Papua New Guinea’s two most powerful legal orders — customary law and state law —undermine one another in criminal matters. This phenomenon, called legal dissonance, partly explains the low level of personal security found in many parts of the country. This book demonstrates that a lack of coordination in the punishing of wrong behavior is both problematic for legal orders themselves and for those who are subject to such legal phenomena Legal dissonance can lead to behavior being simultaneously promoted by one legal order and punished by the other, leading to injustice, and, perhaps more importantly, undermining the ability of both legal orders to deter wrongdoing.

Recent years have seen an increased interest in the variety of cultures co-existing within one state, and a growing acknowledgement of the values ensconced in pluralistic social structures. this book examines the manner in which indigenous people can function in modern states, preserving their traditional customs, while simultaneously adapting aspects of their culture to the challenges posed by modern life. Whereas it was formerly assumed that these tribal frameworks were doomed to extinction, and some states even encouraged such a process, there has been a revival in their vitality, linked to a recognition of their rights. The book offers a comprehensive survey of various aspects of tribal life, focusing on political issues such as the meaning of sovereignty, legal issues dealing with the role of custom and social issues concerned with sustaining communal life. A focused study is made of a whole series of legal factors, relating to possession and ownership of land, religious rites, the nature of polygamous marriages, the assertion of group rites, the manner of peacefully resolving disputes and allied questions. Recent judicial decisions are analysed as a reflection of the far-reaching changes that have taken place, in a process that has seen the former disregard of basic rights of indigenous people being replaced by an awareness of the injustices perpetrated in the past and a willingness to seek to redress them. The comparison between approaches of different English-speaking countries provides an account of interwoven developments.

The introduction of village courts in Papua New Guinea in 1975 was an ambitious experiment in providing semi-formal legal access to the country’s overwhelmingly rural population. Nearly 50 years later, the enthusiastic adoption of these courts has had a number of ramifications, some of them unanticipated. Arguably, the village courts have developed and are working exactly as they were supposed to do, adapted by local communities to modes and styles consistent with their own dispute management sensibilities. But with little in the way of state oversight or support, most village courts have become, of necessity, nearly autonomous. Village courts have also become the blueprint for other modes of dispute management. They overlap with other sources of authority, so the line between what does and does not constitute a ‘court’ is now indistinct in many parts of the country. Rather than casting this issue as a problem for legal development, the contributors to Grassroots Law in Papua New Guinea ask how, under conditions of state withdrawal, people seek to retain an understanding of law that holds out some promise of either keeping the attention of the state or reproducing the state’s authority.