Bapedi Marota Mamone v Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims and Others

The Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims, acting in terms of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003, investigated all existing kingships, including that of the Bapedi traditional community. It concluded in a 2008 report that the Bapedi paramountcy is a kingship established in accordance with customary law and that the kingship resorts under the lineage of Kgoši Sekhukhune I. Historically, Sekwati I had two sons, Sekhukhune I and Mampuru II. Although Mampuru II was the rightful heir under customary succession rules, he fled after being challenged by Sekhukhune I, who then assumed kingship through force. The applicant, representing the Mampuru lineage, challenged the Commission’s decision, alleging it was irrational and failed to consider relevant evidence. The High Court dismissed the review application, and the Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed a further appeal. The matter came before the Constitutional Court on leave to appeal.

Leave to appeal was granted, but the appeal was dismissed. There was no order as to costs.

The case clarifies the scope of judicial review over decisions of the Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims and affirms deference to specialist bodies dealing with customary law. It reinforces that customary law must be determined as it existed at the time of the relevant events and confirms that rationality review under PAJA does not permit courts to substitute their own views for that of the Commission.