black blue and yellow textile
black blue and yellow textile

About Customary Courts Observer (CCO)

supporting the creation of a fairer and pluralistic justice system in Ethiopia

About Customary Courts Observer (CCO)

supporting the creation of a fairer and pluralistic justice system in Ethiopia

go to resources

For more resources on Ethiopia's customary courts?

What are Ethiopia's Customary Courts ?

Under the Model Law, customary courts are legally recognised community-based justice institutions that may take the form of courts or recognised social bodies, derive authority from federal or regional law, resolve disputes using customary law, and operate alongside formal courts within a plural justice system, subject to constitutional and human rights safeguards.

The Model Law on Customary Courts defines customary courts as:

“courts established or social institutions recognised in accordance with the provisions of regional or federal laws to adjudicate disputes based on customary laws.”

In practical terms, this definition shows that customary courts have five core elements.

1. They may take different institutional forms

Customary courts are not limited to formally constituted courts. The Model Law recognises that they may also be social institutions that are legally recognised. This reflects the reality that community-based justice institutions often exist in locally rooted forms before they are formally incorporated into the legal system. Article 2(2) expressly includes both “courts” and “social institutions,” while Article 7(2) sets conditions for their recognition, including the existence of a dispute-resolution structure, voluntary submission for recognition, and commitment to the law’s principles.

2. They must be recognised by law

The authority of customary courts does not rest only on social acceptance. Under the Model Law, they must be established or recognised under regional or federal law. Article 2(2) places them within a legal framework, and Article 3 confirms that the law applies to customary courts recognised at both federal and regional levels.

3. Their function is to resolve disputes

The central role of customary courts is to adjudicate disputes. Their jurisdiction includes matters such as family and personal disputes, petty offences and complaint-based crimes, and other matters permitted by law, as provided in Article 19. The Model Law also recognises their reconciliatory role: Article 21 gives them reconciliatory jurisdiction, and Article 22 allows them to facilitate apology in appropriate cases.

4. They apply customary law

Customary courts resolve disputes on the basis of customary law. The definition in Article 2(2) is tied to Article 2(9), which defines customary law as the body of rules and practices that govern customary institutions. This means that their work is grounded in community norms and practices, rather than solely in formal statutory law.

5. They operate within a plural justice system and are subject to rights protections

The Model Law does not treat customary courts as replacing formal courts. Instead, Article 5(1) provides that they function alongside regular courts as alternative avenues of dispute resolution. At the same time, their recognition and operation are subject to clear safeguards. Article 5(3) requires respect for human rights, non-discrimination, equality of women and men, and the best interests of the child, while violations of these guarantees constitute grounds for appeal.

To learn more about customary courts and our initiative, scroll down

click here

Looking for the model law?

----------------------------------------------------

Why, How and Where

of Customary Courts Observer

blue and white striped round textile
blue and white striped round textile


The programme employs structured observation, documentation, and analysis methodologies to monitor customary court practices. It works closely with justice sector stakeholders to:

  • assess compliance with key principles such as due process, non-discrimination, complementarity, and “do no harm”;

  • document practices, challenges, and emerging trends across different regions;

  • identify and promote best practices;

  • generate evidence-based recommendations to inform policy, legal reform, and capacity-building efforts.

The initiative also facilitates dialogue between customary justice actors and formal institutions, contributing to more coherent and complementary justice systems.


The initiative is implemented at both the federal and regional levels across Ethiopia, covering all regions irrespective of whether customary courts are formally established

There is more!


Customary courts play a central role in resolving disputes across many parts of Ethiopia, often serving as the most accessible and trusted form of justice for local communities.

However, their widespread use has not always been matched by systematic oversight, documentation, or alignment with national legal standards and human rights principles.

The initiative responds to this gap by promoting transparency, safeguarding the rights of vulnerable groups, and supporting the constructive integration of customary justice mechanisms into the existing justice system. It also plans to do more by considering pathways for integration with broader justice and rule-of-law frameworks, including peace-building and transitional justice.

Why are we observing the courts?
How?
Where?