BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Talks.cam//talks.cam.ac.uk//
X-WR-CALNAME:Talks.cam
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:The Prosecution of Rape in Wartime: Evidence From  Kenya\, 1952-19
 60 - David Anderson\, University of Warwick
DTSTART:20131111T170000Z
DTEND:20131111T180000Z
UID:TALK48365@talks.cam.ac.uk
CONTACT:Judith Weik
DESCRIPTION:In July 2012\, a landmark hearing before the High Court in Lon
 don found that the British government had a case to answer concerning huma
 n rights abuses\, including torture and rapes\, allegedly carried out by B
 ritish colonialists in Kenya\, during the Mau Mau counter-insurgency of th
 e 1950s. Amongst the four elderly Kenyan claimants in court that day was a
  Kikuyu woman\, Jane Mara\, whose testimony related the sexual abuses she 
 suffered.    This was the first time that such a story of sexual crimes in
  the former colonies had been laid before a British court\, but for Kenyan
 s the detail of these claims was all too familiar.\n\nThis article uses ne
 w documentary evidence on rape from Kenya in the 1950s\, corroborating and
  enlarging upon the legal and oral testimonies and memoirs that have been 
 recounted in recent court proceedings.  Accusations of rapes and sexual as
 saults by state security personnel are littered through the substantial bo
 dy of new archival material that has been released as a consequence of the
  Mau Mau compensation case mounted in the High Court in London from 2011 t
 o 2013.    Known collectively as the Hanslope Disclosure\, and covering 36
  other former British colonies as well as Kenya\, this body of material (n
 early 9\,000 files in all) includes approximately 600 files dealing with t
 he administration of the Kenyan rebellion.  A significant number of these 
 files relate specifically to the investigation and prosecution of allegati
 ons against the security forces between 1953 and 1959\, including cases of
  rape and sexual other crimes.\n\nThis documentary evidence is powerful an
 d important precisely because it relates to specific cases where investiga
 tions – and sometimes prosecutions - were initiated by the state. These 
 assaults were committed upon civilian Kikuyu women by African and British 
 agents of the colonial state.  Decisions to prosecute related to the disci
 pline and control of the security forces.  For the colonial authorities\, 
 rape was a “difficult” charge\, and many more case were notified than 
 were ultimately prosecuted.    The evidence on these cases thus provides a
  unique insight as to the way that rape in was treated in a colonial conte
 xt during the 1950s\, and adds to the small but growing body of literature
  that addresses the question of how sexual crimes are (or are not) prosecu
 ted in wartime.  Rape in 1950s Kenya was not a “weapon of war”\, but i
 t was a widespread and potent element of the counter-insurgency.
LOCATION:Seminar Room S1 Alison Richard Building\, 7 West Road\, Cambridge
  CB3 9DT
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR