CHAPTER 1: The Colonial Administrative Systems in East Africa

By the end of this chapter, you will be able to:

a) understand the colonial administration systems in East Africa.

b) know the reasons for the different types of colonial administration used in East Africa.

c) know the effects of indirect and direct rule in East Africa.

d) appreciate the contribution of colonial administration systems used in East Africa.

Keywords

• administration
• systems
• direct rule
• impact
• indirect rule

After studying this chapter, you will be able to understand the nature and impact of colonial administrative systems on the peoples of East Africa.
Colonial administrative systems were ways through which colonial governments controlled and maintained power in the East African colonies.
Colonial administration refers to the systems used by the coloniser to organise the human and other natural resources in East Africa to meet the interests of the coloniser.

The Colonial Administrative System in Uganda

Administrative hierarchy of the indirect rule system

Pre-colonial East Africa had kingdoms and chiefdoms with their own systems of administration.

The administration was headed by the king or the chief. The chief appointed other people from among his subjects to take up roles in the administration of the kingdom or chiefdom. The appointment would come from the clans that made up the kingdom or chiefdoms. There was a hierarchy of leadership from the king or chief downward. These included the Saza chiefs, Gombolola chiefs, Muluka chiefs and others at the village level.

In Uganda, the kingdoms included Buganda, Bunyoro, Toro and Ankole while the chiefdoms were Busoga, Acholi, Kigezi, Teso and others.

The explorers, missionaries and chartered trading companies paved the way for the colonisation of East Africa. They had studied the political structures of these kingdoms and chiefdoms. They used them to establish their initial centres of administration.

The colonial governments later used the same structures when they finally took over control of the colonies. The colonial governments used the indigenous political systems through indirect rule in Buganda, Bunyoro, Toro, Ankole, Busoga, Acholi and Kigezi. This was because it was cheap to use them and to avoid resistance from the natives.

The kings and chiefs passed on the directives from the colonial administrators to the natives and they were rewarded for this work. This system was referred to as an indirect rule. Through this system, the colonial masters ruled over the colonies in the different kingdoms and chiefdoms. The British used indirect rule to direct the flow of their policies from the top to the bottom using local African leaders.

Activity 1.1 Finding out about the colonial administration system in Uganda

1. Using ICT or library research, find out how the explorers and missionaries paved the way for the colonial administration in Uganda.
2. Identify and explain the features of direct and indirect rule which exist in your local government today.
3. In groups, discuss the advantages of using the indirect rule system of administration in Uganda.

The Colonial Administrative System in East Africa

East Africa was divided between Britain and Germany. Britain took over Uganda and Kenya while Germany took over Tanganyika.

The explorers, missionaries and chartered companies from these European countries had done great work. They prepared the East African states for eventual takeover and administration as colonies.

The colonial government in East Africa carefully used administrative systems that would give them firm control over their territories. They, therefore, adopted administrative systems which were convenient and cheap to manage. More importantly, they adopted those that created less or no resistance by the natives.

Britain adopted the system of using natives to administer its territories. The Germans opted to administer directly, though they sometimes appointed natives to administer on their behalf.

Indirect rule was used in Uganda and Kenya colonies and later in Tanganyika by the British. Direct rule was used by the Germans in Tanganyika until 1919, after which Tanganyika became a British colony.

The British governors relied more on the natives’ systems and experience. Where necessary, they trained Africans and exposed them to the level of education required to execute the British
interests.

The colonial administration by the Germans in Tanganyika was harsh to the natives who resented and rioted against its implementation. It created conflict between the appointed African leaders and their fellow Africans.

Activity 1.2 Finding out about the colonial administration system in East Africa

1. Using ICT or library research, identify the feature of direct rule as used in Tanganyika.
2. Explain the reasons why the Germans used direct rule in Tanganyika.
3. In groups, discuss the effects of direct rule on the people of Tanganyika.

Reasons for the Adoption of Direct and Indirect Rule in East Africa

The British colonialists practised indirect rule in Kenya and Uganda but after 1919 it was also adopted in Tanganyika. Britain governed its East African colonies through their traditional rulers and the local institutions under the supervision of British officials.

The British recognised the existing local rulers and where such traditional authorities were absent, the British appointed what was called warrant chiefs.

The functions of the traditional or local authorities were to maintain law and order, and collect taxes. In addition to this, they recruited labour for public works, the construction of roads and the trial of
offenders in the traditional courts.

The British ruled Buganda through its traditional ruler the Kabaka of Buganda. This system was spread to other parts of the colony through warrant chiefs like Semei Kakungulu in some eastern
parts of Uganda.

Figure 1.2: Some of the chiefs who implemented an indirect rule for the British

One reason why indirect rule was adopted was the acute shortage of trained European staff to help run the vast territories. Britain also relied on the services of the local rulers because of the high mortality rate caused by the tropical climate and diseases. These reasons made service in Africa very unpopular among Europeans.

The colonial government also did not have enough resources to run the territories. Specifically, they did not have enough funds to take care of the cost of administration. The shortage of funds forced the British to adopt the policy of indirect rule as a way of reducing administrative costs.

The colonies did not have road infrastructure. Therefore, the British could not easily reach most parts of the territories. They, thus, found it wise to empower local rulers to rule on their behalf.

In Uganda, there were well-established systems of traditional administration in Buganda and in other kingdoms and chiefdoms. These institutions were easily adaptable to a system of indirect rule. The traditional leaders were powerful and had an influence on their people. Therefore, Britain came to believe that they were essential for the success of the British administration in East Africa.

The British also avoided direct contact with African people as much as possible for fear of revolts and hostilities. Indirect rule was one way of preserving direct traditional institutions peacefully. By then most communities were still illiterate and could not readily learn through the radio and press about government activities. But through indirect rule, government policies would more easily be passed on to the people.

Activity 1.3 Finding out about direct and indirect rule in East Africa

1. Using ICT or library research, explain why indirect and direct rule were used in Tanganyika.
2. Explain the contribution of indirect and direct rule to the development of the East African nations.
3. In groups, discuss how the indirect rule system used by the British and the direct rule in Tanganyika relate with the current administration in Uganda.

The Effects of Colonial Administration in East Africa

The colonialists’ aim in East Africa was the full exploitation of the areas under their control. Whatever system of administration they employed aimed at ensuring that this purpose was fulfilled. Therefore, both direct and indirect rule benefited the colonisers at the expense of the Africans.

The systems of administration employed had both positive and negative effects. The impact has continued to be clear in East African countries up to today.

Both direct and indirect administrative systems divided the people of East Africa along religious and tribal lines. The divide-and-rule policy in these administrative systems was aimed at destabilising African societies. It was designed not to give Africans a chance to resist colonial rule.

The administrative systems empowered a few individuals in society. Specifically, it empowered the elites to make political decisions on behalf of the people. This has continued to manifest itself in most East African governments up to today. The elite still dominates the political decision-making processes.

The colonial administration partly expanded the economies of East African nations. The economies changed from traditional subsistence production to commercial production. A number of cash and food crops were introduced. These include tea, coffee, cotton, sugar cane, sisal, cassava, maize and sweet potatoes. Some were intended for the export market.

The food crops improved the diet of East Africans. Through the introduction of a cash crop economy, the colonial administration introduced or improved on infrastructure like roads, railways, schools, hospitals and others. This improved the life of many Africans and contributed to the development of these colonies. However, the Africans benefited less. This was because such development mainly increased the exploitation of African resources. The development of infrastructure was done only in those areas where these resources existed.

Figure 1.3: A sugarcane plantation: Plantation agriculture partly changed traditional subsistence farming to commercial production

The colonial administration system reformed the traditional systems of governance. It created a system of rules and procedures that are fair to all members of society. For example, the judicial system focused more on individual rights and freedoms and punished the offenders accordingly. This was not like the traditional system where community values and reconciliation were the focus.

It streamlined the governance systems of centralisation and decentralisation of powers. This was done to allow every individual with the ability to participate in the political process to do so. The colonial administration also introduced western education in East Africa. Eventually, many East Africans learnt how to read. write and communicate to the outside world. The education system created a class of educated leaders who later fought for the independence of their nations from colonialism.

However, western education weakened indigenous education that emphasised skills and apprenticeship. Western education focused more on white collar jobs (office jobs). This education system neglected technical education, which would have been good for creating employment. Instead, technical education continues to be looked at as an area for failures, thus worsening the problem of unemployment in East Africa.

Figure 1.4: Western education enabled Africans to get educated

Activity 1.4 Explaining the effects of colonial administration in East Africa

1. In groups, dramatise the application and effects of indirect rule in East Africa through role play.
2. Write down key issues of indirect rule in your notebook.
3. Study the puzzle quiz below and
   (1) list down the words related to colonial administration
   in East Africa.
   (ii) use these words to make a meaningful sentence about colonial administration in East Africa. Underline the words used.