Papua New Guinea is home to a number of different clans and tribes whose kinship ties determine the manner of relations between people. In general, Papua New Guinea can be characterised as a patriarchal society, despite the existence of some matrilineal cultural practices.
Women are perceived as inferior to men in most spheres of life. As a result, they lack equal access to education and lag behind men in terms of employment opportunities. Violence against women is common, and is exacerbated by widespread poverty.
Legislation in Papua New Guinea provides women with a relatively high level of protection in relation to family matters. However, populations living in the country’s many remote and isolated villages remain unaware of national laws governing marriage and family life, and are instead governed by ancient traditions and customs.
The legal age of marriage in Papua New Guinea is 16 years for women and 18 years for men. Many parents and communities accept the concept of early marriage, at ages as low as 14 or 15 years. Traditionally, boys are seen fit to marry when they are able to independently hunt, fish and build a house. The onset of menstruation renders a girl ready for marriage. A 2004 United Nations report estimated that 21 per cent of girls between 15 and 19 years of age were married, divorced or widowed. Because clan exogamy is a must in marriage, the choice of partner is rarely left to individuals.
The practice of polygamy is widespread, particularly in the Highlands where tradition allows men to take as many as five or six wives. This tradition stems, in part, from practical considerations: having more than one wife ensured that the family workload would be shared among more people. In addition, it was believed that men should have as many children as possible to work, and eventually inherit, the family land. Having several wives was also a means of increasing the number of warriors a clan had available for tribal fights. A recent study by Fagon indicates that polygamy remains prevalent (although less common), but is practised primarily as a means to flaunt wealth.
The law in Papua New Guinea grants parental authority to both spouses, who share responsibilities towards their children. Still, women carry out most household chores as society frowns upon men who do too much “women’s work”.
Women have the right to inheritance. Land and property rights are generally passed from parents to children or from uncles to nieces and nephews. However, women generally do not use clan or lineage land even though they retain the option to do so by contributing to group exchanges.
Legislation protects women’s physical integrity but violence against women is common in Papua New Guinea. Some sources report that the authorities often ignore complaints, and that victims also run the risk of experiencing additional assault at the hands of the police. Domestic violence is a criminal offence, yet is viewed as a private matter and rarely addressed. According to a study by Garap, the tradition of paying a “bride price” is a major contributor to domestic abuse: traditionally, it has been a means for men to achieve status and involve themselves in what would otherwise be multiple adulterous relationships. However, exchanging money – often at distorted prices – for brides reinforces the view that women are property.
By law, rape is punishable with imprisonment but the US Department of State reports that the crime is difficult to combat because some communities prefer to settle incidents of rape through material compensation rather than criminal prosecution. Women also continue to suffer abuses related to sorcery: Amnesty International estimates that in a single province (Chimbu), approximately 150 women are killed each year, for alleged practice of witchcraft.
Female genital mutilation is not a general practice in Papua New Guinea. However, evidence seems to suggest that the country is of major concern in relation to missing women.
It is difficult for women in Papua New Guinea to achieve financial independence for several reasons. Their access to land and access to property other than land is limited by customary law that determines ownership of about 90 per cent of land and by the fact that men determine most (if not all) decisions pertaining to land use. Land ownership follows matrilineal principles in some regions, but even then decisions are likely to be made by a brother (or other male relative) of the female land owner. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) reports that only one or two of the country’s matrilineal societies truly grant women equal rights in land mediation and authority to trade in their own capacity.
By contrast, ADB data show that women’s access to bank loans is improving. Their participation in the micro-finance sector is high and they are more likely than men to translate their loans into benefits for their families. Nonetheless, any earnings deriving from female investments typically remain subject to the control or influence of their families and clans.
Women in Papua New Guinea have a high degree of civil liberty. There are no legal restrictions on freedom of movement or freedom of dress.
Amnesty International (2007), Amnesty International Report 2007: The State of the World’s Human Rights, http://report2007.amnesty.org/eng/Homepage.
Asian Development Bank (2006), Country Gender Assessment: Papua New Guinea, Asian Development Bank, Manila.
Countries and Their Cultures (n.d.), Culture of Papua New Guinea, www.everyculture.com, accessed 7 February 2008.
Fagon, G. (n.d.), Polygamy – Taking a Second Look, Divine Word University, Papua New Guinea, www.dwu.ac.pg, accessed 8 February 2008.
Garap, S. (2000), “Struggles of Women and Girls – Simbu Province, Papua New Guinea”, Reflections of Violence in Melanesia, S. Dinnen and A. Ley (eds.), Hawkins Press/Asia Pacific Press.
UN (United Nations) (2004), World Fertility Report 2003, UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, New York, NY.
US Department of State (2007), Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Papua New Guinea, US Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Washington, DC.
