AmaZulu throne: Expert claims late King Goodwill Zwelithini’s signature on will is a forgery | News24


AmaZulu throne: Expert claims late King Goodwill Zwelithini’s signature on will is a forgery | News24

The late King Goodwill Zwelithini

  • AmaZulu Princesses Ntandoyenkosi Zulu and Ntombizosuthu Zulu-Duma have applied for an urgent indict from the High Court to stop the coronation of Prince Misuzulu as Zulu king.
  • Their lawyer also quoted an expert who claimed that the late King Goodwill Zwelithini’s signatures on his will were forgeries.
  • Prince Misuzulu’s lawyer says the princesses have no right to ask for an interdict and they are not part of the succession.

AmaZulu princesses Ntandoyenkosi Zulu and Ntombizosuthu Zulu-Duma have applied for an interdict to stop the coronation process of Prince Misuzulu KaZwelithini until the claim that the late King Goodwill Zwelithini’s will was forged, has been resolved.

The application to Judge Isaac Madondo was made by the princesses’ lawyer, Nigel Redman SC, who said an expert had declared the will a forgery.

He quoted the expert as having said “the only consistency in the signatures is their shocking inconsistency”.

The expert claimed that the style size, pressure and a number of other factors led them to believe the will was forged.

Redman said:

In one signature the expert said it was a drunk or eight-year-old child that signed it. Set one and set two have not been written by the same hand of King Goodwill Zwelithini.

He added that there appeared to be a time gap in signatures, saying “there are obvious dissimilarities in the signatures”.

Redman said respondents in the matter merely stated the will was authentic without providing any additional reasons.

“They simply state it as fact. There is no substantiation. The respondents say the late isilo’s signature is authentic. Notwithstanding the fact they have no personal knowledge of whether it is or isn’t – it is notable that the people who are witnesses in the document who purportedly signed as such (sic).

“In order to prove the authenticity of the will, a confirmatory affidavit from witnesses to say the king signed the will in my presence, that is his signature, would be easy to do. They don’t do this. It is surprising that the respondents so blindly contend the will and signature on the will are authentic without providing evidence.”

Responding, Griffith Madonsela SC said the princesses had no business calling for an interdict.

Madonsela said: 

This interdict is about interdicting Prince Misuzulu’s coronation pending proceedings relating to the will of the late king. The will of the late king has got nothing to do with the coronation or appointment of King Misuzulu.

Madonsela added that shortly after King Goodwill Zwelithini’s death, the princesses shot down the nomination of Prince Mbonisi Zulu to act as a regent.

He said they were “puzzled about why the princesses are questioning the same will that appointed the regent, who later nominated King Misuzulu”.

Madondo also queried why the princesses were applying for an interdict.

“You want to stay the process for pleasure. You can’t just do it [interdict a person or process] because you don’t like someone or are not a successor. What right do they have to stop the process?”

Judgement in the matter was reserved on Wednesday.

Never miss a story. Choose from our range of newsletters to get the news you want delivered straight to your inbox.



Source link

Leave a Comment