Chieftaincy, the State, and Democracy: Political Legitimacy in Post-Apartheid South Africa

5. The Chieftaincy and the Establishment of Local Government: Multiple Boundaries and the Ambiguities of Representation

chieftaincy and the establishment of local government | 137 The Chieftaincy and the Establishment of Local Government Multiple Boundaries and the Ambiguities of Representation It [local government] provides people with their needs—it is about development. I think if our inkosi had dignity we could be helped because you find that in some other areas the [local government] is helping but not in our area. We will understand [local government] more easily because we know him [the chief]. One of the central premises of the LG White Paper in 1998 was that the sources of authority for the chieftaincy and local government would be distinct. In this way, the ANC hoped that it could accommodate the chieftaincy while simultaneously creating democratic government at the local level. This has proven to be a difficult task as the establishment of local government institutions has altered the legitimation process in rural areas. In particular, the “official” boundaries between the authority of local government institutions and the chieftaincy at the local level that existed 1996–2000 were not as unambiguous as the ANC anticipated. Rather than providing clarity, the establishment of rural local government in 1995–96 was a process that superimposed a new set of norms and rules onto a sociopolitical context where the chieftaincy remained dominant. One of the results is that the authority of each overlaps the other in ways that tend to obscure, rather than reinforce, the boundaries that exist between the chieftaincy and local government institutions. An analysis of how and why these boundaries become blurred highlights the ways in which local populations give meaning to the newly established democratic institutions and their experiences with these institutions. five 138 | chieftaincy, the state, and democracy One of the more significant legacies of colonialism and apartheid is the multiple political boundaries that exist at the local level, especially in the rural areas. As government officials sought to implement local government institutions throughout South Africa, they had to come to grips with apartheid-era boundaries that remained meaningful to local residents. More specifically, in 1995–96, when the first local government institutions were established, the preexisting tribal authorities and regional authorities remained intact. Until the passage of the TLGF Act in 2003, there were 280 tribal authorities and 24 regional authorities in KwaZulu-Natal that continued to function as they had during apartheid. Even with the passage and implementation of the TLGF Act, these boundaries have not disappeared, as tribal and regional authorities were simply replaced with traditional councils and district houses of traditional leaders. For the most part, these new bodies have jurisdiction over the same boundaries and have kept the same names (i.e., Mvuzane Tribal Authority was renamed Mvuzane Traditional Council). Indeed, the institutional changes that occurred in 1996 were in some ways even more important than those adopted in 2003 with the TLGF Act. What changed in 1996 was that the chieftaincy was forced to compete with the newly established local government institutions, and more specifically, with elected local government representatives. This posed a number of challenges for the chieftaincy. First, unlike the members of the tribal and regional authorities that chiefs were able to appoint, local government institutions consisted of elected representatives who based their authority on the electoral process . For many in the rural areas, the presence of elected representatives tended to complicate the idea of “representation,” especially as both traditional leaders and elected councilors competed for the respect and loyalty of the people. Second, under the constitution, local government institutions were responsible for a range of development issues that had been under the jurisdiction of the tribal and regional authorities during apartheid. Pressures for both conflict and cooperation have developed as the chieftaincy and elected councilors have attempted to secure their autonomy, even though local populations expected that traditional leaders should work with local government to facilitate the development process and to maintain the unity and harmony of the area. The next chapter examines in much more detail the implementation of development projects in the rural areas, but the issue of development is also intricately bound up with perceptions of local government. chieftaincy and the establishment of local government | 139 Third, the fact that traditional leaders were ex-officio members of local government meant that they were forced to interact with elected officials in an entirely new political space that was fundamentally different from the tribal and regional authorities. Many traditional leaders used their...