Royals fume over ‘quiet capture of Zulu crown’

Zulu royals are fuming over a sweeping directive issued last week by the prime minister of the Zulu nation, which they say strips them of their traditional role in advising the king and threatens to render them “useless and rudderless”.

Thulasizwe Buthelezi, who was dismissed and later reappointed as prime minister in December, also serves as KwaZulu‑Natal MEC for co-operative governance & traditional affairs and is a senior Inkatha IFP politician.

His dual roles have sharpened debate over whether the directive reflects governance priorities or political manoeuvring within the monarchy.

The memorandum, dated January 9, was circulated to government departments, state‑owned entities and traditional authorities, declaring the king’s private office the “central command centre” for all communications and engagements with the monarchy.

It said no member of the royal family, traditional leadership or external stakeholders may speak, negotiate or act on behalf of the monarch without a written mandate from the private office.

It named Squire Arnold Nododile‑kaNdamase as chief director and private secretary to King Misuzulu, making him the principal administrator responsible for all official interfaces between the monarchy and external entities.

Prince Chris Zulu of the Egazini royal house, who supported Misuzulu’s coronation and was one of the signatories of the memorandum to President Cyril Ramaphosa that led to his recognition, said he was “confused and flabbergasted” by the latest directive.

“It is a standard procedure, even under the previous monarch, that when important decisions are to be taken, the king sits down with members of the Zulu royal family to discuss the matter and seek their counsel,” he said.

“I only saw this memorandum yesterday, and I have been restless. It now means we cannot even come and consult with the king without passing through this private office. This is changing the manner in which the Zulu monarchy has been conducted through time immemorial … Now this memorandum subtracts and removes the role of the royal family in decision‑making. For me, who supported the elevation of this king, it is perplexing.”

Reverend Buthelezi is out of order for issuing that memorandum without consulting with the Zulu royal family

—  Princess Gugu Zulu

Princess Gugu Zulu of the eMatheni royal house was even more blunt.

“Reverend Buthelezi is out of order for issuing that memorandum without consulting with the Zulu royal family,” she said. “It means that we can’t do anything without passing through them. It is ridiculous!”

King Misuzulu’s spokesperson, Prince Thulani Zulu, said he too was caught off guard.

“As the official spokesman of the king, I was not aware of the memorandum until a few days ago, and I was just as surprised by it. I guess the person that can talk about it is the prime minister of the Zulu nation himself,” Zulu said.

Adv Linda Zama, deputy chair of the Ingonyama Trust Board (ITB), said she had not seen the new directive.

“No, I’m not aware of it, but it doesn’t change anything because the ITB communicates through his majesty’s private office,” she said.

Meanwhile, Buthelezi said, despite the memo carrying his signature, the memo was fake.

“Both His Majesty and his prime minister are not aware of this memorandum. It certainly was not issued by the prime minister. Those who are distributing it should disclose the source of this fraudulent memo.

”The prime minister did not sign that memo and neither did he distribute it. It’s a fake,” Buthelezi said.

Buthelezi made headlines almost immediately after his return as prime minister when he announced that King Misuzulu would not attend the ITB’s consultative meeting with amakhosi in Durban on December 9.

The king, who is formally the sole trustee and chair of the trust, is said to be unhappy with the ITB’s powers and the influence of the minister of land reform & rural development in its affairs.

In a letter last year, the king declared: “I have powers to suspend the Ingonyama Trust Board … By being a Zulu monarch and a traditional leader, my duty to the people under my authority has been amplified.” He accused the minister, Mzwanele Nyhontso, of usurping his authority, a dispute that continues to reverberate in royal circles and government corridors.

Critics say the January 9 directive is not only about streamlining governance but also a move to silence royals who remain opposed to King Misuzulu’s ascension to the throne.

Prince Africa of Onkweni, in a letter titled “The quiet capture of the Zulu crown”, warned that such centralisation amounted to capture of the monarchy through administrative means.

Prince Africa was once the spokesperson for King Misuzulu, but the two have fallen out.

Buthelezi’s spokesman, Senzelwe Mzila, did not respond to queries.

Under previous monarchs, queens and princes often pursued independent initiatives that reflected the monarchy’s broader role in society.

Queen Mantfombi Dlamini‑Zulu, King Misuzulu’s mother, championed cultural preservation projects and shortly before her death in 2021 wrote a letter nominating her son as successor — a document now at the centre of ongoing court battles.

Prince Nhlanganiso Zulu, a former AmaZulu FC player, became known for his campaigns against gender‑based violence and for promoting safe circumcision practices.

“We were encouraged to take up causes that mattered to our people,” he said. “Now it seems those voices will be muted unless channelled through a single office.”

The uproar comes as the monarchy remains entangled in legal disputes over succession and recognition.

Central to these disputes is Ramaphosa’s official recognition of Misuzulu as king.

Rival princes, including Simakade and Mbonisi Zulu, challenged the recognition in court, arguing that the president acted unlawfully.

In December 2023, the high court in Pretoria agreed, declaring Ramaphosa’s recognition invalid. But in October 2025, the Supreme Court of Appeal overturned that ruling, finding that the president’s recognition was lawful and valid.

Opponents of the king’s recognition have now signalled their intention to take the matter to the Constitutional Court.

---