We have, we like to believe, broken out of the classical unitary versus federal form of state, and have instead struck our own unique system of cooperative government with three spheres - national, provincial and local - which are distinct, but interrelated and interdependent. This system is at the core of our Constitution. But so too is the imperative for the state to be fully democratic and inclusive, and be embedded in the will of the people.
And if you look at the legislation we've passed since 1994 it becomes all too clear that ours is meant to be a system not just of cooperative government, but, fundamentally, cooperative governance. In essence, government rules in interaction with the people. Ours is meant to be an inclusive, comprehensive democracy.
Which means we have to recognize the institution of traditional leadership. Indeed this is expressly set out in sections 211 and 212 of the Constitution.  Managed properly, as government seeks to do, and increasingly succeeds in doing, the institution of  traditional leadership and our modern democracy are certainly compatible. The Constitution provides the broad framework and legislation gives effect to this.
Exactly how we find the synergy between elective democracy and the institution of traditional leadership changes over time. It's invariably contested. There are inevitable tensions. There are people who feel strongly that too much or too little has been done for the institution of traditional leadership. We must accept these differences and manage them. That too is the hallmark of our democracy.
Of course, we know that traditional leaders feel that they were hard done by with the Interim and final Constitutions which provided for wall-to-wall municipalities. With the establishment of municipalities in rural areas traditional leaders feel that their customary powers and functions were taken away and given to municipalities. Traditional leaders have other grievances too. Government is willing to engage with traditional leaders about their concerns.
Of course, there are problems, but we have, in fact, come a long way since 1994.  We now have the National House, and Provincial and  Local Houses of Traditional Leaders. We adopted a White Paper on "Traditional Leadership and Governance". Various pieces of legislation that deal with the institution of Traditional Leadership have been passed since 1994 that provide for an enhanced role for the institution.