What to do with the chiefs? Revisiting the historical shifts and continuities of rural land administration and tenure systems in the former Transkei of the Eastern Cape, South Africa

ABSTRACT

At least seventeen million South Africans live on ‘communal’ landholdings that are held in trust by the state under the custodianship of traditional leaders. Yet, traditional leaders’ land administration powers are undetermined, thereby impeding planning efforts and infrastructure provisions in South Africa’s rural regions. The aim of this article is to revisit the historical shifts and continuities pertaining to rural land administration and tenure systems during successive regimes by focusing on ‘communal’ landholdings in the former Transkei. In so doing it becomes clear how rural regions remain victims of colonial and apartheid land laws despite a quarter of a century of policy redress. Arguably, until decisive answers are established regarding traditional leaders’ land administration powers, residents will continue to live without municipal services and economic opportunities. Similar realities are also found across sub-Saharan Africa. Lessons from the former Transkei might then be relevant elsewhere despite situated differences.

KEYWORDS:

• Tenure insecurity
• land reform
• colonialism

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the editors and anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and change suggestions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 The history of South African law has a Roman-Dutch foundation. However, by the early 1800s, South African common law was influenced by British common law practices (Bennett 2004).

2 It is important to note that this official understanding of ‘land ownership’ in the South African context pertains to a Western understanding despite the promulgation of post-apartheid land laws (Alden Wily 2008).

3 African men who qualified for the franchise were those who held property in land and buildings worth £25 or more, as well as men who received an annual salary of £50 or more (Wotshela 2018).

4 Some chiefs’ refusal to collaborate with the state culminated in a series of rural revolts across South Africa during the 1950s, including in Tembuland of the present-day Eastern Cape. Paramount Chief Sabata Dalindyebo led this rebellion. Consequently, he was deposed by the Nationalist government and replaced by his rival, chief Kaiser Mathanzima, who became the president of the Transkei in 1976 (van Kessel and Oomen 1997).

5 Many chiefs were among the founding members of the ANC in 1912. But from 1948 onward, the ANC transformed itself into a mass movement with a growing working-class base; and by the early 1960s, chiefs were no longer perceived as instrumental to the liberation struggle, since the ANC maintained that the road to democracy would be achieved via urban guerrilla activities and not rural rebellions (van Kessel and Oomen 1997).

6 The 1997 White Paper contains three overarching programmes for the purpose of redressing past land injustices: land restitution; land redistribution; and tenure reform.

7 In 2000, the Nhlapo Commission was set-up by the state to investigate who among the many royal families and traditional leaders might be considered legitimate as opposed to apartheid-manufactured leaders. The Commission’s findings, which were published in 2010, were rejected by many traditional authorities, as only seven of the twelve kingships investigated were deemed legitimate (Ainslie and Kepe 2016).

8 After a thirteen-year absence from the post, Thoko Didiza was reappointed as Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development in 2019.

9 The South African Constitution stipulates that existing laws will remain in force until they are replaced by appropriate legislation.

10 This follow-up study was scheduled to take place during 2020. However, due to COVID-19 restrictions, it is suspended until research participants feel safe to once again engage in a project that aims to unearth nuanced understandings between past and current policies and spatial consequences.