Posted by Chester Morton / Wednesday 15 June 2016 / No comments
Comparison between the traditional system of justice and modern judicial system in West Africa
COMPARE AND CONTRAST THE TRADITIONAL AND MODERN JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN WEST AFRICA
SIMILARITIES
Swearing of oath
One
of the similarities between the traditional and modern judicial system
is that in both cases the litigants were made to swear an oath. In the
traditional setting, the parties swore by
the stool or the gods but in the modern judicial
system, the litigants swear by the Bible, the Cross or the Koran.
Appeal system
Another
similarity between the traditional and modern judicial system was the
right to appeal
a sentence if a plaintiff was not satisfied with the ruling. For
example, if the case was tried by the Divisional Chief, the dissatisfied
plaintiff could appeal until the case got to the court of the Paramount
Chief beyond which there was nowhere to go to. In the modern judicial
system also, a plaintiff
could appeal his or her sentence till he/she reaches the Supreme Court
of the land.
Trial by Jury
When
a matter is brought to the court, a jury sat down to listen to both
parties to the dispute. After both parties have presented their case,
and after they have been cross-examined, the Jury then deliberated over
the
matter. It is only after this deliberation that judgment was pronounced
and fines imposed on the guilty party. In the modern judicial
system, the jury also deliberates over and arrives at a verdict. The
judge is then expected to hand down sanctions to the guilty party.
DIFFERENCES
The role of the Chief
One
of the differences between the modern and the pre-colonial judicial
system is that in the traditional judicial
system, the chief was the Chief and his elders constituted the
jury. The court premise was the chief's palace. The court was presided
over by the chief acting as the Chief Justice. In the modern judicial
system, the courts are manned
by professionals like lawyers and judges.
Cross-examination
In the traditional judicial system, the
litigants in the case were allowed to cross-examine each other where no legal
counsel is involved. In the modern judicial system legal counsels are allowed
to do the cross-examination on behalf of their respective clients.
Trial by ordeal
Trial by ordeal is a system used,
traditionally, to determine the guilt or otherwise of an accused person. The accused
submitted to tests believed to be painful, the outcome of which was believed to depend on divine intervention.
The traditional judicial system has room for such a trial, depending upon the nature
of the case. In the modern judicial system, trial by ordeal is not acceptable. It
is evidence based and judgment is given based on the evidence adduced.
Written records
Trials in the traditional court were
verbal. No written records were maintained for future reference. On the other hand, the modern judicial system
maintains detailed written records which serves as reference materials on which
future cases may be based.
SAMPLE
QUESTIONS
1. Highlight three similarities and
three differences between the traditional and the modern judicial system.
2. Compare and contrast the modern
and the traditional judicial system.
