Community policing in rural Kenya – a model for local government?

The Kenyan state is considered corrupt by international observers, the judiciary and police in particular. As a result, the Kuria people in Nyanza Province have begun to police themselves. Although formally illegal, the community policing organisation is encouraged by the state to manage local crime. It is surprisingly accountable and could perhaps support action in other fields such as HIV and AIDS.

Self-help in reducing crime tends to be viewed negatively and suggests vigilante groups and lynch mobs. However, research by the Crisis States Research Centre in the UK suggests that the Kuria community policing movement, known as ‘sungusungu’ (originally developed in Tanzania), is an important experiment in self-assertion. If the state cannot control crime and corruption, then these organisations might be able to do so.

Twenty years ago, Kuria people measured their wealth in cattle and children. Now they measure wealth in money, property and education. With the change from pastoralism to production for the market, a gap has opened up between rich and poor people. At the same time, the nature of theft has broadened from ‘traditional’ cattle raiding to stealing anything that is removable. The increasing availability of guns has made the situation worse and the state has failed to deal with the problem.

In 1998, local people in Kuria mobilised themselves into a collective force to counter increasing crime. Although many were sceptical at first, ‘sungusungu’ rapidly spread through Kuria. But as it spread, so did the need for cooperation between different groups. Trust was difficult, particularly where it involved different local groups.

However, local law has now taken over from national law in dealing with significant crimes, particularly theft. Furthermore, the state administration protects ‘sungusungu’ from undue harassment by the police and courts.

‘Sungusungu’ is successful because it:

• involves the participation of local people
• is independent of the government and not dependent on the police and the judiciary
• uses indigenous ways of governing for new purposes
• brings traditional forms of theft under scrutiny and community discipline
• redefines political loyalties
• establishes a new moral consensus.

‘Sungusungu’ assemblies have created a new kind of unity, stressing common ideals over factional interest. Can they move from being a community police force to something resembling a ‘community government’? The study suggests that this will depend on:

• whether their success in fighting their own corruption will also be effective in fighting government corruption
• how the local movement can influence national practices
• the extent to which they can help and protect ordinary people
• how successful they are in moving into other issues such as health
• the extent to which they will continue to receive state approval.

Source(s):
‘Making law in rural East Africa: sungusungu in Kenya’, Crisis States Working Paper, Series 2, no 2, Crisis States Research Centre: London, by Suzette Heald, 2007 (PDF) Full document.
‘State, law and vigilantism in Northern Tanzania’, African Affairs 105, pages 265-283, by Suzette Heald, 2006 Full document.
‘Domesticating Leviathan: Sungusungu in Tanzania’, Crisis States Working Paper, Series 1, no 16, Crisis States Research Centre: London, by Suzette Heald, 2002 (PDF) Full document.

Funded by: UK Department for International Development (DfID)

id21 Research Highlight: 17 October 2007

Further Information:
Suzette Heald
Crisis States Research Centre
London School of Economics
Houghton Street
London, WC2A 2AE
UK

Tel: +44 (0)20 78494631
Fax: +44 (0)20 79556844
Contact the contributor: s.heald@lse.ac.uk

Crisis States Research Centre, London School of Economics, UK

Other related links:
'Policing development: linking security and poverty reduction'

'Negotiating between traditional authority and democracy in South Africa'

'Formal and informal governance in rural India'

'A new force: unconventional policing in Karachi'