Building a bureaucracy: the transfer of responsibility for refugee affairs from United Nations Refugee Agency to Government of Kenya

Thesis

In this thesis, I explore the role of Refugee Affairs Secretariat (RAS), within the Government of Kenya, in the management of refugee affairs in Kenya, focusing on RAS’ role in refugee registration and refugee status determination (RSD). Methodologically, I seek to understand the state through the everyday practices of its ‘street-level’ and managerial-level bureaucrats.

My first argument is rooted in the observation that the Kenyan state’s engagement with refugee registration and RSD has been marked by what I argue can be called a 'procedural indifference' – defined as a lack of interest or concern. I use this to critique the theories of state power outlined by Foucault, Scott and Torpey whereby state power is achieved through the administrative penetration and embrace of society. I advance this argument by showing that historically the Kenyan state, and the African state more broadly, developed without a reliance on bureaucratic knowledge. Together, I argue that this shows the historical and political contingency of registration and RSD as central components of the so-called ‘international’ refugee regime, and the importance of questioning normative ideas of statehood and idealised notions of surveillance.

My second argument explores a capacity building project by UNHCR to facilitate the full transfer of RSD to RAS and unify registration (previously done by both UNHCR and RAS in parallel). I explore the empirical dynamics of how the development project played out, whose interests it served and theoretically consider how power was exercised. I show that capacity building was oriented around deliberately maintaining UNHCR’s influence over RAS. I argue this was done by UNHCR to resolve its own institutional tension between institutional demands to carry out the transfer and concerns about how this could jeopardise refugee protection. This control however fitted well with RAS’s indifference and their desire for the financial incentives offered by the project. I therefore argue that the official aims were not achieved because of how both partners designed the project. This case highlights the intriguing ways in which competing agendas of development partners can come together to facilitate a project but struggle to achieve its official aims.

Authors: Walkey, CE

• DOI: 10.5287/ora-n1ebj5j65
• Type of award: DPhil
• Level of award: Doctoral
• Awarding institution: University of Oxford
• Language: English
• Keywords: refugee registration; bureaucracy; Kenya; African state; refugee status determination; refugee protection; UNHCR