AFRICAN MIRROR REPORTER
DR Mathole Motshekga, one of South Africa’s leading lawmakers and a cultural expert, has asked the courts to stop an attempt to hijack the country’s only queenship – the Modjadji Royal throne – and asked for those behind the plot to be dealt with decisively.
In court papers, Dr Motshekga, who is also a legal advisor to the Balobedu royal family, accused those behind attempts to remove Queen-elect Masalanabo Modjadji VII (16) as a violation of SA’s laws and centuries-old traditions.
Queen-elect Masalanabo is expected to assume the throne when she turns 18 and her uncle Prince Mpapatla was elected as regent.
Things took a turn for the worst on May 07 when a faction of the Modjadji Royal Council announced Prince Lekukela, the Queen-elect’s brother, as the new king of the Balobedu royal nation.
Motshekga said in the court papers that those who wanted to deprive Queen-elect Modjadji VII of her throne should have followed due process, approached the courts and asked for her recognition President Ramaphosa and his government, to be rescinded. He argued that they did not, and therefore took the law into their own hands.
“It is axiomatic that the First (Modjadji Royal Nation) and Second Respondent (Prince Mpapatla) have no regard to the rule of law. To put it bluntly, their conduct clearly signifies the fact that they are the law unto themselves. Judging from their attitude during the press conference held on 17 May 2021, and the tone on their press statement and press conference, it is clear that they don’t respect decisions of government for as long as they wish to do things their own way even if it is against the law,” Motshekga said.
Motshekga has asked the courts to set aside the appointment of Prince Lekukela and to punish members of the Balobedu Royal House responsible for the appointment.
Motshega said those behind the attempt to deprive Queen-elect Masalanabo of her birthright took the decision without considering crucial factors and applicable laws.
“I submit that, for the First Respondent (Modjadji Royal Nation) and Second Respondent (Prince Mpapatla) to attempt to change their decision to appoint Queen-Elect Her Majesty Masalanabo Modjadji VII, they ought to have passed few hurdles before dreaming about appointing Lekukela Modjadji as the next leader of the Balobedu Nation in an unlawful manner. Firstly, if the First and Second Respondent could have wanted to explore whether they are entitled by law to review or change their previous decision, they should have followed due process, legally so, through a self-review which they failed to do. Self-Review, requires them to file a Review Application before the High Court to set aside their own previous decision.
“Obviously by approaching the High Court, this will afford the affected party an opportunity to exercise audi alteram partem principle. In this case, had the First and the Second Respondent filed an application in Court, Queen-Elec Her Majesty Modjadji Masalanabo would have had an opportunity to challenge the First and Second Respondent’s decision by putting the other side of her story through her guardian and foster parent as she is still a minor. The second hurdle that the First and Second Respondent ought to have passed prior to changing their decision would have been to first challenge the recommendations of the Tolo Commission and the decision of the President of the Republic of South Africa at the time. The First and Second Respondent should have known better that the recommendations and the findings of the Tolo Commission remain binding until they are set aside by a court of law.
“I submit that the First and Second Respondents are disrespectful to the government’s decision and the rule of law. The third hurdle that the First and Second Respondent ought to have passed prior to reviewing and or changing their previous decision is that, they ought to have convened the Royal Family meeting in accordance with the prescripts of the Framework Act where all relevant family members would have been present to discuss the issue prior to making a drastic decision that they have taken and thereafter involve the Senior Traditional Leaders who forms part of the Balobedu Royal Nation by virtue of Queenship status. It is axiomatic that the decision was taken by the selected few and not the Traditional Leadership Structure envisaged by the Framework Act. I respectfully submit that the First and Second Respondent’s decision to oust Queen-Elect Her Majesty Masalanabo Modjadji VII from her birthright inheritance is contrary to the principle of legality. It does not accord with the Framework Act which requires the Traditional Leadership and Royal Council to act within the purview of the customary law and other applicable law in exercising their administrative function including the administrative decisions.
Mathews Phosa, a lawyer for the Queen-elect, has recently said the decision to deny her passage to throne flew in the face of all historical, cultural and traditional facts and was a clear deviation from the culture, tradition and customs.
“The decision is therefore null and void from the beginning and has no force and effect in law. Their decision is contrary to the principle of legality. It does not accord with the prescripts of the law. It violates the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act, 2003. The Tolo Commission legitimately recognises the queenship status of Queen-elect Her Majesty Masalanabo Modjadji VII. President Jacob Zuma accepted and later approved the Tolo Commission’ Report on traditional leaders and subsequent to that President Ramaphosa announced and confirmed the recognition of Balobedu Royal Nation under the Queen-elect, Her Majesty, Masalanabo Modjadji VII,” Phosa said.
