Zulu Princes Simakade kaZwelithini and Mbonisi kaBhekuzulu argue that only the royal family, not the president of the country, has the authority to choose a king.
This as the AmaZulu succession duel continues in the Pretoria High Court on Tuesday where Prince Simakade KaZwelithini and Prince Mbonisi kaBhekuzulu are challenging the appointment of King MisuZulu kaZwelithini.
The trial began on Monday and is expected to be finalised on Wednesday.
Advocate Thabani Masuku (SC), representing Prince Mbonisi, contended that President Cyril Ramaphosa should have waited for the legal battles concerning the matter to be resolved at the Constitutional Court before making the appointment in 2022.
In a shared perspective, both princes agree that the role of the late Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi at the royal house was questionable.
Alan Dodson (SC), representing Prince Simakade, argued on Monday that Buthelezi had a pre-determined outcome to have King Misuzulu nominated, bypassing the due process.
Buthelezi overstepped his role
They contend that Buthelezi, merely acting as a messenger for the late King Zwelithini, overstepped his role and wrongfully claimed the prerogative that belongs to the royal family alone.
Meanwhile, Prince Simakade, claiming to be Queen Mantfombi’s son by affiliation following the custom of ukufakwa esiswini, argued that he is the rightful heir to the throne as the king’s first-born son from the great wife.
However, Prince Mbonisi disputed the claim.
The court heard that he has also shifted his support to a different candidate for the kingship, creating a conflict of interests.
“It appears that Prince Mbonisi now supports a different candidate for the kingship [although he does not explicitly disclose who the candidate is].
“Whereas I submit that I am the rightful king in terms of Zulu customary law and the operation of the custom ukufakwa esiswini, Prince Simakade argued.
While both parties seek similar relief to set aside the decisions leading to King MisuZulu’s appointment, their interests do not align entirely.
The dispute extends to differing views on the legitimacy of ukufakwa esiswini.
Prince Simakade argued, however, that his explanation of this custom is supported by an independent expert in Zulu customary law and history.
“Custom is not – as Prince Mbonisi suggests in paragraph 89 – what he says that it is, and Prince Mbonisi has no ability or authority to determine the custom and its requirements.
“Prince Mbonisi’s suggestion that ‘[his] knowledge of this custom is more precise and accurate than that of Prince Simakade’ is not supported by the independent expert whose confirmatory affidavit accompanied my founding affidavit.”
The trial continues today.
