A decades-long battle over the Mulamula chieftainship is seemingly far from settled, with fresh legal challenges set to prolong a dispute that has divided the royal family and community for years.
In the latest of the legal scuffles, the findings of the Kgatla Commission were set aside, which had recommended that Gezani Johannes Maluleke's descendants should be recognised in the senior traditional leadership of the Mulamula Traditional Community. The case was heard in the High Court of South Africa, Limpopo Division, Polokwane, with acting judge M.H.M. Masilo announcing his decision on 30 January this year.
The court set aside both the Kgatla Commission's decision and the Premier's decision to give effect to the recommendation and appoint Maluleke as new leader. It ordered the matter to be referred back to the Mulamula Royal Family to identify a successor in accordance with the community's customary laws and practices within 90 days.
But this ruling was not met with enthusiasm from all parties. The Mulamula Traditional Authority has already filed papers applying for leave to appeal the latest decision. They are preparing to take the matter all the way to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
Factual background
The Mulamula traditional community traces its lineage from Chavane "Mulamula" Maluleke, who led until 1919. His successor, Photani Jim Mkhacani Maluleke, held the chieftaincy from 1928 until his death in 1947.
Hosi Jim's first wife, Xalati, had two sons: Gezani Johannes Maluleke (first-born) and Risimati John Mulamula (second-born). On the face of it, Gezani, as the elder son, should have inherited the chieftaincy. He did not, and this is the heart of the entire dispute that has continued for decades.
The version maintained by the Mulamula Royal Family is that Gezani was not Hosi Jim's biological son — that Xalati conceived Gezani before she married Hosi Jim, and that Gezani was only accepted within the Royal Family as an "accommodation." This was described as a well-kept family secret known only to the elders, which was disclosed publicly for the first time at a Royal Family meeting in October 1996 by Hahani Nwa Photani Tsatsawani Vukeya, known as "Aunt Hahani," who is the sister of both Risimati and Gezani.
Following Hosi Jim's death in 1947, the Royal Family designated Risimati John Mulamula as Hosi Jim's successor, and he was duly appointed. He served as regent for 29 years, leading the community through the apartheid era until his death in 1977.
Thomas Hasani Mulamula, the son of Risimati, led the traditional authority for the next 40 years, guiding it through South Africa's democratic transition. In 2018, his position was disrupted by a government decision. He died five years later, in 2023.
The formal dispute and government intervention
In 2017 Mdungazi Joseph Maluleke, the uncle of George Mkhancani Maluleke, submitted a claim for restoration and recognition of the Mulamula senior traditional leadership. (George Maluleke was the firstborn son of Samuel Xihupani Maluleke, the son of Gezani Johannes Maluleke.)
On 6 September 2017, the Limpopo Provincial Committee on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims accepted his claim, recommending that the senior traditional leadership in the lineage of Risimati John be dissolved with immediate effect, and that leadership should go to George Maluleke, the son of Samuel, the first-born son of Gezani. The recommendation followed an investigation into the matter by the Kgatla Commission.
The Premier of Limpopo accepted this recommendation as part of a broader government programme aimed at correcting historical distortions in traditional leadership structures. On or about 11 June 2018, Stanley Mathabatha dissolved the senior traditional leadership in the lineage of Risimati John Mulamula, removing Hasani Thomas Mulamula from his position.
Hasani Thomas Mulamula and the Mulamula Royal Family then took the matter on review. In 2019, the High Court agreed with them and set aside both the Committee's recommendation and the Premier's decisions, ruling that by operation of law, Hasani Thomas Mulamula reverted to his position as senior traditional leader.
The Mulamula Royal Family's website notes that this judgment found, among other things, that the Premier was not empowered under the relevant legislation to dissolve the senior traditional leadership from a lineage, and that required jurisdictional steps — including a proper investigation and recommendation — were absent.
The matter was remitted to the Premier to make a new decision within 30 days, in line with section 26(3) of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act.
But again, there were complications. Mdungazi Joseph Maluleke continued to serve as acting senior traditional leader from 2019 to 2021, without the approval of the Royal Family. Maluleke was also given a certificate of recognition by Limpopo Premier Chupu Mathabatha and was expected to be officially installed. However, he died at Polokwane Hospital following a short illness before his formal installation could take place.
While the legal battles continued, Desmond Maluleke has been recognised by COGHSTA (the Department of Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs) and is currently serving as acting senior traditional leader.
Back to court, again
The default judgment granted in 2019 was overturned in 2020 following a successful rescission application, reopening the dispute. The case was heard again on 18 November 2025 before acting judge Masilo, with both sides presenting arguments on the legitimacy of the commission's findings.
In a judgment delivered on 30 January 2026, the court issued orders that significantly affected the implementation of the commission's recommendations, a move that has now triggered an application for leave to appeal.
The applicants brought a review application seeking to set aside two decisions: the Kgatla Commission's decision to uphold a claim for senior traditional leadership by Mdungazi Joseph Maluleke, and the Limpopo Premier's decision to recognise Desmond Maluleke as acting Senior Traditional Leader of the Mulamula Traditional Community.
The court found that the Kgatla Commission failed to properly investigate the central factual question of whether Gezani Johannes Maluleke was the biological son of Hosi Jim Photani Mkhacani. The commission had powers under the Commissions Act, 1947, to order DNA testing or even exhumation to resolve this question, but failed to do so.
The Premier also failed to refer the matter to the Provincial House of Traditional Leaders within seven days as required by legislation. The court also found that the Premier did not have the legal power to dissolve the senior traditional leadership in the house of Risimati Mulamula.
The court referred the matter back to Mulamula Royal Family, particularly the house of Risimati John Maluleke led by Thomas Hasani Mulamula, to identify a successor in accordance with the community’s customary laws and practices within 90 days.
The Premier (first respondent) was ordered to pay the wasted costs arising from a postponement on 22 September 2025, as well as the applicants' costs of the application.
Application to appeal filed
Mulamula Traditional Authority spokesperson Dyson Dumela said in an interview last week that they believe the court committed serious legal and factual errors, leaving them with no choice but to challenge the ruling.
"The court went beyond its powers by effectively replacing the findings of the Kgatla Commission with its own conclusions on complex genealogical and customary law issues," said Dumela. "That is a matter that should have been left to the commission, which was specifically appointed to investigate and determine such disputes."
Dumela further argued that the court relied on questionable evidence that had not been properly tested and misdirected itself in several key areas. "These include conflating a review process with an appeal, disregarding crucial evidence that supported the recognised lineage, and failing to properly consider issues of authority regarding who was entitled to bring the application," he said.
The applicants also argue that the court misinterpreted customary law by placing emphasis on disputed factors such as alleged pregnancy at marriage, biological paternity and burial sites, instead of relying on established community practices and the findings of the commission.