What's in a name? A lot, is seems

The concourt’s decision extends equality in that men can now take their wives’ surnames, but not everyone agrees that this move is liberating

- Sbusiso Gwala

In the name of equality: Justice Jody Kollapen's ruling has extended the rights of men.

(Photo The South African Judiciary)

The Constitutional Court’s recent decision that husbands can legally take their wives’ surnames has stirred debate across South Africa.

Justice Jody Kollapen ruled that stopping men from doing so “unfairly discriminated against them” and reminded us that “the right to equality is not a one-way street”.

Many South Africans will rightly celebrate this as a victory and an overdue step in dismantling the old assumption that women alone should change their identity in marriage. Equality matters and this achievement should not be dismissed.

But one should consider the origins of this legal challenge. The application came from two couples, Jana Jordaan and Henry van der Merwe and Jess Donnelly-Bornman and Andreas Nicolaas Bornman. Their case, which reached the apex court after oral hearings earlier this year, reflects a particular cultural and social experience.

While the judgment allows men to take their wives’ surnames, it does not mandate anyone to do so. For many Africans, whose surname systems carry ancestral and cultural significance, this ruling introduces potential tension between legal rights and traditional practices.