Dispute Resolution; Perception and Practices in informal justice system (A case study of Fatehpur village, District Larkana)

Abstract

In the province of Sindh, there are two types of dispute resolution mechanisms currently prevailing viz. Faislo, termed as Indigenous Dispute Resolution Mechanism (IDRM), which prevailed over centuries throughout villages and formal justice system or state-based system whose origin goes back to the colonial era. The present study specially focuses on the role and effectiveness of local actors (May they be state or non-state) on the dispute resolution mechanism and identifies all those socio economic and political factors and their narratives that has helped survive and sustain Faislo as an effective and responsive alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism. Keeping this in view, the study uses the lens of Legal Pluralism theory to understand the co-existence of two parallel legal systems in one social space i.e. Fatehpur, a village in the province of Sindh, and employs a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methodology to ensure diversity of responses and ascertained its target sample population by using purposive sampling techniques in survey, case-study and in-depth interview methods. The major findings of the study reinforce that local consider dispute as cultural actions and seek mechanisms that understand the socio-cultural meaning and context of the dispute. Moreover, Faislo is governed by traditional laws derived through customs, social-culture norms and values which displays ethnic identity, social and familiar networks such as caste, kinship or tribe. Locals prefer Faislo over Formal Legal system because of their familiarity, access, cost effective, responsive, personal affiliation etc. while in the latter is considered alien, unsuitable, costly, bureaucratic behavior and marred with corruption. Though the verdicts given by Faislo has no legal binding but still every dispute of life, may it be civil, criminal, commercial or personal, is brought to Faislo for resolution. Perhaps it is well founded perception that this system is works better specially in cases of marginalized, illiterate, and poor sections of the society. The local actors such as ChangoMurs and Elders act as arbitrators and legitimize their authority and status through tradition and control the decision-making process. They are assisted and where necessary, held accountable by the state actors such as Police, Judiciary, and non-state organization such as media and civil society. The strength and sustainability of Faislo is over centuries is because it is a representative, consultative, and volunteered council that works on restorative DRSML QAU IV justice with the larger purpose of ensuring social peace and harmony across communities. Faislo acts like social assemblies that constitute and maintain the socio economic and political hierarchies of the village. The mechanism plays a major role in peace- keeping and building among social groups at large. It promotes values of forgiveness, solidarity and sharing among the locals.