Abstract

SWANEPOEL, Paul. Colonial judges, administrative officers and the Bushe commission in interwar Kenya and Tanganyika. Fundamina (Pretoria) [online]. 2017, vol.23, n.1, pp.89-110. ISSN 2411-7870.  http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/2411-7870/2017/v23n1a5.

By focussing on a colonial commission of inquiry into the administration of justice in East Africa, this article outlines the major themes that dominated East Africa's legal "world" during the interwar period. The most important of these was the doctrine of indirect rule, which was the prevailing administrative policy during the period. Ultimately, there were two opposing views during this period. The traditional view, held by the judiciary, was that Africans must be "civilised" and integrated into a system of British courts. The opposing view, advocated by administrative officers, held that Africans must be protected against the harmful consequences of any contact with foreign law. One of the central tenets of the doctrine was placing customary courts under the supervision of administrative officers rather than under judges. Directly linked to the resulting legal problems were disagreements between the two sides as to the applicability of English law and customary law. More widely, this detailed study of the Bushe Commission provides an opportunity to view the administration of justice from the perspective of the Colonial Office as well as the colonial state.

Keywords : Colonial commissions of inquiry; East African legal history; indirect rule; administrative justice; colonial judiciary.

        · text in English     · English ( pdf )