Home The Gamechangers Community Justice Services

Community Justice
Services

Community Justice Services are those where the local community is involved in the definition or the delivery of the service available to all members of the community.. The services are provided by community authorities, trusted members of the community, or public officials elected or endorsed by the community.

Community justice services are all about delivering justice close to people’s homes. Although community justice services exist in different forms in different countries, they can be identified by four core characteristics.

Policy Brief

Informal justice

Recourse to or supervised by formal courts

High-quality and standardised

Likely to remain donor-funded supported by public sector

Community Justice
Services

Community Justice Services are those where the local community is involved in the definition or the delivery of the service available to all members of the community.. The services are provided by community authorities, trusted members of the community, or public officials elected or endorsed by the community.

Community justice services are all about delivering justice close to people’s homes. Although community justice services exist in different forms in different countries, they can be identified by four core characteristics.

Informal justice

1

High-quality and standardised

2

Recourse to or supervised by formal courts

3

Likely to remain donor-funded supported by public sector

4

In what setting?

Community justice services exist all over the world but they are generally more common in rural settings than in cities. They can relate to customary justice in a tribe, or they may have roots in a religion. Community justice services can be connected to local or central government, with the potential to scale across borders.

The origin of the community justice service may limit its potential to scale. In Ethiopia for example, different informal justice services cover different states, depending on which tribe has the majority. In Switzerland, each canton has a separate system of local dispute settlement services. In some countries in the Sahel region, the government’s geographic reach is limited, meaning services initiated by the government may not achieve national scale. If a local tribe has developed a specific way of settling disputes, this may not be acceptable to people from other tribes in the same region. In Colombia, houses of justice are seen as mechanisms for establishing government authority in remote areas.

Community justice services sometimes scale across borders. Facilitadores judiciales programs exist in a number of South American countries; paralegal models in many African countries.

Case studies and scaling strategies

The map shows some of the prominent examples of community justice services available in different parts of the world.

Delivery models

Casas de justicia (houses of justice) in Colombia have been implemented in different ways across a country. A study on Local Council Courts in Uganda shows how a clear mandate in the law can help and much more. Click the button below to see the different local delivery models. The table also shows how services are connected to revenue streams and to follow-up services.

From the HiiL Portfolio, Barefootlaw and Bataka Court Model from Uganda are notable examples.

Country	Community Justice Services
Bangladesh	Village courts and Shalish
Belgium	Justices of the peace (Vrederechters/Justice de paix)
Burundi	Bashingantahe
Colombia	Houses of justice or Casas de Justicia
Ethiopia	Various states in Ethiopia have informal justice systems
France	Maisons de la justice et du droit (houses of justice) in major cities
India	Lok adalats
Kenya	Community based paralegal programs
Liberia	National Palava Hut Program
Nicaragua	Facilitadores Judiciales
Nigeria	Various systems of community justice guided by traditional rulers
Norway	Conciliation boards in every municipality
Philippines	Katarungang Pambarangay
Rwanda	Abunzi courts
Sierra Leone	Paralegal program ran by Legal Aid Board
South Africa	Community paralegals
Switzerland	Each canton has its own system of justices of the peace or other Schlichtungsbehör den (Autorités de conciliation)
Uganda	Local council courts

Community Justice Service Examples

Bangladesh

Village courts and ShalishBelgium

Justices of the peace (Vrederechters/Justice de paix)Burundi
BashingantaheColombia
Houses of justice or Casas de JusticiaEthiopia

Various states in Ethiopia have informal justice systemsFrance

Maisons de la justice et du droit (houses of justice) in major citiesIndia

Lok adalatsKenya

Community based paralegal programsLiberia

National Palava Hut ProgramNicaragua

Facilitadores JudicialesNigeria

Various systems of community justice guided by traditional rulersNorway

Conciliation boards in every municipalityPhilipines

Katarungang PambarangayRuwanda

Abunzi courtsSierra Leone

Paralegal program ran by Legal Aid BoardSouth Africa

Community paralegalsSwitzerland

Each canton has its own system of justices of the peace or other Schlichtungsbehör den (Autorités de conciliation)Uganda

Local council courts

*Hover for details

Scaling Community Justice Services

A rigorous approach is needed to set up or improve community justice services. In order to achieve consistent and high quality services, a scaling strategy is needed. Elements of this are a clear value proposition, a team focused on scaling, a sustainable revenue model and much more. For the community services to create significant impact, an enabling environment needs to be created with multiple stakeholders coming together. Regular monitoring of data and outcomes also becomes crucial. Above all, the movement of creating people-centered justice at scale needs to be strengthened. Detailed outline of these strategies are shared in the 2021 Trend Report “Delivering Justice Rigorously” .

The points below provide specific points of attention:

Community justice services are attractive for governments

Delivering justice close to people’s homes is appealing for politicians. In the Netherlands, members of parliament suggest a system of justices of the peace, similar to those in Belgium, Norway, Russia and Switzerland. Houses of justice were set up in Colombia and France, followed by Argentina more recently. India invested in a system of Lok Adalats. Rwanda has an extensive system of Abunzi courts. A regional task force, run by the Organisation of American States, has set up networks of facilitadores judiciales connected to the judiciary in multiple Latin American countries. Community paralegal programmes exist throughout Africa and are promoted as a way forward by the Elders. In China, village mediation committees exist.

Community justice services are attractive for governments

Promoting consistent quality is challenging and possible

Our case studies on houses of justice in Colombia and Local Council Courts in Uganda illustrate how working methods remain ad hoc. Under one umbrella, very different houses of justice exist, depending on local initiative. In the current setting, it is difficult to replicate a good community paralegal service or Local Council Court. Community justice services would benefit from standardised treatments described in guidelines (with scope for necessary customisation across communities). Practitioners in communities have to deal with complex problems and are unlikely to be highly-skilled dispute resolution professionals. Like community health care workers, they benefit from clear recommendations about how to resolve issues.

Promoting consistent quality is challenging and possible

Monitoring outcomes can add value

Systematic monitoring of outcomes can add value as well. Justice practitioners working close to where people live can contact people after a solution has been achieved. Are the proposed interventions effective? Is more needed?

Monitoring outcomes can add value

Ensuring compliance with human rights standards

Data show that citizens are often quite satisfied with solutions generated through community justice services. But community justice in rural areas is sometimes harsh, seen to be applying violent sanctions or confirming traditional, male power structures. Treatment guidelines can provide for a link with formal justice and prove to be a solution for this returning point of contention. More often than not, the people sitting in community courts or specialising as justice facilitators are interested in best practices from other locations and from international research. Harsh punishments, gender inequality and oppression of minorities will become less likely if good practice is strengthened by guidelines and monitoring of outcomes. Malfunction needs to be addressed, rather than disqualifying community justice wholesale or assuming the superiority of formal justice. This is an important lesson learned.

Ensuring compliance with human rights standards

Linking informal systems and formal (court) systems

The governance model and the regulatory system will have to bridge the gap with the formal systems. This is similar to the challenge of linking primary healthcare and hospitals. By taking an outcomes-focused, problem-solving approach, community justice services can provide the start of a user-friendly journey that makes use of the most suitable service providers for different stages of conflict resolution. If community justice practitioners cannot completely resolve a problem, they should refer the problem to a next level of expertise. This may be a court in a nearby town.

Linking informal systems and formal (court) systems

Financial models need attention

Community justice services need better and more sustainable revenue models. In high-income countries, they may rely excessively on volunteers, who are left on their own and follow their intuition. In low-income countries, they are funded by grants from international donors, local nonprofits or sometimes even through village-level contributions. This leads to grant and donor-dependence, not allowing a scalable and sustainable service to emerge. Community justice services are likely to need funding through user contributions and subsidies from national budgets, This includes public and donor-based funding as well as user fees. An outcomes-focused approach with clear indicators also has the potential to attract private sector capital, particularly impact investors and development finance institutions.

Financial models need attention

Investments have to cover tools and methods to provide effective services

Community justice workers will also need practice guidelines and protocols, teaching tools, data collection instruments and means of identification. Depending on the local situation, they also need budgets for transportation and office space.

Investments have to cover tools and methods to provide effective services

Support by an outcomes-focused case management system

A system collecting data monitoring outcomes is crucial. Customising such a solution to include an outcomes-focused user journey would allow for an integrated approach from diagnosis to resolution. Many programs have developed their own case management systems. Having a specialised third party service provider allows for greater efficiency and lower costs.

Support by an outcomes-focused case management system

Focus on solving the most pressing problems

In order to ensure effectiveness, leaders of community justice programmes should focus on standardised delivery. They can aim to provide solutions for 80% of the most pressing problems, covering the top 5 problem categories first, and follow a plan for implementing evidence-based working.

Focus on solving the most pressing problems

Photo by Tom Cat King from Wikimedia

Towards gamechanging community Justice services

Suggestions for what should be addressed in a feasibility study:

Leveraging the commitment of politicians

These services exist in some organised form in a majority of countries and are often the most pervasive and easily accessible of justice services. Delivering justice close to people’s homes, is appealing for politicians. In the Netherlands members of parliament suggest a system of justices of the peace, similar to the ones in Belgium, Norway, Russia and Switzerland. Houses of justice were set up in Colombia and France, followed by Argentina more recently. India invested in a system of Lok Adalats. Task forces in Nigeria want to work with traditional leaders in communities and in Kenya justice leaders …. Australia … Rwanda has an extensive system of Abunzi courts. A regional task force, run by the Organization of American States, has set up networks of facilitadores judiciales connected to the judiciary in multiple Latin American countries. Community paralegal programs exist throughout Africa and are promoted as a way forward by the Elders. In China, village mediation committees exist

From ad hoc to standardised treatments for top 5 problems

The case studies on houses of justice in Colombia and Local Council Courts in Uganda illustrate how working methods remain ad hoc. Under one umbrella, very different houses of justice exist, depending on local initiative. In the current setting, it is difficult to replicate a good community paralegal or Local Council Court. Systematic monitoring of outcomes and mapping how a typical justice journey looks like may be needed. Community justice services would benefit from standardised treatment guidelines (with scope for necessary customisation across communities). In order to ensure effectiveness, task forces would stimulate leaders of community justice programs to focus on standardised delivery. They can aim to provide solutions for 80% of the most pressing problems, covering the top 5 problem categories first, and follow a plan for implementing evidence based working.

Incentivising use

A strategy designed by a task force in Imo state in Nigeria has ADR inspired community justice services as a first port of call for land problems, family justice, neighbour problems, money issues, domestic violence and everyday crime. Indeed, research suggests that community justice services should be strongly incentivised. In Switzerland, using them first is mandatory before a civil justice action can be started.

Ensuring compliance locally

Treatment guidelines for community justice services will leverage the capabilities of communities to ensure compliance. This includes options to involve the police or the judiciary in difficult cases.

Using treatment guidelines to eradicate bad practices

Data show that citizens are often quite satisfied with solutions generated through community justice services. But community justice in rural areas is sometimes harsh, seen to be applying violent sanctions or confirming traditional, male power structures. Treatment guidelines can provide for a link with formal justice and prove to be a solution for this returning point of contention. More often than not, the people sitting in community courts or specialising as justice facilitators are interested in best practices from other locations and from international research. Harsh punishments, gender inequality and oppression of minorities will become less likely if good practice is strengthened by guidelines and monitoring of outcomes. Malfunction needs to be addressed, rather than disqualifying community justice wholesale or assuming the superiority of formal justice. This is an important lesson learned.

Develop model with sustainable revenues

Community justice services need better, and more sustainable revenue models. In high income countries, they may excessively rely on volunteers, who are left on their own and follow their intuition. In low income countries, they are funded by grants from international donors, local nonprofits or sometimes even through village-level contributions. This leads to grant and donor-dependence, not allowing a scalable and sustainable service to emerge. Community justice services are likely to need funding through user contributions and subsidies from national budgets. Some programs also undertake action on behalf of communities against mining activities. Community paralegals may help a community to gain access to electric power or other government services. This valuable “class action” work is more ad hoc, though. It has a different business model than helping community members consistently solve the most pressing justice problems that will certainly come up every next month.

Towards an investable opportunity

Click below to access the Business Model Canvas on how this model would work, based on the example of local delivery of basic justice in Uganda.

Here we quantify the costs of activities, possible revenue streams and give an indication of the required investments. We also give estimates of market size and potential contribution to growth of the justice sector, showing the most important assumptions for these calculations.