Notes
1. See for example, Stephen Carter and Kate Clark, "Snakes and Scorpions": ]ustice and Stability in Afghanistan (Kabul: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, May 2010).
2. For the use of informal conciliators in the Kabul court system, see Zuhal Nesari and Karima Tawfik, The Kabul Courts and Conciliators: Mediating Cases in Urban Afghanistan, Peace Brief 101 (Washington, DC: USIP, July 2011).
3. The Center for Policy and Human Development (CPHD) at Kabul University estimated in 2007 that 80 percent of all disputes were being resolved in the informal sector. Based upon USIP's work in nine provinces and interviews with those working in other areas, this estimate seems accurate, perhaps even underestimating the reach of the informal system; TLO, for example, reports 95 percent of cases are resolved in the informal sector in Deh Rawud district of Uruzgan and the Grishk district of Helmand in 2010, and NRC reported only 16 percent of cases brought to them in 2008 were brought to the formal system. See CPHD, Afghanistan Human Development Report 2007: Bridging Modernity and Tradition-the Rule of Law and the Search for ]ustice (Kabul: CPHD, Kabul University, 2007), 9. For Afghan perceptions of the formal system, see the Asia Foundation (TAF), Afghanistan in 2011: A Survey of the Afghan People (Kabul: TAF, 2011).
4. This tendency of various international organizations to continue to favor a highly statist approach to justice in countries where most continue