Andile J Mabele v Dr Nokuzola Mndende and The Premier, Eastern Cape

The applicant sought judicial review of the decision of the Premier of the Eastern Cape endorsing a recommendation of a Provincial Committee of the Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims dismissing his claim to be recognised as the traditional leader (chief) of the Mxhelo Administrative Area near Alice. The applicant alleged that the Mabele Royal Family historically exercised chieftainship over Mxhelo and that he was the rightful heir in terms of customary law and the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003. The claim was investigated by the Provincial Committee, which relied on historical research, oral evidence, public hearings, and documentary material. The Committee found that there was no credible evidence that a permanent Mabele chieftainship ever existed in Mxhelo and recommended dismissal of the claim. The Premier accepted the recommendation. The applicant challenged the decision on grounds including bias, procedural unfairness, failure to consider relevant evidence (including a research report and alleged written submissions), reliance on incorrect law, and unreasonable delay.

The application to review and set aside the Premier’s decision was dismissed. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs.

The judgment reinforces the limited scope of judicial review over traditional leadership disputes and affirms the deferential approach courts must adopt toward specialist bodies such as the Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims. It clarifies the application of the post-2009 amended framework of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act and distinguishes earlier Constitutional Court cases dealing with decisions made under the pre-amendment regime. The case also illustrates the application of PAJA principles, rationality review, and the Plascon-Evans rule in disputes involving customary law.