Whether Nyumba Kumi or Imidugudu, vigilance is key

In the wake of the Westgate Mall attack in Nairobi, the “Nyumba Kumi” (ten house cluster) concept has taken hold of Kenyans’ imagination with the idea of Rwanda’s imidugudu, among similar concepts elsewhere, often receiving mention in the mainstream and social media.

Thursday, October 24, 2013
Gitura Mwaura

In the wake of the Westgate Mall attack in Nairobi, the "Nyumba Kumi” (ten house cluster) concept has taken hold of Kenyans’ imagination with the idea of Rwanda’s imidugudu, among similar concepts elsewhere, often receiving mention in the mainstream and social media.To say the least, the debate has been fierce with the pros and cons being unflatteringly laid bare.The possibility of its implementation in Kenya finds its basis in a well meaning intention: That, ten households adopt it a strategy to know their neighbours to check any un wanted "neighbourly” activity, petty crime or terrorist, and ensure security.The strategy presumably should also be adopted in refugee camps where, it is now being reported, the al-Shabaab militants might have planned the Westgate attack and were ferried in broad daylight to their gruesome assignment from the Dadaab Refugee Camp by a chartered helicopter.The Nyumba Kumi idea could probably work – that is, if it gets past legal suits that will surely follow by any indignant citizen or human rights NGO.The key argument will likely be that unless the people will be willing, implementation of Nyumba Kumi will be an abrogation of the people’s right to freedom of association. It is a matter of privacy, personal freedoms and convenience in which Article 36 (2) of the Kenyan Constitution states that "a person shall not be compelled to join an association of any kind”.The battle lines are therefore drawn, no matter that Nyumba Kumi is a security strategy seeking to facilitate information-sharing and promote confidence between police and the people.The Kenyan government finds it appealing and continues to toy with the idea, as it grapples with how to formulate a Nyumba Kumi policy. Yet there are examples within Kenya where a ten house system is reported to be working. In Likoni in the coastal city of Mombasa a District Officer is quoted in a newspaper report explaining how the system has reduced crime rates substantially, by up to 60 per cent. The District Officer is proud that they have created a tight security system that catches criminals before they strike.He is quoted as saying that unlike before where the area was known as a drug den and for its petty crimes, muggings and killings, it is now slowly becoming peaceful due to the cooperation between the local provincial administration officers, village elders, Nyumba Kumi heads, and community members.Besides fighting crime, it is reported that the system has also helped to bring harmony to various households as the house cluster heads and village elders help solve domestic and other local disputes.In Rwanda, according to the 2009 National Human Settlement Policy, "Umudugudu is defined as a mode of planned settlement made of between 100 and 200 houses…for various nonagricultural activities so as to allow the population to earn their lives.”Though reference is to the rural areas, it applies in urban centres of which ensuring security is part of it, as well as national reconciliation and resettlement. But it is essentially also about freeing land for cultivation and allowing easy access to infrastructure and services, i.e., water, electricity, etc.However, whether in Kenya or in Rwanda the dangers have been pointed out. Without sufficient checks and balances, the Nyumba Kumi system is prone to abuse for political and other manipulative reasons as has been recorded in Kenya under the all-powerful chiefs and headmen under the now defunct provincial administrative system.Rwanda also has its former system of rigid structure in which the country, pre-1994, was divided into ten prefectures and 145 communes led by burgomasters. In those days, one could not move to another commune, let alone settle there, without permission from a village head.The structural rigidity was such that a World Bank report would lament the oppressive pre-1994 government’s restriction of free movement of population and labour that not only violated basic human rights, but inhibited personal and national development.It is something that Kenya and Rwanda should ever be vigilant about, even as security concerns must be addressed.The writer is a commentator on Rwanda and regional affairsTwitter: @gituram