This must go down in the annals as one of the all time classic press statements issued by a head of state:
Clarity on the spouses of the President
6 January 2010
The Presidency has noted media reports and speculation following the wedding of President Jacob Zuma to Ms Tobeka Madiba-Zuma and wishes to clarify a few points.
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 and the public service regulations do not make provision for a First Lady or First Ladies, and there is no such official designation.
However, as has been the practice in past administrations, The Presidency provides administrative support to the spouses of the President through its spousal office.
The President will be accompanied by any of the spouses to official or public engagements, or all of them at the same time should he so decide. This is his prerogative, and has been the practice since he took office.
The spouses may choose to engage in community work or any other activity that supports the work of the President. This is not mandatory as they are not part of the Presidency or the public service. They undertake this work purely on a voluntary basis.
Currently, MaKhumalo’s area of interest is agriculture and food security, and she runs a vegetable garden project in Nkandla, while KaMadiba has a special interest in health matters, especially work relating to the fight against cervical cancer. MaNtuli’s focus is in social development and she does a lot of work relating to assisting orphans and vulnerable children.
We have also noted incorrect media reports stating that the President has five wives. For the record, President Zuma has three wives: Ms Sizakele Khumalo (MaKhumalo), Ms Nompumelelo Ntuli (MaNtuli) and Ms Tobeka Madiba (KaMadiba). He has a fiancée, Ms Bongi Ngema.
In isiZulu culture, married or adult women whose surnames begin with “Ma” automatically inherit the prefix “Ka” instead of “Ma” to avoid tautology, which is why Ms Madiba-Zuma is not referred to as “MaMadiba”.
Enquiries
Vincent Magwenya
Cell: 072 715 0024
Issued by: The Presidency
6 January 2010
Related posts:
??? This is the full text of a statement by the presidency. Hardly the “criticism” you speak of, Nausher
The plural of the word ‘spouse’ in the polygamy context should be ‘spoese’ to avoid tautology.
That might be in bad taste but then it is all just so hilarious.
LYFHO
Maybe if Rahman got his head out of the ANC’s collective ar.ses then he would see that our very poor country cannot afford a free-spending president who has already married five times in the past and plans a sixth. If South Africans truly believe that we should not have to pay for the excessive consumption of these super-incompetent thugs, then we need to consider withholding our personal taxes. How the ANC can refer to their top dogs as “leaders” or “the leadership”, beggars belief.
@ Eli,
You are such a coward, you shut your arse when your most respectable mlungus are talking rubbish i.e Marthinius. You act as if you never picked it up, but when a black man talks, you are quick to redicule him or her.
F#ck you man, what you are doing is disgusting. Nxahhh!!!!!!!
@ Thug 4 Life — Not sure who this “Marthinius” is that you refer to. But if you are referring to Kortbroek then he is just as big ar.se wipe as you for supporting the ANC regime. No ethics or values. Just jobs for pals and personal gain at the expense of the millions of illiterates who return the ANC to power year after year.
Hi Ray,
My point was directed at your “all time classic” statement.
I read it as being more than just slightly condescending- like you were sniggering. That’s not on, especially if you’re not going to flesh out your commentary with a bit more detail of what exactly you find amusing?
Nausher Rahman
January 8, 2010 at 10:33 amDude, come on! I don’t agree with polygamy, but the man isn’t breaking any laws and we should all lay off his private life (as long as there’s nothing illegal there).
It was wrong when the media went hysterical about Clinton’s dalliances, and it’s wrong in this instance too.
Surely we have far more important matters to constructively criticise?