On October 1st, 1972, the Minister of Justice of the Democratic Republic of the Sudan constituted a committee consisting of 25 leading members of the Sudanese Legal Profession for the purpose of “re-examining fully the Sudan Civil Code, 1971, the Civil Procedure Code, 1972, the Civil Evidence Code, 1972, and the draft Penal and Commercial Codes”. The Committee was requested to recommend to the Minister whether all or any of the aforementioned codes should be abrogated, temporarily suspended (if already in force), kept as it is, or amended. The Committee was asked to submit its findings and recommendations as soon as possible and was authorised “to receive evidence from experts as well as from those directly connected with the application of the law”.

The Republic of the Sudan, born on January 1st, 1956, is, like many other independent states in Africa, a political, and not an ethnic unit. It ranks high among the countries with extraordinary ethnic and cultural diversity. Besides the Arab tribes which constitute 39% of its population, there are numerous non-Arab tribes of several racial and linguistic families.

Oral data are an integral part of the raw material used in anthropological research on social organization. They have also been heavily relied upon in the study of disappearing American Indian societies and, more recently, in the reconstruction of African history. By contrast, with some striking exceptions, they are in danger of being neglected in the anthropological study of law. Oral data have only recently been employed in Frenchsponsored studies in this field. In the English-speaking world, the dominant theme of dispute settlement and its apparent corollary, the case method, may leave little room for the systematic collection and the careful analysis of oral data.

En République du Zaïre, la conscience de la nécessité de remettre en honneur les valeurs traditionnelles et de puiser aux richesses de la culture africaine, la volonté de “recourir à l’authenticité” comme on a coutume de dire, est actuellement très forte. Cela laisse supposer que la réforme du droit civil, récemment mise sur le chantier, sera marquée par la volonté de revaloriser la tradition.

Since the British established the first statutory native courts in Nigeria, attempts have been made to reserve for such courts original civil jurisdiction in customary law matters which were considered to be within the peculiar knowledge of traditional authorities, who, consistently with the indirect rule system, normally manned the tribunals. The first legislative measure reserving original civil jurisdiction for the statutory native courts was the Protectorate Courts Ordinance, 1933 which established a High Court for that part of the Colony and Protectorate of Nigeria known as the Protectorate, and provided that the High Court was not to exercise original jurisdiction in cases raising any issue as to title to, or interest in, land and which were subject to the jurisdiction of a native court, except where the Governor in Council directed otherwise or where the case was transferred from a native court under the provisions of the Native Courts Ordinance, 1933. Thus matters involving land tenure with respect to which native courts had jurisdiction were regarded as. customary law matters which could best be dealt with by traditional courts or courts having a traditional setting.

Il existe à l’heure actuelle des différences considérables dans notre connaissance du droit africain et spécialement dans celle du droit privé. Si le droit public des états d’Afrique est d’un accès aisé et fait ou a fait l’objet de travaux en nombre déjà important, par contre le droit privé—en particulier le droit coutumier—nous est très inégalement connu. A cela plusieurs raisons qu’il semble inutile d’évoquer ici, sinon pour déplorer le peu d’intérêt que la période coloniale a manifesté pour ces recherches, du moins dans les pays faisant jadis partie de l’empire français. Le France a sûrement été, parmi les ex-puissances colonisatrices, une de celles qui ont le moins participé à l’étude de ce droit coutumier dont l’importance et la valeur scientifique ne sont pourtant pas à démontrer. Le présent article n’a d’autre ambition que d’apporter une très modeste, très partielle contribution aux recherches qui heureusement, depuis quelques années, prouvent une modification radicale des esprits en ce domaine et témoignent de l’attrait nouveau exercé sur les juristes français par le droit traditionnel africain. L’historien du droit qui a la chance de se trouver en présence d’un droit coutumier vivant, au lieu de l’étudier momifié dans les recueils du passé, ne peut laisser échapper cette occasion, même si, comme c’est le cas de l’auteur de cet article, il est tout à fait conscient de n’apporter qu’une minuscule pierre à l’édifice qui se construit.

“At present, indeed, the Nigerian courts tend slavishly to follow any English decision”. This recent decision of the High Court of Lagos State, however, appears to be the first example of a judicial refusal to follow an English precedent, other than in cases involving the measure of damages, or interpretation of statutes similar to those in force in Nigeria, but not identical. BECKLEY, J., said of Edmeades v. Thomas Board Mills Ltd.: