The 2012 conflict in Mali highlighted the urgent need to address a broader crisis of governance – a defective provision of justice. This report examines how the provision of justice in Mali could form a key part of a broad-based strategy to help the country regain the status of emerging democracy which had won it so much praise before 2012. It argues that better justice outcomes in Mali can only be achieved by stimulating greater mutual recognition of, and interaction between, the country’s customary and state judicial systems as more or less equal in order
The report is split into four sections. Section 1 examines the political context of access to justice. Section 2 discusses the systemic constraints on, and the popular expectations of, Mali’s state and customary justice systems that impede their performance at the strategic level. Section 3 examines the operational performance of Mali’s customary and state justice systems, including transitional justice and past improvement efforts. The final section recommends a strategy to improve the synergy between the country’s customary and state judicial systems.
Key findings
- While the state judiciary system is relatively new, customary justice systems remain the mechanism of choice for Malian people.
- At the political level:
- Elite-capture of the state governance systems means that the provision of justice as an impartial public service is incredibly difficult.
- Mali has a wide variety of customary justice mechanisms with a strong sense of shared identity, but this is typically limited to a particular ethnic group and does not extend nationally.
- While elite-capture is lessened by local executive power-holders and their links with communities they serve, customary justice mechanisms often represent much more conservative social values that do not always reflect constitutional rights of Malian people.
- At the systemic level:
- the state judiciary is difficult to operate effectively for two reasons: it is complex and largely an imported foreign (French) legal system with little customisation with Mali’s history, capabilties and resources.
- At the operational level:
- the state judiciary suffers from deep rooted corruption, and general shortage of resources, compounded by poor utilisation of the limited resources that exist. Similarly, customary authorities have little power to enforce judgments and are marked by a certain level of corruption as well.
Five step recommendations
- Map the nature and legitimacy of Mali’s many customary justice systems to develop a better understanding of their performance and development potential.
- Organise justice conferences throughout Mali on the basis of this mapping to discuss the problems that Malian citizens encounter in their justice systems, how these can be resolved and what role Mali’s state and customary justice mechanisms can play in making this happen.
- Make greater use of customary justice leaders as legal officials of the state to increase mutual exposure and create shared experience. Cooperation between both systems can grow and in the long-term, could lead to the creation of one system.
- Work towards recognition of those customary justice systems that enjoy adequate levels of popular legitimacy and are open to development in order to make better use of existing and more integrated, mechanisms.
- Imagine what the next phase of Malian justice could look like, based on the results of steps 1–4, drawing from the strengths of both state and customary systems while achieving both modernisation and maintaining a fit with Malian culture.