No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Gwao Bin Kilimo: The Administrators' Reaction
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
Extract
The case of Gwao bin Kilimo v. Kisunda bin Ifuti decided by the colonial courts of the then Tanganyika has always held a certain fascination for those interested in the process of law under colonial rule. This is for a variety of reasons. The case seems to put into sharp focus the conflict between the imposed common law system and the indigenous customary law. This in turn stimulates questions as to the social values that lay, and probably still lie, behind the two systems and the extent to which those values reflect actual differences between the societies in which they developed. Since the conflict arose in a colonial context, the case also raises the question of the rôle of law in such a society and therefore, to some extent, the rôle of law in relation to ideology and political economy in this and in other contexts also. What is less well known is that the case was the subject of comment by colonial administrative officers at the time, comments which point up many of the issues involved and provide some insight into the different perceptions of African society on the part of administrative officers on the one hand and the judiciary on the other.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1988
References
1 L.R., Tanganyika Supp. No. 8 of 1938, p. 33.Google Scholar
2 These are contained in the file T.N.A. (N.S.) 262774 “Liability of Relatives of a Native Debtor for Debts Contracted” in the Tanzania National Archives. References in footnotes are to this file unless otherwise stated.
3 Indian Code of Civil Procedure. Ord. 21 rule 60. Code of Civil Procedure, Act V of 1908, O. 21 r. 60Google Scholar:
Where upon the said investigation the Court is satisfied that the reason stated in the claim or objection such property was not, when attached, in the possession of the judgment-debtor or of some person in trust for him, or in the occupancy of a tenant or other person paying rent to him, or that, being in the possession of the judgment-debtor at such time, it was so in his possession, not on his own account or as his own property, but on account of or in trust for some other person, or partly on his own account and partly on account of some other person, the Court shall make an order releasing the property, wholly or to such extent as it thinks fit, from attachment.
4 Acting Provincial Commissioner Southern Highlands Province to Chief Secretary, 27 11 1938Google Scholar.
5 Provincial Commissioner Eastern Province D.S.M. to Chief Secretary, 17 11, 1938Google Scholar.
6 Deputy P.C. Lake Province to Chief Secretary Mwanza, 18 11, 1938Google Scholar.
7 P.C. of ? to Chief Secretary, 3 01, 1939Google Scholar. The place is illegible, but from the reference in the text it seems it may be a reply from Northcote, P.C. of Southern Highlands Province.
8 P.C. Western Province (Williams) to Chief Secretary Tabora, 30 12, 1938Google Scholar.
9 Provincial Commissioner Northern Province to Chief Secretary, 3 02, 1939Google Scholar.
10 P.C. Dar es Salaam to Chief Secretary, 17 11, 1938Google Scholar.
11 P.C. of ? to Chief Secretary, 3 01, 1939Google Scholar.
12 P.C. Dodoma (Central Province), 12 12, 1938 (C. Partridge)Google Scholar.
13 P.C. South Province. Lindi to Chief Secretary, 14 12, 1938Google Scholar.
14 Collective Punishment Ordinance, Cap. 22, Laws of Tanganyika.
15 Northcote to Chief Secretary, 27 09, 1938Google Scholar.
16 Deputy P.C. Lake Province to Chief Secretary Mwanza, 18 11, 1938Google Scholar.