Using Afumba’s suffering in defense of ‘Litunga’ litigation is an emotional low blow

(L-R) Inambao Kalima, Likando Pelekelo and Afumba Mombotwa are currently serving 10 years Zambian prison sentences for declaring and establishing Barotseland transitional government (L-R) Inambao Kalima, Likando Pelekelo and Afumba Mombotwa are currently serving 10 years Zambian prison sentences for declaring and establishing Barotseland transitional government

Using Afumba’s suffering in defense of ‘Litunga’ litigation is an emotional low blow Featured

By / Editorial Comments / Tuesday, 07 February 2017 10:14

 

BAROTSELAND POST COMMENTARY 7th FEBRUARY 2017

Those in support of Imikendu’s current litigation against the Litunga should do so on its cultural and national merits rather than emotionally blackmailing their counterparts on the opposing side. In fact, arguing against Imikendu’s action is not synonymous with supporting Lubosi Imwiko II’s alleged bad governance, neither does it mean taking pleasure in the continued persecution of Hon Afumba Mombotwa and others currently imprisoned under Lubosi Imwiko II’s reign nor the 19 innocent Barotse souls killed by Zambian assigned agents in 2011 under his watch.

Therefore, those using such emotional blackmail are throwing cheap ‘low blows’ at their perceived opponents.

Opposition to Imikendu’s current action is actually based on the PRINCIPLES of who and what we are as MALOZI and the precedence we seek to set for posterity.

In fact, those that know Afumba Mombotwa’s gallantry and integrity will understand that not even in his suffering or death would he support an action that gives power to the Zambian government, a power he has so courageously poured contempt on as an ‘occupying force’. Afumba believes that Barotseland is an independent nation, and he is willing to die for that belief. He believes that Barotseland has its own laws, culture and identity separate from Zambia’s. Has he not refused deals for personal freedom in exchange for selling out the struggle for independence from Zambia severally? When he was dragged to a Zambian court, did he not argue on the basis that he did not recognize Zambian courts’ jurisdiction over him and his colleagues as Barotse nationals, to the extent that it cost them their personal freedom? How can anyone, therefore, assume that Afumba would support such action against the LITUNGASHIP of Barotseland in a ZAMBIAN court regardless of who occupies the Barotse throne?

The problem with the proponents and supporters of Imikendu is that they seem to be so ‘stuck’ on embarrassing Edwin Lubosi Imwiko II as a person, and do not seem to care about the ‘bad and wrong’ precedence they are now setting over the Litungaship!

Edwin Lubosi Imwiko II’s reign has affected a lot of us in such negative and dangerous personal ways that we would have so easily used this present avenue to get back at Lubosi Imwiko II, but we have decided to take a PRINCIPLED position in defense of BAROTSELAND and its NORMS because we realize that he will not be Litunga forever. The bad precedence set today, however, may haunt all other future Litungas and posterity may judge us harshly.

Imikendu and his friends, whether they succeed or not, have so loudly declared that our cultural and governance systems are not ADEQUATE. They have clearly said that ‘IMBWAE’, as kingmaker in Barotseland, is ‘OBSOLETE’, and now Barotseland needs the ‘courts’ to dethrone the Litunga. Imikendu, being kingmaker (although also embattled) should have taken the courage to ‘dethrone’ Lubosi Imwiko II with the support of the Barotse National Council (BNC)  or the relevant Barotse institutions, the Barotse way. And to do this, IMBWAE would not need courts, whether in Barotseland or Zambia.

IS THIS THE PRECEDENCE WE DESIRE TO SET?

In principle, a thing is undone by the same means it was done. For example, we have here consistently advanced that Barotseland must leave the union with Zambia by the same means it joined the union. How? Through the Barotseland Agreement 1964 – not via Referendum for instance! This is perfectly legal because a ‘thing is undone by the same means it was done’. Another example, a marriage can only be annulled by the same means it was consummated.

Therefore, this is not about supporting Lubosi Imwiko II, but really about following the right channels and supporting the SOLID foundations of Barotseland. Without these foundations, then we are doomed as a people. The Litunga of Barotseland cannot be dethroned via the courts because he does not ascend the throne through the courts. But if we dethrone the Litunga through the court, it would also follow that the next Litunga MUST be enthroned through and in conjunction with the same courts.

It must also be understood that the power to ‘HIRE’ is the same power to ‘FIRE’. This is why we challenge IMBWAE to ‘dethrone’ Lubosi Imwiko II the same way he was enthroned. If he enthroned him through the Zambian courts, then that is fine, but if not, then he is equally abdicating and relegating his authority, howbeit, to foreign systems considered oppressive.

However, if IMBWAE gives his power to another institution, the courts, to DETHRONE Lubosi, he has INADVERTENTLY given the same courts power to be KINGMAKER. This is not who we are as MALOZI!

Are we going to narrowly focus on dethroning Lubosi at the expense of who we are as Malozi? Are we so desperate that we are now willing to sell our ‘NATIONAL SOUL’ at the ‘alter’ of ‘EXPEDIENCY’? Are we now going to do what we regard as advantageous or politically convenient rather than what is RIGHT or JUST for us to pursue self-interest and self-preservation?

It does not really matter whether or not Imikendu succeeds in his present action; he is wrong either way as his action will come back to haunt us and future generations because today it is Edwin Lubosi Imwiko II, tomorrow it is another Litunga who will be dragged to court.

Emphasis should be put here that there are well known processes in Barotseland for censuring, disciplining, rebuking and even dethroning erring Litungas. If Imikendu is really serious and wishes to dethrone Lubosi Imwiko II, why can he not apply and use these ‘legitimate’ processes in this case? Can Imikendu explain to us what challenges he faces in doing his national duty? Could it be that he fears that he may not be legitimate himself or that his action has no blessings of the people? Or is he not the Kingmaker who installed Lubosi Imwiko II?

Let Malozi debate freely, because Barotseland is a century old democracy where everyone’s voice must be heard, without emotional blackmail. We must discuss the merits and demerits and not throw ‘low blows’ such as: ‘if you don’t support Imikendu, then you wish to see Afumba dead’, or that ‘if you don’t support Imikendu, then you are an enemy of Barotseland’. Nowhere in Imikendu’s court action has he stated that he’s doing this to free Afumba or to free Barotseland! So why drag Afumba into it?

MALOZI ARE FREE TO SUPPORT IMIKENDU JUST AS THEY ARE FREE NOT TO SUPPORT HIM!

Author

Business Editor

Business Editor

comment

  • Situtu Ikandulwa Situtu Ikandulwa 7 February 2017

    Ku pakela Imikendu konji ya pulumuka kamba ya lumilwe ki PF

Leave a comment

Current Track: Loading ...
Stream Title:
Server Status:
Station Time:

Mongu

Clear
21°C
ESE at 8.05 km/h /37%
Tuesday
11°C / 27°C
Wednesday
11°C / 27°C
Thursday
11°C / 27°C

Latest Comments

Who is Online

We have 108 guests and no members online

Please publish modules in offcanvas position.