19
demonstrate their presence in the territorial confines of the colony prior to the
establishment of direct colonial rule were considered an ethnic group of the
colony and thus governed under the principles of indirect rule with a native
authority (Mamdani 2002, p. 494-5). In the Congo, the Belgian version of
indirect rule, although similar to the British, made exceptions in the eastern part
of the colony and experimented with multiple administrative groupings in which
the Banyarwanda were able to run their own affairs next to other ethnic groups
(Vlassenroot 2002, p. 502-3). However, Banyarwanda who migrated to these
respective areas during the colonial period were not considered ‘indigenous’ and
thus given a different status that made them directly subject to the rule of the
colonial state. In Mamdani’s words, they were considered a race rather than an
ethnicity.
It should not come as a surprise that these designations were maintained
in the post-colonial period. Of the three major groups of Banyarwanda living in
the Kivu provinces of the Congo, only the Banyarutshuru in North Kivu were
considered indigenous while the Banyamasisi in North Kivu and the
Banyamulenge in South Kivu were not. Although there had always been the
possibility of designating citizenship rights in the post-colonial state on the basis
of residence, ancestry became that determinant and the dividing line between
who was considered indigenous and who was not was colonial rule itself
(Mamdani 2002, p. 495). The violent conflicts in Rwanda and Burundi during the
early period of independence added the category of Banyarwanda refugees to this
mix who had even fewer rights than those considered indigenous.
Convention