Chiefs And Rural Local Government In Post-Apartheid South Africa

Introduction Colonialism caused fundamental damage to the role of chiefs. It disturbed the pre existing redistributive lineage system, undermined the foundation for the existence of chiefs and limited their tradition-based and personalised form of authority. It transformed chiefs from independent representatives of various people into government officials, appointed by the new colonial power and paid a salary. Shorn of their judicial power and prevented from performing their traditional functions, their pre-existing worlds of authority were dwarfed by the overpowering force of the colonial state. In broad terms, this depiction of the impact of colonialism on indigenous forms of authority may strike a chord of familiarity. Y et it presents only a partial picture. If indeed chieftaincy was robbed of the internal dynamics vital to the autonomy of chiefs, how is it that they have survived for so very long? If part of the reason for this longevity of chieftaincy is the fact that some chiefs had become co-opted into the local arm of the colonial state how does one explain the persistence of their apparent legitimacy? This paper will provide some tentative answers to these questions by attempting to paint a fuller picture of the various and changing roles of chiefs in the context of an emerging democratic order in the former bantustans of the Eastern Cape. Irrespective of the fact that a large number of chiefs became colonial stooges, and despite the fact that many rural residents would be hard pressed to provide a precise definition of the contemporary role for chiefs in a democratic South Africa, chiefs have been recognised in the country's Constitution of 1996 as well as in legislation affecting the former Reserve Areas. This recognition causes tension and inconsistency in the Constitution. On the one hand, the Constitution enshrines democratic principles in the Bill of Rights while on the other, it acknowledges the role of unelected traditional authorities. There are large disparities between rights