While informal dispute resolution mechanisms are generally considered legally distinct from the "formal" state mechanisms, there are several places where various forms of nonstate dispute resolution are mentioned within the body of Afghan law. Conciliators, for example, can be used to help resolve court cases in conjunction with the formal system.30 here is a particular emphasis on encouraging the resolution of marital disputes outside of the court room, for example. he civil procedure code states that the court can assign conciliators from the family of both the husband and wife who must be "honest and trustworthy."31 hese individuals are then expected to "find the cause of the dispute between husband and wife, and resolve it." Similarly, arbitration by conciliators is discussed extensively in chapters 7 and 11 of the commercial procedure code.
Beyond this integration of informal mechanisms into formal court proceedings, however, mention of other bodies for informal dispute resolution in the Afghan legal code is rare and often confusing. For example, the Law on Provincial Councils states that one of the duties of the provincial councils is to "participate in the settlement of ethnic and local disputes through the holding of peace councils {shura-e islahi)."32 here is no elaboration on what these councils should look like, who is eligible to sit on them, what types of disputes they are allowed to resolve, or what their relation to the formal court system is.
Additionally, the High Council of the Supreme Court in 1975 issued a series of "Traditional Dispute Resolution Guidelines" that set out a series of procedural regulations for how informal disputes should be resolved, including eligibility requirements for those who make such resolutions and conditions under which cases should be brought to the court system. Despite the fact that laws from this era are still technically valid {unless they have been specifically overturned by subsequent legislation), few judicial officials are aware of these guidelines and they currently do not appear to be enforced anywhere in the country.
A further complication in the relationship of informal mechanisms to the formal state system is that new councils have been set up by government entities, such as the Independent Directorate of Local Governance {IDLG), to deal with issues such as disputes arising from the reintegration of former insurgent fighters.33 hese bodies are not provided for in any Afghan law, and it is not clear what legal authority they have. Similarly, international donors have set up local councils for various purposes, though again they have no basis in actual law.34 When questioned, government officials often give contradictory accounts as to the specific responsibilities and authority of these gr