A survey of the influence of ‘ethnicity’, in African governance, with special reference to its impact in Kenya vis-à-vis its Luo community

Abstract

‘Ethnicity’ and disparate group-based socio-economic development make governance in Africa problematic. This paper explores them through a lens – objectively, subjectively or a combination thereof – to understand governance patterns in Africa, with special reference to Kenya and its Luo community. Whilst demonstrating the argument that negative ‘ethnicity’ owes its existence largely to colonialism, we contend that the phenomenon particularly thrives under capitalist dispensations. We employ a historical narrative to explain the marginalization of the Luo of Kenya. We argue that politically constructed stereotypes and prejudices, associated with the Luo, can be traced to the colonial era. We find that a new form of authoritarianism is emerging in Kenya under the Jubilee Administration that negates the new constitution and threatens the fragile peace in the country. Accordingly, the paper concludes that with the view to combat ethnic strife and violence, purposeful, meaningful efforts should be made, to acknowledge the democratic rights of the Luo, and other politically marginalized communities, in all sectors of the Kenyan society.

Keywords:

• ‘Ethnicity’
• Luo
• governance
• democracy
• Kenya
• Africa

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa under grant number 99984. Opinions expressed, and conclusions arrived at, are those of the authors and are not necessarily to be attributed to the NRF.

Notes

1. We do not subscribe to the idea that humans belong to different ‘ethnic groups’; rather, humankind, since time immemorial, belongs to different historically informed social formations, often co-existing, amicably, in the same geographical region, especially prior to the colonization of Africa in 1884/1885. In this sense, ethnicity is an ‘exogenous construct’ imposed on the aboriginal people of Africa (see Mafeje, 2002).

2. Panopticon power, according to Foucault, ‘is power that is invisible or hidden; it functions to dominate and mould people in order to make them more serviceable for the state. It orders and arranges every part of their life, so that they become convinced that state power is everywhere and inescapable’ (See Schirato, Danaher, & Webb, 2012, pp. 86–87).

3. See The Election Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2016, p. 21. Available from http://www.parliament.go.ke/