliminary stage.

On the article’s closing point about armed conflict, the record supports the caution and also qualifies it. Customary mechanisms have not ended wars. They have repeatedly settled the local disputes that wars generate and that national agreements never reach: grazing and water access, the return of displaced families, cattle raiding, the fate of the missing. In South Sudan, in Somalia, in Sudan and in eastern Congo, agreements reached by elders have reduced violence in defined areas while the national conflict continued. The scope is limited and the effect is real, and the appropriate conclusion is not that these mechanisms fail in war but that they operate at a level the international apparatus consistently overlooks.

Finally, the article’s opening insight about familiarity is the one most worth carrying beyond this setting. A process that people recognise is entered without suspicion, and one that arrives with foreign vocabulary and unfamiliar procedure spends its first months establishing what it is. Practitioners working anywhere would do well to ask what the local equivalent already is, and to build from it rather than beside it. The Yoruba saying the author cites contains the whole of the method in a single line: asking the person who offended you for an explanation is the medicine that sustains friendship. No training programme improves on that.

* Added by the WMO Editorial Team

REFERENCES

BATNA: Definition, Importance and Practical Examples. Corporate Finance Institute. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/valuation/what-is-batna/. Accessed 29 January 2025.

Menkel-Meadow, Carrie, Lela Porter Love, Andrea Kupfer Schneider, and Jean R. Sternlight. Dispute Resolution: Beyond the Adversarial Model. New York: Aspen Publishers, 2005.

Roles and Duties of a Mediator. VIA Mediation Centre. https://viamediationcentre.org/readnews/MjM1/Roles-and-Duties-of-a-Mediator. Accessed 29 January 2025.

Touval, S., and I. W. Zartman. International Mediation in Theory and Practice. Avalon Publishing, 1985.

Wolski, Bobette. Confidentiality and Privilege in Mediation: Concepts in Need of Better Regulation and Explanation. 43 (2020).

Supplementary references added by the WMO Editorial Team

Wehr, P., & Lederach, J. P. (1991). Mediating Conflict in Central America. Journal of Peace Research, 28(1), 85 to 98, on the insider partial mediator.

Mason, S. J. A. (2009). Insider Mediators: Exploring Their Key Role in Informal Peace Processes. Berghof Foundation, Berlin.

Elechi, O. O. (2006). Doing Justice without the State: The Afikpo (Ehugbo) Nigeria Model. Routledge, New York.

Zartman, I. W. (Ed.) (2000). Traditional Cures for Modern Conflicts: African Conflict Medicine. Lynne Rienner, Boulder.

Boege, V. (2006). Traditional Approaches to Conflict Transformation: Potentials and Limits. Berghof Research Center, Berlin.

United Nations Development Programme (2016). Informal Justice Systems: Charting a Course for Human Rights Based Engagement, New York.

Bradbury, M., Abdile, M., & Farah, A. Y. (2006). Local Peace Processes in Sudan and Somalia. Rift Valley Institute, Nairobi.

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, provisions on customary courts, and the Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.