This paper discusses the phenomenon of single women claiming, and acquiring, residential sites in the former homelands since the end of apartheid in 1994, against the backdrop of steadily declining marriage rates. It argues that the transition to democracy changed the balance of power within which ‘living customary law’ is negotiated at the local level, and emboldened women. The changes are put at risk by controversial traditional leadership laws enacted since 2003. These restore the power of definition to chiefs, and reassert constructs of customary law that obscure the dynamics of the changes under way. I suggest that the ‘changes’ may, in part, reflect the re‐emergence of pre‐existing repertoires that were suppressed by official customary law. The paper contrasts the Constitutional Court's inclusive approach to ‘living customary law’ and the legislative process, with the autocratic approach of the new laws, one of which has already been struck down by the Court.
People in the former homelands waged a successful battle against the imposition of 'tribal levies' during the anti-apartheid struggle. Recently, however, there has been a resurgence of traditional authorities demanding annual levies. Those who refuse to pay cannot access government grants and identity books. This article argues that recent laws bolstering the powers of traditional leaders have contributed to this resurgence. It argues that the laws undermine the citizenship rights of the poorest South Africans as well as their ability to hold traditional leaders to account. It suggests that the laws have been ambiguously worded in an attempt to disguise the fact that they are inconsistent with the Constitution. It rebuts the argument that annual tribal levies are consistent with and justified by customary law, by describing their colonial and apartheid genesis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.