Paper long abstract:

This paper addresses the ambivalent position of magistrates - notably judges - who are obliged to deal with 'witchcraft.' In many parts of Africa people put pressure upon the state to do something about a supposed proliferation of new forms of witchcraft, against which older sanctions would no longer be effecticve. Thus 'witchcraft'or 'sorcellerie' - or whatever term people use - becomes an urgent challenge to the secular character of the state. Judges are forced to reconcile one way or another their positive juridical training with the depth of popular anxieties about occult aggression. In practice all sorts of adaptations are tried out to take accusations seriously even if they can not be substantiated by 'tangible proof.' The ambiguity is reinforced by the fact that many magistrates feel privately obliged to have recourse to the same specialists who play a central role in popular rumors about the occult forces.

In this paper I will compare a few of these ambivalent attempts at reconciling positivst law with witchcraft thinking from Cameroon and South Africa.