Image Source: BBC
Local – South Africa’s top court recently ruled that husbands can take their wives’ family name, overturning a law that banned them from doing so.
The Constitutional Court struck down part of the 1992 Births and Deaths Registration Act, which had previously allowed only women to change their surname after marriage.
Supporters hailed the decision as a win for gender equality, personal freedom, and dignity.
However, United Africans Transformation (UAT) Head of Communications and National Spokesperson Doer Mighty Mabule sharply criticised the judgment, saying it ignores African traditions and cultural values.
“As United African Transformation, we have actually noted with deep concern the judgment by the Constitutional Court, and we’re actually saying it’s quite unfortunate that after over 21 years of democracy, we indeed experience the pain of having a judiciary that is still not transformed… They do not really consider our customs, our values, the way we conduct ourselves as Africans.”
Supporters Celebrate Equality, Critics Oppose
Mabule stressed that surnames hold more meaning in African society than simply being personal identifiers. He explained that they link individuals to their ancestors and family history.
He warned that undermining these traditions could create confusion and weaken the transmission of heritage across generations.
“A man’s surname is not his alone. It carries the weight of the forefathers, connects the person to the clan and ensures children inherit the identity of the lineage”
“If you’re saying that, then men must take the surname of the woman… how will those kids be connected to the forefathers and the world? So that’s so bad.”
Supporters of the ruling argue that it was necessary to address gender imbalances in past surname laws, but Mabule rejected that argument.
He said the framework of South Africa’s judiciary fails to reflect African values and relies too heavily on Western legal traditions.
“The legal experts that you’re talking about, they’re basing all their decisions… on laws that are not African. Our law is not accompanied by participatory and culturally sensitive policy.”
“Still, it’s a pure technical amendment that does not really consider how we conduct ourselves, how we live as Africans.”
Mabule warned against allowing modern reforms to override long-standing traditions. He cautioned that if cultural identity is eroded, future generations could lose their sense of belonging.
“We don’t want the type of development that makes us lose ourselves… destroy our humanity… because this nation will be conquered.”
