There are many reasons why payment of salaries for izinduna (rightly referred to as traditional community leaders) may be coming under heavy criticism from some quarters.
Opposition political parties have gone berserk following the announcement by MEC for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs Nomusa Dube-Ncube in the departmental budget policy speech presentation for the 2017-2018 financial year, that izinduna are to be paid monthly stipends, sourced partly from a chunk of the department’s cake as well as from contributions by sister departments in the province.
The MEC has said: “Since 1994, we have improved the remuneration of amakhosi and restored their dignity by making them public office bearers with benefits. In our journey of reclaiming the dignity of the institution, we have now introduced the remuneration of izinduna in recognition of the role they play as catalysts for development in our communities. Although this has had a major impact on the financial position of the department, we believe that there will be a return on this investment for the communities... Over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, the amount required to fund izinduna is calculated at R252 million, R266m and R280m, respectively.”
Concerns from those opposed to this undertaking vary as follows:
The unstable economy;
Izinduna play no significant role in communities; and
Traditional leadership (and the monarchy) is unimportant.
Yet they are simply uneducated about the role of traditional leadership, in particular izinduna, in rural communities.
The actual criticism has its roots in the Western colonial belief system that, in order to weaken and infiltrate Africa, you had to hit its soul. Traditional leaders were seen as the stem that had to be cut off, since it kept all the branches of the African people united as one nation. Hence the campaign led by Sir Theophilus Shepstone for the erstwhile Natal administration, in terms of which rightful traditional leaders were deposed, jailed on manufactured charges, to be replaced by those viewed as puppets of the English supremacist regime.
Many traditional leaders were removed from their thrones in the Eastern Cape and replaced with headmen, which was one way of undermining the entire institution of traditional leadership.
Remember that in African tradition, a king or traditional leader is referred to as “umlomo ongathethi manga” (or he who speaks no lie). This means that he is the chief commander, whose order cannot be opposed or ignored. So the oppressors would not have such high authority existing for the people, who should instead recognise Western man as the ultimate authority.
Africans had to have no leader, so that when ultimately told by the white man to relinquish his land and livestock, and become a slave in the mines, he would simply jump without asking: “How high?”
Today, the hullabaloo around the payment of izinduna, as if the issue were merely about looking after the public purse, is simply a continuation of the war between the West and Africa, cold as this battle is now.
Although the world is experiencing trying economic times, every person must get paid for the work that they do.
Induna have a very active responsibility within the community or village where they are deployed, in the same way that a councillor has his work cut out within the ward of his jurisdiction.
The KwaZulu-Natal Department of Cogta says that traditional leaders, including izinduna, are well respected in communities, since the institution of traditional leadership is what they relate to. It has long been a key feature of Africanism, before the birth of democracy, that leaders are voted into office.
Sixty percent of izinduna are appointed by inkosi and the other 40 are elected by the citizenry, thus aligning traditional leadership with our democracy.
Izinduna foster social cohesion among communities. They deal with disputes and report to an inkosi if matters escalate beyond their control.
As a taxpayer, I am comfortable about izinduna and amakhosi being paid from the public purse, as they benefit the entire SA society, since stable communities represent a healthy nation.
Further, traditional leadership is provided for in the constitution, therefore there is no need to criticise the decision made by the MEC for Cogta in KZN, because it is an undertaking that cannot be challenged legally.