Reconciliation among the central luo of northern Uganda: The ingredients and process of Mato Oput

Abstract

There are suggestions to adopt Mato Oput as a way to bring about reconciliation in northern Uganda; however, there are limited data on the processes and events that lead to Mato Oput. The aim of this study was to describe the processes that lead to and the ingredients of Mato Oput. We conducted a qualitative study using an ethnographic approach and secondary data review. The researchers visited and interviewed renowned elders purposefully selected based on their knowledge and participation in the process of reconciliation in Acoliland. Eight respondents, aged 60–101 years were included in the study. The researchers also observed and documented the processes of a case of Mato Oput in 2019. Mato Oput is the second last step in the process of reconciliation and restoration of peaceful co-existence following commission of grave harms by a person against another. Both the culprit and victim must be known, and the culprit must have knowingly caused the grave harm to the victim for Mato Oput to be relevant in the reconciliation process. If the grave act of a magnitude that would require Mato Oput happens between Acoli people and a group of people from some other tribes or ethnic groups, then Gomo Tong is performed as part of reconciliation ceremony, not Mato Oput. The researchers conclude that Mato Oput in its real essence is unlikely to be an appropriate way to deal with circumstances of mass killings and violent crimes against humanity like those that occurred in northern Uganda.

Keywords:

• Acoli
• reconciliation
• Mato Oput
• Gomo Tong
• Transitional justice

1. Introduction

There have been several conversations regarding Mato Oput in the literature since 2006, especially in the realm of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and its search for justice following the violent and devastating war that pervaded northern Uganda for more than two decades (BRANCH, 2007). The debate on Mato Oput followed the referral of the matter of the LRA and Joseph Kony to the ICC by the President of the Republic of Uganda on 16 December 2003 (Akhavan, 2005; UN, 2004). Following due considerations and investigations, the prosecutor of the ICC, Moreno Ocampo in 2005 issued arrest warrants for five members of the top leadership of the LRA (Akhavan, 2005; APUULI, 2006; ; ICC, 2005b, 2005a; ROSE, 2008). The LRA has been accused of multiple war crimes and crimes against humanity on the Acoli people. The LRA war as it is known, started in 1987 and continued right into 2006 when the Juba Peace talk eventually brought the hitherto poorly understood war to an end (E. BAINES, 2007a; BRANCH, 2005; Van Acker, 2004). Bako asserts that “Kony started this war with the intent to defend the Acoli people from abuse by the National Resistance Movement (NRM) led by (General) Yoweri Museveni, who took over power in 1986 from the Acoli General, Tito Okello” (BAKO, 2009). It is therefore not clear how Acoli eventually became the target of Kony and his commanders! And now Kony is to drink the bitter roots in reconciliation with the Acoli that he intended to defend. Something must have terribly gone wrong along the Kony campaign, or perhaps Kony never intended from the very beginning to defend the Acoli but acted on his own accord or as agent of another party to decimate the Acoli. The latter motive would explain in part the uniform destructiveness of the Kony campaign against the Acoli. For example, previously abducted people say that whenever the LRA captured people, the LRA would execute the Acoli and leave free the non-Acoli captives. Be that as it may, this unpopular and intentionally neglected war resulted into phenomenal outcomes; hundreds of children were abducted and conscripted into rebel ranks, scores of women were forced to become wives to rebel chiefs, hundreds of people had their limbs, noses, ears and lips cut off, and more than 90% of the Acoli population were forced into disease-saturated concentration camps euphemistically referred to as protected internally displaced persons (IDP) camps (BRANCH, 2008, 2009, 2013). Some scholars have described the northern Uganda war as an ignored war against children, and a forgotten conflict with the most serious internal displacement in recent time (MOOREHEAD & RONE, 2005; RUAUDEL & Timpsen, 2005). Indeed, the UN undersecretary general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief coordinator Jan Egeland described the situation in northern Uganda as one of the world’s worst humanitarian disasters (MOOREHEAD & RONE, 2005). Egeland referred to this particular war that devastated Acoliland from 1987 until 2002 as the greatest and most neglected humanitarian crisis ever known to the human race (QUINN, 2009; TAYLOR, 2005). Britain’s “Break the Silence Campaign” led by the Church Missionary Society was intended to make the massive atrocities being committed in northern Uganda known to the international community (TAYLOR, 2005). The international community thereafter woke up but only in the evening of the war when all destructions were already done to the satisfaction of the perpetrators and war merchants who benefitted economically from the war (DOOM & VLASSENROOT, 1999; Van Wyk, 2017). The former United Nations (UN) Secretary for Children Affairs described the war as a genocide ignored by everyone. “There has never been any instance in world history where the whole population of a people have been forcefully interned for such long a duration in order to properly destroy the culture of the people and decimate them; not even the Jewish camps in Germany were of this magnitude in any of its dimensions including cultural, psychosocial and physical destructions”, says Ambassador Dr Olara Otunnu (Personal communication, 7 April 2019). Since the issuant of the arrest warrants by the ICC, one of the indicted rebel chiefs, Dominic Ongwen has been arrested and prosecuted at The Hague. Joseph Kony is still at large, while Otii Vincent, Raska Lukwiya and Okot Odiambo are reportedly dead. It is during the investigations and start of prosecution of Dominic Ongwen when conversations about Mato Oput reached its peak in the international circles. However, some scholars immediately expressed doubts about the success of the ICC in dealing with the rather complex LRA situation in Uganda because of several limitations including inadequate analysis of the political and social situation within which the war occurred, negative impacts of prosecuting only the LRA and leaving the NRA/UPDF, challenges in identifying the actual victims that require compensations/reparations, and inadequate funds for reparations (BRANCH, 2007). Most of the literature have presented Mato Oput as a magic bullet, which once performed, justice will automatically be realized and peaceful co-existence restored. Mato Oput has variously been represented as the beginning and end of reconciliation between the aggrieved parties and the aggressors. The proposal to embrace Mato Oput as a way to deal with war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in northern Uganda has brought Mato Oput into the limelight as one of the traditional ways to bring about justice and reconciliation in post war peace building and reconstruction process (APUULI, 2011). The Acoli Religious Leaders under the umbrella organization Acoli Religious Leaders Peace Initiative (ARLPI) and the Acoli cultural leaders, the Rwodi (Chiefs) were the advocates of Mato Oput as the most suitable means of re-establishing sustainable peace in post conflict northern Uganda. The religious and cultural leaders have argued that the ICC approach to justice and peace was harshly retributive and unfair than restorative as desired for peaceful co-existence after such a prolonged violent conflict that engulfed the whole Acoliland and destroyed its moral fibres, impoverished the region and turned the people into beggars (BIRD et al., 2010; BRANCH, 2009). Traditional means of justice and reconciliation have been exercised in Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Mozambique and Liberia with varying extent of successes (BABATUNDE, 2014; KOKO, 2019; RETTIG, 2008; SCHOTSMANS, 2015). The Gacaca of Rwanda is reputed by some scholars for promoting half-truths, lies, concealment of truths and sowing fear among survivors, thereby deepening resentment and ethnic disunity (KUBAI, 2007; RETTIG, 2008). In South Africa, the Truth and Justice Commissions (TJC) and involvement of religious leaders were adopted as means to deal with widespread violations of human rights and crimes during the apartheid regimes and post-apartheid social reconstruction and peacebuilding (GIBSON, 2002; GRAYBILL & LANEGRAN, 2004; KOKO, 2019; LENKABULA, 2005). Culture and cultural leaders played a significant role in the reestablishment of peace and harmony in South Africa post-apartheid (ALLAN & ALLAN, 2000). Most scholars of transitional justice systems believe that transitional justice that have been applied in different countries have not failed completely in their objectives but at best delivered only modest results (GRAYBILL & LANEGRAN, 2004). There is evidence from Liberia and Burundi that transitional justice through participatory traditional justice system contributed significantly and seems an essential component of child soldier disarmament, demobilization and reintegration into society for sustainable peace and coexistence (BABATUNDE, 2014). Transitional justice is a short-term hybrid judicial and non-judicial approach to address human rights abuses, violence and destruction of property during an authoritarian rule or violent conflict (ANDERLINI et al., 2004). The aims of transitional justice in a society that have experienced gross human rights violations and crimes against humanity include healing the wounds of divisions, creating an accurate historical record of wrongs through truth telling and confessions, providing justice for victims and demanding for accountability from perpetrators, restoring rules of law, and setting up systems to minimize repeat of human rights violations while promoting peaceful coexistence and sustainable peace between and amongst victims and perpetrators (ANDERLINI et al., 2004).

In the context of northern Uganda, there are some pertinent questions to ponder over before delving into the debate on transitional justice especially that which involves Mato Oput: Why did the Acoli religious and cultural leaders propose and argue very strongly for restorative justice and peace building rather than retributive and reparatory justice advanced by the ICC and government of Uganda? Who were the protagonists of this war? Who actually benefitted from this war? Who were the primary target of attack in this war? Who therefore is/are the aggressors, perpetrators, and victors in this war that should be reconciled with the Acoli people who lost everything valuable during the war? However, this piece of work does not necessarily address itself to the forgoing questions but rather focuses on the key ingredients and processes of Mato Oput as practised by the Central Luo. Mato Oput was used in specific contexts among the Acoli. Therefore, the aim of this ethnographic study was to understand and clarify the ingredients, processes, personalities involved, utterances, consequences of none adherence to terms of the rituals, and how reparations can be achieved for serious transgressions. This body of knowledge would then inform transitional justice interventions that would involve integration of the Acoli tradition and culture of Mato Oput.

2. Methods

2.1. Study design and setting

This was an ethnographic study that involved repeated in-depth interviews and discussions with renowned elders and cultural leaders of Acoli, the Central Luo. The authors also observed the ceremony of Mato Oput between the Pujwani Lamogi clan and Pupano Kal Palaro clan in regard to the death of Brigadier Pierino Okoya Yere which occurred on 25 January 1970 during the reign of President IDI Amin Dada (MONITOR, 2012). Since 1987 when the Kony war started, these rebels prohibited all cultural rituals and practices in Acoliland and promoted Biblical principles even in fighting their wars. However, since the cessation of hostilities in about 2006, cultural and traditional practices have been rejuvenated. For example, a grand ritual of Mato Oput was conducted in a public setting in Palaro in regard to the death and compensation for the late Brigadier Pierino Okoya Yere who was longed thought to have been killed by unknown assailants. On the 9 March 2019, the Pujwani Lamogi clan publicly accepted responsibility for the death of Brigadier Okoya and his wife Anna Aneno Okoya during the ceremony of Mato Oput (URN, 2019). The study was conducted in Acoli land, including the eight districts of Agago, Amuru, Gulu, Kitgum, Lamwo, Omoro, Pader, and Nwoya.

2.2. Study population and data sources

We included elders (men and women aged > 60 years) who have been involved in reconciliation rituals, who have documented the processes and reconciliation rituals they observed from time before the war that devastated the tradition and cultural practices of the Acoli, and clan/chiefdom chiefs who have been involved in conflict mediation between clans in Acoliland. We also included data from secondary sources—books and journal articles on reconciliation and peace building among the Luo, especially the Central Luo in northern Uganda. The secondary data were presented to the elders and chiefs included in this study for validation and/or critique. The secondary data were presented much later in the process of data collection in order not to influence the original viewpoints of the elders and chiefs regarding the subject matter.

2.3. Sampling and recruitment

The respondents were purposefully selected based on their age, and knowledge and experience in Acoli traditional and cultural rituals including reconciliation for conflicts due to violent crimes. Snowball approach was used to identify and recruit respondents that were not known to the researchers. For example, the respondent from Ker Kwaro Pageya in charge of death compensations and reconciliation was suggested by the Chief of Ker Kwaro Pageya.

3. Data collection tool and procedures

A semi-structured in-depth interview guide was used to collect data from January 2017 to June 2019. Interviews were conducted in quiet and private rooms or under trees within the homes of the respondents. Non-respondents were not allowed at the interview venues. However, during interviews with the chiefs, their wives were available because the culture requires that the chief does not address himself to any official matter in the absence of the chiefdom wife—“the daker or dako ker”. However, the questions and concerns were not directed to the daker who often remained silent and only talked to remind the chiefs on some key details especially where items for rituals were being listed or when the chief asked for some particular information. Audio-recording was done during interviews with permissions of respondents. None of the respondents declined audio recording. Two male interviewers (ADM and WOO) conducted the interviews. No research assistants were involved because of the nature of the study that required detailed follow up questions and observations, and the characteristics of the respondents including chiefs who demanded for direct contact with the researchers. One interviewer engaged the respondents with questions, while the other took field notes especially on nonverbal cues to augment the recorded information. The researchers went back to the respondents with results and presented to them to confirm (member check) that the issues were what they had discussed, and so they add or remove any aspects they did not agree with. The data from secondary sources were also presented to the respondents to comment on, to verify and identify areas of contentions for more detailed discussions. No secondary data was removed from results because the respondents disagreed with it wholly.

4. Data management and analysis

Audio-recordings from the in-depth interviews were transcribed within two weeks of interviews/discussions by a female social worker who has worked with the first author as research assistant in other studies. She is experienced in qualitative data collection and transcription. ADM reviewed the transcribed data and completed incomplete segments by listening to the respective audio-recordings and review of field notes. The respondents were revisited to complete areas in the transcripts where the trends of thoughts were not clear or appeared incoherent to the researchers. The dataset was cleaned and then exported into ATLAS.ti version 9.2 for qualitative data analysis. Thematic analysis technique was used to analyse data. Codes were formulated from data guided by the research questions and thematic areas in the study guide. Codes were shared and agreed on by the two researchers before application of the codes to the datasets. Variations in code definitions or disagreement on what constitutes a code were resolved through discussions between the two investigators and through revisits to some respondents to verify the issues. ADM applied the codes on meaning segments in each of the transcripts. Themes and subthemes were developed from the meaning segments. Representative quotes were selected to exemplify and clarify each themes. Themes and subthemes were discussed by the researchers before reverting to the respondents for any additional clarifications. The results are presented as summary of consensus views without necessarily including typical quotes, except in few circumstances where there were needs for emphases.

5. Ethics approval and informed consent

No ethics approval was sought for this study protocol. This was an ethnographic study whose need evolved and themes for discussions changed over the three years of data collection. However, every study respondent provided verbal informed consent following detailed explanations about the study including its purpose and the procedures. Additional and separate verbal permission was obtained for audio-recording the interviews. No respondent withdrew from the study.

6. Results

6.1. Study respondents

The study included eight (08) respondents; majority of respondents were male aged 60–102 years. There were three respondents aged > 100 years. All were married except the female cultural leader (R6) who was a widow (Table 1).

Table 1. Characteristics of study respondents

Respondents	Age category (years) as of May 2018	Respondent’s description
R1: Retired Anglican Bishop	70–89	A clergy, a Nobel Peace Prize Award winner.
R2: Chief of a clan in Gulu, West Acoli	70–89	Business man, later enthroned as clan chief. Has been central in organizing Mato Oput in regard to Brig. Okoya
R3: Chief of a clan in Kitgum, East Acoli	60–79	Negotiated and mediated several deaths compensations, participated in organization of Mato Oput.
R4: Retired teacher and sportsman	90–109	Involved in peace talks in 1994 and extensively documented the process of conflict, peace talks and reconciliation.
R5: Head of rituals in a chiefdom (RIP)	70–89	Involved in a number of rituals, and leader of rituals regarding death compensations (Culu Kwor) and Mato Oput in a chiefdom in Gulu.
R6: Woman cultural leader	70–89	Initially lay reader in the Catholic Church; suspended church activities for the promotion of Acoli cultural values and rituals. Participated in several rituals to bring the LRA war to an end. Participated in investigating causes and reasons for several abnormal occurrences and illnesses in Acoliland.
R7: Self-made professional banker and political scientists (RIP)	90–109	Never attended formal education; read several books and on his own became a banker in the immediate postcolonial era; he became politically active and participated in several military and political struggles. He wrote books on political science and Acoli culture
R8: Retired teacher	90–109	Primary school teacher since immediate postcolonial era. Traversed Acoli land teaching in different schools. Retired into craft work and promotion of Acoli cultural heritage.

7. Natural history of conflict

Respondents were keen on antecedents to reconciliation and peace-building rituals among the Central Luo (Acoli) of northern Uganda. The processes that lead to the crimes, circumstances of the crimes, and how the crimes are committed are considered key determinants of the consequent reconciliation processes. Not all crimes and offences are serious enough to warrant Mato Oput. The respondents narrated the nonlinear processes that initiate and lead to serious wrongs; these include:

7.1. Material wrong between two or more people

Respondents concurred that during human interactions, there are often events that may lead to wrongdoing against other people in the same or distant communities. These wrongs maybe incidental or intentional; may involve physical bodily harm, injury to reputations of a person or people, and/or damage to property, depending on circumstances and characters of the people involved.

“The main cause of wrong, fights and quarrels is not telling the truth during human interactions … untruth or falsehood is very bad. It has caused a lot of problems in human societies”, (R4).

Truth telling and love are the cornerstones for peace and harmonious co-existence. A respondent tells how lack of love and over insistence led to the separation between the Acoli ancestral brothers Gipir and Labongo.

“What happened between the two was that there was no love, no forgiveness, no spirit of reconciliation; those two had no love for each other at all so they separated forever. So, that bitter experience, that traumatic experience that the Luo went through made them come up with five guiding principles. The first one was called; ‘pe iting ali latina’, ‘ali ber ki winyu okwata,, ma nongo genu bwomme ni’; meaning don’t commit the first offence to anybody; being a first offender is only befitting for birds especially the common black hawk that has strong wings to fly off. That is the first principle for the Luo … Two; have respect for all ‘bed ki woro ikom dano ducu’. Three, speak the truth at all times and in all places, you shouldn’t only speak the truth when you are at home but also when you are away … The forth principle is; Never, never ever tell lies under any circumstances even at the point of death. It is better for you to die for the truth than to tell lies. The fifth principle is; do not steal; there is a song that says ‘ayaa lamera wac kom loyo kwo’ it means Ayaa it’s better for you to be lazy than to be a thief, if it means feeding you I will because you are my mother’s child but don’t steal”, (R1).

Conflicts start with someone or a group committing some material wrong against another person or group of people. In the olden Acoli community, some of the commonest causes of conflicts included struggling for a woman or someone eloping with another person’s wife, and especially serious was anyone playing around with a wife of a chief. Second was dispute over ownership of precious property e.g., tusks of an elephant and animals killed during hunting expeditions. Clans with bigger numbers sometimes hijacked the property of a hunter with fewer clan members in the hunting grounds. Third was courting a girl against the will of the parents and brothers. Conventionally, the Acoli boys would not meet girls on the roadside or common gatherings and then launch their intentions to marry. A female relative, usually aunties would travel around and into certain clans which are known to have girls with good manners and from homes with no misfortunes. After the auntie or sister of the boy has identified the girl, then an uncle of the boy approaches the family of the girl and shares their intentions. The family of the girl also then takes interests in studying the boy and his family. If they are convinced that the boy is responsible and the family has a good standing, then they will visit each other and eventually marriage processes follow. However, if the brothers of a girl find a boy they do not approve of playing around with their sister, a fight and counter fights would ensue, and that sometimes led to death on either side.

7.2. Disagreements and quarrels

The material wrong committed can be resolved immediately by the people involved or delayed; when delayed, then eventually many more people get involved. The wrong committed can lead to proportionate degree of disagreements, quarrels or violence between the parties. Sometimes silence and withdrawal are adopted by the offended depending on his/her or their calculated strengths in relation to perceived strength of the offender (s).

“Keeping silent and withdrawing ‘kun’ in the midst of looming trouble is both good and bad. ‘Kun ber, dok kun rac’. It is bad if you keep quiet and withdraw too early before people have talked and shared the underlying basis for what they have done and why they behaved the way they did. They may not have intended to wrong you, and if you walk away without hearing them, then you never get the truth. It is good to not over argue because you then minimize possibilities of tempers running high and people hitting each other. You may save a bad situation by quietly walking away. Both sides then find ample time to meditate over the matter, and a better solution may emerge, (R4)”.

Determination of extent of a material wrong How the offended responds to the wrong depends on several factors including his/her own disposition and attitudes towards the substance of the wrong, perceived attitudes of others, perceived degree of loss due to the wrong, perceived disposition and intention of the offender (s), perceived effects of the wrong on other significant others, and availability of resources and readiness for retaliation.

“It is always good to listen to the inner voices in you. Those are voices from the spirits of your ancestors. They always tell you to do what saves life. Avoid quarrels as much as possible, even with you wife or husband”, (R2).

Certain actions have potentials to cause anger, lead to disappointments, but the respondents consider calm response as the best way to avoid escalation.

“Angry response is never good. First settle down and think through an annoying issue. ‘Aranyi rac, ento pe mitte ni ikec ata’; it is bad for someone to wrong you purposefully, but even then, you do not have to respond with anger. If you get too angry too fast, you are bound to escalate matters”, (R4).

“But also over insisting that you are the only one on the right when a dispute arises is bad. ‘Dano omyero obed mamwol, owek cero lok lataya’. You cannot be the only person who is right all the time. Even if you think you are right, keep calm, and respect other people’s views to avoid troubles. You will annoy people with your being right”, (R4).

The wrong action of a member of the family or clan also causes anger and pain to his/her own people. No family, even the family of a serious offender does not need evils to enter into their family/clan. So, the Acoli community had rules and principles that would guard against evil penetrating the home and the whole clan in case a member commits a serious offense. If any member of the family/clan committed a serious offense, the community respond immediately to mitigate the effects of the offense, first on the family and then the clan.

“For instance, if you kill, there are two other principles that are call on; in case you kill and you come back to the village with blood in your hands you are not allowed to enter the homestead with that blood; secondly you must give personal testimony against yourself. You start with pronouncing your father’s name, your mother’s name and your maternal uncle’s name, these three people indicate who you are, your identity. Thirdly you must give your motives; so you would answer by saying probably that that person provoked you, or did something bad such that in self-defence you killed him … then the elders from within the community, do what they call community based collective responsibility on your behalf. So they come at the entrance to the culprit’s homestead with fresh eggs, put it down and then you step on it; after which you are allowed to enter the homestead but you don’t go into your house/hut, you just enter into the homestead. Stepping on the egg symbolizes three things 1st; acceptance that you are still part of the community, a child of God, created in the image of God, despite the fact that you have brought shame and disgrace on the entire community, 2; it symbolizes purity and the sanctity of human life that nobody in the world is allowed to violate or disgrace. They make you do this also to show the gravity of your action, the murder you have committed, meaning you have done something you shouldn’t have done. Thirdly it symbolizes self-destruction because having killed another human being you have destroyed yourself, it’s like you have killed yourself”, (R1).

Determination of the appropriate response to a wrong The offended person or party develops an internal sense of what the wrong means to him/her, and this informs his/her perceived next course of action. Feelings of defeat following a serious wrong such as killing a person can breed revengefulness, while considerations of the wrong as not worth the efforts and time of the offended can lead to outright forgiveness or just letting things be, “jalo ne”. Take the example of a scratch leading to a “small dent” on your vehicle by another driver when on the road. Many seasoned drivers out rightly forgive the other person if they consider the dent small and that there was no intention to harm but an incidental occurrence. Those without sense of forgiveness and extreme anger often magnify simple matters and cause troubles to societies.

“Once a serious wrong has been committed against you, the best thing is to judge your capacity for response. But even before responding, decide whether the wrong is so important that you need to respond, or revenge. Even when you want to respond by revenge, first determine your capacity, you may suffer double loss”, (R7).

Perception of loss due to a wrong can lead to anger. An obvious loss can lead to quarrels and counter attacks immediately if that is judged the best option to the offended. The conduct of the offender is important in the determination of the exact options to actions following perception of a loss. Other people present during the altercations may cause the offended to get annoyed.

“It is normal to get annoyed when offended, but you should always give a measured response. Do not over react”, (R1).

Other people present at the time of a wrong may augment the seriousness of the situation; fanning fire in the circumstance. A common approach to making someone offended really get annoyed is to remind him/her of a proverb that relates to their mother, and why they should tussle out any issues that come their way, and never seek to return to the safety of the womb. One can only go back to the womb of their mothers through the vagina, and no adult ever wants to see the vagina of their mothers. A respondent presents how such debate would go;

“I asked him that are you mature? He said yes! Then I proceeded with asking him that if you are really mature then, do you know the saying in Acoli that ‘lalworo odok iyi minne’ literally meaning a fearful person should go back into the mother’s womb (laughter); have you heard about it? … When you were coming out of your mother’s womb did you see what you came out from? Where you came out from did you see? Do you really want to see it (laughter). Now that you are an adult will you accept to see your mother’s vagina and enter in it and go hide inside her womb?” (R2).

7.3. Vengefulness

Once determination of the extent of loss is made, and yet the offender(s) does not seem remorseful or ready to make up for the loss, and the offended and his/her community do not consider themselves ready enough to retaliate, then they begin to contemplate revenge. Time and resources are put into revenge plans. However, the offended community usually do not hurry to revenge until when the truth has come out, and that takes time, usually years. If you hurry to revenge, you may hurt the wrong family! In circumstances of killing with impunity “nek anywar”, the victim family and clan go through some processes before considering revenge. First, the slain person is given opportunity to revenge for him/herself by causing problems or death in the family of the perpetrators. The burial of a slain person is done differently; once the dead body is brought home, a tent is made in the compound where the body is laid. The body is never taken into the house/hut. Relatives and friends are not to mourn as usual by crying—they come and say prays (lammu dog), praising the slain person for the good things ever done, and regretting the evil that has killed him/her; they implore the slain person to fight for him/herself, “omera/lamera, wot ki wiyi, cul kwor ni in kikomi”, i.e. literally, my brother, my sister, look for the person who killed you and revenge. The family puts a gourd of water into which the elderly women in the family have spitted their saliva (blessings) near the body, and a particular grass called “ajur” is placed in the water. People use the grass to sprinkle the water onto the dead body as they make their utterances in low tone. After the relatives and friends have performed this ceremony, the body is buried.

“The body of a slain person is not buried like for people who died a natural death from disease or old age. He/she is buried at the edge of the compound with the head facing the bush, and face looking up so he/she goes out there and looks for the killer and revenge. People are usually buried by the side of the house/hut; a woman buried on the side of the house where the fireplace is located so she may continue with her cooking role, while a man is buried on the opposite side to the fireplace, next to the water pot so he may fetch water and go hunting. And they are buried lying on their sides – the woman on the right side of the body while the man on the left. The head faces the compound, not away from the compound as it is done for the slain person. They are welcome home, to stay home in peace with the family”, (R2).

In most cases, the victim family waits for a message through dreams from the slain person as to whether he/she has completed his/her revenge on the perpetrators who often get strange and painful experiences including births of children with severe deformities and unexplained deaths of both the young and youth.

“The slain person keeps revenging; when he/she is done, he/she comes in dreams to two or three immediate family members within a short span of time. He/she reports three things; that revenge is finished, he/she wishes their grave be smeared with the black soil mixed with the special local brew ‘kwette” as is done for all other buried people, and thirdly, that the family can go on to organize the last funeral rite. On getting these testimonies, the head of the family selects three elderly but still able ladies from the clan to go confirm these messages from a powerful diviner. The elderly ladies go with the hens and food required, tell the diviner to call the dead person to talk for him/herself about what has been received in dreams. The diviner then organizes and performs the ritual of calling and talking to the dead, during which the dead person is asked to confirm the messages received in the dreams; ‘we are here, your mothers and sisters are here, you visited them in their dreams; you died a painful death, we have not done anything in revenge because we had left you t to first do the revenge yourself; tell us, are you done with the revenge? Was it you who visited your kin in the dream?’ If the dead person confirms, then they thank him/her and then wish him/her well. The emissaries then take the message back to the head of the family who then plans for the immediate smearing of the grave, and the last funeral rite”, (R2).

The family of the perpetrator on the other hand remains suspicious, restless and in pain as the dead revenges on them. The family members experience strange occurrences as the creator makes them go through difficult situations so they realize by themselves and appreciate the wrong done by killing a person innocently.

“The perpetrator family keeps a keen watch of the events in the home of the victim. In particular, they will never want the grave smeared and last funeral rite done before they have asked for forgiveness and paid compensations for the dead. The moment the last funeral rite is organized before compensations and Mato Oput, then the perpetrator family will be in troubles forever, suffering from torments of an evil spirit ‘cen’, because the slain person immediately becomes a ‘Lacen’ once the last funeral rite is done before forgiveness, compensation (culu kwor) and Mato Opu. This ‘cen’ will ravage the whole clan, moving from one family to another. The family that is suffering from its effect usually secretly have to transfer it to the family of a brother or sister or cousin using a black sheep (ki ywayo ki romo macol, kilokko cen bot ngat mukene, doko alok idogola) in a process called ‘lwoko cen’ or cleansing the evil spiri”, (R2).

7.4. Seeking for forgiveness and reconciliation

While the offended and his/her community might be planning and preparing for revenge, the offender and his/her community have the option to reconsider their position given the benefits of hindsight and impact of the wrong. The offender testifies about the wrong committed to his/her family, and clan leaders regarding the particulars of the wrong and against whom the wrong was committed, including the circumstances and intentions for committing the wrong. The family and clan investigate to confirm the testimony of the offender, evaluate the circumstances and graveness of the wrong, and take a position: to seek for forgiveness and reconciliation or settle that the wrong was justified, and therefore no need for reconciliation. The offender clan often seeks for reconciliation when they consider that the degree of misfortunes in their clan is out of proportion to natural occurrences and these misfortunes are attributable to revenge by the spirit of the slain person, “cen”. The best way to deal with vengeance from the spirit world is for the elders and clan leaders to organize rituals to appease the spirits.

“Before the reconciliation, the two families and clans never drink water from the same pot, they never share food amongst themselves, and they never marry from each other’s clan. If they eat of food prepared by either, it is referred to as ‘camu ojebu’ and immediately the teeth of those who have shared food start to rot off”, (R6).

However, if the perpetrator family chooses not to reach out to the victim family, actual revenge may be planned and executed. The Acoli believe that revenge is not good; that it is more painful than the first injury, and should therefore be avoided unless justified. This is entrenched in the Acoli proverb “Ma alunya loyo ma lakwong”, meaning revenge is more painful than the first injury, wrong or offence. Justified revenge to the Acoli people is when one who has committed a heinous crime including intentional killing goes on to pride him/herself with presumed impunity that I have killed your person, what can you do!; the “aneko nyong” concept. The offended community in the circumstance of “aneko nyong” gives time to the offender and his/her community so they can completely comprehend the wrong done and seek forgiveness by themselves. The Acoli do not hurry to revenge even in such circumstances because they believe that the person might be acting in the “aneko nyong” mode not out of his/her own will but rather the direct influence of the blood of the slain person, making the killer behave abnormally; “nongo latoo tye kawot ki wiyi”. There is therefore need to give time for the killer to calm down, become remorseful and seek forgiveness through his/her clan. Should the “aneko nyong” mode continue, then the aggrieved clan begins to plan revenge; they would consider such revenge justified. The timing of the actual revenge depends more on how well the aggrieved clan considers themselves ready for a win in the battle in relation to the strength of the killer’s clan. Once the war planners of the aggrieved clan find the right opportunity when they are sure they will win, a concise and surprise revenge is launched against the offender clan. In such revenge, huts and houses are burnt down, cattle killed and raided, women and children abducted, and occasionally people killed during defence but never in cold blood. Killing in cold blood would invite and justify counter revenge. All respondents in this study concur that the Acoli would do everything to avoid serious crimes including killing.

“Revenge is not good; people will remain insecure and fail to enjoy life in fear of revenge. Acoli only revenge when one purposefully commits a serious wrong and prides him/herself, that Aneko nyong … but even then, there is no hurry to revenge. You may lose twice, so wait until when the other clan has forgotten, then you surprise them with revenge”, (R1).

8. Reconciliation for killings and crime against humanity

The respondents concurred that conflicts can lead to grave outcomes including destruction to property, physical bodily injuries and deaths. Crimes and killings can be directed against a known victim(s). The perpetrator of the wrong can be an individual or several individuals with common interest to cause pain and losses to the victims. Conflict is not alien to the Central Luo; throughout history and migration from Egypt along the Nile valley, the Luo faced off with different saboteurs and perpetrators of heinous acts. The Luo have been acutely aware that life has to continue post violent conflicts. The Luo therefore developed means of reconciliation to allow harmonious co-existence post violent conflicts. There are two main approaches to reconciliation post violent conflict; Mato Oput and Gomo Tong. Mato Oput ritual is performed when a particular person is killed by a known person or persons, often as a result of a conflict. In the event where several people are killed and no particular person is known for killing a particular person, the two parties involved in the conflict perform Gomo Tong ritual. In Gomo Tong, the parties involved in mass killing agree to perform a reconciliation ritual which involves eating and drinking from a common source, and during which the blade of a spear is bent, symbolizing cessation of hostilities and violence, saying that the spear used for war is now destroyed, and there shall be no more fighting between the two parties involved in the violent conflict. Gomo Tong involves reconciliation of groups for mass killings and crimes against humanity, committed during periods of violent conflict between known groups.

9. Mato Oput

Respondents cautioned that Mato Oput is a very serious undertaking that should not be rushed into without adequate evaluation and complete considerations by the elders and clan leaders.

“Mato Oput is not rushed; you do not want to provide it ‘when still hot.’ Let things first calm down; when it is cool, then people can drink and swallow. Do not give it when hot, because it will burn the mouth, and will not be swallowed (pe ki ruyu mato gin ma wango dong dano. Omyero kong okwe mot, weko ki romo mato ki mwunyo)”, (R4).

Burn the mouth in the above quote is used figuratively not that the Oput juice will be literally hot, and therefore burns the mouth. But rather, that when the tempers are still high following the killing, it is not safe to bring people to discuss the matter, it may lead to quarrels and more troubles.

After some years, when the family and clan of the offender have by themselves accepted responsibility for the wrong and have chosen to seek for forgiveness, then the process of Mato Oput sets into motion.

“So the perpetrator community, let’s call it community “A”, then goes to another community, a third party community, who serves as a mediator, let’s call it community “B” and whose role is to play arbitration between community “A” and “C”; “C” being the community of the murdered person, the victim community. But these two communities “A” and “C” don’t communicate with each other directly, they all go through community “B”. So a member or two from community “B” will now go and tell “C” that someone from “A” murdered your child; he then gives them a brief background on how it happened as told to them by “A” who would have used the testimony told to them by the killer. Community “B” tells “C” the actual identity of the alleged killer from community “A”, clearly stating names of his/her mother, father and maternal uncles; those three characters form the identity of any person among the Acoli. Then they will also explain to “C” the stated motives behind the killing and the means by which the killing was committed; they also explain clearly the characteristic features of the person killed – his/her sex, estimated age, and the kind of dressing the person was putting on the day of death. So after that if community “C” agrees that the slain person described is indeed their child, then they request the mediator to give them sometimes to investigate further, consult, and mourn because the story told may have triggered emotions of pain again. Then later, community “C” reach out to the mediator. Usually this happens after six months or one year, and “B” then sends a message to “A”, that the victim community “C” is ready to talk to them, to listen from the perpetrator community directly. The first segment of the process is ‘truth telling’. The truth telling process is very important; it is the first step to the reconciliation and in that process the whole truth must be told without fear. After that then comes the second stage, ‘genuine accountability’ for the wrong done. The perpetrator community provides a genuine and elaborate account of the killing including the reasons and intended benefits, and who were involved in the process of killing. Then stage three is ‘compensation’; this focuses on and puts to test the sincerity of the perpetrators. If they willingly accept to provide reasonable compensations, then it means that they truly regret what their son/daughter (killer) did and are indeed sorry; it’s not just about the money because human value can’t be replaced in terms of material wealth, it is invaluable, it is irreplaceable. The fourth stage is the ‘ritual of sharing food’; the food and drinks that shall be served on the day of Mato Oput. After this has been planned and accepted, then comes the fifth stage, ‘the ritual of drinking the violence and death, the Oput’ called “Mato Oput”. “Oput” is a ‘family tree’, they grow in clusters, so many of them in an area but while sharing one root. So when they want to use it for this kind of ritual they pick a portion of the root from the middle part that connects all the other trees and then they pound it and mix it with the local brew. This concoction is what is given to the people involved to drink. It is a very bitter drink and it represents the bitterness and violence of death; it is not supposed to be drank by everyone but by selected representatives from both parties; so if there are to be four people drinking the concoction, then there will be two from either side. So after drinking the bitter root concoction is finished then comes the sixth stage, the ‘restoration of human relationships’ that were broken because of the killing. This involves sharing food and offering certain symbolic gifts to the victim community by the perpetrators. Then lastly, the seventh stage, is ‘societal transformation’ in which members of the general communities not involved in the violent conflict but that have come to witness the reconciliation join in to feast and merry. The past is forgotten and people start a fresh chapter”, (R1).

There was no substantive variation among respondents regarding the process of Mato Oput, and the stages are set out in details as follows:

9.1. Realization of faults and remorsefulness by perpetrator family

The perpetrator family and clan often deny killing, and remain belligerent, but only until when strange painful occurrences never seen before start affecting them. These painful events include births of children with severe physical deformities and mental disabilities, sudden unexplained deaths, and wild animals entering into the family compounds. The Acoli perceive these events as God’s retributions for the killing of an innocent person, and tells the killer and family that it was wrongful killing, not self-defence, and they should apologize and compensate the victim if they need peace in their lives.

“Some unexplained painful experiences happen to the offender or members of his family. These happen repeatedly, and is associated with him dreaming about the person he killed. These are to make him realize the wrong he committed and confess to the family. Once he has told the elders, the family interrogates him, and investigates further including visiting diviners. When the elders are convinced the abnormal painful occurrences are due to the killing, they then start to contemplate on and plan to seek reconciliation with the victim family”, (R4).

9.2. Identification and establishment of a mediator clan

Once the elders and clan leaders of the offender feel confident that their son/daughter indeed committed the wrong (heinous crime), and that there is need for reconciliation, then they contact a leader of another clan that is considered to be in good standing with the offended clan. There should not be history of any substantial wrong between the clan chosen as mediator so there is no suspicion of any hidden intent to harm either the offended or offender clan during the intended negotiations. The mediator clan leader meets with his clan elders and consider the role being asked of them. They do their own investigations about the wrong and come up with their position; who is alleged to have committed the wrong, the circumstances of the wrong and consequences thus far. Once convinced with their own investigative findings about the wrong, they then invite the clan leaders and elders of the offender clan to openly make their request, reveal what they know about the wrong and make public commitment to the process of reconciliation. The mediator and offender clans then come up with a clear position regarding the process of reconciliation before contacting the offended family and clan.

“You do not just rush to mediate. The offender clan also does not just select anybody to mediate them with the offended clan. It is a process my sons. The offender clan need to be sure they are in safe hands; you need be sure you will not be sold off after making declarations about a serious crime. Equally, you the mediator should not just rush to become involved in a serious issue without understanding. You even investigate independently before you accept the offender clan to come and testify to you. The whole process is done with a lot of caution and care”, (R2).

9.3. Truth telling and accountability by offender community

The mediator clan leader approaches the victim clan and shares the details of the declarations about the wrong by the perpetrator clan. The elders and clan leaders who already had investigated the wrong compare the declarations from perpetrator clan, and evaluate the declared intentions for reconciliation. They then call their own clan meetings and deliberate on the issues before accepting admissions from the perpetrator clan. If pain and anger are still fresh on the minds of majority of the victim clan members, then the process of reconciliation is stayed.

“Nobody goes on telling the truth about brutal killing of a person to the clan members of the victim anyhow. The ground needs to be levelled first. The mediators need to be sure that acceptance by the victim clan is not to lure the perpetrator clan members so they are hit hard in revenge. So, when you are a mediator, you need to be very careful, evaluate both sides and ensure they are genuine in their intentions to talk peace”, (R3).

Once the two sides are ready to talk, the mediator organizes a meeting involving family members, elders and clan leaders of the victim and of the perpetrator. This meeting takes place at a neutral ground, usually at the mediating clan meeting point. It is in this meeting that the full truth is told by the perpetrator clan. A review of the lecture notes by Retired Bishop MacBaker Ochola emphasizes the completeness in truth telling.

“The offender community voluntarily takes the lead … telling the truth in the spirit of love, mutual respect and mutual understanding. For this reason, the offender community boldly makes public acknowledgement or accepts public ownership or responsibility, on behalf of the offender and on behalf of the offender’s immediate family. Such public acknowledgements, confessions, repentance, or public expressions of remorse are specifically meant to reveal the whole truth … Through public confessions, the offender community becomes vulnerable and guilty for the crimes committed by one of its members” (OCHOLA, 2009).

The stage of truth telling is very critical in the whole process of reconciliation. When mishandled, then the mediation and reconciliation efforts become a betrayal. The retired bishop compares this stage with touching on a naked electric wire.

“The whole revealed truth functions like the naked electric wire, which is dangerous and deadly to both communities involved in the violent conflict. It can only be handled through the power of mercy and forgiveness by the offended community. This is the beauty of reconciliation when both mercy and forgiveness come out of conviction of the heart of the offended community” .

9.4. Acceptance of plea for forgiveness

The victim community interrogates the perpetrator family and clan regarding the circumstances and intention for the killing of their loved one. The basis for seeking for reconciliation is interrogated. Often, the offender community could have been suffering torments or misfortunes perceived to be due to the vengeance spirit of the slain person. This needs to come out clearly. The offender community needs to disclose any sufferings they have experienced that they perceive could have been due to the spirit of the slain person; they need to demonstrate that they are indeed sorry for having murdered him/her. Issues that have come up during the truth telling stage are counter investigated and corroborated by the victim and mediator clans, and are discussed again and again before the victim family and clan accept the plea for forgiveness and progress to the next stage of the process.

“When you lose your dear one to brutal death, you do not just accept anything you are told about the death. You do not just take any plea for mercy. Why did they kill in the first place? You need to receive their testimonies but still go and investigate. You do not get satisfied immediately and move on to discuss compensation. This is not about compensation for the death as some people think. It is not about the actual bitterness of the Oput juice. It is about settling the spirit of the victim. It is about calming the members of the family of the victim. So, you have to investigate and prove that what you have been told are true and then you accept the pain of the death of your loved one as you look at the killers now in front of you. Then in the spirit of peaceful co-existence, you accept their plea for forgiveness”, (R6).

9.5. Compensation for the death of the victim

Once the three communities that are party to the reconciliation process have reached the key point when the family and clan of the victim have accepted the plea for forgiveness, then discussions of compensations start. Often the mediator advises adherence to predetermined compensation amounts rather than subjecting the matter to debate as though it is to do with the value of life of the person slain or the degree of loss the victim family perceives. Compensation is symbolic and is levied as a way of deterrence to other would be offenders. Lecture notes of Bishop MacBaker alludes to this effect.

“The payment of compensation is not meant in any way to replace the life lost because human value is invaluable. It is simply to demonstrate or show the sincerity and purity of the heart as graphically as expressed in the public confession” (OCHOLA, 2009).

9.6. Public admissions of responsibility for killing

On the day of Mato Oput, the offender family and clan are intercepted (rather symbolically) at the entry to the homestead of the victim. Armed youths followed by elders hurry towards the offender clan who would also have some armed youths for defence of the clan, just in case the victim clan changed their minds from reconciliation and suddenly choose the path of revenge. The two teams meet right at the gate to the homestead of the victim; the victim family would be hauling insults and aiming their weapons at the perpetrators saying among others, “why have you come to our home? You killed our son/daughter, now what do you still want with us?” To this, the perpetrator clan will make their public confessions regarding their heinous act of murder; “we are sorry our son/daughter killed your son/daughter; we are not interested in fighting. We are sorry; we have come to you to ask for forgiveness; please forgive us”. While all these happen, the mediator who would be in between the two team puts across the way a stick used for opening the granary called “layibi”, saying “please forgive them, they have come for reconciliation, forgive them. Put your weapons down. Do not fight. Fighting brings pain, brings widowhood, and orphans, please do not fight.” At this, the two sides lay down their weapons for attack and for defence, starting with the perpetrators and then the victim side. The victim clan youths put their weapons down only when the perpetrators have indeed laid down their weapons, just in case they planned to kill again. Among the weapons in the hands are sticks from a particular tree (pobo) used for making ropes and for washing clothes. Pobo has very slippery saps that are used for washing dirty linens with stains. The saps have the capacity to remove stains from garments.

“Both sides carry branches of Pobo. The branches are good for beating. However, now that fighting is not going to happen, the branches are used symbolically for their cleansing ability. The branches are picked up by the mediator and taken to the point where the sheep are going to be slaughtered and Mato Oput takes place. The representatives of both clans walk over the Pobo branches to cross towards the homestead where Mato Oput will take place. Mato Oput takes place at a point on the pathway to the home of the victim. The parties are considered cleansed when they walk over the Pobo branches. All their bitterness, pain and dirt in the heart are removed”, (R5).

9.7. Slaughtering of two sheep and Mato Oput

Immediately after the Pobo branches, the team move to a point where a gulley has been dug across the path to the homestead of the victim. This is the spot where the gourd with Oput power, the local brew (kwette) from both clans, knives and other items for the rituals are placed. The perpetrator clan remains on the other side of the gulley away from the homestead. The mediator then arranges the two sheep side by side. The sheep of the victim faces the East while the sheep of the perpetrators faces the West (sunset). The sheep are cut across in the middle without first killing them. Their mouths are held tight to not allow them bellow while being cut across at the intersection of the abdomen and chest. The heads and chests of the sheep are interchanged; the victim’s clan take the head of the sheep from the perpetrators, and the perpetrator clan takes the head of the sheep of the victim clan. The blood from both sheep are collected and poured into the gourd of Oput mixed with the kwette brew. The otherwise brown or mahogany like Oput power then becomes red because of blood from the sheep. The whole mixture of Oput power, kwette and sheep blood are mixed thoroughly by the mediator.

“Once the mixture is prepared, the representatives from the two clans come and kneel by the gulley; two or three from either side. The Victim’s representatives are on the side of the homestead facing the gulley while the representatives of the perpetrators are on the other side facing the homestead. The mediator then holds two heads- one from the victim’s side and the other from the perpetrator side and knocks them onto each other three times above the gourd with Oput. The mediator repeats this with all the representatives kneeling at the gourd with Oput. The mediator then makes some utterances then the two sides will proceed to drink from the bitter roots and blood of the innocent sheep to make the two sides never want to go back to bitterness with each other but become friends and allies. The representative of the offender clan starts to drink. With hands clasped together at the back, he leans to drink from the gourd on the ground. After each mouthful of the mixture, he rises up onto his knees proper, looks at the representatives across, and then leans down again to take another mouthful. He does this three times. Thereafter, the representative of the victim does the same. If there are more than two representatives, this procedure is repeated for each pair until all are done”, (R2).

During the process of “Mato Oput” that the researchers observed, the elder in charge of rituals said the following;

“It is the two people here who will drink the ‘Oput’, but before they do that I want to correct something, me as the mediator between these two I will knock their heads three times before they start “Mato Oput”, drinking the bitter root, have you understood? … You the two people involved should make sure you kneel in a good posture not in a half kneeling posture, so that you do not fall. You put your hands behind your back and kneel down … Even while getting up you get up the same way without touching the ground. The hands are put behind the back to show that us (the two parties and witnesses here) don’t want any more misunderstandings, there will be no more fights and ill heartedness between us … Leave space for those who are kneeling so that they do not bump onto you … don’t stand next to any of them”, (R5).

After drinking from the mixture, the mediator makes a very important utterance that are responded to by the whole congregation. “Let the setting sun take the bad blood, bitterness and all the bad things!” And the whole congregation responds in chorus, “And let the sun take, and take it far! Take it away forever”. In Luo, the mediator says: “Wek wang ceng ote ci ote!” And the congregation responds: “Ote, ote mabor!” This is repeated three times, nothing else happens during this moment, except dead silence.

This is how it happened in the Mato Oput the researchers witnessed in 2019;

“We have come to reconcile these two clans LMKT and PMLK. As for you two, who are representing your respective clans, today we shall use you and we pray that just as our ancestors used to do long ago, we pray also that if all the things that were happening before (the misfortunes and painful experiences) were because of this reason, then we therefore ask that they stop, they should stop indeed”, (R5).

The mediator then goes into the prayer of casting away all misfortunes that were happening because of the vengeance of the slain person:

Mediator:“Wang ceng ote, ci ote” (let the setting sun take them [the misfortunes], and take them forever).

Audience:“Ote” (Let the setting sun take them away)!

Mediator:“Ote” (Let it take them away)!

Audience:“Ote mabor” (Let it take them far away)!

Mediator:“Wang ceng otero” (The setting sun has taken them away)!

Audience:“Ci otero” (And it has taken them away)”, (R5).

After the casting of the evil utterances, the mediator says,

“From now, the people from LMKT and PMLK can now live together in peace. There is nothing that will stop them anymore. This blood that has been shed here is to wash away the sins or ill heartedness that was once among the people. Now, from today people from LMKT are welcome to enter the homesteads/households of people from PMLK comfortably, without fear. The two clans can now share food and drinks. So now we are going to enter the homestead and perform other rituals that need to be done from there”, (R5).

Members from the two clans then walk to the homestead with their halves of the sheep. The two groups go to their respective cooking sites in the homestead and start to prepare their food including the sheep halves.

9.8. Payment of compensations for the death

Clan leaders, chiefs and elders as well as members of the public go onto the next stage of payment of compensation if this was not already done prior to the Mato Oput ceremony. The money for the compensation is paid in public. However, there is cleansing of the money before the payments are done. Ill obtained wealth are never accepted for compensations and payment of bride price among the Central Luo. The people paying the money must declare that the wealth/money being paid was not obtained in a criminal or dirty manner. However, no one can ever prove that indeed the wealth/money was obtained in clean manner. So, the Central Luo perform a cleansing ritual on the money/wealth before taking them into the house and also before using them. So, after the money/wealth have been handed over to the mediator, the elders of the receiving clan immediately sit and perform the cleansing rituals with the mediator in charge of rituals. A white hen without any other colour patches on it (unblemished) is used. The hen is held with the legs and wings left free to swing. The clan leader/elder swings the hen over the money/wealth three times as he makes these utterances (lamu dong), pleading with the dead and ancestors long gone, in low tone, saying for example,

“In (the slain person is named) ki nekki nek malit, ki nekki nek alany; cwinywa ocwer pi too ni; tin dong kiculu cogo ni en. Nek alany dong obed peke, nek alany ogiki; dong wabedu ki kuc; kuc odwog ikinwa; in dong iywer ikin kwariwa. Wek nyodo opoti ikom mon; wek lutino onyar ipacu; wun kwariwa uwek pacu obed mukwer”, (R5).

Literally meaning;

“You (the slain person is name is mentioned), you were killed brutally, you were killed for no reasons; we were all sadden by the news of your death; today compensations is being paid in your name. Killing with impunity should stop, killing with impunity must stop; we should live in peace; let peace return amongst us; you now rest in peace in the company of our ancestors. Let women in this clan be fertile and deliver children; let us have many children; you, our ancestors, let there be peace in this clan”, (R5).

The rest of the clan members and witnesses remain silent throughout this process. Thereafter, the money for compensation is passed on to the victim family, who passes it on to the people who should use it if these people have already been identified. If not, the clan leader assigns someone to keep the money until such a time when it is to be used. Such a money is never kept in the bank or together with any other money meant for other purposes. At the doorway of the person selected to use the money, another ritual is performed. An unblemished sheep is slaughtered, and the blood mixed with gastric juice (wee) then sprinkled on the money. These two rituals are performed for three reasons: remove any dirt or foul play committed in the process of obtaining the money by the offender clan, join the living with the spirits of the ancestors and living dead through the utterances, and commit the users by the blood of the sheep sprinkled on the money to the purpose and hence avoid misuse of the money.

“Now the money for “kwo” has already been given to you people, it is up to you now to choose the people who will use this money. But before the money enters the house, the person going to use must have the money cleansed by swiping on a sheep. It is that person who will use the money that should get a sheep to cleanse it … and then when also picking the money to be used for marriage the same ritual is done to cleanse the money, but this time, the sheep is slaughtered and then you get “wee” (gastric juice) and sprinkle it on the money and then the money can be used. Keep the money in the house or elsewhere, but never take it to the bank. Money for “kwo” (death compensation) cannot be used for business; don’t use it for business, don’t be tempted to pick some of it with the mindset that I will replace it, that is what you people should know so that people’s lives remain well in the future. The money is for marriage, it is for paying bride price. But it should be cleansed before taking it for paying the bride price … when the girl who has been married with it comes home, a similar cleansing ritual is supposed to be performed. When the bride who was married using the “kwo” money steps at her marital home, a goat or a sheep is used to cleanse her and the home that has received that money also performs a cleansing ritual of swiping the money on a sheep”, (R5).

The consciences of the people are tied to the death of the slain person and the spirit world so that any tendency to misuse the money creates guilt and foretell troubles in the life to come after death of the material body in this world.

“This money is never to be used for business, construction or any other purpose, but payment of bride price … The money is to be used to marry a wife or wives who will give birth to the clan and ensure continuity of the clan. The woman or women to be married with this money should be one who has never delivered before; should not be an “oruta” (woman who has delivered before with some other man/men, not the man currently living with or to be married to). The first child of this woman is named after the dead person. And there are no precedence among the Central Luo that the sex of this child is ever different from the sex of the deceased whose compensation money was used to marry the mother of the child in question”, (R5).

After the payment and rituals for cleansing the money are completed, the elder in charge of the ritual of the mediator clan makes important utterances:

“Let no one again bring misfortunes to these homes (Ngat mo pe dok oting ali onyo okel kiciran mo igang kany)! The girls and boys in these homes are now released from agony. Let birth befall the girls (wek nyodo opot ikom anyira twa). Let the boys marry and bring us children … Let no one bring shame to this home”, (R5).

When all these prayers or pleadings are being said, everyone else, even the chiefs are silent. After elder in charge of ritual has finished these prayers to the spirits of the ancestors and living dead, he invites everyone, especially the two clans to sing and dance three different funeral songs; but not any of the songs is sung to the finish (ki yoko wer lyel adek ayoko). He then declares that the two clans are henceforth free to interact without any fear. The victim clan can also proceed to smear the grave with the black soil mixed with local brew (kwette), and thereafter organize the last funeral rites of the deceased. There are no more obstacles.

“The issues which would have been a stumbling block on doing the funeral rites is what we have finished today. So since we have closed that chapter today, it will now be up to you people … so that you come up with the dates for the funeral rites, because now nothing can stop that from happening since the “Mato Oput” has already taken place”, (R5).

9.9. Sharing food between victim and perpetrator clans

The Luo do not share food and water from their drinking pots with enemies. Sharing food and water is a sign of fellowship, love and communion. Since the onset of conflict and murder of the victim, the two clans in the reconciliation ceremony had never shared food and drank water from the same pot. There is no life without water and food for biological beings; there was therefore no life between the two clans since the murder. Now that reconciliation is being conducted, new life starts. People eat together! The retired bishop of Kitgum diocese said in his lecture notes;

“Sharing food with one another is a fundamental fellowship. Sharing of food expresses the love and intimacy the people enjoy through communion and fellowship with one another and with the living dead, the ancestors. In situation of conflict, sharing of food with those who have murdered a member of your clan is not allowed at all, under all circumstances … The shared meat (sheep halves) is cooked by each community in different pots. The cooked meat is shared between the offender community and the offended community as a sign of acceptance of each other into new relationship. This communion and fellowship is witnessed by the living dead and the unborn. It is an occasion where humanity, nature and God come together in solidarity and love with one another through forgiveness and reconciliation” (OCHOLA, 2009).

Members of the public, the witnesses that are not from the two clans do eat at the ceremony but not of the sheep that were used in the cleansing ritual. These sheep are eaten only by members of the two clans being reconciled. The other people eat food cooked ordinarily. Sharing food and drinking water is so very central and is a symbol for true reconciliation among the Luo. It is so important that it serves as a sign that indeed forgiveness has taken place. The offender community becomes reassured after eating together and drinking from the pot of the offended that no one from among the offended clan will harm them on their way back to their clan. In fact, the Luo will never kill by their hands or by any means directly or indirectly, any person who has rightfully eaten or drank water from their family drinking pot. If anyone is waylaid and harmed or killed when getting out of a Luo home, the killer is certainly not from the clan where the person has eaten or drank water. The spirit of such a person who ate and drank water is bound to finish the whole clan if anyone from the clan kills that person.

“The ritual of sharing food, that’s why the Acoli have a saying that ‘whoever drinks your water, whoever eats your food, whoever enters in your house, whoever runs to you when he or she is in danger becomes part and parcel of your life instantly.’ … So we have the best culture in the whole world, starting from the guiding principles”, (R1).

But be aware that the Luo are warriors and with several excellent war strategies! Eating and drinking water from their pots is therefore not a guarantee of no harm thereafter. If the Luo want to deal with you even after eating and drinking in their homes, they will still do it without disturbing the spirits of their living dead. However, this is not the place for discussing the Luo war strategies, and therefore the researchers will go into no further details.

10. Discussions

We found that the Central Luo in northern Uganda understood conflict and violence as part and parcel of life, and established mechanisms for reconciliation post violent conflicts. When the conflict involved groups and there was mass killings, the Central Luo would not go into specific death compensations and reconciliation at individual level but rather organize intergroup/inter-clan reconciliation ritual, Gomo Tong, which seeks to atone for the crimes at the level of the groups/clans involved rather that individuals. When there was violence against a specific individual(s), and this individual was killed in the course of the violence, then at the appropriate moment, the Central Luo would perform a reconciliation ritual in which the individual offender or his/her clan undergoes a process including truth telling, public confessions, drinking the Oput juice, paying compensation for the deceased and sharing food in the homestead of the deceased (BAGUMA, 2013; BAKO, 2009; E. K. BAINES, 2007b). Mato Oput is an inter-clan and intra-Acoli practice to re-establish peaceful coexistence following murder of a known person by another known person from another clan. If the murder occurred within a clan, only culu kwor is conducted. This has been explicated in the opening of an article, in which Baines narrates the ordeal of a former abducted girl, Alice who participated in the brutal killing of her sister Joy. Alice later on escaped captivity but would get nightmares and suffered from bad spirit’s attacks (cen) on herself and her child. Alice is reported to have undergone the communal ritual of nyono tong gweno, but was still searching for money for culu kwor (compensation) and Mato Oput (E. BAINES, 2007a). While compensation would be paid in the circumstance of Alice, Mato Oput would not be required. It has to be understood right at the outset that these reconciliation rituals only achieve their goals if both parties/clans to the wrong believe in the power of the rituals. Rituals, whether cultural or religious only have meanings and achieve intended effects or guide course of actions and strategies for actions if and only if the parties involved do understand and believe in them. The steps and ingredients in the process of the rituals need to make sense to the parties involved (BLOCH, 1974; KYALO, 2013; SWIDLER, 1986).

Mato Oput has been proposed and discussed extensively as an approach to reconciliation and peaceful coexistence in the case of the brutal conflict in northern Uganda between the LRA and government of Uganda. The violent conflict in northern Uganda that lasted more than two decades (1987 to 2006) has been described by various authors and stakeholders as the most neglected atrocious conflict in the history of mankind. Referring to the report of Medicines San Frontiers, Westerhaus said, “For 21 years, northern Uganda has experienced a particularly brutal conflict between an insurgent group called the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and the army of the Uganda government” (WESTERHAUS et al., 2007). More recently, MALAMBA et al. (2016) noted, “In Northern Uganda, protracted war between the Government of Uganda and the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) resulted in widespread atrocities, rights violations, displacement and death” (MALAMBA et al., 2016). Tim Allen noted that “when the situation in Northern Uganda was referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in late 2003, the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) had been fighting the Ugandan government of Yoweri Museveni for over 15 years. It has abducted thousands of adults and children, and mutilated or killed victims on a shocking scale. Ostensibly for their own protection, most of the local population has been concentrated into hundreds of densely settled camps in atrocious living conditions” (ALLEN, 2007). There seems to be no dispute as to who were the protagonists in the conflict in northern Uganda; the conflict was between the LRA and the government of Uganda. In 2003, the government of Uganda branded the LRA a terrorist group and referred the rebel outfit for trial by the ICC. The ICC investigated the matter and issued arrest warrants for five of the top LRA commanders. However, to discuss Mato Oput without setting out clearly the protagonists in the conflict is doing half the job, and a gross injustice to justice and reconciliation. Perhaps, this is partly the reason Tim noted early on that “The international Criminal Court’s intervention in northern Uganda has faced opposition from supporters of traditional justice”. He continues to say, “However, there is less local consensus about reconciliation rituals than has been asserted, and the hybrid forgiveness ceremonies, being performed with external assistance under the auspices of a newly created council of chiefs, are not as significant as enthusiasts imagine” (ALLEN, 2007). This intriguing article by Allen begs for a number of questions regarding this conflict and Mato Oput as a step in a reconciliation process:

1. Why is there less local consensus for Mato Oput as a way for resolving this brutal conflict?

2. If local refers to Uganda and not Acoli land where the conflict was experienced, were the people who did not express approval for Mato Oput part of the Acoli or other tribes/communities in Uganda?

3. Why did the local leaders in Acoli propose and strongly support Mato Oput as the way to end the conflict and re-establish peaceful coexistence among the clans in Acoli as well as their neighbours who also suffered the “LRA violence”? Could it be conceivable that the Acoli religious leaders and the Chiefs who proposed Mato Oput were promoting impunity and not considerate of the sufferings their own people have gone through?

4. Could it be the case that the proponents of Mato Oput clearly know that Mato Oput does not fit in the circumstance of the LRA but all the same still decided to support it in search of peace and harmony rather than justice and reconciliation? Could it be that these local leaders had clearly seen that justice was already aborted right from the outset when the ICC did not consider the other parties to the crime but only the LRA? If that is the case, then it could be that the Acoli cultural and religious leaders saw that the ICC was aimed at miscarriage of justice and promotion of injury against innocent abducted children trained in ritual of killing and brutality as a means of survival rather than military strategy!

5. Are the proponents of Mato Oput bent towards helping the Acoli destroy completely any remnants of their culture by altering meanings of important cultural rituals such as Mato Oput so that the Acoli of tomorrow are lost and without any cultural rituals that could help them reunite in the face of violent conflict?

These are not the only questions that could be asked upon thorough reading of the article by Allen and other scholars regarding the ICC intervention in northern Uganda. Interestingly, the responses to all these questions are embedded in the intense arguments by Allen regarding the appropriateness or rather how Mato Oput cannot be reasonably argued to substitute, complement, or operate in parallel to the ICC, and/or worth any reasonable person’s debate at all. The use of African traditional rituals in peace building and reconciliation has been extensively discussed in the case of Rwanda (Gachacha courts), and South Africa (truth and reconciliation commission). The important issues that Allen pondered over in his articles on the northern Uganda conflict and ICC intervention in particular is shared by many other scholars including Baguma, Bako and Otim (BAGUMA, 2013; BAKO, 2009). Some scholars avow that the traditional means of justice do not work, while majority suggest a hybrid approach that involves adaptation of aspects of local justice that meets international standards of justice, responsibility and accountability, and a transformation of the international strategies to fit local sociocultural and economic realities of the people involved in the conflict (E. BAINES, 2007a). That Mato oput is not applicable to the circumstance where there is a third party in the killing or when no one knows exactly who killed who was expressly stated by the Chua Chief in the case of the Mucwini massacre (TSHIMBA, 2015). The Chief suggested culu kwor by the government, and sharing meals after peace negotiations as the preferred way forward to re-establish peaceful coexistence among the two warring clans, but not Mato Oput. This is mainly because a third party (the LRA) effected killing of several people at once, and no one knows exactly who killed who (TSHIMBA, 2015). Challenges to Mato Oput has been discussed by several scholars, most of whom contend that Mato Oput is an excellent time honoured reconciliation process, but that the process does not apply in the case of the LRA and northern Uganda conflict where there were several victims and perpetrators, and different degrees of crimes and crimes against humanity committed. In addition, the geographical scope of the war, that affected several other tribes and nations makes the Acoli traditional reconciliation and peace building ritual inadequate as a way of ending the war and re-establishing sustainable peaceful coexistence (BAGUMA, 2013).

Our findings provide adequate responses to some of the concerns regarding Mato Oput. The ritual is conducted in circumstances of conflict that have existed between well-known foes and who have for a long time since the violence never shared food nor water from their homes. Unlike Gomo Tong, Mato Oput rituals are performed for the deaths of victims whose killers are known, and who confess to the killing of named persons. If Mato Oput were to be used in the case of northern Uganda, then the right answer needs to be given as to who were in conflict and who killed who? The LRA leaders accused cannot go into Mato Oput with Acoli, Madi, Lango and Teso as a group of people. The conflict was supposedly between the government of Uganda and the LRA, and not between the LRA and the civilian who were murdered at will by whoever had guns and wanted to kill. The particular LRA leaders accused need to willingly testify to the killing, and name the particular persons they have each killed. The LRA leaders and their clans need to mobilize resources to compensate these persons they have each killed. But do the LRA leaders know who they have killed? Are they willing to name them and publicly ask for forgiveness? Allen alludes to this when he refers to his interview in 2005 with the LRA Brigadier Sam Kolo, “ … I asked if he would perform Mato Oput. He replied that he would, but when asked if he would look in the eyes of those he had harmed, request reconciliation and pay compensation for what he had done, he just laughed, saying that he would not do that. I asked if he thought that the public ceremony was really something serious. He laughed again, saying nothing” (ALLEN, 2007). The issue of wilful acceptance of guilt and confession, and agreement to compensations are central to the Mato Oput process. This was also expressed by Baguma when he described the three steps in the process of Mato Oput as confession of wrong done, agreement on compensation and performance of a ritual to symbolize an agreement (BAGUMA, 2013). Among the Central Luo, no one accepts responsibility for killing a person one does not know; you do not pay compensation for the death of a person who you never quarrelled with before killing; you do not drink the Oput juice with the clan of the deceased who you never intentionally killed. In addition, the offenders or perpetrators often seek for mediation and reconciliation that includes Mato Oput when the spirit of the known person they have killed haunts them. But the spirits of many people killed without quarrel and without the deceased seeing the killer into the eyes do not haunt anyone! According to the tradition and culture of the Central Luo, Brigadier Kolo would be right not to accept to undergo the true process of Mato Oput with the whole Acoli community, and even other tribes like Madi, Lango and Teso for the crimes against humanity said to have been committed by the LRA. Allen observed this when he said, ” … and none of the Mato Oput ceremonies actually observed or investigated in the course of my field-research were directly connected with the LRA. They all related to homicides that had occurred within the population, sometimes many years ago” (ALLEN, 2007). This observation by Allen is quite critical and telling. Could it be that all deaths related to the LRA atrocities are still fresh and therefore not time for clans to perform Mato Oput in regard to them? Before Mato Oput, feeling of guilt and willingness to confess and seek for forgiveness come naturally in the offenders, and this takes sometimes. In some circumstances, the increase in misfortunes in the family and clan of the offender is the trigger for truth telling and search for reconciliation. All these take time.

If Mato Oput ritual is indeed inappropriate in the case of northern Uganda, then why did the Acoli cultural and religious leaders propose and insist on the same as the best way forward? Why have very eminent Acoli leaders including the retired Anglican Bishop MacBacker Ochola II openly supported Mato Oput (BAGUMA, 2013)? The appropriate responses seem to lie in the argument by Allen when he noted, “The fact that President Museveni himself requested the ICC to investigate the situation in the north of his country has made it difficult to throw off the accusation of bias. There is plenty of evidence that the Ugandan armed forces have also committed very serious crimes, including mass forced population displacement, but no warrants have been issued for government officials or soldiers” (ALLEN, 2007). It is reasonable to conceive that the cultural and religious leaders perceived the long delayed intervention by the ICC to lack justice both in content and procedures, and therefore wanted to avoid creating incredibly nasty situations in the process of prosecuting the LRA leaders, many of whom were victims of the LRA themselves. Maybe the traditional and religious leaders would have perhaps been more comfortable if there was prosecution of both the LRA and the government of Uganda—the protagonists of the conflict. The Acoli religious and cultural leaders know very well that the LRA war was not between the Acoli community and the LRA, but the LRA and the government of Uganda. These leaders are well aware that Mato Oput takes place between the warring parties, not between the victim of circumstance and either of the parties in conflict. Acoli have been a victim to these two fighting forces. Why should the Acoli drink Oput with the LRA and not with the government? Are there reasons to believe that the Uganda government soldiers were clean, and never committed atrocities against the Acoli communities? But if the ICC starts with exonerating the government soldiers and government of Uganda officials without any attempt whatsoever to investigate them for any possible slightest involvement in the killings and destructions in northern Uganda, then the religious and traditional leaders would probably be right to think that there is no need to trust the ICC and spend any efforts working with it. If the Acoli religious and cultural leaders did not nurture this perception and thereby acted in consonant with it, then why did they propose Mato Oput when they very well know the circumstances for Mato Oput? This argument does not bind the Acoli religious and cultural leaders, nor does it tend to interpret their minds, but simply attempts to explain their voluntary and conscientious position regarding how the conflict in northern Uganda is to be resolved. Thinking that these leaders, the custodians of culture of the Acoli people, did not understand Mato Oput and therefore suggested its use in error is a grave error that is worth avoiding by any serious scholars and analysts. Clearly, the researchers in this paper do not know why the Acoli religious and cultural leaders took the direction they did in regard to the ICC involvement in the LRA/NRA war. We simply observe that this reality has apparently been missed in most of the debates on Mato Oput as regards the use of traditional and cultural justice means in resolving the LRA war and atrocities in northern Uganda. The researchers are no specialists in transitional justice, and would make no mistake in suggesting preferred transitional justice approaches, and/or attempt to competently analyse the ICC intervention in northern Uganda. We however wish to provide guidance to scholars and analysts involved in transitional justice approaches aimed at dealing with post violent conflicts, peace building and harmonious coexistence especially where Mato Oput would be considered. Renown scholars involved in transitional justice and violent conflict including Branch, Allen and Finnstrom have discussed the varying dimensions of this violent conflict (ALLEN, 2005, 2007; ALLEN & REID, 2015; BRANCH, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013, 2014; FINNSTRÖM, 2010, 2020). Their painstaking work could help readers grasp the origin and broader context of this conflict. It is clearly a conflict with international, political, economic and strategic military dimensions, and with several interested parties.

It is unlikely that the proponent of Mato Oput are in anyway bent towards helping the Acoli destroy one of their most essential cultural rituals that could be called on in circumstances of violent conflicts that split the people. On the 9 March 2019, the Acoli cultural leaders held one of the most spectacular Mato Oput ceremonies to deal with one of the deaths considered most painful to the Acoli as a people; the brutal killing Brigadier Okoya and his wife Anna Okoya in 1970. There were clear signs of joy and reunion among the two clans. Equally, one could see joy and relief on the face of the multitude of Acoli who travelled from far and near to be part of that historic event at Palaro (URN, 2019). Brigadier Okoya and his wife were killed in cold blood in their home in Gulu during the reign of Dr Apollo Milton Obote I, when General Idi Amin Dada was the army commander (MONITOR, 2012). Gen. Amin toppled Obote’s government soon after the murder of Brigadier Okoya and became the President of the Republic of Uganda from 1971 to 1979 when a combined force of exiled Ugandan army and Tanzanian Peoples Defence Forces toppled his government.

The Acoli believe in both independent thinking and coexistence. The Acoli need each other for achievement of common goals and aspirations, but also believe that each person should uphold their independence and freedom of thoughts and actions. They know when to unite for a common purpose and when to enjoy the fruits of life as individuals. The Acoli cultural and religious leaders cannot therefore proceed to consciously or otherwise propose to water down the power of such critical rituals including Mato Oput and Gomo Tong. These leaders are fully aware that if they connived in any way to destroy such important rituals, they would not go without severe punishments by the spirits of the elders of Acoli resting in the peaceful and powerful world of the dead. Likelihoods are high that the Acoli religious and cultural leaders supported the issue of Mato Oput as preferred transitional justice approach in the northern Uganda conflict when they were well aware of the emptiness in the process but only to safeguard the innocent children abducted and recruited to the ranks of the LRA, and now indicted and set for prosecutions by the ICC. Allen alluded to the emptiness of Mato Oput when adopted as a national system of transitional justice; ” … the proliferation of recognised, named rituals does not resolve the basic difficulty of turning selected local practices into something new. Listing them in this way takes them out of the contexts in which they have been used, and reifies them. If they are institutionalized into a semi-formal judicial system, they will inevitably be very different to what they were to start with” (ALLEN, 2007). Consequently, rituals used out of their contexts lose their power and essence (KYALO, 2013); (SWIDLER, 1986). The Acoli would not want Mato Oput to lose its essence. The power of a ritual lies within its perceived value, context and repercussions when its promised ends are not met. The fear of the consequences of non-adherence to the dictates and terms of a ritual is central to its observance. Once a ritual is performed outside its context and by people not prescribed to perform it, the ritual is null and void ab initio. It remains a point of speculation as to what the Acoli religious and cultural leaders could have calculated as their point of departure should Mato Oput be accepted as a transitional justice means by the alien ICC, not culturally authorised to perform or be a party to the performance of such a ritual. While it is true that some of the chiefs in current Acoli land are not truly from royal clans but a making of the British colonialists (ALLEN, 2007), it is unlikely that it is their lack of knowledge and poor understanding of the cultural rituals that made them propose Mato Oput as a means of transitional justice in the post violent conflicts in northern Uganda. The correct reasons for the proposition of Mato Oput as the appropriate means of reconciliation to forge peaceful coexistence among the Acoli of northern Uganda and their neighbours can be known only after the ICC exoneration of the government of Uganda has changed, and or when the ICC has failed because of the increasing complexities as many more witnesses testify in support of and not against the indicted LRA leaders including Dominic Onwgen. Several western arguments will be advanced by criminal justice and transitional justice scholars to explain the failure of the ICC when it does fail, but what is clearly visible through the lens of the victims of the northern Uganda conflict is what is hidden within the proposal of Mato Oput as the preferred means of re-establishing restorative justice, peace and harmonious coexistence in northern Uganda as a priority. There is no naivety in this argument, but rather living to the reality of the experiences of the survivors of this severe conflict.

11. Limitations and strength of the study

The investigators to this study are adult Acoli who have more than 40 years of lived experiences in Acoli land and cultural practices. Their emic interpretations of the war that they experienced and survived offers a wealth of wisdom to the debate on Mato Oput and Gomo Tong as means of reconciliation following violent conflicts that have led to loss of several innocent lives. Point of data saturation was achieved and members’ checks were done to verify points of views. The purposeful selection of respondents known to be knowledgeable on the practice of Mato Oput were selected for the study. However, the qualitative nature of the study does not lend itself to quantitative evaluation of the notion of Mato Oput, and assign any measures of proportion that would offer representativeness to the views expressed in this paper.

12. Conclusion

Mato Oput is considered a critical ritual of existential value among the Central Luo. The ritual is performed when conflict between two or more people has led to death of a known person, and the death is considered intentional and deserving revenge. Mato Oput comes long after the death, and follows deliberate efforts by the offenders to seek mediation and reconciliation with the offended clan. The ritual involves several stages including deliberate admission of guilt and taking responsibility for the offence, public testimony for the offence and remorsefulness, seeking for forgiveness, negotiation, determination and acceptance to pay compensation, pubic admission of responsibility before the two clans and witnesses, slaughtering the two sheep and drinking the Oput juice, payment of compensation, and sharing of food. The money for the compensation are used for specific activities, mainly marriage of a woman who had never delivered before, so she delivers children to “replace” the deceased person. Mato Oput is not used in circumstances of mass murder where the individual persons killed never had eye to eye contacts with their killers. The promotion of traditional and cultural means of conflict resolution and reconciliation in dealing with the myriads of violent conflicts in Africa is a noble strategy to sustainable peace. However, the proponents of traditional and cultural means of justice and reconciliation for sustainable peace and harmonious co-existence need to pay keen attention to the details of the rituals that lead to reconciliation. Most of the rituals in Central Luo cultural practices are hinged around prohibitions and have pre-prescribed consequences if the terms and conditions of the rituals are not followed through to the final end. Concern parties to a ritual—cleansing or reconciliation, are made aware of the dire consequences of not following the ritual terms and conditions. Often the consequences are personal and devastating to the person’s children and lineage. It needs to be stated unequivocally that the dire consequences that would create fear and hence enforce adherence to the terms of the rituals are null and void ab initio if the ritual was not according to the tradition. Therefore, conflict resolutions and reconciliation rituals may never be effective and terms adhered to if the concern persons are aware that the ritual was not conducted according to the tradition.

Acknowledgements

The authors are greatly indebted to the following elders who provided in-depth knowledge regarding the ingredients and process of Mato Oput among the Central Luo (Acoli) of northern Uganda. They are not just study respondents but the body of knowledge on Mato Oput. The researchers are extremely grateful to Ladit Levi Ayweny, a retired teacher and great sportsman who provided us great details and written records based on real life observations on this matter. We are grateful to the Rwot of Pageya, Ladit Yusuf Adek for the frequent debates he has had with the authors on Acoli cultural rituals including Mato Oput. We thank the Rwot of Labongo, Ladit Poppy Arop, who shared with us his detailed knowledge based on information gained from oral tradition and participation in the practice of Mato Oput among the Acoli. In the same vein, we are grateful to Ladit Romano Okello (RIP), the elder in charge of Mato Oput and culu kwor (compensation for deaths in suspicious circumstances and/or intentional killings) in the chiefdom of Pageya. He unreservedly shared his experience in implementing Mato Oput as the climax of reconciliation and restoration of peaceful co-existence among the Acoli of northern Uganda. The authors are grateful to Ladit Ambassador Dr Olara Outnu who unreservedly shared his expertise on matters of conflict and conflict resolutions from both international and Acoli perspectives. The authors re indebted to Ambassador, Dr Olara Otunu for the invaluable comments that have shaped the final manuscript. The authors are equally grateful to all the authors whose work have been used as secondary sources to inform this work that provides great details on matters of reconciliation and restorations of peace through the Luo remedy of Mato Oput. We would love to list all the people who shared with us their views including those who argued against Mato Oput as an important ingredient in the process of reconciliation and restoration of peaceful co-existence among a people. However, this is not possible in the available space. Please know that we are grateful for your considered viewpoints on this matter that has recently found its place in international discourse regarding transitional justice following mass violence and disenfranchisement.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).References

Additional information

Funding

The authors have no funding to report.