King MisuZulu ka Zwelithini. (RAJESH JANTILAL/AFP via Getty Images)
Members of the Zulu royal family have accused King MisuZulu ka Zwelithini of using the Ingonyama Trust Board to further his own business interests and those of “unscrupulous private investors”, among them his close associates.
They claim the king has set up 13 companies, some of which are doing business with members of the board, which conducts the affairs of the Ingonyama Trust — of which he is sole trustee — on his behalf.
They want the court to stop the king from exercising his powers as trustee pending the outcome of their challenge to his appointment — which is being heard in the Pretoria high court — and to set aside the appointment of the current board.
The claims of abuse are made in court papers filed by MisuZulu’s uncle, Prince Mbonisi Zulu, and four other members of the royal family in an application to the Pietermaritzburg high court this week.
The disaffected royals had made an earlier application for an interdict against the king and the ITB to the same court, but withdrew it on 26 October, the same date the ITB filed its responding papers showing massive abuse of its funds by the previous board.
Their lawyer, Barnabas Xulu, on Monday refiled the application against the king, the ITB, President Cyril Ramaphosa, KwaZulu-Natal Premier Nomusa Dube-Ncube as well as Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development Minister Thoko Didiza, under whose ministry the ITB falls.
In a notice of motion, Mbonisi asked that the king be barred from “exercising the powers of the trustee of the Ingonyama Trust”, from convening meetings with amakhosi and from giving them any directive in this capacity.
Mbonisi said the king’s status was still the subject of the Pretoria court challenge, and that until the court rules, he should not be allowed to appoint a new traditional prime minister to replace the late Mangosuthu Buthelezi.
He asked the court to stop the board from making any payments for the king’s personal benefit, including legal fees on his behalf.
Mbonisi also asked the court to review and set aside all decisions made by the board, which he accused of the “unlawful dissipation of the financial resources of the Ingonyama Trust in support of the personal interests” of MisuZulu.
He said it was “untenable” that government departments continued to pay the king’s stipend — currently at R77 million a year — and for his transport and security when his ascension to the throne is being contested in court.
Ramaphosa officially recognised MisuZulu as the Zulu king last year and he has since received all of the privileges that come with the position, despite the court challenge by royal family members.
Mbonisi said it was “irresponsible, irrational and an unreasonable exercise of public powers” for government departments to “ignore” the existence of the court case and recognise MisuZulu.
He said there was “clear evidence of harmful conduct” by the king and a “real danger” that the trust’s funds would be “dissipated in his favour” by the time the Pretoria court ruled in the challenge to his appointment.
The king had “spared no moment” in establishing the 13 companies that “trade on the status of kingship and the assets associated with the kingdom — the trust land and finances of amaZulu kingdom.”
According to the court papers, the king is the sole director of several of the companies, and co-director along with Mpumalanga entrepreneur Jacob Mnisi in others. Mnisi is a close associate who the king had named as ITB chairperson, but who declined the post.
Mbonisi said none of the companies had existed before MisuZulu was named king, which indicated that he had set them up to profit from his ascension to the Zulu throne by doing business with the trust.
Mbonisi said the king had “planted persons who he believes will do his personal bidding” at the ITB, which he was using to “advance his personal and private business interests”.
He claimed the monarch was “in business” with board members, using the 13 companies to do so.
But none of the board members are listed as directors of the companies on the supporting documents submitted to the court.
Mbonisi said an interdict would be necessary to prevent the board from lending R12 million to Mnisi to buy a mine in Mpumalanga.
Mbonisi said there had been an attempt to make MisuZulu’s appointment “a fait accompli” by the government, which had “bolstered” the king into “acting with bravado” by recognising him prematurely.
“He has been given a false sense of security in his unlawfully obtained status because his misdeeds are simply ignored by the government respondents, who … treat him as a legitimate king of the Zulus.”
Mbonisi said that there was a “credible rumour” that the king was a drug addict who was “captured by drug mules” and that he had run up an alcohol bill of R57 000, paid for by the ITB, at a hotel during a meeting with amakhosi.
The king also was happy to finance “appearing in glitter and glamour” using “the financial resources of the Zulu people”, spending freely on luxury watches, shoes and accessories, Mbonisi said.
He said board members had abused the ITB’s finances by giving staff members, including the executive, retrospective increases and that they had been submitting inflated expense claims.
Mbonisi asked the court to order the board to make available all its records of decision — and financial decisions — because these would back up “credible reports” that the new board had wasted resources by holding meetings at outside venues.
Mbonisi said Didiza had not followed proper procedure in appointing the current board, or in appointing an interim board in December 2022 because the ITB’s enabling legislation did not allow for this.
He said the removal of the chairperson, Jerome Ngwenya, in March by the king was unlawful, as was the appointment of his successor, Thanduyise Mzimela.
Ngwenya was recalled by MisuZulu after an exposé by the Mail & Guardian into a dubious R41 million investment made by Ngwenya through Ingonyama Holdings, set up in 2019.
The money has not been recovered.
Mbonisi asked the court to review both sets of appointments, and to set aside all decisions made by the new board since it was appointed by Didiza.
The matter is set to be heard in February.