One of the issues I am interested in is how a village community perceives its local leaders. Well, an ordinary person has quite a number of leaders. Each of them deals with various issues, has different sources of legitimacy and authority, and is thus woven into different webs of relations.

There are cultural leaders heading farmers’ groups, dealing with land issues and cattle. There are the elders and clan leaders, who gain authority by simply getting older or heritage. There are women representatives, youth representative and representatives of people with disabilities; elected by their respective target groups.

And of course the leaders that are part of the formal government system at the level of the village, parish, sub-county and district level, elected by universal adult suffrage. In the village, people hardly talk about their leaders beyond the sub-county level, since they are quite distant to people’s local life. They generally refer to district level as ‘those above’.

A strategy often used by NGOs is to select individuals and train them as certain leaders. This is alright when the fulfil a gap in local systems, like for instance human rights observes that can inform the villagers about forms of abuse. It gets a little tricky when they actually overlap with the formal responsibilities of leaders in local administration. I have seen a few cases where it led to conflict.

Things become even more complicated when the leaders double in various roles. Like the chair person of the NRM party is also as parish level chair person, the LC1 as the focal point for a peace building NGO etc. I know one LC1 who is also a Change Agent. I also know a man who is focal point for four different organisations and he is supposed to give training on HIV/Aids, gender based violence, conflict resolution and saving groups... Some people tend to accumulate positions.

The community is thus in various ways related to its leaders. Your village leader LC1 is your neighbour, your cousin, you clan elder, your NGO access card. And probably around election time the LC1 realises that his neighbours and nephews also form his/her electorate.

My question to people in the village about who are important leaders to them is thus not easily answered. In the mapping exercise we do with participants, a big web of relations appears on the paper. The most important leaders are usually the LC1, the clan leader and Rwod Kweri; those who are closest to people.

Surprisingly, the NGO focal persons never make it to the top three. There is also a clear hierarchy; you cannot access parish and sub-county level without going through LC1. Very few people therefore make it to a level higher than the village. Even though the sub-county is of crucial importance to the village, people cannot easily find out how.