By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) upheld the decision by President Cyril Ramaphosa’s to recognise King MisuZulu kaZwelithini as the rightful Amazulu king.
Ramaphosa approached the SCA to have the High Court decision, which deemed his recognition of the Zulu King as unlawful and invalid, reversed.
He contended that the high court had erred on key issues, including the lawfulness and rationality of the recognition, the interpretation of section 8(4) of the Act, and the application of the legal doctrine of res judicata.
The res judicata principle means that if a court has already made a final judgment on a particular case, the same issue cannot be brought before the court again by the same parties.
The President presented the certificate of recognition to the King in October 2022.
Thereafter, King Misuzulu’s older brother, Prince Simakade, approached the high court, claiming the identification process that saw his brother ascend to the throne was flawed.
The Pretoria High Court Judge Norman Davis, had found that Ramaphosa erred in formally recognising King Misuzulu.
The appeals court asserted that the High Court had erred in its previous decision: “The high court erred in reviewing and setting aside the recognition decision and remitting the matter to the president for him to establish an investigative committee.”
“The first (Ramaphosa) and second (King Misuzulu) appellants’ appeal is upheld,” the SCA declared in its ruling, unequivocally supporting the President’s decision.
The SCA found that Pietermaritzburg High Court Judge Isaac Madondo concluded that there was no dispute for the Premier of KwaZulu or the President to investigate and to refer back to the Zulu Royal Family for consideration and resolution in terms of s 8(4) of the Leadership Act.
“The fact of the matter is that by the time that the president took a decision to recognise Prince Misuzulu, there was neither evidence nor allegations that the Zulu customary law and customs were not complied with in the identification of Prince Misuzulu,” it said.
The appeals court also said it was clear that Ramaphosa consulted with the then KwaZulu-Natal Premier, Sihle Zikalala, before he recognised the King, hence Prince Simakade’s claim that there were no consultations falls away.
“In my view the President, as required by the Leadership Act, consulted with the Premier before deciding to recognise Prince Misuzulu as the rightful king. It therefore follows that Prince Mbonisi’s attack on the recognition decision based on the President’s failure to consult with the Premier, must also fail,” reads the SCA ruling.
King Misuzulu’s camp welcomed the verdict as a vindication, with supporters celebrating the end of uncertainty. While Prince Simakade’s team expressed disappointment, hinting at a possible appeal to the Constitutional Court.
The late King Zwelithini Ka Bhekuzulu had been the king of the Zulu nation since 1968 until his death on March 12 2021. In his last will and testament, he had nominated one of his wives, the late Queen Mantfombi Dlamini Zulu, as his successor. The royal family met on March 24 2021 to appoint the queen as the regent, and Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi, the traditional prime minister of the Zulu nation, publicly announced her as such.
The queen died on April 29 2021 before she could be officially recognised as the regent, but before her death, at a meeting of the royal family on March 30 2021, proposed and nominated Prince Misuzulu, her first-born biological son, as the successor to the throne in terms of the Zulu customary law and customs.
She had similarly nominated him as the king in her will.
Aggrieved by this, some members of the royal house sought an order interdicting the endorsement of Misuzulu, disputing that he was correctly identified or nominated by the Zulu royal family.
Meanwhile the Pietermaritzburg High Court has ordered Sipho Ngwenya, the former chairperson of the Ingonyama Trust Board (ITB), to repay more than R30 million to the Ingonyama Trust within 30 days.
The High Court found that Ngwenya, who is a former judge, lacked the ITB’s authorisation to transfer funds from a property sale between the eThekwini Municipality and the Ingonyama Trust to Jafta Incorporated.