Why are chiefs recognised in South Africa’s new democracy? Issues of legitimacy and contestation in local politics: A case study of chiefly and local government in Vaaltyn Dineo Ephodia Skosana A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Arts, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts by Dissertation. Johannesburg, 2012 1 Declaration I declare that this thesis is my own unaided work. It is submitted for the Degree of Master of Arts in Political Studies at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. It has not been submitted before for any other degree or examination at any other university. Dineo Ephodia Skosana March 2012 2 Abstract This thesis examines the legitimacy of chiefs in post-apartheid South Africa through the prism of the Vaaltyn Mokopane chieftainship in Limpopo Province. It is used as a case study to understand how chiefs gain and maintain legitimacy. This is studied within a framework of a succession dispute between two candidates, Vaaltyn A (born in 1964) and Vaaltyn B (born in 1974). The claim of Vaaltyn B was legitimized by the local government of Mokopane and the provincial government of Limpopo, irrespective of the fact that that majority of the Kekana tribal council and the community members supported Vaaltyn A. The thesis suggests that the legitimacy of chief Vaaltyn B is maintained through patron-client relations in which the local/provincial government enters into and initiates economically viable relations with Vaaltyn B and mining houses. These patron-client relations are formed and continued within a context of a succession dispute which allows for Vaaltyn A and community members to be sidelined. Finally, the thesis discusses where the legitimization of chief Vaaltyn B by the people stands, in this case where authority has already been awarded by the government. This serves as a platform to probe whether people continue to support the continuing existence of chiefs in a democratic dispensation. 3 Acknowledgements I wish to acknowledge Prof Philip Bonner, my mentor, who has been my inspiration throughout my postgraduate experience. He was unbelievably supportive and patient throughout the process of developing this thesis. I have gained extensively both academically and personally from working with him. I would not have produced this thesis without him. He has made my post graduate experience incredibly enriching. My gratitude extends to Prof Sheila Meintjes for her input and guidance in this thesis. Prof Noor Nieftagodien has been my pillar of strength. I appreciate his technical input on how to organise the ideas in this thesis. I am also grateful for his support which extended beyond academia. Many thanks to Dr Amanda Esterhuysen and Prof Peter Lekgoathi who were supportive and helped me establish a relationship with the Kekana family. I appreciate Vusumuzi Khumalo, Sarah Godsell, Molemo Moiloa, Zahn Gower and all the other National Research Foundation Chair in History scholars, for their academic inputs, friendship and support. I value the presence of close friends, Sakkie Robert, Kedibone Mabote, Thembelihle Seruto, Nxalati Baloyi and Zwelihle Ngwenya, for their support during this writing period of this thesis. This thesis would not have been possible without the support of the Skosana family. I am thankful for the support from my Grandfather Aaron Skosana, my mother and aunts and my brother Lehlohonolo, who was always understanding of why I could not be an active sister during the time of writing this thesis. I also wish to thank the Kekana family and their respective tribal councils who agreed to participate in this study. I appreciate the manner in which I was received by both tribal councils. I am also thankful to Mocks Mokhonoana, Terrance Kekana, Bob Mmola and his former local government councillors for their role in this research. Lastly, my gratefulness extends to the people of Mokopane for allowing me to tell their stories. 4 Contents Chapter 1 Debates on chieftaincy in South Africa Introduction Page 7 Rationale Page 9 Literature Review Page 10 Debates on chieftaincy in South Africa Page 10 An overview of the Ndebele in South Africa Page 20 Methodology Page 25 Chapter outline Page 27 Chapter 2 Page 32 The interface between tradition and modernity: An outline of the succession dispute between chief Vaaltyn A and Vaaltyn B Chiefly lineage of Vaaltyn A and Vaaltyn B Page 32 The early lives of both the contending chiefs Page 37 The traditional vs. the modern chief Page 39 Northern Ndebele Culture Page 45 Chapter 3 Page 50 Boundary determination negotiations within a context of a succession dispute Transformation of the local Government Page 51 The Municipal Demarcation Act Page 53 ‘The undemocratic incorporation of Vaaltyn....’ Page 55 Chapter 4 Page 67 5 The encounter between the Kekana chiefly family, communities and the Platinum Reef Resource mining narratives: A local and provincial government initiation The mineral rights Act in South Africa Page 68 Mining in Mokopane Page 70 The narratives about the struggle against the Platinum Reef Resource Mine in Vaaltyn and surrounding areas Page 73 Chapter 5 Page 82 People’s perceptions about succession dispute and the continuing existence of chieftainship People’s perceptions about the dispute and its effects on their area Page 84 The legitimacy of chieftainship in Vaaltyn and surrounding villages Page 88 Chapter 6 Conclusion Page 98 Scholarly ideas about the existence of chieftainship within the democratic dispensation Bibliography Page 105 6 Chapter 1 Introduction Regardless of the contested history of traditional leaders, they have remained a conspicuous feature of post-apartheid South Africa. It is the aim of this research to understand why it is that even though democratic structures and democratically elected leaders have been set in place, the traditional form of governance remains salient. The thesis addresses the question about who legitimizes the chief. Vaaltyn in Mokopane (Limpopo) is used as a case study to understand one group of people’s perceptions about chieftainship. This thesis is written within a context of a succession dispute between two candidates, Vaaltyn A and Vaaltyn B, who both belong to the Kekana chiefly lineage. The resolution to the dispute paves the way for Vaaltyn B who is now chief, to secure recognition from the democratic government. State recognition offers a platform for the recognized chief and his tribal council members to enter into economic deals and politically binding decisions, without consulting the unrecognized faction or the villagers. This thesis shows how patronage networks and negotiated agreements between the chief, the local and the provincial government and the Platinum Reef Resource mine, maintain his authority. In turn these patron-client networks and the decisions taken within these networks isolate him from his subjects and the contending faction. Therefore, the study considers the extent to which people support chief Vaaltyn B and the impact these patronage networks have in the area. The research findings indicate that people of Mokopane do not support chief Vaaltyn B. They prefer his rival, Vaaltyn A. However, while they are against Vaaltyn B’s rule, their responses indicate that they are not necessarily against the institution of chieftainship per se. Although this is the case, this study does take into consideration that the group interviews conducted for this research may not be sufficient to conclude that chieftainship in Vaaltyn remains popular. Thus there is a need for scholars to continue to embark on extensive research to identify the areas in which chiefs remain supported and to determine in those areas where they are still popular, why that is the case. 7 Fig 1 Vaaltyn (referred to as Mokopane on the map) and surrounding chiefdoms 8 Rationale This thesis arises out of my Honours dissertation entitled ‘Traditional Authority in the context of democratic governance: A case study of a dynastic dispute in Vaaltyn.’ In that work, the research focused on the relationship between traditional leaders and local government in democratic South Africa. The dynamics of this relationship were explored through an ongoing chieftainship dispute around the incumbent Kekana chief in the area of Mokopane, Vaaltyn (Limpopo Province). The current dispute emerged when chief Alfred Kekana died in 2001. The royal family split into two rival factions, each supporting its own candidate. In the same year the local and provincial government intervened. They conducted interviews with both the contending tribal councils and decided to grant recognition to only one of the contending chiefs. I argued in the dissertation that the chieftainship dispute in Vaaltyn was about gaining political recognition within a democratic space. Chieftainship is a source of political power in itself, as it provides allocative authority. Chiefs in particular have a stake in recognition as legitimate participants in a democracy in their own right. In addition, I argued that oral accounts of tradition were manipulated by the contending tribal councils and used to secure a place within a democratic discourse. Recognition provides the successful tribal faction with material and political resources to which only the officially recognised group could gain access. I emphasized that the acknowledged tribal faction was not the only recipient of the benefits that accrued to those in office but also that the local government benefited through being able to acquire communal lands for the municipality. Hence I showed in the study that the structuring of chieftainship post- 1994 resonated with the earlier system, but the shift in the status of chiefs within the new state, provided chiefs with an opportunity to legitimise their power and authority in a new and comfortable relationship with local government. A significant dimension of the struggle was that some of the local councillors straddled democratic office and their position in the chief’s council as members of the chiefly lineage.