Inheritance-induced familial disputes in north-west Ethiopia: the role of legal-policy gaps and aggravating socio-economic dynamics

The study addresses the rise of inheritance-induced familial disputes in Ethiopia despite longstanding family and inheritance laws. Families are fundamental social institutions for socialization, intergenerational support, and socio-economic development; however, rapid socio-economic change has intensified family conflicts, including those triggered by inheritance. Prior research has focused more on wealth transmission and intergenerational solidarity, with less attention to intra-family stress and disputes. In Ethiopia, most conflict research emphasizes ethnic, clan, or political conflicts rather than family inheritance disputes. This study focuses on East Gojjam (northwestern Ethiopia) and asks: (1) What familial ties are most involved in inheritance-induced disputes? (2) What types of properties are most frequently disputed? (3) What legal-policy gaps induce these disputes? (4) What emerging socio-economic dynamics aggravate them?

The literature highlights that inheritance systems vary widely across societies and are shaped by formal laws and customary norms. Ethiopian civil and family codes (from 1960 onward, revised in 2000) sought to regulate family relationships and inheritance, but customary practices often persisted, historically disadvantaging women and shaping patrilineal transfers, especially of land. Under the Derg (post-1974), rural land was nationalized (1975), restricting transfers and weakening tenure security. The 1995 Constitution and subsequent proclamations defined land as state property but recognized rights of possession and inheritance; regions adapted land policies accordingly. Debates persist: some argue current land policies inadequately address peasant needs, flexible strategies, and opportunities for youth to access land (e.g., USAID/Ethiopia, 2004), while others contend state ownership enhances tenure security (Sibuh, 2019). Empirical evidence from Ethiopia and elsewhere shows rising inheritance-related disputes, notably around farmland, with gender dimensions and consequences for poverty transmission and social stability. The coexistence and incompatibility of statutory and customary inheritance rules are recurrently identified as sources of conflict.

Study area: East Gojjam Zone, Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia, comprising 21 rural districts and 4 municipal administrations; predominantly rural (over 78%) with agriculture as the main livelihood. Research design: Mixed-methods, cross-sectional. Quantitative analysis described distributions of disputes by kinship and property type; qualitative analysis explored experiences and perspectives of disputants and legal professionals. Sampling and data sources: Two-stage sampling selected four rural districts and four municipal administrations randomly. Court cases involving inheritance-related family disputes at the zonal level with final decisions in 2020 were identified. Of 570 closed cases, 235 were sampled using Yamane’s (1967) formula (5% precision). From these, quantitative data were collected from 470 disputants (one accuser and one defendant per case). Qualitative data included in-depth interviews with 12 key informants (one legal advisor and one judge from each selected district) and 18 disputants. Emphasis was on closed cases to avoid interfering with ongoing proceedings and to ensure data reliability. Data collection: Review of closed court records; surveys of disputants; in-depth interviews with non-sampled disputants, judges, and legal advisors (interviews conducted at informants’ homes to ensure privacy). Data analysis: Quantitative data analyzed using descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages). Qualitative data analyzed via thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006): repeated listening to recordings, transcription in Amharic, translation to English, coding, theme development, and triangulation with quantitative findings.

- Kinship ties in disputes: Among 235 cases, 57.45% (126) involved siblings; 17.45% (41) parent–child; 13.19% (31) children–grandchildren; 6.38% (15) siblings of the inheritor; 5.53% (13) parents–grandchildren; additional smaller categories included aunts/uncles and nieces/nephews. Disputes were most common among siblings (including many half-siblings) and secondarily between parents and children. - Property types: Farmland dominated disputes: 77.87% (183/235). Other assets: houses 7.23% (17), livestock 6.38% (15), family business 2.55% (6), jewelry/equipment 2.13% (5), multiple-asset cases 3.84% (9). Farmland disputes align with the agrarian economy and land’s cultural significance. - Economic impacts: Due to disputes, 43–57% of agricultural land (varying by district) was reportedly mismanaged with reduced productivity; disputants reported annual losses of 1–2.5 quintals compared to pre-conflict yields. Litigation diverts time and resources from productive activities. - Legal-policy gaps fueling disputes: (1) Unlimited time to claim inheritance rights; (2) No time limit for establishing child/paternity status (e.g., Civil Code art. 776), enabling claims long after transfers and even posthumously; (3) Unrestricted will revocation and modifications (e.g., art. 899), resulting in multiple wills on the same property and conflicts between siblings and between parents and children; (4) Incompatibility between statutory equal-inheritance rules and customary practices that privilege sons, proximity, and caregiving; (5) Limited avenues to acquire land beyond inheritance/gifts due to state ownership and practical scarcity of redistributable land, intensifying sibling competition. - Aggravating socio-economic dynamics: (a) Improved legal consciousness among previously marginalized groups (notably women and persons with disabilities) leading to more claims that challenge customary expectations; (b) Growing corruption in the justice sector (bribery, manipulation of timelines, false witnesses) undermining fairness and escalating disputes; (c) Decline in familial emotional ties and values, with higher conflict among half-siblings and in single-parent contexts; women more frequently involved in farmland disputes due to customary disadvantages despite statutory equality.

The findings address the research questions by showing that inheritance disputes in East Gojjam concentrate among close kin, especially siblings and parent–child dyads, reflecting the focal point of both customary and statutory transfers. Farmland’s predominance in disputes underscores its dual economic and symbolic value in an agrarian society, where alternative land acquisition channels are scarce. Identified legal-policy gaps—indefinite periods for inheritance and paternity claims, unlimited will revocation, and the coexistence of conflicting legal regimes—create procedural and substantive uncertainty that encourages litigation and intra-family contestation. Socio-economic dynamics further intensify conflicts: enhanced rights awareness among marginalized heirs increases assertion of statutory entitlements that clash with customary expectations; corruption reduces trust in adjudication and incentivizes aggressive legal strategies; and weakening familial bonds heightens zero-sum framing of inheritance. Together, these factors explain rising caseloads and prolonged disputes that degrade land productivity and family cohesion. The results highlight the need for legal reforms that clarify time limits and will revocation rules, harmonize or prioritize legal frameworks to reduce forum-shopping, and broaden land access mechanisms to reduce inheritance pressure.

Inheritance-induced family disputes in north-west Ethiopia primarily involve siblings and parent–child relationships, with farmland at the center of contention. Coexisting statutory and customary systems create conflicting entitlements that disputants leverage, while practical limitations on land acquisition funnel youth and siblings into inheritance competition. Key legal-policy gaps—indefinite timeframes for inheritance and paternity claims, unrestricted will revocation allowing multiple wills on a single asset, incompatibility between statutory and customary norms, and limited land access—drive disputes. Aggravating dynamics include heightened rights awareness among marginalized groups, corruption in the justice system, and weakening family ties. The study recommends: revising family and inheritance laws to close conflict-provoking gaps (e.g., setting reasonable time limits for claims and regulating will revocation), prioritizing statutory over customary rules in courts to reduce discriminatory outcomes, considering farmland privatization or expanded lawful exchange mechanisms to diversify land access, establishing anti-corruption measures in the justice sector, and community interventions to strengthen familial values and conflict mediation.

The analysis focuses on closed inheritance-related cases adjudicated at zonal-level courts in 2020 within selected districts of East Gojjam, which may limit generalizability to other regions or court levels. Legal-policy gaps were identified primarily through review of case records and stakeholder perspectives rather than exhaustive documentary analysis; gaps not reflected in cases may be underrepresented. Self-reported experiences and interviews are subject to recall and social desirability biases. Limited availability and high cost of DNA testing in Ethiopia constrain reliable establishment of paternity in relevant disputes, potentially affecting case outcomes. Cross-sectional design captures a snapshot rather than changes over time.