CHAPTER TWO
2.7. TRIBAL AUTHORITIES AND THE GOVERNMENT
The aimof this section is to explore the relationship between the traditional leaders and the national government, with regards to development and support. Through this discussion, it is believed that some ofthe problems on working relationship will be identified as they will have
to be considered for development.
An example from Botswana has been extracted to indicate how the system of delegating the chiefs is practiced. The importance of reviewing this example is to identuy strengths and weaknesses of the system, as the same may occur with local traditional leaders. According to Keulder (1998) in Botswana, there is a House of Chiefs and their advice is often ignored, even when the issues may affect the leaders and their communities.
"Where advice is accepted, the issues are less serious, suggesting perhaps that houses have more symbolic other than functional value" (Keulder, 1998: p.301). Such experience can be argued as taking place in almostallthe cases of traditional leaders working with the government.
The limited functioning of the tribal authorities can further be attributed to certain other factors apart from ignorance. Keulder (1998) points out the argument that:
"Functionally, their effectiveness has been restricted, not only by their limited powers, but also by the low education and literacy levels of their members" (Keulder, 1998: p.30 1). From the quote, stumbling blocks on communication can be identified in a sense that one official language (for now, it is English) is set as the medium of communication. Therefore, issues of illiteracy among traditional people are an obstacle. The critical factor to such a situation, could be that incontrast to urban areas, education has not been regarded as the main priority.
From Keulder's (1998) observation on tribal leaders in the broader context of Africa, the impact or contribution from the House of Chiefs towards policy-making has been benefitting them more than the communities. This sets up a challenge on what can be done to create a good
working relationship between the traditional leaders and the national government.
Nevertheless, Botswana has been congratulated in achieving progress toward successful state building (monopolizing control). Their achievement is based on being able to incorporate traditional leaders into State structures; traditional as a potential source of control, independent from the state and they have been turned into state agents of social control.
The example of this nature, with reference to KwaZulu/Natal can be looked into, m relation to land issues. The fact is; the government and the traditional leaders own and allocate land in different ways. The consequence of such a poor working relationship has given rise to development stagnation, especially within the rural setting. Itcan be argued by implication that the dilemma of the relationship of the two authority structures affects almost all the provinces.
In the context of this study, the rnam concern would be identifYing the core cause of these problems, to ease the way to creating an environment, where a policy that will address the housing needs in the rural areas can be formulated. Usually, if there is any need that has to be provided for communities, the government is always the first to be charged for responsibility.
Now it is realized that both the government and the traditional leaders should be able to work together to avoid one being a hindrance in any development planning.
What can be said is that in spite of the negative criticisms that have been raised against the traditional leaders, they are firmly entrenched. This would mean going beyond problems of illiteracy, and to adopt a positive view on the possibilities of rural housing development.
Keulder (1998) has pointed out that the traditional leaders have a crucial role to play which involves enhancing the state's social control and legitimacy, especially in rural areas. This comment emphasizes the need for a social relationship between the two parties, when it comes to development.
In order to address the matter of cooperation, there are certain things of the past that have to be addressed, or they might distort the vision on which to work towards rural housing or any other development. From the viewpoint of traditional authorities it is apparent that their foundation is mainly in regard to cultural beliefs.It has been said that getting communities to understand and accept the recommendations of being involved with the government cannot be easy as people are more influenced by their cultural beliefs. Keulder (1998) has made this recommendation that;"It is to the benefit of the New South African State to have traditional leaders represented at the central level" (p.31 0).
Proposals that have been made on the Integrated Rural Development White Paper have also considered the importance of a good working relationship between the government and the traditional leaders. Ithas been argued that the new constitution should carry an element which focuses on co-operative governance, which can replace the previous emphasis on hierarchical tiers of governance. Furthermore, the tri-dimensional spheres of the government which are national, provincial and local; are to be mutually interdependent.
The interdependence of governmental spheres is not regarded as an end. The involvement of traditional leaders is also emphasized. Exclusion of traditional leaders in the process of
development has been identified as one of the factors contributing to these leaders being defensive and protective of their powers. As it has been discussed, the main problem in relation to rural housing development is the issue of land. Therefore, withholding land rights has been one of the defensive acts by the tribal leaders. Itis suggested that:
Mechanisms need to be put into place to enable traditional leaders to play a positive role in local development activities. In the absence of such mechanisms, traditional leaders will be unable to respond in developmental ways (Xaba and Associates, 1998. p 20 ).
The commonly identified solution by Keulder (1998) and the IRD, to the problem of the poor relationship between the government and the traditional leaders is that there should be a flow of information between the two. According to the IRD, traditional leaders have not been empowered to participate in the development by the government departments which have been responsible for them. As mentioned before, lack of education and training, poverty and access to developed resources contributed a lot in traditional leaders taking a backward seat when it comes to development.