09.01.2015 Views

1uvZ4zN

1uvZ4zN

1uvZ4zN

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Volume III<br />

Chapter ONE<br />

74. The practice of illegal allocation and distribution of land has led to a general<br />

feeling of marginalisation among some communities as well as the ethnicization of<br />

the land question. The Commission of Inquiry into the Illegal/Irregular Allocation<br />

of Pubic Land (the Ndung’u Commission) noted that throughout the 1980s and<br />

1990s public land was illegally and irregularly allocated “in total disregard of the<br />

public interest and in circumstances that fly in the face of the law.” 69 This became<br />

the foundation of ethnic tensions, and later violence, particularly in the Rift Valley<br />

and Coast Provinces.<br />

75. Further, through its policies that favour the investment of resources in only high<br />

potential areas that have ample rainfall and fertile lands, the government has<br />

encouraged asymmetrical development in the country that, because of the ethnic<br />

dimension of land allocation and ownership, itself has ethnic consequences. 70 The<br />

relationship among land ownership, development, and ethnicity is summarized<br />

in a recent report by the NCIC:<br />

The Sessional Paper No. 10 of 1965 on African Socialism and its Application to<br />

Development and Planning sought to empower Kenyan citizens of the new nation<br />

through the provision of services and expansion of economic opportunities. In<br />

doing so, the Government adopted the Africanization Policy to replace the departing<br />

European and Asian communities with educated or skilled Africans. Most jobs, firms<br />

and businesses were taken over by the African elite but in an ethnically biased manner<br />

that also led to the exclusion of Kenyan Asians and Europeans from citizenship and<br />

appointments in the civil service. In addition, Sessional Paper No. 10 dismissed the<br />

livestock-based pastoralist economy and in the process contributed to unequal<br />

development patterns and the marginalization of non-crop-farming communities.<br />

There are historical legislative frameworks and policies that facilitate undesirable<br />

ethnic and race divisions. Examples of these frameworks and policies are: the Stock<br />

and Produce Theft Act which came into operation on 5th May 1933 and is still in force;<br />

Sessional Paper No 10 of 1965 that highlighted the areas with potential for growth<br />

and relegated other areas to underdevelopment without regard to the people who<br />

live there; and The Indemnity Act of 1970 which gives immunity to perpetrators of<br />

state violence against its citizens in Northern Kenya. Legislative frameworks that<br />

would have enhanced harmonious ethnic and racial coexistence were largely ignored<br />

or subverted. In addition, poor and lopsided economic policies and planning have<br />

enhanced inequality and ethnic tensions. 71<br />

69 Republic of Kenya ‘Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Illegal/Irregular Allocation of Pubic Land’ (hereafter the ‘Ndungu<br />

Report’) (2004) 8.<br />

70 African Peer Review Mechanism ‘Country review report of the Republic of Kenya’ available at and (last accessed 17 April 2010).<br />

71 National Cohesion and Integration Commission Commission ‘Kenya ethnic and Race Relations Policy’ (2011)13.<br />

REPORT OF THE TRUTH, JUSTICE AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION<br />

27

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!