Alternative Land Dispute Resolution in Rwanda: Mediation as a Path to Social Cohesion
- 34 minutes ago
- 5 min read
Jossam Potel | 6 July 2026
Land disputes are among the world's most ancient causes of disagreements and conflicts. Land is crucial to social, economic, and political relationships in many nations with an agrarian economy. Nonetheless, disagreements over land ownership and use are frequent and cause conflict between people, organisations, communities, and even nations. Rwanda has traditionally valued land because it represents the survival and cultural uniqueness of the country. Traditionally, several disagreements over landownership and use have led to the dissolution of intergroup relationships, posing further difficulties for the nation's social and economic advancement. In Rwanda, where land is scarce due to high population density, decades of displacement, exile, and return have left many people with competing claims to the same land. As a result, disputes over landownership have become both common and deeply rooted in the country’s history. Because of this, Rwanda's post-genocide experience was characterised by a number of conflicts over land ownership and distribution, affecting the nation's social cohesiveness.
Traditionally, Rwanda used a variety of alternative conflict resolution methods, including as mediation, to settle such complicated land-related problems. ADR, or alternative dispute resolution, is the process of settling conflicts outside of the official legal system. In Rwanda nowadays, mediation is considered one of the main methods of alternative dispute resolution. Through mediation, disputing parties can discover common ground, reach concessions, and communicate their ideas regarding the problem rather than depending on judicial rulings. The Rwandan government supports mediation as a means of enhancing justice access and fostering population harmony. To resolve post-genocide issues, the government implemented various community-based strategies. For instance, the so-called Abunzi system was created to facilitate mediation between the parties in dispute without the need for judges and courts.
It should be mentioned that one of the most common instances that Abunzi mediators deal with is land disputes. Their job is to solve the issue in a way that doesn't compromise the community's social cohesiveness. Since there are several obstacles to using formal court procedures to resolve land-related disputes, mediation is very effective in Rwanda. First of all, a judge's decision might lead to further disputes because court rulings choose the winner and the loser. Moreover, the disputing parties remain enemies after the procedure, which can negatively affect future relationships within the community.
Second, mediation makes it possible to reach a solution that will be effective in the particular situations where opposing parties must constantly communicate. Therefore, mediation guarantees the peaceful coexistence of contending parties while the court decides who is the rightful owner of a piece of land. For example, disagreements about property ownership between long-term residents and returnees in post genocide periods may have had disastrous results. People agreed to share the land and prevent disputes because of the mediation process. As a result, mediation became a tool for rebuilding Rwanda rather than a way to resolve disputes.
Among the most important goals of Rwandan mediation practice are social cohesiveness. The ability of members of a society to work together and communicate in spite of possible disagreements and inconsistencies is known as social cohesiveness. For a number of reasons, mediation promotes social cohesiveness as it restores relationship between parties back to pre-dispute situations. First, mediation is based on conversation rather than accusation and dialogue rather than conflict. Additionally, because mediation is a community-focused procedure, individuals are more likely to trust local mediators than judges from distant locations. Additionally, mediation facilitates emotional contact between people in conflict, which helps to lessen animosity and foster understanding.
The third reason mediation promotes social cohesion in post-conflict nations is that it mirrors African customs, which emphasise the importance of re-establishing equilibrium. Positive outcomes and acceptance of mediation are facilitated by this cultural factor. High levels of accessibility can be identified as one of the benefits of the current land dispute mediation system. Mediation is more accessible to the general public than official court proceedings, which can be costly, time-consuming, and difficult for those without expertise in this field.
This method of resolving disputes offers a number of benefits. First of all, it makes it possible to deal with the problem quickly and prevent relationships from deteriorating. Second, it fosters public confidence in the conventional courts. Thirdly, community mediation procedures avoid overcrowding courts with small-scale conflicts. However, there are a number of drawbacks to the current system. There are disagreements that are impossible to resolve due to deeply ingrained emotional and historical factors. The differential power positions of contesting parties present another difficulty that could result in biased outcomes in certain situations. Additionally, some mediators lack legal understanding, necessitating additional training and ongoing professional growth. Additionally, it can be difficult to enforce agreements and achieve decision conformity. Finding the ideal balance between justice and restoration of relationship is another issue that needs to be addressed. Parties may be under excessive pressure during mediation to come to a solution regardless of possible unfairness.
The efficiency of mediation as a means of resolving land conflicts in Rwanda can be improved in a number of ways. The first approach is to educate the public about the regulations and legal requirements of mediation and to give mediators further training. Second, it's critical to guarantee that official court bodies and mediation processes work closely together. In the process of creating a post-conflict society, mediation can be crucial. Thus, encouraging peaceful coexistence, dialogue between disputing parties, and population reconciliation, mediation as a dispute resolution tool can contribute to the development of social cohesion. Mediation is especially crucial in post-genocide Rwanda because property ownership conflicts are emotionally charged and reflect historical events. Rwanda's experience demonstrates that mediation can be utilised successfully to promote social reconciliation and enhance local justice delivery despite a number of obstacles.
Keywords: #Alternative #LandDispute #Mediation #Rwanda #Abunzi
Jossam Potel is assistant lecturer at the University of Rwanda. He holds a Master of Science degree in Geo-Information and Earth Observation with a specialization in Land Administration and Management from the University of Twente in the Netherlands. Additionally, he earned a bachelor's degree in law from the University of Rwanda and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Peace, security and Conflict at the University of Rwanda and Gothenburg University, School of Global Studies. His teaching responsibilities include subjects like Land law, tenure systems, Land use-related courses, Property rights and the Commons, Evaluating Land Administration systems, Negotiation, and land dispute resolutions. He primarily conducts research in social sciences and natural resource management, with a focus on publications related to land administration and management. He also oversees research projects for undergraduate students in the same field. Jossam possesses substantial experience in the field of land administration and management programs, property evaluation, taxation, and land governance. He holds the position of a councilor in the African Association of Remote Sensing and Environment (AARSE) and is a member of FIG. Having worked for 11 years with the Rwanda National Land Authority and decentralized entities, he has a deep understanding of the governance issues related to decentralized entities in the context of land administration and governance, as well as capacity building. He is also well-versed in the broader political and economic factors influencing land matters in Rwanda and institutional frameworks. Jossam's work experience extends beyond Rwanda to countries like Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Uganda, and Kenya. Currently, he serves as the Executive Secretary of the Eastern Africa Land Administration Network (EALAN).
Ken M.P. Setiawan is Senior Lecturer in Indonesian Studies at the Asia Institute, The University of Melbourne. Tintin Wulia is an artist, Senior Researcher at HDK-Valand, University of Gothenburg, and a Visiting Research Fellow at International History, the London School of Economics and Politics. They are co-initiators and members of 1965 Setiap Hari, a transdisciplinary and transnational research-relay collective that focuses on narratives of the Indonesian genocide of 1965-66. In addition to the two authors of this article, its members are Wulan Dirgantoro, Felencia Hutabarat, Mikael Johani, Fitri Mohan, Rangga Purbaya, Sirin Farid Stevy, and Kiki Zakiah.
