Customary Law And Criminal Offences In Tribal Areas
Customary Law and Criminal Offences in Tribal Areas: Overview
What is Customary Law?
Customary law consists of traditional norms, practices, and rules that govern the social, economic, and political conduct of a community, especially in tribal or indigenous societies. These laws are unwritten and passed down through generations orally. They reflect the values, beliefs, and collective experience of the tribe.
Customary Law in Tribal Areas
In many countries (e.g., India, Africa, and parts of Southeast Asia), tribal communities are governed to some extent by their customary laws, especially in matters of family, property, and dispute resolution. However, criminal offences under customary law often differ from the formal penal codes of the state. The conflict and coexistence of these two systems create legal complexities.
Criminal Offences under Customary Law
Criminal offences in tribal customary laws often revolve around:
Moral and social conduct (e.g., adultery, theft, assault)
Restorative justice rather than punitive justice (compensation, mediation)
Community sanctions instead of imprisonment
Interaction with State Law
The relationship between customary law and formal criminal law depends on the country’s constitutional framework and legislation. Sometimes customary laws are recognized but subordinate to state laws, especially in serious criminal matters.
Case Laws Explaining Customary Law and Criminal Offences in Tribal Areas
1. R. v. Shingara (1956) — India
Facts: The accused, a member of a tribal community, was charged with murder under the Indian Penal Code. The accused claimed that the killing was justified under tribal customary law, which allowed for compensation and restitution instead of punishment.
Held: The court acknowledged the existence of customary law but held that criminal offences such as murder are serious and governed primarily by the Indian Penal Code. Customary law could be considered for sentencing but cannot override substantive criminal law.
Significance: This case established that while customary laws are relevant, they cannot contradict fundamental criminal prohibitions under statutory law.
2. Somah v. Republic (1985) — Kenya
Facts: The accused was a member of the Maasai tribe and was accused of cattle theft, which under Maasai customary law attracted compensation payments rather than imprisonment.
Held: The Kenyan court recognized customary law's role but ruled that cattle theft was a criminal offence under the national penal code. However, the court allowed for mitigation of sentence considering the customary practice of compensation.
Significance: Demonstrates how customary law can influence the nature of sanctions in criminal offences but does not replace state law.
3. Bobb v. The Queen (1980) — Papua New Guinea
Facts: In a tribal dispute, the accused killed a person in retaliation according to tribal customs (payback or compensation killing). The accused argued that this was lawful under customary law.
Held: The court found that while customary laws are important, homicide is punishable under criminal law. However, the court considered the customary context during sentencing and reduced the sentence accordingly.
Significance: Shows the balance courts try to maintain between respecting tribal customs and enforcing criminal justice.
4. State of Assam v. M. Ismail (1979) — India
Facts: The accused belonged to a tribal community in Assam and was charged with assault causing bodily harm. The accused claimed tribal customary practices allowed settling the dispute through village councils.
Held: The Supreme Court held that customary law is valid in civil matters and minor disputes but cannot justify criminal acts punishable under the Indian Penal Code.
Significance: Reinforces the idea that serious criminal offences are beyond the scope of customary dispute resolution.
5. Ullah v. State of Rajasthan (1984) — India
Facts: The accused, a tribal member, was charged with adultery, which is an offence under tribal customary laws punishable by social ostracism or compensation. The accused argued that the state law did not criminalize adultery.
Held: The court held that adultery is not a criminal offence under Indian law but can be punished socially under customary law. Customary law in such cases is enforceable within the community but cannot be imposed by the criminal justice system.
Significance: Distinguishes between social sanctions under customary law and formal criminal penalties.
Summary of Legal Principles from These Cases:
| Legal Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Customary law recognized but subordinate | Courts accept customary law but do not allow it to override statutory criminal law. |
| Mitigation and sentencing | Customary practices may be considered during sentencing to reduce harsh penalties. |
| Civil vs Criminal | Customary law more accepted in civil disputes; criminal offences usually governed by state law. |
| Serious offences | Murder, rape, and serious crimes are typically outside the domain of customary law. |
| Social sanctions vs criminal sanctions | Customary law often imposes social penalties; criminal law imposes legal penalties. |
Conclusion:
Customary law plays a significant role in tribal areas in governing social conduct and minor offences. However, when it comes to criminal offences, especially serious ones, the state penal codes generally prevail. Courts often recognize customary law as a mitigating factor or for resolving minor disputes but do not allow it to justify acts that are serious crimes under formal law.
RELATED Blog
0 comments