An integrated model for harmonising traditional leaders’ courts with modern justice delivery system in Zimbabwe: a case of Kadoma Magistrate Courts

Abstract

The main objective of the study was to develop an integrated model for harmonising traditional leaders’ courts with the modern justice delivery system in Zimbabwe. The coexistence of traditional leaders' courts and the modern justice system in Zimbabwe presents significant challenges in harmonizing these two parallel structures. Despite the recognition of traditional leadership in the 2013 Constitution, conflicts often arise between these systems regarding jurisdiction, authority, and adherence to human rights principles. A qualitative study, guided by a pragmatic philosophy and case study research, was undertaken. A sample of 40 participants was taken. In-depth interviews, open–ended questionnaires, and an observation checklist were used as the research instruments. A response rate of 90% was obtained. The integration of traditional leaders' courts with modern justice delivery systems is not only feasible but also essential for improving access to justice in Zimbabwe. The findings indicate that both systems can coexist and complement each other if structured appropriately. By recognizing the strengths of traditional courts, such as their cultural relevance and community trust, while addressing their limitations through training and resources, a more cohesive legal framework can be established. Moreover, fostering collaboration between traditional leaders and modern judicial officials is crucial for ensuring that both systems work towards common goals. This integration can enhance legal literacy among traditional leaders and foster greater respect for customary practices in modern courts, ultimately benefiting the community as a whole. Taking into account participants' contributions, an integrated model was developed to harmonize traditional leaders' courts with the modern justice delivery system in Zimbabwe, fostering collaboration, transparency, and efficiency in legal proceedings. The study recommends amending existing legal frameworks to formally recognize the authority of traditional courts in specific types of cases.