As South Africa consolidates its democracy, chieftaincy has remained a controversial and influential institution that has adapted to recent changes. J. Michael Williams examines the chieftaincy and how it has sought to assert its power since the end of apartheid. By taking local-level politics seriously and looking closely at how chiefs negotiate the new political order, Williams takes a position between those who see the chieftaincy as an indigenous democratic form deserving recognition and protection, and those who view it as incompatible with democracy. Williams describes a network of formal and informal accommodations that have influenced the ways state and local authorities interact. By focusing on local perceptions of the chieftaincy and its interactions with the state, Williams reveals an ongoing struggle for democratization at the local and national levels in South Africa.

This book argues that the promulgation of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework and Communal Land Rights Acts runs the risk of compromising South Africa's democracy. The acts establish traditional councils with land administration powers. These structures are dominated by unelected members.

Post-1994, South Africa's traditional leaders have fought for recognition, and positioned themselves as major players in the South African political landscape. Yet their role in a democracy is contested, with leaders often accused of abusing power, disregarding human rights, expropriating resources and promoting tribalism. Some argue that democracy and traditional leadership are irredeemably opposed and cannot co-exist. Meanwhile, shifts in the political economy of the former bantustans − the introduction of platinum mining in particular − have attracted new interests and conflicts to these areas, with chiefs often designated as custodians of community interests. This edited volume explores how chieftancy is practised, experienced and contested in contemporary South Africa. It includes case studies of how those living under the authority of chiefs, in a modern democracy, negotiate or resist this authority in their respective areas. Chapters in this book are organised around three major sites of contest: leadership, land and law.

References pp. 115-132.

This book shows that powerful hereditary chiefs do not undermine democracy in Africa but, on some level, facilitate it.

Being critical and empirically grounded, the book explores the complex, often counter-balancing consequences of the involvement of traditional authority in the wave of democratization and liberal-style state-building that has rolled over sub-Saharan Africa in the past decade.

Chieftaincy is one of the most enduring traditional institutions in Ghana, which has displayed remarkable resilience from pre-colonial through colonial to postcolonial times. In the past, the role of a chief was to lead his people in war to defend, protect and extend their territories. The modern role is to combat poverty and other social ills: illiteracy, ignorance, environmental degradation, and the depletion of resources. Nowadays, chiefs are under pressure to achieve good governance in their traditional areas. They are challenged to integrate tradition and modernity, a process about which there is considerable debate. They carry out their duties in an increasingly globalised world where the accent is on democracy, human rights, health delivery, employment, human development and regional integration. Their ability to come to terms with these challenges will provide an indication of their relevance and the relevance of the institution to Ghana?s long-term development. This massive volume is arguably the most comprehensive and detailed scholarly study of the institution of chieftaincy to appear on the subject to date. The subjects and approaches are wide- ranging, and cover most aspects of the institution in every geographical area in Ghana. Some thirty contributors from the humanities and social sciences tell the story of chieftaincy past and present from a multitude of perspectives: anthropological, historical, economic, sociological, gender, literary, religious and philosophical.