Select Page

Madagascar News Forums Food for thought the domination of the Merina oligarchy Reply To: the domination of the Merina oligarchy


Fokonolona has long been a judicial institution. The archivist Razoharinoro-Randriamboavonjy cites some examples of cases considered by the community organization.

In 1968, this is what Fokonolona decides that the debtors of a certain Rafaralahy free themselves of their debt which amounts to 35 piastres. “The sum was paid half and half by Ramahalimby Randrianantoandro. In the same year, Rainimasy and Rasoarivony are on trial for a sum of 17 piastres. “Rasoarivony paid to Rainimasy 7 dollars and a sixth to keep the promise she gave. The payment was made in the presence of Fokonolona well as Rafaralahimiaina, Rainitsarabe, Razafimanana 14 honors Rainizafy, Ralaitsiry, Rafaratsirabo “as witnesses. Two years later, a dispute between Ramantsoa and Rainipatsa. “The Fokonolona suggested to the parties to submit their case. This was done. Those present heard the case … If a party contests the judgment, a fine consisting of a dollar (for the sovereign), 30 dollars and an ox, will be imposed. Follow the names of witnesses (among a dozen). “

In 1871, R. and R. are on trial. “The Fokonolona admonished both. It was understood that … one of the parties contesting the judgment, the following fines shall be imposed: one ox, three piastres, and one dollar of silver for the lord. ” The same year, Ra. and Ra. Bring a lawsuit against R. for some good. “Litigants have received our advice and then were asked to explain each in the presence of his opponent. Here is our judgment after hearing the litigants: They offered the dollar for the king, and recognized their faults. We have said to them: One of you who has retracted and denied what he has said here will be punished with a fine of 30 piastres, an ox, a piastre d ‘ money for the king. Whoever untie his oath definitively renounce the well and the penalties provided by the laws of the state will be applied to it. The statements were made on the basis of witnesses’ …

In 1878, therefore, after the organization of the army by Radama Ier, creating Sakaizambohitra saw some soldiers become “borizano” (civilians or reservists) and diminishes more and more the role of Fokonolona as a judicial institution. The “Sakaizambohitra” are, however, not judges, but “bodies only to refer to the Antananarivo court the defendants.” Thus, they are not entitled to hold a hearing because they are set up to simply “hear” and “see,” or receive complaints.

However, the reform tends to significantly reduce the authority of Fokonolona (Article 4 of the Instructions for use by Sakaizambohitra). Indeed, this article provides: “If the people summon someone to appear in court, get it up, because it is the Fokonolona who asks. “That is to say, go to the higher court, that of Antananarivo. Thus the Fokonolona is only one of the two bodies to proceed with the trial of an accused. Hence it says in Article 14 of the same text: “If the Lord, head of the district or the Fokonolona wants to assume the right to arrange a deal of strength against the will of a party, do up this matter in Antananarivo. “

In fact, the article will especially avoid abuse of lords or Fokonolona if they are the wrongdoers. It is perhaps also a warning against the temptation to cut too sovereign in all things. “But it happened that the Sakaizambohitra did not always agree with the Fokonolona. Some of them have even caused disturbances in their constituency because of their dishonesty. “They alienate sympathy Fokonolona because” they often abused their authority