REPORT ON THE FIRST OUTREACH SESSION
“CONFLICT RESOLUTION: TRADITIONAL METHODS"

Organized by

Centre for the Study of Local Cultures, Kuvempu University
In collaboration with M. P. Prakash Arts Foundation Shimoga
 
The first outreach session of the CSLC was organized at Manasa Education Trust, Shimoga on 18th July 2009. The theme of this programme was ‘Conflict Resolution: Traditional Methods”.   What follow is a report of the programme, which   focuses on some general impressions and conclusions, rather than a detailed description of each session. We invited different people from different sectors to take part in the outreach session. The outreach participants included leaders of Raita sangh, Mullas, NGOs working on rural issues, Industrialists and businessmen, journalists and members of traditional panchayats. The president of the M. P. Prakash Arts Foundation, Vidwan Nagaraj welcomed participants to the programme. The Director of the CSLC Prof. Rajaram Hegde provided a brief introduction about the CSLC and structure of the programme. The participants were, Kadidal Shamanna, Subrahmanya B.K. Shankar, Basavaraj, A.N. Nagaraj, Shreedhar, B.Chandregowda, K.C. Basavaraju. Dr. K. M. Kumar, Dr. Haseena Khadri and research scholars of the Centre. Totally 30 members participated in the programme. Prof. J.S. Sadananda coordinated the sessions and Prof. Rajaram Hegde summarized the points.

Issues discussed were: What kinds of conflict emerge in villages? How the traditional methods resolve conflicts? What is the role of modern judicial system in village problems?  

I. What kinds of conflict emerge in villages?

During the three sessions, participants explained few cases and how they resolved them.    Conflicts usually emerge between families, castes and communities, because of land,   ritual privileges in festivals, money transactions, allotment and utilization of public properties, etc.      

Cases cited:

• Basavaraju, leader, Raita Samgha: Upper castes objected the untouchables playing olaga in a temple festival. Basavaraju settled it and convinced the upper caste to accept it. (This is usually taken as an example of caste conflict. Why should we look at this as caste conflict? Is it not a conflict connected with ritual? Does it have any consequence on the status or affairs of the castes concerned?)
• A case on property dispute was taken to court by the daughters of a landlord. It could have been settled by villagers, but the parties did not listen to the advice of the people and took it up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court gave a decision to distribute all property equally, but to implement it they have to divide the land in such a way that it will render cultivation impossible.  Thus, till today, the decision is not implemented.  The family is in distress.
• Chandregouda: Two lambs were stolen by a member of Okkaliga caste. But two untouchables were fined because they were with the thief. The thief was not fined. W clear partiality by Okkaliga panchas.
• A temple calf was sold out and money was given to the owner. A member of Untouchable caste claimed the money for a calf of the temple because he had looked after it. Upper castes say that the claim was false. He threatened to file atrocity case on the upper castes. The untouchables also refused to prepare torana during the temple festival and spoke arrogantly. Upper castes gave the calf to the untouchable to avoid further legal complications. And started doing the temple work themselves.   Some of the untouchables felt themselves isolated and volunteered to work, but the villagers did not involve them in any work.
• A dispute about allotment of the sites to different parties was solved by picking up the paper slips written with individual names.
• A temple land dispute was taken to court. The decision was not implemented; therefore the temple land was left fallow.

II. What is the role of traditional system in resolving the conflicts?

When villagers face these kinds of conflicts the initial step of resolving problem is appealing to village traditional panchayat. Panchayats play very crucial role in resolving conflicts. When the conflict is found critical third parties bring them to panchayat, or the panchayat members themselves pursue the parties for a settlement. Some familiar methods of resolving conflicts are: the toss system, excommunicating accuser, fine system, etc. Thus the panchayat (Pancharu) works as primary level court in village. Some times, different jatis have separate panchayats. Muslims have shariyat courts. The disputes not resolved by them are brought to village panchayats. Disputes are usually settled in the village temples. The parties have to take oath in front of the deity to abide by the agreement. The fines collected are preserved as village fund in the temples. Some times there are disagreements to the decision which lead to courts. 

•  Most of the participants asserted the effectiveness of the traditional conflict resolution methods. According to them, 70% of the cases in villages are settled through traditional method. This proportion is same in the case of the Muslim Shariyat courts also.  
• Main concern of the traditional system is to keep community united.
• Therefore though they have no legal framework, the panchas mainly act as counselors, negotiators, who strike a compromise between two parties by convincing both parties.
• Traditional method is contextual and it evolves according to the needs of the time. It can add or remove any practices. This system is largely influenced by the values which support the present day judiciary also. 
• Main concern is to settle the dispute rather than achieving an abstract concept of justice or norms.

III. Does the court system help to solve such conflicts?

According to participants people go to the modern judicial system when their traditional system does not settle the problem.

• The participants generally held the view that modern judicial system is not affordable to the poor people. That is one of the reasons that have kept them away from this system.  
• This system costs a lot of money, energy and time.
• The decisions given by this system are impractical. There are instances where the decisions could not be implemented. Such implementation would lead to further conflicts among the parties or they prove totally impractical for them.
• Modern judiciary has caused strains in the inter-caste relations.
• There is a general impression that the judicial and police system is corrupt and it is easy to manipulate it through money, therefore approaching police is inviting further problems.  The villagers think it better to avoid the involvement of the police and court.
• It was a general impression that those, who are legitimately denied favour   in village panchayat, who think they can manipulate justice opt for court and police.
• Judicial system works like an inspector i.e. it functions on the premise that the people are prone to commit crime, they have to be checked in order to regulate their practices.
• Modern judiciary is an individual approach, to check or enable an individual in terms of justice. It is not concerned with the community life.
• Modern judiciary is concerned with rendering the justice based on a legal system founded on constitution; therefore it is insensitive to the local cultural context. It has a potentiality to create new tensions and conflicts among the persons and traditional communities.

IV. Out come of the programme

What emerges is that settling the dispute is the central concern of the traditional methods. They are prepared to take help of any recourse or devises to settle the issue. The concern is to arrive at a consensus. Adhering strictly to the legal norms is the central concern of the modern judiciary. These legal norms are believed to be based on humanitarian values and the ultimate goal of the society is to achieve those values. Law should act as a force to insist upon such norms.

V. Some questions

1. Is there any conflict between both the systems? : The general impression was that Village panchayats are adopting and incorporating the modern judicial system and its values, but not the vice versa.

2. Is it true that the decisions in traditional panchayats are partial and manipulable by upper castes? Some of the participants who firmly believed the story of caste system refused to accept that traditional system can be just and impartial. According to them: 1) The traditional system does not operate on the basis of any just legal framework, therefore it can be arbitrary. 2) Therefore there is a basic defect in traditional concept of justice itself. It stands for inequality, superstition, etc. which are accepted traditional values. 2) This leads to the manipulation of this system by the dominant castes. Village panchayats helped the dominant castes to suppress the lower castes and perpetuate caste system. The modern legal system stands for emancipation and equality.

• In some villages every caste, especially concerned with the dispute is represented in panchayat. But in some villages, untouchables are not represented.   (According to the above contenders, involving all the castes is an influence of the modern values. This generates an empirical question: Is it true that involving untouchables in village panchayat is a modern phenomenon?)

• Shamanna says that mostly the upper caste people opt for courts because they have money. This was a general impression also. If we accept the contention that village panchayats are tools of upper castes, then Shamanna’s statement is problematic, because it shows that 1) Upper caste is not contented with village panchayats. If they could manipulate this system, why are they not contented with it? 2) These cases might be the disputes among the upper castes so that the panchayat members inevitably had to displease one of the parties. It shows that panchayats could not logically please all the upper castes in past also, especially when there were no court systems.
• Some of the participants told that the lower castes usually accept the decisions given by the panchayats. (The contenders say that it is an evidence for the helplessness of the lower castes ) The upper castes go to the courts.

The discussion on these matters starts with presuppositions borrowed from colonial descriptions about the traditional society and values. There is lot of speculations about Indian history which needs empirical scrutiny.

3. Is it true that dispute settlements in traditional method are regulated by the fear of deities?

• Nagaraj says that sense of justice was given the prime importance. Temple priests   are also subjected to the decisions.