Tribal and regional identities
Clan and regional affiliations anchor identity, pride and political life. They provide solidarity but can also drive conflict when groups compete for resources or influence.
Papua New Guinea • Kastim Lo & State Law
The Two Rivers of Justice in Papua New Guinea
Papua New Guinea is a centre of legal diversity, where Kastim Lo – the body of custom, rules and relationships – flows alongside a Western-style state legal system. Everyday justice is shaped by both rivers.
1. Overview
A land of unparalleled legal diversity
With more than 800 languages and countless local cultures, there is no single PNG customary law. Instead, Kastim Lo is a mosaic of locally grounded systems, each tied to land, lineage and story.
Customary authority governs most everyday disputes and land dealings, especially in rural areas. Formal courts and ADR schemes operate alongside these practices, creating a highly plural legal environment.
Understanding how these systems relate is essential for anyone designing or facilitating dispute resolution processes involving Papua New Guineans, whether in PNG itself or in the region.
2. Cultural foundations
Kastim Lo, wantok and bigman: the architecture of social order
Conflict and its resolution in PNG are shaped by overlapping systems of obligation, leadership and identity: Kastim Lo, the wantok network and traditional bigman leadership.
Custom Kastim Lo & the wantok system
The foundations of obligation
Kastim Lo is the local body of customs and rules for each cultural group, passed down orally and adapted over generations. The wantok system links people who share language and kinship into networks of mutual support and reciprocal duty.
- Wantok is a vital safety net, mandating support, hospitality and resource sharing.
- It can also complicate impartial decision-making in state institutions and politics.
- Both Kastim Lo and wantok shape expectations about who must contribute to resolving disputes.
Leadership The bigman system
Influence built through generosity
Traditionally, bigman status is earned rather than inherited. Leaders gain authority by persuasive speech and by redistributing wealth through feasts, gifts and assistance, building a network of reciprocal loyalty.
When this model is distorted, modern political bigmen may capture state resources and turn communal obligation into patronage and corruption.
Spiritual worldviews
Beliefs around spirits, ancestors and sorcery (sanguma) shape understandings of misfortune and harm, and therefore who is held responsible when things go wrong.
3. Customary mechanisms
Restoring communal harmony, not punishing individuals
Under Kastim Lo, the primary aim of dispute resolution is to restore harmony within and between wantok groups, not to impose punitive sanctions on isolated wrongdoers.
Objectives Repair, reintegrate, reassure
- Restoration: mend relationships and ensure future cooperation.
- Reciprocity: centre settlements on compensation, apology and exchange.
- Collective responsibility: involve kin and community in reaching and funding outcomes.
- Public process: hold open hearings so that justice is seen and reinforced by the community.
Emotional harm and disrespect are often treated as seriously as physical damage, because they threaten the cohesion of the group.
Informal community forums
Many conflicts are first taken to informal moots or wari courts. Elders and other respected figures facilitate dialogue and encourage early, local repair.
Local mediators
Authority comes from respect, wisdom and knowledge of custom, not from state accreditation. These leaders often act as both mediators and guarantors of any settlement reached.
4. State system & ADR
The state’s river: courts, ADR rules and Village Courts
PNG’s state system combines English common law with post-independence legislation. Courts operate in a hierarchy, but for many people the Village Court is the most important justice forum.
Courts From Supreme Court to Village Court
The Supreme Court and National Court deal with constitutional, serious civil and criminal matters. District Courts handle less serious disputes. Village Courts have the widest reach, hearing local conflicts that often involve custom.
The Underlying Law Act 2000 requires courts to take account of customary law where no statutory rule applies, reinforcing the formal role of Kastim Lo.
Interface Village Courts as confluence
Mediating first, adjudicating only if needed
Village Courts were designed as the main interface between custom and state law. Their mandate is to ensure peace and harmony by mediating disputes, applying local custom wherever appropriate.
- Mediation is compulsory as the first step; formal orders are a last resort.
- Courts may apply “any law or custom” within their jurisdiction on minor matters.
- Magistrates are local community members, not legally trained judges.
5. Legal pluralism
When the two rivers collide: key points of friction
While PNG law explicitly recognises custom, serious tensions remain, particularly around individual rights, gender, impartiality and due process.
Fault lines Individual, gender, due process
- Individual vs collective: state law focuses on individual rights; custom emphasises group harmony and obligations.
- Gender: in cases such as domestic violence or sexual assault, compensation to a victim’s family can sideline the interests and safety of women.
- Impartiality vs kinship: wantok obligations can conflict with expectations of equal treatment and the rule of law.
- Due process: flexible, story-based customary procedures may clash with the state’s requirements for strict evidence and procedure.
Hybrid institutions
Village Courts blend state symbols with customary goals, using the authority of the state to reinforce consensus and compromise at community level.
Misuse of custom
Wantokism and bigmanism can drift into nepotism and corruption when they are harnessed to modern political and administrative power.
Sorcery-related violence
Accusations of sorcery (sanguma) can lead to serious violence and human rights abuses. Addressing these disputes requires engaging with spiritual beliefs while upholding criminal law protections.
6. Comparison
The Two Rivers of Justice: PNG customary resolution and the state system
Practitioners must navigate not just two institutions but two philosophies: PNG customary resolution (Kastim Lo) and Western-style adjudication and mediation.
| Feature | PNG customary resolution (Kastim Lo) | Western / Australian mediation |
|---|---|---|
| Primary goal | Restore communal harmony, repair relationships, reintegrate offenders, satisfy victim’s kin. | Reach an efficient, rights-based settlement between individual parties; finality of agreement. |
| Third party role | Active, non-neutral participants (bigmen, elders, Village Court magistrates) who advocate for peace and may help shape outcomes. | Impartial, external mediator who manages process but does not advise or decide. |
| Process style | Public, oral, flexible; relies on storytelling and community participation; often held in open forums. | Private, confidential, time-bound; follows a structured sequence of stages. |
| Core remedy | Compensation, apology and other restorative acts, funded and guaranteed collectively. | Written settlement terms focused on rights and obligations of the immediate parties. |
| Voluntariness & confidentiality | Authority-influenced consensus; public validation is often key to enforcement. | Strict voluntariness, party self-determination and legal confidentiality. |
7. Practice guidance
The mediator’s prime directive: do no harm
Imposing a rigid Western model can be an act of cultural harm. Effective practice requires a hybrid approach that works with, rather than against, PNG social realities.
Directive Avoid ontological violence
When a process ignores wantok networks, Kastim Lo and spiritual beliefs, it can cut parties off from their support systems and undermine the very conditions needed for compliance and healing.
The task is not to export a single model but to co-design processes with local partners that protect safety while respecting community authority.
Principle 1
Partner, don’t prescribe
- Work alongside local leaders, elders and Village Court officials.
- Treat them as co-designers of the process, not just informants.
Principle 2
Embrace the collective
- Expect extended family and clan involvement in both problem and solution.
- Design processes that allow community endorsement and ratification.
Principle 3
Use the hand rule as a design tool
- Story – allow full narrative of events and relationships.
- Issues – identify key themes together.
- Questions – reframe issues into shared questions.
- Answers – explore culturally congruent options.
- Transaction – agree on compensation, apology or other exchange.
Principle 4
Language and interpretation
- Use Tok Pisin or local languages with trusted interpreters when needed.
- Check understanding regularly; do not assume Western legal phrases translate cleanly.
8. Case studies
Justice in the Village Court and beyond
Case studies from Tubuserea and Gerehu illustrate how Village Courts and local leaders actively shape outcomes while keeping custom at the centre.
Case Reaffirming tradition & creating new custom
Village Court as hybrid forum
In one case, magistrates refused to make a formal order in an elopement and sorcery dispute, forcing parties back into traditional negotiations and reinforcing family-based obligations. In another, a new shared rule for an urban garden dispute was created and accepted as if it had always been custom.
These examples show how Village Courts use state authority to nurture, rather than replace, customary solutions.
Case Sorcery accusations
Mediating the intangible
Sorcery accusations are often linked to unexplained deaths or land conflicts. Parties may see both the alleged sorcery and the accusation itself as forms of violence. A hybrid approach treats parties’ safety concerns seriously while locating the underlying disputes over resources and relationships.
Effective mediators frame sorcery as a shared safety problem, not a question of belief to be judged.
9. Conclusion
Towards a braided river of justice
PNG shows what it means for custom and state law to engage each other continuously, not as rivals to be ranked, but as rivers that can be braided together.
Customary law has not disappeared under state law; it has adapted, engaging with courts, ADR rules and development projects to create hybrid forms of justice that remain deeply local. Village Courts are a key site of this innovation, blending state symbols with customary goals of reconciliation.
For practitioners, humility and adaptability are indispensable. Durable outcomes depend on processes that honour Kastim Lo, work with wantok networks and address emerging issues such as corruption and sorcery-related violence without dismissing the beliefs that underlie them.
The goal is not for one river to absorb the other, but for both to flow together in a stronger braided river of justice that is distinctly Papua New Guinean.
