Mode of Convergence of Case Adjudication between Judicial and Akan Traditional Courts

Abstract

Judicial and traditional courts play significant roles in resolving disputes and maintaining social order in many parts of the world, particularly in Africa. These institutions adjudicate both civil and criminal matters that have the potential to disrupt peace and stability. In Ghana, judicial courts are constitutionally mandated to resolve disputes and administer justice, while traditional courts, led by traditional rulers, serve as accessible mechanisms for conflict resolution within local communities. Although traditional rulers play a vital role in promoting peace and order in cities, towns, and villages, their authority as conflict mediators is not formally supported by statutory laws and regulations. This study investigates the points of convergence between judicial and Akan traditional courts and advocates for their complementarity in ensuring effective justice delivery. The concept of complementarity is employed to examine the linguistic similarities within the normative domains of these two adjudicative systems. An observational research approach was adopted to obtain an in-depth understanding of their practices. The findings reveal substantial similarities between the two institutions, suggesting that traditional courts play an important role in the administration of justice and should receive greater institutional recognition alongside the formal judicial system. The study draws on evidence from selected judicial courts across Ghana and traditional courts in the Ashanti Region to examine the similarities in their adjudicative processes.