By Princess Eugene Majuru, Princess of Harare
Masvingo – The confrontation between Chief Murinye and Mr Mutangiri has opened a long-sealed wound in Zimbabwe’s traditional governance system. What appeared, at first glance, to be a localised land dispute has exposed deep structural failures in how traditional authority is treated, protected, and respected in Zimbabwe. This moment demands urgent national reflection, policy reform, and cultural re-awakening.
A System Still Trapped in Colonial Logic
It is deeply unfortunate that since the British colonisation of Zimbabwe, traditional leaders have been systematically diminished. Chiefs—who were once kings in their own right—were reduced to administrative appendages of the colonial state. They were stripped of sovereignty, dignity, and status, and turned into intermediaries answerable to colonial officials.
Independence did not fully reverse this damage.
To this day, ministers are treated as more important than chiefs, despite the fact that ministers are political appointees, while chiefs are hereditary custodians of land, culture, and people. This inversion of authority is not only culturally wrong—it is historically and institutionally dangerous.
Under African tradition, chiefs are not junior figures. They are kings of their territories, entrusted with land, law, and spiritual order. The idea that a minister outranks a chief is a colonial administrative construct that Zimbabwe has never fully dismantled.
What the Constitution Says—And What Practice Ignores
Zimbabwe’s Constitution of 2013, under Chapter 15 (Sections 280–283), recognises traditional leaders and outlines their roles. Section 281 explicitly states that traditional leaders must:
• Uphold cultural values;
• Administer communal land;
• Resolve disputes in accordance with customary law;
• Protect the environment and heritage.
However, the Constitution also places traditional leaders under political neutrality and excessive state oversight, limiting their practical power while expecting them to maintain order on the ground. This contradiction weakens chieftaincy in practice.
Recognition without power is symbolic at best and deceptive at worst.
The Traditional Leaders Act: An Outdated and Hollow Instrument
The Traditional Leaders Act [Chapter 29:17] is one of the weakest pillars of Zimbabwe’s governance framework. While it outlines the appointment and functions of chiefs, it is riddled with serious gaps:
• It does not provide real enforcement mechanisms to protect chiefs from disrespect or marginalisation.
• It fails to clearly define the binding authority of chiefs in land and development decisions.
• It offers no meaningful safeguards against political or administrative victimisation.
• It does not empower chiefs to participate meaningfully in national decision-making.
The Act treats chiefs as local managers rather than sovereign custodians. It requires urgent and total overhaul, not cosmetic amendments.
Chiefs Without a National Voice
One of the gravest injustices is that chiefs in Zimbabwe have no meaningful national voice. They may speak within their communities, but they are largely excluded from national policy formulation, economic planning, land reform oversight, and cultural legislation.
This exclusion is wrong.
Chiefs govern people. Chiefs safeguard land. Chiefs manage conflict before it escalates. To exclude them from national decision-making is to govern blindly.
The Chief Murinye case has shown what happens when a chief dares to act decisively, lawfully, and fearlessly. Many chiefs support him in principle, but fear speaking out due to victimisation, political pressure, or loss of benefits. This climate of fear is incompatible with true traditional leadership.
If Zimbabwe had 50 chiefs like Chief Murinye—chiefs who are proactive, fearless, and vocal—meaningful change would already be underway.
Education of Chiefs’ Children: A Question of Dignity and Equity
Another silent injustice lies in the treatment of chiefs’ families. Ministers’ children enjoy state-funded education, security, and privilege. Chiefs’ children—despite their parents’ constitutional and cultural responsibilities—do not.
This is unacceptable.
If the State values traditional leadership, then chiefs’ children must receive equal educational support. Education is not a luxury; it is an investment in continuity, stability, and informed leadership.
A chief whose family is neglected is a chief deliberately weakened.
The Colonial Regalia: Symbols of Humiliation
Perhaps the most visible insult is the continued use of colonial regalia—the red gowns and builder-style helmets imposed by British colonisers. These were never symbols of African royalty. They were deliberately designed to de-king African rulers, reducing kings to “chiefs” in costume.
That Zimbabwean chiefs still wear these garments decades after independence is deeply painful.
They do not reflect African royalty.
They do not reflect Zimbabwean culture.
They do not reflect dignity.
These items belong in a museum—or a bin.
True decolonisation requires new regalia rooted in Zimbabwean tradition, crafted to reflect royal lineage, spirituality, and authority. Chiefs must look like kings again, because they are kings.
Chief Murinye: A Necessary Disruption
Chief Murinye’s actions should not be viewed as defiance but as necessary disruption. He exercised his authority to:
• Object to unauthorised land use;
• Demand cessation until regularisation;
• Insist on consultation;
• Defend community interests.
This is exactly what the Constitution and customary law expect of a chief.
The backlash he faced reveals how uncomfortable Zimbabwe has become with assertive traditional authority. That discomfort is not his fault—it is the system’s failure.
A Call for Urgent Reform
Zimbabwe must urgently:
• Overhaul the Traditional Leaders Act;
• Strengthen constitutional protections for chiefs;
• Restore chiefs’ national voice;
• Equalise benefits between political leaders and traditional leaders;
• Decolonise traditional regalia;
• Re-educate the nation on the true status of chiefs.
My Voice as Princess of Harare
As Princess Eugene Majuru, Princess of Harare, I speak without fear. My forefathers—the Kings of Harare—never ignored injustice or cultural erosion. It is within my DNA to speak when tradition is under threat.
I am a cultural advocate by lineage and by conviction. Anything that undermines traditional leadership, culture, and heritage demands response. Silence would be betrayal.
The Chief Murinye incident is not a problem—it is a warning. Zimbabwe must listen, reform, and act.
The time to restore dignity to traditional leadership is now.
Comments
About Author
