What considerations are relevant in deciding punishment in tribal societies (India)?

Relevant consideration

While deciding punishment the tribals take into consideration the social status, sex and other distinctions of the criminal. For example, in Garo tribe in India an adulterer is punished by death but adulteress is given the milder punishment of piercing of the ears. However, if she repeats this crime several times she is punished by death.

Similarly, there are some criminal acts which carry no punishments if done by the chief while every other person is punished for them. Similarly, punishment may be varied in proportion to the social status of the criminal.

The higher status sometimes carries lower punishment while at other times it is the reverse. For example, in some African tribes adultery by a common woman is considered a minor crime while death punishment is awarded for the same crime to the wife of the chief. In some tribes punishment is not given to the individuals but rather to the groups, families or clans.

A village is punished for the crime of a member of the village. Revenge also is not sought by an individual against another individual but by a family against another family, a village against another village and a clan against another clan.

Provision for compensation

Like the civilized societies most of the primitive societies have provision for compensation for the loss due to crime. In some societies the compensation has to be paid by the criminal according to definite customs.

The list of crimes carrying definite compensation is different in different tribes. In Ifugao tribe most of the crimes are decided by compensation. The compensation for life, however, can be life, blood for blood. In such cases the criminal is killed and no other compensation is accepted.

The amount of compensation often varies according to economic status of the criminal. In Kirgiz tribe compensation is fixed according to economic status. Among Red Indians of U.S A. compensation is sought by destroying some valuable possessions of the criminal. This policy is particularly practised in the cases of adultery.

In Samoa tribe the criminal has to give valuable presents as compensation. By this he means to show that he has surrendered and is prepared to face any punishment given to him. Such presents and surrenders usually do not go waste since the aggrieved party usually accepts the presents.

In some other tribes other forms of compensation are prevalent. One way is to give a feast to the whole village. In some tribes if the offender is unable to pay compensation himself the compensation is paid by the chief of his group.

Mechanism of Trial

As a general rule one finds some rudimentary form of tribal before the award of punishment to the primitive criminal. Both the plaintiff and the defendant present their cases before the chief and the council of elders who carefully hear and sometimes cross questions are put by them. Example of this arrangement for trials may be found in most of the Indian tribes.

From the above discussion of the system of justice and punishment in tribal societies it is clear that they exhibit almost all the elements of the system of justice in rudimentary form.

The main distinction between the primitive and civilized societies concerning crime and punishment is that while in civilized societies it is absolutely concerned with the individual, in primitive societies it is a collective affair.

This is applicable to crime, punishment and compensation. While in the civilized society it is the concern of the individual, in primitive societies it is the concern of collectivity. It may be said that the latter arrangement is more humane and better measure for the prevention of crime. In this absence crime increases both in quality and quantity with the growth of civilization.