detention camps and prisons were built primarily by detainees, many of whom
were later executed. As David Anderson showed in his book, death sentences
were routinely applied to individuals for Mau Mau participation.41 Interestingly, the
British targeted the power of the oath in controlling Mau Mau. The language used
by the Supreme Courts for prosecution was: “being present and consenting to
the administration of an oath relating to the unlawful society commonly known as
Mau Mau, contrary to section 61B of the Penal Code.”42
In the subsequent section, oathing cases serve as examples of colonial
justice during the emergency period. In the center of all of these court
interrogations was the alleged practice of the Mau Mau oath. The objective is to
show that during the Mau Mau period a new oathing relationship to criminality
was created which prior to 1952 did not exist. The cases provide evidence of this
newly formed relationship and the details surrounding the oathing experience
captured in the archival records. The cases show evidence of colonial
persecution of suspected oathers along with their biases in administering justice
during the Mau Mau period.
The Oathing Case of Masika S/0 Nyanze43
During the emergency period, there were numerous Africans who stood
before the colonial courts for their alleged Mau Mau oathing involvement. On
June 14, 1954, Masika S/0 Nyanze was executed by the Supreme Court of
4' Anderson, Histories of the Hanged, 353-356.
42 Verbiage on warrant of execution of sentence to death documents related to cases associated with the
Mau Mau oathing used here as an example of the offence from the perspective of the colonial courts. KNA
MLA 1/1007/CC 127/1954.
43 Referenced in Archive flies as Case # 36 & #60 (Machakos) - Regina versus Masika S/О Nyanze
124