Human rights, cultural diversity and customary law in south africa

Journal of African Law

Volumn 50, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 2-23

  Grant, Evadné ^a  

^a OXFORD BROOKES UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85022925640     PISSN: 00218553     EISSN: 14643731     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0021855306000039     Document Type: Article

References (185)

1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, UN GA Res. 217A (III) 1948.
2. Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, United Nations General Assembly, UN Doc. A/CONF.157/23, 12 July, 1993, para. 5.
3. Lindholt makes the point that arguments about the universality or not of human rights often confuse the questions whether human rights ought to be universal and whether they are universal. The first is a normative question; the second an empirical one. See L. Lindholt, Questioning the Universality of Human Rights: The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights in Botswana, Malawi and Mozambique, Aldershot, 1997, 23.
4. There is an extensive literature in which different positions are explored. See A. An-Na'im, “Problems of universal cultural legitimacy for human rights”, in A. An-Na'im and F. Deng (eds.), Human Rights in Africa: Cross-Cultural Perspectives, Washington, D.C., 1990, 331
5. R. Falk, “Cultural foundations for the international protection of human rights”, in A. An-Na'im (ed.), Human Rights in Cross-Cultural Perspectives: A Quest for Consensus, Philadelphia, 1992, 44
6. R.E. Howard, “Dignity community and human rights”, in A. An-Na'im (ed.) Human Rights in Cross-Cultural Perspectives: A Quest for Consensus
7. M. Freeman, Human Rights, Cambridge, 2003, ch. 6
8. K. Hastrup (ed.), Legal Cultures and Human Rights, The Hague, 2001
9. K. Mickelson, “How universal is the Universal Declaration?” (1998) 47 University of New Brunswick Law Journal 19
10. M. Goodhart, “Origins and universality in the human rights debates: cultural essentialism and the challenge of globalization”, (2003) 25 H.R.Q. 935.
11. For a discussion, see F. Banda, “Global standards: local values”, (2003) 17 International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 1
12. B. Ibhawoh, “Cultural relativism and human rights: reconsidering the Africanist discourse”, (2001) 1 Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 43
13. B. Ibhawoh, “Cultural tradition and national human rights standards in conflict”, in Hastrup, above n. 4, 85
14. T. Nhlapo, “Cultural diversity, human rights and the family in contemporary Africa: lessons from the South African constitutional debate”, (1995) 9 International Journal of Law and the Family 208, 215
15. M.E. Adjami, “African courts, international law, and comparative case law: chimera or emerging human rights jurisprudence?” (2002) 24 Michigan Journal of International Law 103, 118.
16. See F. Banda, Women, Law and Human Rights: An African Perspective, Oxford, 2005, 34
17. C.I. Nyamu, “How should human rights and development respond to cultural legitimization of gender hierarchy in developing countries?” (2000) 41 Harvard International Law Journal 381, 401.
18. See, e.g., H. Charlesworth and C. Chinkin, The Boundaries of International Law: A Feminist Analysis, Manchester, 2000, 222
19. S.M. Okin, “Is multiculturalism bad for women?” (1997) 22 Boston Review 25
20. F. Raday, “Culture, religion, and gender”, (2003) 1 I.CON 663.
21. S. 7(1) of the Constitution of South Africa, 1996 (Act 108 of 1996).
22. S. 8(1) of the Constitution states: “The Bill of Rights applies to all law, and binds the legislature, the executive, the judiciary and all organs of state”.
23. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 999 UNTS 171. Ratified by South Africa on 10 March, 1999.
24. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, 1979, 1249 UNTS 13. Ratified by South Africa on 14 January, 1996.
25. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 660 UNTS 195. Ratified by South Africa on 9 January, 1999.
26. Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, 1577 UNTS 3. Ratified by South Africa on 16 July, 1995.
27. African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, 1981, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/67/3 Rev. 5. Ratified by South Africa on 9 July, 1996.
28. Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, 2003. Available at . Ratified by South Africa on 16 March, 2004.
29. 2005 (1) B.C.L.R. 1 (CC).
30. While the terms ‘customary law’ and ‘indigenous law’ are often used interchangeably, the 1996 South African Constitution uses the term ‘customary law’. The South African Law Reform Commission (SALRC) has taken the view that the term customary law is to be preferred as it is the more widely used and best understood term, not only in South Africa, but throughout Africa. See SALRC, Project 90, The Harmonization of the Common Law and the Indigenous Law: Report on Conflicts of Law (September 1999) 1
31. SALRC, Project 90, The Harmonization of the Common Law and the Indigenous Law: Report on Traditional Courts and the Judicial Function of Traditional Leaders (21 January, 2003) 4, available at (accessed 30 August, 2005).
32. See F. Kaganas and C. Murray, “The contest between culture and gender equality under South Africa's Interim Constitution”, (1994) 21 JLS 409, 427–428
33. L. Mbatha, “Reforming the Customary Law of Succession”, (2002) 18 South African Journal on Human Rights 259.
34. See J. Symonides, “Cultural rights”, ch. 5 in J. Symonides (ed.), Human Rights: Concept and Standards, Aldershot, 2000, 175, 179
35. L.V. Prott, “Cultural rights as peoples' rights in international law”, in J. Crawford (ed.), The Rights of Peoples, Oxford, 1988, 93, 96
36. Y.M. Donders, Towards a Right to Cultural Identity? Antwerp, 2002, 2.
37. See Symonides, above n. 21, 179.
38. World Conference on Cultural Policies, Mexico City, 26 July-6 August, 1982, Final Report, Paris, UNESCO, available at (accessed 19 August, 2005).
39. See T.W. Bennett, Human Rights and African Customary Law under the South African Constitution, Cape Town, 1995, 23.
40. See also Prott, above n. 21, 94.
41. R. Keightley, “Public international law and the final constitution”, (1996) 12 South African Journal on Human Rights 405, 415
42. J. Sarkin, “The effect of constitutional borrowings on the drafting of South Africa's Bill of Rights and interpretation of human rights provisions”, (1998) 1 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 176.
43. J.D. van der Vyver, “Cultural identity as a constitutional right in South Africa”, (2003) 1 Stellenbosch Law Review 51, 52. Bennett notes that art. 27 applies only to minorities, but argues that the right to self-determination and the doctrine of aboriginal right provide the international law background to the right to culture in South Africa.
44. See T.W. Bennett, Customary Law in South Africa, Cape Town, 2004, 84.
45. See Keightley, above n. 26, 406.
46. Customary Law in South Africa., 415.
47. The terms “minority” and “ethnic” in art. 27 have been omitted. See Bennett, above n. 27, 86.
48. Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities Act, 2002 (Act 19 of 2002).
49. S. 211(1) also recognizes the “institution, status and role of traditional leadership, according to customary law … subject to the Constitution”. For a discussion of the position of traditional leaders under the 1996 Constitution, see M. Pieterse, “Traditional leaders win battle in undecided war”, (1999) 15 South African Journal on Human Rights 179, 185.
50. See also s. 15(3) which permits the recognition of “systems of personal and family law under any tradition”.
51. Bennett, above n. 27, 88.
52. The proviso added to s. 31 is: “The rights in subsection (1) may not be exercised in a manner inconsistent with any provision of the Bill of Rights”.
53. See also s. 39(3) which provides: “The Bill of Rights does not deny the existence of any other rights or freedoms that are recognized or conferred by common law, customary law or legislation, to the extent that they are consistent with the Bill”.
54. See T. Nhlapo, “African family law under an undecided constitution: the challenge for law reform in South Africa”, in J. Eekelaar and T. Nhlapo (eds.), The Changing Family: Family Forms and Family Law, Oxford, 1998, 617, 618–622
55. Kaganas and Murray, above n. 20, 410–411
56. Bennett, above n. 25, 20.
57. For a detailed account of the negotiations, see H. Corder, “Towards a South African Constitution”, (1994) 57 M.L.R. 491.
58. See the Certification Case, Ex Parte Chairperson of the Constitutional Assembly: In re Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996 (4) S.A. 744 (CC)
59. 1996 (10) B.C.L.R. 1253 (CC) para. 189ff.
60. Kaganas and Murray argue that they were also motivated by the fear that their power within their communities, which was based on a tradition of patriarchy, would be eroded. See Kaganas and Murray, above n. 20, 410.
61. Nhlapo, above n. 5, 215.
62. B.C.L.R, 210.
63. V. Bronstein, “Reconceptualizing the customary law debate in South Africa”, (1998) South African Journal on Human Rights 388, 390
64. Bennett, above n. 25, 90–91, 126–128. Many of these disabilities have now been abolished by the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act 120 of 1998.
65. Bronstein, above n. 51, 392.
66. Bhe, above n. 18, para. 71.
67. See also Moseneke, J., in Minister of Finance v. Van Heerden 2004 (6) S.A. 121 (CC)
68. 2004 (11) B.C.L.R. 1125 (CC) para. 22
69. O'Regan, J., in Brink v. Kitshoff NO 1996 (4) S.A. 197 (CC)
70. 1996 (6) B.C.L.R. 752 (CC) para. 33.
71. For a discussion of the equality jurisprudence, see J. Small and E. Grant, “Dignity, discrimination and context: new direction in South African and Canadian human rights law”, (2005) 6 Human Rights Review 25
72. E. Grant and J. Small, “Disadvantage and discrimination: the emerging jurisprudence of the South African Constitutional Court”, (2000) 51 Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 174.
73. See Ngcobo, J., in Bato Star Fishing v. Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism and Others 2004 (7) B.C.L.R. 687 (CC) para. 73
74. Minister of Finance v. Van Heerden, above n. 53, para. 22–24.
75. See also K. Klare, “Legal culture and transformative constitutionalism”, (1998) 14 South African Journal on Human Rights 146.
76. See Kaganas and Murray, above n. 20, 417
77. Bennett, n. 25, 56–57.
78. See L. Fishbayn, “Litigating the right to culture: family law in the new South Africa”, (1999) 13 International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 147, 157.
79. Bronstein, above n. 51, 410.
80. See the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act 120 of 1998. For a discussion, see M. Mamashela, “New families, new property, new laws: the practical effects of the recognition of Customary Marriages Act”, (2004) 20 South African Journal on Human Rights 616
81. V. Bronstein, “Confronting custom in the new South African state: an analysis of the recognition of Customary Marriages Act 120 of 1998”, (2000) 16 South African Journal on Human Rights 558.
82. See SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19
83. SALRC, Report on Traditional Courts and the Judicial Function of Traditional Leaders, above n. 19
84. SALRC, Project 90, The Harmonization of the Common Law and the Indigenous Law: Discussion Paper 93 Customary Law: Succession (August 2000), available at (accessed 30 August, 2005).
85. See SALRC, Discussion Paper 93 Customary Law: Succession, Customary Law: Succession, 5–6
86. Mbatha, above n. 20, 284.
87. Intestate Succession Act, 1987 (Act 81 of 1987).
88. Black Administration Act, 1927 (Act 38 of 1927).
89. Langa, D.C.J., notes (n. 2 of the judgment in Bhe) that although the Black Administration Act used the term “black” to describe a member of the indigenous race in South African, the term “African” is used in the judgment. This is not intended to confer legal validity on such usage. The same approach is taken in this paper.
90. Regulations 2, 3 and 4 of the Regulations of the Administration and Distribution of the Estates of Deceased Blacks (Government Gazette 10601 of 6 February, 1987) reproduced at para. 36 of the judgment. The circumstances in which an exemption may be granted are specified in the regulations.
91. At para. 77 of the judgment. Different arrangements applied to polygynous marriages. See Mbatha, above n. 20, 261
92. Bennett, above n. 27, 337–338.
93. Para. 68. At the time of writing, the Repeal of Black Administration Act and Amendment of Certain Laws Bill was before Parliament. The Bill makes provision for the repeal of many of the provisions of the Act. See (accessed 23 November, 2005).
94. A draft bill aimed at bringing the customary law of succession into harmony with the Constitution had been submitted to the government by the SALRC in June 1998. When this was introduced into Parliament as the Customary Law of Succession Amendment Bill, 1998, it elicited so much opposition that it was withdrawn and the matter was returned to the Law Reform Commission for further investigation. The Law Reform Commission has issued a further discussion paper together with a draft bill, but the matter had not, at the time of writing, been returned to Parliament. See SALRC, Discussion Paper 93 Customary Law: Succession, above n. 62, 1.
95. A third form or category, namely “academic” customary law, is also identified. This is the law used for teaching purposes. In order to teach customary law, it is necessary to introduce students to “official” customary law, but many academics take a critical view of the law applied in the courts and by state officials. See J. de Koker, “African customary law in South Africa: a legacy of many pasts”, in Eekelaar and Nhlapo, above n. 46, 322.
96. See Bennett, above n. 27, 7
97. Bronstein, above n. 51, 398
98. W. van der Meide, “Gender equality v rights to culture: debunking the perceived conflicts preventing the reform of the marital property regime of the ‘official’ version of customary law”, (1999) 116 South African Law Journal 100, 105.
99. See, e.g., M. Chanock, The Making of South African Legal Culture 1902–1936, Cambridge, 2001
100. Bennett, above n. 27, ch. 2
101. H.R. Hahlo and E. Kahn (eds.), South Africa: The Development of its Laws and Constitution, Cape Town, 1960.
102. The use of this term is problematic, but is the most generally used. See K. Lehmann, “Aboriginal title, indigenous rights and the right to culture”, (2004) 20 South African Journal on Human Rights 86, 104.
103. De Koker, above n. 88, 324
104. SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19, 6.
105. Bennett, above n. 27, 35
106. SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19.
107. Chanock, above n. 90, 250–257
108. Bennett, above n. 27, 37–38
109. De Koker, above n. 88, 325.
110. Bennett, above n. 27, 37–38.
111. Ordinance 3 of 1849.
112. See Banda, above n. 6, 16
113. SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19, 7.
114. See Bennett, above n. 27, 38.
115. SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, n. 19, 7
116. See Chanock, above n. 90, 245–250.
117. See Bennett, above n. 27, 39.
118. De Koker, above n. 88, 326.
119. On the basis that customary marriage was potentially polygynous and lobola amounted to “bride-purchase”. See SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19, 9.
120. See also Chanock, above n. 90, 270–272.
121. SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19.
122. See also M. Pieterse, “It's a ‘black thing’: upholding culture and customary law in a society founded on non-racialism”, (2001) 17 South African Journal on Human Rights 364, 368–369.
123. Chanock, above n. 90, 31
124. Bennett, above n. 27, 41.
125. S. 12 of the Act. See Pieterse, above n. 104, 370
126. Bennett, above n. 27, 41.
127. SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19, 10.
128. Bennett, above n. 27, 42.
129. Pieterse, above n. 104, 371–373.
130. See Chanock, above n. 90, 244.
131. See Bennett, above n. 27, 42.
132. See Bennett, above n. 27, 6
133. De Koker, above n. 88, 333
134. Ngcobo, J., in Bhe, above n. 18, paras. 169–171.
135. Nhlapo, above n. 5, 211.
136. See Mbatha, above n. 20, 261–262
137. Mamashela, n. 61, 621.
138. Bennett, above n. 25, 126.
139. See also SALRC, Discussion Paper 93 on Customary Law, above n. 81, 1.
140. SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19, 99.
141. Fishbayn, above n. 59, 149
142. Kaganas and Murray, above n. 20, 422.
143. 2003 (12) B.C.L.R. 1301 (CC) paras. 52–53.
144. Nyamu, above n. 6, 405.
145. Discussed in Banda, above n. 6, 17–19
146. Kaganas and Murray, above n. 20, 423
147. De Koker, above n. 88, 334
148. J.E. Stewart, “Why I can't teach customary law”, in Eekelaar and Nhlapo (eds.), above n. 46, 217, 226.
149. Bennett, above n. 27, 5–7
150. Kaganas and Murray, above n. 20
151. De Koker, above n. 88, 335.
152. See also SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, n. 19, 101.
153. Mamashela, above n. 61, 622.
154. These are not the exact solutions proposed, but they are arguably inherent in the proposals. See also Pieterse, above n. 104, 393, who proposes four possible routes to change.
155. SALRC, Discussion Paper 93 Customary Law: Succession, above n. 81.
156. Mbatha, above n. 20, 285
157. Ngcobo, J., in Bhe, above n. 18, para. 229.
158. See Bhe, above n. 18, paras. 40–43.
159. Bhe, above n. 18, para. 235.
160. See Nhlapo, above n. 46, 631.
161. See Bennett, above n. 27, 79
162. Ibhawoh (2001), above n. 5, 88.
163. SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19, 99.
164. T.W. Bennett and T. Vermeulen, “Codification of customary law”, (1980) 24 J.A.L. 206, 219.
165. Bennett, above n. 27, 47.
166. See SALRC, Discussion Paper 93 Customary Law: Succession, above n. 81, 8.
167. Discussion Paper 93 Customary Law: Succession, 9.
168. See SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19, 104.
169. Bennett, above n. 27, 45.
170. See Pieterse, above n. 104, 397.
171. See Bennett, above n. 27, 48
172. SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19, 105.
173. Proof on a balance of probabilities is required. See SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19, 107.
174. Report on Conflicts of Law, 108.
175. Report on Conflicts of Law, 111.
176. See also A. Costa, “The myth of customary law”, (1998) 14 South African Journal on Human Rights 525, 536.
177. SALRC, Report on Conflicts of Law, above n. 19, s. 3 of the Draft Bill.
178. Report on Conflicts of Law, s. 4.
179. Pieterse, above n. 104, 396.
180. Report on Conflicts of Law, 380.
181. See J. Small and E. Grant, “Equality and non-discrimination in the South African Constitution”, (2000) 4 IJDL 47, for a discussion of the application of the equality clause.
182. Pieterse, above n. 104, 367.
183. See also Costa, above n. 164, 532.
184. IJDL, 538.
185. Pieterse, above n. 104, 393.