By Sewuese Felicia Atsehekaa I Friday, July 24, 2026
LAGOS, Nigeria – Earlier this week, while observing proceedings in a matrimonial matter, I watched the trial judge direct the parties and their counsel to explore reconciliation before the hearing of the petition. As I listened, one question lingered in my mind: how effective is this process in achieving genuine reconciliation between parties?
To strengthen the implementation of reconciliation in matrimonial matters, the Family Court should be granted exclusive jurisdiction over such disputes. This would enable judges with expertise in family law to preside over these cases. In addition, adequate facilities and resources should be created for counselling and therapy support departments to assist parties where reconciliation is feasible
The judge’s direction to explore reconciliation was in compliance with the Matrimonial Causes Act (MCA). Also, one of the accompanying processes of a petition for dissolution of marriage is a Certificate of Reconciliation. This demonstrates that reconciliation is an integral part of matrimonial proceedings.
Under the MCA, a petition for dissolution of marriage is never granted as a matter of course. Beyond proving that the marriage has broken down irretrievably, as required by Section 15, it also enjoins the judge to explore reconciliation between the parties, unless the nature of the petition is such that reconciliation cannot reasonably be considered, before the petition itself is heard.
This opportunity for reconciliation exists to preserve the family unit and encourage the peaceful resolution of marital disputes.
In most cases, when the court directs parties to explore reconciliation, that responsibility falls almost entirely on counsel. While this approach may work in some cases, it is sometimes not effective. Lawyers bring indispensable legal expertise to matrimonial proceedings, and many possess excellent negotiation skills.
However, family mediation requires specialised competencies that extend beyond legal advocacy. It requires an understanding of family dynamics, emotional intelligence, conflict resolution and communication techniques.
Some lawyers may enter the reconciliation process with the same adversarial mindset of the regular courtroom. Some may not attempt to carry out reconciliation at all, thereby reducing the process to a mere formality rather than a genuine effort at resolution.
The MCA, however, anticipated this shortfall, hence Section 11(1)(a)–(c) sets out three ways a judge may pursue reconciliation: (a) by adjourning proceedings to give parties the opportunity to reconcile, or to allow either of the following steps to be taken; (b) by interviewing the parties in chambers, with or without counsel, as the judge considers appropriate, with a view to effecting reconciliation; or (c) by nominating a person with experience or training in marriage conciliation, or in special circumstances some other suitable person, to attempt reconciliation with the consent of the parties.
That third option is significant. This provision recognises that trained conciliators, rather than lawyers alone, may be better positioned to guide couples through reconciliation. Instead of treating this mechanism as an occasional measure, perhaps it should be institutionalised within Nigeria’s family justice system.
For reconciliation to be a genuinely effective tool in resolving matrimonial disputes, it is worth considering involving trained marriage counsellors and family therapists in the reconciliation process alongside parties and their counsel.
To strengthen the implementation of reconciliation in matrimonial matters, the Family Court should be granted exclusive jurisdiction over such disputes. This would enable judges with expertise in family law to preside over these cases.
In addition, adequate facilities and resources should be created for counselling and therapy support departments to assist parties where reconciliation is feasible. They could also provide post-divorce support services to help parents navigate co-parenting and reduce the long-term impact of marital breakdown on children.
This can be done either by referring parties to trained marriage counsellors registered with the courts, or by attaching marriage counsellors and family therapists to courts, to guide parties and their counsel through the reconciliation process.
This is not intended for every matrimonial dispute. There are cases involving violence, abuse, or other circumstances where reconciliation would neither be appropriate nor desirable.
The Act provides safeguards in the reconciliation process to protect the interest of parties. There is a time limit of 14 days for either party to request that the matter be set down for hearing. It also protects the confidentiality of the reconciliation process by making information disclosed during reconciliation inadmissible in any court of law, and the conciliator, in the performance of these duties, is required to swear an oath of secrecy (Sections 12–14, MCA).
With the surge in matrimonial disputes, it is time the courts included trained marriage counsellors and therapists in the reconciliation process, where feasible, before proceeding to dissolve marriages.
Also, where reconciliation fails, parties are guided in parting ways amicably. They are also put through the process of custody and co-parenting. Although the marriage has ended, where there are children of the marriage, the parties must continue to maintain a cordial relationship. They have to continue to communicate, cooperate and make decisions together in the best interests of their children, for even though they are no longer spouses, they remain parents to their child/children.
Resolving matrimonial disputes requires great care and expertise because the consequences are lasting, particularly where children are involved. Third-party assistance within the judicial system would reduce the acrimony associated with the dissolution of marriage and offer effective co-parenting principles.
Family justice should not be measured solely by the decree dissolving a marriage. It should also be measured by whether the legal process helped preserve dignity, protect children and reduce unnecessary conflict and enmity. The MCA has already laid the foundation by Recognising reconciliation as an essential part of matrimonial proceedings. The next step is to ensure that our family justice system is equipped to make that reconciliation truly meaningful and achievable.
NB: Sewuese Felicia Atsehekaa, a legal practitioner, can be reached via [email protected]
