Tshinga Dube wades into Ndebele king saga

FORMER War Veterans minister Tshinga Dube has waded into the Ndebele king issue, saying it is a constitutional matter, even though it is not currently provided for in the Constitution.

BY NQOBANI NDLOVU

Speaking on the sidelines of a war veterans, ex-detainees, war collaborators, widowers, widows and children of war veterans meeting at Stanley Square in Makokoba on Saturday, Dube said those advocating for installation of the Ndebele king could lobby parliamentarians to amend the Constitution and include a clause to authenticate the process.

“I think is that it’s a constitutional matter. I believe there are other countries like South Africa in whose constitutions they have kings.

“However, in our country, it’s not in the Constitution. If it’s accepted to be part of our tradition, then there won’t be any problem as it will be constitutionally provided for unlike the case now,” the legislator said. Advocates of a Ndebele kingship argue the matter does not need a constitutional provision, but is a traditional matter.

Government banned the installation of South Africa-based Bulelani Collin Khumalo as King Lobengula’s successor, arguing that the move was unconstitutional.

Prominent Bulawayo cultural activist, Zwide Kalanga Khumalo was recently unveiled as King Nyamande Lobengula II during a ceremony held at Bulawayo Amphitheatre. The government did not stop the event.

Khumalo, who has for years been advocating for the revival of the Ndebele monarch, said he ascended to the throne following a long and “necessary” consultative process by the King Lobengula royal house representatives.

A faction of the Khumalos last year announced that South Africa-based Bulelani was Lobengula’s heir-apparent, while Stanley Raphel Khumalo proclaimed himself as King Mzilikazi II.

Lobengula was the last king after a British Pioneer Column led by Cecil John Rhodes destroyed the Ndebele Kingdom in 1983.

4 Comments

  1. I dont agree Tshinga. As long as the Constitution recognises African people’s rights to their Cultures, there is no need to specify the different leadership hierarchies in these cultures. Some cultures dont have Monacrchies, others do. The question that arises is this: is a Monarchy not a Cultural institution in some Cultures, yes or no? If it is, and the Constitution recognises a people’s rights to their Cultures, then what is the problem? Where is the contradiction?

  2. I dont agree Tshinga. As long as the Constitution recognises African people’s rights to their Cultures, there is no need to specify the different leadership hierarchies in these cultures. Some cultures dont have Monacrchies, others do. The question that arises is this: is a Monarchy not a Cultural institution in some Cultures, yes or no? If it is, and the Constitution recognises a people’s rights to their Cultures, then what is the problem? Where is the contradiction?

  3. I dont agree Tshinga. As long as the Constitution recognises African people’s rights to their Cultures, there is no need to specify the different leadership hierarchies in these cultures. Some cultures dont have Monacrchies, others do. The question that arises is this: is a Monarchy not a Cultural institution in some Cultures, yes or no? If it is, and the Constitution recognises a people’s rights to their Cultures, then what is the problem? Where is the contradiction?

  4. As long as the king wont need to dip hands in the gavhumendi purse….. other countries in the region and in the same sentence you name RSA as the only example?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.