Paper short abstract:

In this paper I offer a genealogy of efforts to define and use the constitutional categories ‘minority’ and ‘marginalised community’ in Kenya. I show the impossibility of fixing consistent definitions or list of people(s) to whom they can be applied ,and reflect on implications.

Paper long abstract:

In Kenya over recent years several ethnic groups have begun to claim the status of ‘minority’ or ‘marginalised community’, both classifications that would entitle such a group to several beneficial provisions under the 2010 constitution. Though the implementation of these provisions has been so slow as to be almost non-existent, the term is nonetheless gaining significant political traction. In this paper, I offer a genealogy of efforts to code for ethnic minority and/or marginalised status in Kenya. I explore the work of government, legal and civil society bodies to operationalise this code, and show how impossible it is to fix a consistent definition of the terms or list of people(s) to whom they can be applied. I analyse the content, form and logic of the coding efforts and demonstrate a strong consistency with colonial logics of ethnic classification. At the same time, however, as in other studies of the production of knowledge about populations and individuals in Africa, I explore how these efforts defy and in some ways depart from the desire behind that logic. That is, I show how legibility and governability are not necessarily the driving force behind classification work. Reflecting on the implications of this analysis, I argue for a vigilance in the use of these classifications, for they can serve multiple political projects, not all desirable, including for the groups who use them.