Constitutions often speak loudest in their silences, the most difficult and contentious issues frequently being set aside by constitutional architects for future generations to resolve. The political role of chieftaincy stood as just such an issue for South Africa's 1996 constitution. An entire section of the document was devoted to the subject of “Traditional Leaders,” yet that section comprised only fifteen lines of text. Echoing the CODESA negotiations and the 1993 interim agreement, the 1996 constitution officially recognized traditional leadership, but offered no specific guidance as to the powers or roles of traditional leaders. The chiefs continued to preside over land allocation and customary law in rural communities. The state continued to pay their salaries.

The institution of chieftaincy also remained a flash point for political tension. As the country's 2000 municipal elections approached, a loose coalition of chiefs threatened to disrupt the balloting in rural areas unless their demands for political power were met. The announcement of a date for the elections was pushed back as government officials negotiated with chiefs linked to both the IFP and CONTRALESA. The local elections eventually went ahead, with the chiefs receiving a promise from the ANC government that they would be granted a form of guaranteed representation on local councils.

In September 2003, a white paper on traditional leadership finally emerged from the Department of Provincial and Local Government. The white paper represented a significant step forward in the legal definition of a role for chieftaincy.