{"title":"Gendering Citizenship and Decolonizing Justice in 1960s Ghana: Revisiting the Struggle for Family Law Reform","authors":"K. Skinner","doi":"10.1093/AJLH/NJAA015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article revisits the debates over family law reform in the years surrounding the independence of Ghana from British colonial rule. It builds upon social historical studies of marriage and child-rearing, and puts these into dialogue with the scholarship on legal pluralism, in order to examine the postcolonial implications of gendered legal struggles over social reproduction that arose during the colonial era. Drawing on key court cases, the report of a commission of inquiry, parliamentary debates, and the papers of a voluntary association, the article explores how different groups of women established their authority to speak on these issues, and why they were able to legitimate some reforms but not others. Whilst historians have pointed to the constraints that single-party socialism imposed on feminist mobilization in Ghana, this article explores further the ‘form, scale and scope’ of women’s agency. In the context of republican attempts to tackle colonial legacies of ‘deep legal pluralism’, and a programme of socialist development, women reformers framed their arguments in terms of a balance between the preservation of ‘custom’ and ‘advancement’ to modernity, and claimed their authority as mothers. By working creatively with the contradictions arising between legal, political, and sociological discourses, women parliamentarians secured a child maintenance law in 1965, even though earlier attempts to reform the marriage, divorce, and inheritance laws had ended in failure.","PeriodicalId":54164,"journal":{"name":"AMERICAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL HISTORY","volume":"399 1","pages":"357-387"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMERICAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL HISTORY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/AJLH/NJAA015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
This article revisits the debates over family law reform in the years surrounding the independence of Ghana from British colonial rule. It builds upon social historical studies of marriage and child-rearing, and puts these into dialogue with the scholarship on legal pluralism, in order to examine the postcolonial implications of gendered legal struggles over social reproduction that arose during the colonial era. Drawing on key court cases, the report of a commission of inquiry, parliamentary debates, and the papers of a voluntary association, the article explores how different groups of women established their authority to speak on these issues, and why they were able to legitimate some reforms but not others. Whilst historians have pointed to the constraints that single-party socialism imposed on feminist mobilization in Ghana, this article explores further the ‘form, scale and scope’ of women’s agency. In the context of republican attempts to tackle colonial legacies of ‘deep legal pluralism’, and a programme of socialist development, women reformers framed their arguments in terms of a balance between the preservation of ‘custom’ and ‘advancement’ to modernity, and claimed their authority as mothers. By working creatively with the contradictions arising between legal, political, and sociological discourses, women parliamentarians secured a child maintenance law in 1965, even though earlier attempts to reform the marriage, divorce, and inheritance laws had ended in failure.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Legal History was established in 1957 as the first English-language legal history journal. The journal remains devoted to the publication of articles and documents on the history of all legal systems. The journal is refereed, and members of the Judiciary and the Bar form the advisory board.