The Role of Traditional Conflict Resolution Mechanisms in Local Peacebuilding in Auchi, Edo State, Nigeria: A Qualitative Case Study

Traditional conflict resolution remains an important component of local peace governance in many Nigerian communities, yet its contemporary operation cannot be understood solely through claims of cultural legitimacy or accessibility. This study examines how the Otaru-in-Council functions as a local peacebuilding institution in Auchi, Edo State, with attention to its mechanisms, perceived contributions, inclusionary limits and interaction with formal justice institutions. The study examines the structure and functions of the Otaru-in-Council, identifies the conflict resolution mechanisms employed, assesses their perceived advantages and challenges, and considers conditions for constructive interaction between traditional and formal justice systems. A qualitative case study design was adopted. Primary evidence was obtained through in-depth semi-structured interviews with 30 purposively selected participants comprising traditional rulers and palace officials, senior chiefs and elders, ward and quarter heads, youth representatives, women representatives, civil society actors and community residents. Two non-participant observations of open dispute-resolution sessions and documentary materials supplemented the interviews. Data were analysed thematically, with triangulation, member checking and thick description used to strengthen trustworthiness. Mediation, reconciliation rituals, adjudication, consensus-building and arbitration were reported as principal mechanisms. Participants associated the traditional institution with cultural legitimacy, relatively low cost, accessibility, speed and restoration of social relations. At the same time, respondents reported gender exclusion, weak documentation, political interference, elite bias, limited enforcement capacity and tensions with formal law. The findings suggest that the contribution of the Otaru-in-Council to local peacebuilding is conditioned by both legitimacy and institutional safeguards. The Otaru-in-Council should be understood neither as a substitute for the state justice system nor as an inherently effective institution. Its peacebuilding significance lies in its embeddedness in local social relations and its capacity to convene disputants, while its limitations arise partly from exclusion, politicisation and uncertain interfaces with formal law. Reforms should clarify referral and jurisdictional boundaries, strengthen documentation, widen women’s and youth participation, develop human-rights and procedural capacity, and establish practical coordination between customary and formal institutions without eroding the authority that makes local mechanisms socially meaningful.