ANC rejects King Misuzulu's call to rename KwaZulu-Natal

The ANC in KwaZulu-Natal does not support AmaZulu King Misuzulu kaZwelithini’s campaign to rename KwaZulu-Natal to KwaZulu.  

Speaking at the 147th commemoration of the Battle of Isandlwana two weeks ago, the king announced that he would embark on a campaign to get Natal removed from the province’s name, stating that it should be known as KwaZulu (the place of Zulus). 

Commenting for the first time on the matter at its media briefing on Tuesday, the party’s Provincial Coordinator, Mike Mabuyakhulu, ‘diplomatically and politely’ rejected the proposal, saying that, as much as the ANC is willing to engage on the matter, it does not believe that the name should be changed because it was an outcome of the engagements.

Mabuyakhulu cited the raising of emotions as the reason for his party not to support the name change.

“Changing of the province’s name is a constitutional matter; therefore, those advocating for the name change must adhere to constitutional imperatives. However, as the ANC stands, we do have a problem with the current name since it was an outcome of the consensus. This matter will raise emotions, so we do want something that will raise the people’s emotions,” said Mabuyakhulu.

The ANC’s concerns about the name change resonated with cultural and political analysts, who argued that dropping Natal and elevating one cultural community over others would have negative ramifications for unity and social cohesion. 

However, the IFP in the KwaZulu-Natal Legislature has expressed its full support for the renaming of the province, describing it as both ‘timely and historically justified’. 

In a statement, the party’s Chief Whip Blessed Gwala said his party felt ‘vindicated by His Majesty’s position’. 

Gwala said it is well documented that during the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA) negotiations in the early 1990s, there was intense debate over the renaming of provinces, particularly Natal. 

He said his party did not find anything sinister in the king’s proposal and blamed the demarcation.

“The demarcation resulted in the loss of many parts of KwaZulu, which were placed under other provinces. This proposal, therefore, comes as no surprise and is neither unreasonable nor uncalled for,” read the IFP statement

Gwala, who is also the IFP’s national chairperson, said his party consistently and firmly advocated for the recognition of KwaZulu in acknowledgement of the Zulu Kingdom and its profound historical, cultural, and political significance. 

He further stated that the current name remained a compromise that failed to fully reflect this reality, adding that the king’s call opens the door to addressing other longstanding historical distortions, particularly the matter of Pietermaritzburg, which is referred to as uMgungundlovu.

“It is a well-known fact that uMgungundlovu was King Dingane’s royal palace near Ulundi, which was destroyed, after which the Voortrekkers named Pietermaritzburg, a ‘fake’ uMgungundlovu with the deliberate intention of mocking and ridiculing the Zulu people,” said Gwala

The IFP is expected to table the motion for the debate on the matter, which will lead to a process of public participation.

willem.phungula@inl.co.za