No abstract

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

No abstract

Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved.

Perhaps the most signifi cant trend in justice reform eff orts in the last decade in fragile states and developing societies has been a growing interest in informal justice systems. Th is trend is partially in response to the poor track record of interventions aimed at transforming formal justice institutions into well-functioning systems that meet the ideals of Western rule of law. It also refl ects an eff ort to accommodate what is now recognized as an empirical fact -in many societies, informal justice systems are the primary locus of dispute resolution for the vast majority of the population, and therefore cannot be ignored. However, the rhetorical recognition of the importance of informal systems has far outpaced change in strategies or even programming. Th ere are several reasons for this, but the biggest challenge is a normative one. International actors regard the alternative paradigms of justice off ered by local communities as desirable only to the extent that they off er accessible and restorative remedies in ways that do not contravene international standards of rule of law and human rights. Here, the recognized advantages tend to be outweighed in the minds of many development actors by the perceived failure of informal systems to comply with these norms -especially when it comes to women's rights.Th e dilemma this poses has resulted in two primary approaches. Th e fi rst assumes that informal systems are inherently and irremediably inconsistent with women's rights and therefore the formal system must be the primary, if not sole, forum for adjudicating disputes involving women. Th e second approach seeks to engage with informal systems with the aim of transforming them to comply with international standards, while retaining the positive features of accessibility, familiarity and eff ectiveness. Th is note note discusses and analyses the limitation of these two approaches. Ultimately, it is argued here, they are fl awed.Th is note presents an alternative way of problematizing women's access to justice and corresponding ways of addressing the inequality. Rather than focus on selecting, promoting or changing the formal or informal justice system, intervenors need to embrace processes of social change as the means for instituting legal change. Note * Th e World Bank, tchopra@worldbank.org.