I am trying to remember my interaction with the Provincial administration and specifically chiefs and sub-chiefs.

I know when I needed an ID after attaining majority age I was supposed to go to my location's chief to sign for me the forms that he knew me and my family.

Instead, I visited the chief of the area close to where I was applying for my ID. They signed for me despite the fact that I was not from their location neither was I residing there. Mr Chief just made some grumbling noises while signing my papers but did not demand a bribe. I was later told that I was lucky.

Later, when I was admitted to a university, I had to interact with the chiefs again. This time I went to my location's chief who was very helpful and demanded no bribe.

I had some not so interesting incident later on where my sub-chief and his APs arrested me for 'holding a night meeting'. It was 8 pm and after parting with my buddy I ran into the sub-chief who arrested me but released me later after I had identified myself.

I know in the rural set up, these people are regarded as very necessary. Small disputes are handled by them as well as issues such as fighting drugs and illicit brew. Now most of these functions have been moved to the county govt. Can a national govt appointee take orders from the county govt bosses?

How do they do it elsewhere? Would more police posts eliminate the need for a chief and his APs?

Chiefs are usually appointed from the local community. How free will communities be with an outsider?

They should stay. We need them to solve cases of who borrowed my spade and never returned and manenos of lost chicken.

simonkabz, What are some of the security dangers that county governments pose?

When the constitution is silent about a matter, aren't we supposed to 'invoke' the spirit of the law? If this is true what would the spirit of the law ask for?

Could the centralization of security services leave county governments vulnerable? That is, won't it be possible to have a president 'sabotage' a governor by even withdrawing his security detail?

The danger is real. And it follows that central government should/ will be able to 'sabotage' or 'balance' the power of county governments.

But the central authority comes from the counties through the 'fifty plus one' threshold. So the danger hasn't been removed. Then consider that the central government will be bearing the counties debts, so there will be even more pressure to keep the danger alive. That is, the current security arrangements are no where near mitigating the danger.

The only solution I can think of entails embracing new political and economic models.

A workmate was taken by his wife to the chief because he was not taking his responsibilities seriously. After solving their problem the chief said to the guy as he was leaving, 'Mr.X siuniachie kitu'. If this is what we want to continue with, i vowed never to listen to any pro-chiefs rant. by the way the guy told the chief, hatujalipwa mshahara', and went home.

xxxxx

When in shags, the chief and subchief are very important. But important to whom? My grandmother who was in the Mau Mau.

If the issue is solving neighbour disputes, then set up a small claims court at the local level.

This idea of sticking with an archaic system that was setup to actually humiliate the populace is out of the 19th century.

So, though I understand that there needs to be local solutions to local issues, I just don't subscribe to the idea that only chiefs can do so.

After all, in my small estate, I have never seen the chief, don't even know who he is and we still have a better living standard than all those fellows in shags with a subchief and chief as daily visitors

@Mukiri if that is what you understood from my statement, so be it.

It's called separation of powers which is in the constitution. Executive, Parliament and Judiciary. Exactly what part of this are the chiefs? The executive has no part in executing justice.

If their work is in settling family disputes, which are legal in nature, then its in the judiciary. So speak to the earinged one and I'm sure you will find support for local solution courts. If I'm not wrong he supports elders.

But chiefs as you have put it are in the colonial era, not even the 20th century. They aren't supposed to have been there in the first place.