FORT HARE RENAMED CHIEF MAQOMA UNIVERSITY

LAW OF DELICT

FORT HARE RENAMED CHIEF MAQOMA UNIVERSITY

The true version is that AFRICANS had their own law of delict. The Native chiefs and kings presided over crimes and delicts in the traditional courts before the Annexation which took place in 1844. Traditional Native Courts were replaced by the MAGISTRATE COURTS. A good example on this point is the case of SKHWIKHWIKHWI v NTWAKUMBA where Sleigh a magistrate who was the PRESIDENT of the NATIVE APPEAL COURT…

Another example is the case of MBAYA V MATATO. The defendant is alleged to have said “Igusha lam lityiwe ngu PIYOSE” Africans also differentiated between LIBEL and Slander i.e oral and written defamation. Chiefs also presided in cases of imputation of witchcraft. The defendant would be fined a beast payable to the plaintiff to wash his name, the delict of UKUHLAMBA IGAMA LOMNTU”.

MAQOMA opened the case by stating the following:

“First in my land, there is no slave so I’m going to decide this case between man and man, not slave and master”. The slave gave his version and so did the white man. Maqoma ruled in favor of the slave and fined the farmer an ox payable to him. The farmer refused and insisted on an appeal. Maqoma insisted that he pays the fine before the appeal. The farmer ended up paying the ox. He then retaliated saying “i’ m going to report you to LORD CHARLES SOMERSET who is going to show you the difference between a deer and an elephant. Maqoma replied as follows “In my father’s land no one has ever called me a dear even CHARLES SOMERSET himself” That was the end of the delict. Maqoma handed the ox to the PLAINTIFF as compensation for the injuries sustained.

MzeeAQOMA case is evidence that AFRICAN CHIEFS presided over delicts in their traditional courts. Maqoma presided in that case before traditional courts were abolished in 1844.