In a village between Tinhou and Péhé, a 25-year-old sold more than 20 hectares of his grandfather’s land. The village chief signed the land contract, validating a sale for more than 2 million CFA (US$4,000). Human Rights Watch interviewed separately a village elder involved in resolving the dispute and one of the grandfather’s sons, who found Burkinabés cutting down trees on the land and discovered who sold the land. Both said that the village chief merely asked the youth if the family knew and agreed with the sale; the youth apparently said yes. The grandfather, who is the family head, lives in the village, meaning a quick visit or call could have established whether he had indeed approved the sale. The village chief chose not to do so, leading to a bitter conflict within the family and against the Burkinabés who bought the land. One person involved in the case suggested that the village chief likely received a kickback for approving the sale. The youth that illegally sold the land quickly skipped town, and the family has been unable to reach him.212 Customary authorities are only held to account for corruption in the rarest of circumstances. The sub-prefect in Bloléquin did suspend the former Diboké village chief in early 2012 after it became clear that he was implicated in illegally selling both land owned by other individuals and part of the Goin-Débé protected forest, owned by the government.213 However, no criminal sanctions appear to have been brought, and the current village elders in Diboké told Human Rights Watch that they had asked the former village chief if he would remain involved in the village leadership.214 He declined. Under international law, including as explained in the Pinheiro Principles, mechanisms dealing with land restitution claims are to be “equitable … independent, transparent and non-discriminatory.”215 Many customary leaders work admirably and impartially to resolve land disputes. But in situations in which the village chief’s impartiality appears compromised—whether against a “native” or “non-native” party—complainants should be able to bypass the village authorities and go directly to the sub-prefect. 212 Human Rights Watch interviews with family member who found the buyers on the land, western Côte d’Ivoire, June 8, 2013; and with a village elder involved in resolution of the dispute, western Côte d’Ivoire, June 8, 2013. 213 Human Rights Watch interviews with residents of Diboké, June 6 and 8, 2013; with a community leader, Diboké, June 8, 2013; and with a representative from a humanitarian organization, Abidjan, June 2013. 214 Human Rights Watch interviews with residents of Diboké, June 6 and 8, 2013; and with a community leader, Diboké, June 8, 2013. 215 Pinheiro Principles, principle 12. “THAT LAND IS MY FAMILY’S WEALTH” 72