Conducting Political Research In A Highly Sensitive Post-Conflict Environment: Reflections From The Internally Displaced Camps In Kenya

Muhammad Danial Azman

doi:10.22452/mjir.vol4no1.2

Abstract

This article elucidates the ethical and methodological intricacies of the semi-structured interviews when the author conducted is qualitative-based fieldwork in the Internally Displaced Camps (IDPs) in Nairobi and Rift Valley, Kenya. Research can be regarded as the production of knowledge, and the research process is the roadmap used in order to produce scientific knowledge about the objectivity of individual agency and its social reality, but there is a paucity of recent studies that reveals the complexity of conducting research in highly sensitive environments, especially in the IDP camps. This study hopes to fill in the gap in scholarship by interviewing the survivors of the post-election violence (PEV) who occupied the IDP camps and urban slums using a framework of research ethics on the IDPs. The essay looks into the process of ethical and moral considerations in response to the issues of political sensitivity when interviewing the IDPs. The paper begins with a brief introduction to the case study. Secondly, the research ethical framework and the actual research design are discussed. Following this, the challenges faced by the author regarding research important decisions made before, during and after the fieldwork (research steps and processes) are examined. The analysis concludes by suggesting the research prospects and limitations of the semi-structured interview method in the IDP camps and highlights the importance of recognising the 'positionality' of the researcher from just 'observing' to the further step to 'do good' within a setting of the post-conflict environment.

Highlights

This article is based on a study that was designed to research the impact of Transitional Justice Mechanisms (TJMs)[1] in addressing the shattered living conditions of Internally Displacement Persons (IDPs) 2 following the 200 200 postelection violence (PEV)[3] in Kenya
The PEV provides an instructive opportunity for cross-disciplinary commentators to e amine the relations between the broader comparative themes of procedural democracy in African politics and the mushroomed publications of socio-legal analysis in suggesting the potential of the TJMs in resolving a recent electoral violence, regime change, and Arab Springs in Africa, all of which hinted for a clearer understanding that the legalistic nature over the study of TJMs requires a heightened degree of political analysis.[6]
This research is anchored in the idea that the attempt of TJMs to successfully implement some form of post-conflict justice in enya was flawed because they did not take into account how these institutional arrangements were subjected to elite brinkmanship games, and as a result, TJMs in enya failed to address the problems of the IDPs, whose politically subjectivity and agency were denied in the process of achieving realistic forms of justice and reconciliation.[9]

Summary

INTRODUCTION

This article is based on a study that was designed to research the impact of Transitional Justice Mechanisms (TJMs)[1] in addressing the shattered living conditions of Internally Displacement Persons (IDPs) 2 following the 200 200 postelection violence (PEV)[3] in Kenya. The author shares the major dilemmas that arose before, during, and after the fieldwork that emerged perhaps due to working in the new environment of the IDP camps and enya (Africa), as well as being new to using the semi-structured interview method in highly sensitive political environments He had travelled to the country prior conducting his e tensive fieldwork in 2012, he was new to the study site (IDP camps and slums in suburban Nairobi and Rift Valley), with prior knowledge based only on having learned about it through secondary literature and media from the area. This bears methodological implications to researchers wanting to work in the lobal South, collaborating with local N s, as the author did, helps to bridge these different methodological circumstances as they are obviously more aware of local customs and protocols

CONCLUSION

34 SS 102