Political Editor, Barotseland Post
The political pronouncements promising to restore the defunct pre-independence Barotseland agreement whenever critical elections are imminent by successive presidents of Zambia is now an overused political gimmick aimed at nothing more than garnering electoral votes from the people of Barotseland. First republican president, Kenneth Kaunda, did it at Senanga grounds on the campaign trail in 1991, FTJ Chiluba did it in 1996, so did Patrick Mwanawasa, Rupiah Banda. Michael Sata did it at Mongu’s Blue Gum grounds on the campaign trail in 2011 and now Edgar Lungu is doing exactly the same at statehouse. What is disappointing is that the same Barotseland Agreement 1964 document becomes treasonable immediately after the politicians win the elections, with mass arrests of the Lozi people who remind them of this one electoral campaign promise.
How the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) and the Litungaship keep buying into this cheap political treachery beats the imagination of any rational thinking, and the common citizen of Barotseland can no longer be fooled by it and they are right not to. In fact, the people of Barotseland have said that they are no longer interested in the restoration of the defunct agreement because they have already unanimously declared Barotseland independent in 2012, and it is the pursuit of this independence that the progressive Lozi are now devoted to. The BRE, with their shameful insistence of dragging the people backwards, defying the popular and unanimous wishes of the people of Barotseland should be ignored.
However, it is important to understand the political matrix that drives the excitement around the Barotseland Agreement of 1964. It is becoming very clear, for instance, that both Lusaka and Limulunga use this matter to seek desired attention using the common Lozi in Barotseland. Whenever Limulunga has felt that they no longer receive due attention, financial and otherwise from Lusaka, they have often used the people of Barotseland to sing the Barotseland independence song and Lusaka would immediately rush with hefty goodies, literally bribing the BRE, to calm their people into silence. This way, Limulunga would get their desired attention once again, while the ordinary people remain yearning for their real freedom. On the flip side, whenever Lusaka feels that they are in real danger of losing Zambian elections as a ruling party, or if they need the Barotse vote to win it, as was the case with Mr. Sata in opposition, all they have to do is dangle the Barotseland Agreement restoration carrot, and the Lozi would be excited to give them the vote in the hope that they would truly have their self-determination. In fact, the Lozi love their Barotseland or ‘Bulozi’, as they call their homeland, so much that it is almost the only thing that they really want to hear about from the politicians in Lusaka. Sadly many don’t know the difference between the ‘restoration’ of the 1964 agreement and the ‘independence’ of Barotseland. They think it is one and the same thing.
Below outlined are a couple of reasons why Barotseland Agreement 1964 restoration will still not satisfy the ordinary person in Barotseland.
The Barotseland Agreement 1964 promises power and ‘benefits’ only to the ruling class of Barotseland in some autocracy style government, while the poor common Lozi would remain impoverished. It was this undesirable phenomenon why many commoners in 1964 desired to be part of the new republic of Zambia, if only to escape from the excesses of the ruling royal class. Many loathed the ruling aristocracy at the time and hoped the republican government in Lusaka would put the royal authority at Limulunga in check. Sadly, however, such a political status would now benefit the ruling class in Lusaka because they will now only have to satisfy the few Limulunga aristocrats, and together they would rape the vast virgin resources of Barotseland such as timber, diamonds, oil and others which are in prospect. The ordinary people would still be nowhere in the equation.
Secondly, the restoration of the 1964 agreement is also very undesirable in the minds of many Zambians who see it as a creation of a ‘special’ prestigious status in the Lozi ‘tribe’. The Zambians do not really understand, and those that do understand do not really wish to accept that the Lozi can be and should be treated more ‘special’ than the rest of the ‘tribes’. The reality, however, is that this is not a matter of Lozi superiority but rather that the Lozi have always had their own national status different from Northern Rhodesians and only joined Zambia even at independence through this defunct treaty. Historically, Barotseland and Northern Rhodesia were two separate British protectorates which were administered jointly by the British for mere administrative convenience because of territorial proximity, and having amalgamated the two territories in 1911 – 1924. In essence, these were and needed to be administered as two separate countries, a status unacceptable to most Zambians currently who blame the British for having given such status on the Lozi to merely serve as surrogates of colonialism. In fact, many Zambians would only be more open to a situation where such devolution of power is granted to all the other provinces of Zambia, except that the Lusaka ruling elites rejected such proposed devolution of power in the new draft constitution last year.
Therefore, in the restoration of the 1964 agreement, only the ruling class at both Limulunga and Lusaka benefit while the people of Barotseland will remain impoverished, ever desiring their total freedom.
In 2011 – 2012, the BRE again found themselves needing attention from Lusaka because they had supported Rupiah Banda’s MMD which lost the 2011 election, having massacred 19 Lozi youths extra judicially barely 9 months before the September elections, while the ordinary people supported Sata’s PF in opposition who promised to honour the Barotseland Agreement of 1964 in 90 days of his presidency if the Lozi gave him the presidential vote. However, Sata reneged on his Lozi electoral promise, angering the ordinary Lozi who voted for him, while the BRE needed to reestablish attention with Lusaka under the new Sata government. This created a common rallying point. The BRE and the people of Barotseland could now work together, not knowing that their agendas were different. While the people desired TOTAL freedom from Zambia, the BRE as always, merely wanted some usual financial and political ‘attention’ from Lusaka. It was no wonder that the BRE and Lusaka were very shocked that instead of demanding the usual RESTORATION of the defunct Barotseland Agreement of 1964 at the March 2012 Barotse National Council (BNC), the people were actually unanimous in their demand for TOTAL independence of Barotseland.
Limulunga and Lusaka panicked at this UNUSUAL and UNFORESEEN BNC demand because both Lusaka and Limulnga know that BNC in Barotseland is SUPREME and even the Litungaship and the BRE are bound by its decisions. This was the first time ever that the people of Barotseland had publicly declared Barotseland independence. While the people expected the BRE to help facilitate the furthering of Barotseland independence from Zambia peacefully, it became clear that the BRE and the Litungaship were instead now working with the Lusaka government to find ways of coming out of this precarious eventuality that came out of the March 2012 BNC that both Lusaka and Limulunga not only endorsed with their attendance but also helped organize. This is why Lusaka has been on the offensive arresting and imprisoning Barotse in favour of Barotseland self-determination while Limulunga sits by without doing anything to dissuade Lusaka.
Realizing that the people no longer had the willing participation of the royal establishment in pursuing Barotseland sovereignty, the main independence movement, Linyungandambo, under Afumba Mombotwa with other like minded activists of other groupings, went on ahead to constitute the Royal Barotseland Government, also known as Barotseland Transitional Government (BTG) in transition to take the lead in establishing Barotseland self government based on a parliamentary system type of democratic constitutional monarchy.
Although Afumba Mombotwa and two other key figures in the Barotseland government were tried for treason and imprisoned for 10 years, this government has continued to mobilize for international diplomatic recognition and resource mobilization in preparation for Barotseland self-rule which now stands imminent, and no pronouncements from Lusaka or Limulunga to the contrary will prevent Barotseland independence.
Meanwhile, Lubosi Imwiko II, the Litunga of Barotseland, remains embattled with few of his cronies at the Limulunga BRE kuta for their willing collaboration with Lusaka’s Edgar Lungu, a stance widely seen by his subjects in Barotseland as treachery, with many now wishing and demanding that he could freely abdicate the Barotse throne to pave way for a more progressive Litunga that would lead the march to Barotseland independence.
The Zambian government through its intelligence wing, popularly known as OP (Office of the president), has now plotted to assassinate two named influential princes, the Barotseland National Information Centre has reported.
Unearthing the plot, an official at the centre, Pelekelo Siachalwa, has said that credible reports reaching the centre from sources within the Barotseland Intelligence Agency (BIA), indicate that the government of Zambia has plotted yet another criminal act in Barotseland - this time targeting His Royal Highness Inyambo Yeta, Reigning Prince at Mwandi Palace and another prince, Dr. Akashambatwa Mbikusita Lewaninka. The duo’s current targeting is said to be as a result of the perceived overwhelming support that the two enjoy from across the Barotse community compared to the now embattled Litunga Lubosi Imwiko II, who has widely been accused of grossly disregarding the Barotse norms and culture in preference to undesirable and 'suspicious' personal ties with ‘treacherous’ Lusaka.
The assassination manoeuvres were reportedly put in motion after social media reports of the disappearance and demise of Lubosi Imwiko II last month proved that many Barotse would not be at loss if the current Litunga had perished in the rumoured road accident because either one of the two would be more preferred to immediately take up the Litungaship if Imwiko had really died or been incapacitated.
Lubosi Imwiko’s reported demise, however, turned out to be a mere ‘sick’ social media gossip that may have further exposed just how unpopular Lubosi Imwiko II had become among his subjects, prompting the royal establishment to quickly organize the embattled Litunga’s public appearance at a church service at St Lawrence Catholic church on the 5th of June 2016.
“How could anyone wish His Majesty dead, and how would news of the purported demise of His majesty excite any well meaning person?” Induna Mukuluwakashiko had lamented as he ‘unveiled’ the embattled Litunga Lubosi Imwiko II to the public immediately after the church service, right on church grounds, scoffing at those that were involved in the unfortunate social media rumour mongering.
However, according to the intelligence report, the Zambian government have ranked the two targeted personalities as the more preferred candidates for the highest office of Litunga, if the unfortunate vacancy had occurred. Therefore, with the two out of the way, the Zambian government would want to put their ‘puppet’ on the Barotse throne so as to easily continue enslaving the people of Barotseland in black on black colonization style.
The report further indicates that the Zambian government already had a preferred candidate, a man known and feared among the Barotse community as not only selfish and self-centred but also one who is known to think that non-royal commoners are ‘slaves’.
In the report, the people of Barotseland are further cautioned to be on the lookout for both internal and external enemies of Barotseland and protect one another, and especially protect the named Royal Highnesses.
The report concluded and advised that the Zambian government ought to be warned that should any harm come to either of the named Royal Highnesses, they would be held responsible and answerable to the people of Barotseland.
Meanwhile, the information centre has advised that the report should be taken seriously as recent historical evidence would prove cases of espionage, acts of aggression and gross interference in the Barotse monarchical succession by the Zambian government, some of which will soon be tabled before the international community.
The following is a compilation by Afumba Mombotwa, Royal Barotseland Government, and was sent to the United Nations, for the world’s information and for the sons and daughters of Barotseland to know the reasons why Barotseland and Zambia will never be one nation.
The compilation advances 100 reasons why Barotseland and Zambia can never and will never be one nation.
They also illustrate that there is no union or relationship between them other than that of being neighbours forever, and that this fact must be easily understood by all sane people.
1. Nobody can refute the territorial integrity of Barotseland in the world.
2. Barotseland is an organic nation.
3. Barotzish did not renounce their nationality in 1964.
4. Barotseland and Zambia did not confederate.
5. Nobody can claim anything under an Agreement that is not in force.
6. The Barotzis are not made by a constitution. The constitution was made by man and not man by the constitution. So we have already rejected the Zambian constitution.
7. The Litunga (King) cannot be a subject of his subjects viz Councillors/ MPs.
8. Britain had no moral right to transfer Barotseland into the hands of a novice state (Zambia).
9. When Sir Mwanawina signed the Agreement, he represented the Nation of Barotseland, whereas Mr Kaunda represented his Government (temporal authority) so we have nothing to do with the successor governments.
10. Any Agreement does not offer rights to the third party.
11. The relationship of Britain and Barotseland was based on treaties signed, but when the treaties were terminated, also the relationship came to an end; similarly, the relationship between Barotseland and Zambia came to an end when Barotseland Agreement 1964 was terminated.
12. Zambia is occupying Barotseland illegally.
13. The Barotzish did not surrender their sovereignty to any state ever since.
14. Mr Kaunda signed Barotseland Agreement 1964 when he was a Malawian citizen until 1970 when he renounced his Malawian Nationality. Hence, he acted as an imposter; thus whatever he did to us is null and void.
15. The law of Zambia does not recognise Barotseland as a state party, but as a vassal state to it. This causes animosity.
16. We cannot debate our identity, self-determination and our right to our country.
17. There is nothing that gives Zambia any right to rule Barotseland apart from military hardware.
18. Nobody can convince us on how and when we became Zambians since the law proves the contrary.
19. The British tried to merge or compromise the two antithetical political systems viz republic and monarchy. This causes antagonism.
20. No law on earth is against liberty and self-rule.
21. No nation has the right to swallow another.
22. Independence is neither crime nor misdemeanour.
23. In default of the union Act, there is no law to prove that Barotseland and Zambia were politically united.
24. That which is made contrary to law is deemed not to have been done at all or it is illegal.
25. Barotseland is not a legal part of Zambia. The President of Zambia simply inherited the obligations of her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain (coloniser). So Zambia is a quasi-coloniser or protector of Barotseland.
26. Barotseland was treated like a serf since 1964 to date.
27. The law stipulates that the Agreement that has not entered into force is not legally binding, thus we have nothing to do with the Agreement and Zambia.
28. We stake a claim to Barotseland; nobody else can claim our territory.
29. Zambia wants to rely on the law of succession to rule Barotseland.
30. The Barotseland question requires the applicability of international law, justice and law of Agreements and Human Rights law and not laws of Zambia or personal opinions.
31. Unity, cohesion or relationship cannot be maintained by the barrel of the gun.
32. Colonisers can build schools, hospitals and roads, but that does not change their character and nature, they still remain colonisers.
33. We are fed up of being tormented, dominated and incarcerated by dishonest, unscrupulous and treacherous people (Zambia).
34. Mr Kaunda said “we cannot have a Nation within a Nation”; equally we cannot cease to be a Nation because of an ill-bred mortal being who does not want us to be.
35. As Barotzish, we cannot lose our nation on account of demagogic ideologies of “tiyende pamodzi.”
36. Zambia’s political propagandas and promises effected by security officers can never legitimize Zambia’s illegal occupation of Barotseland.
37. Mr Kaunda declared that the “Litunga is simply a chief (Induna) and Mr Sata resounded the same words; no sane Barotse person could be pleased with this state of affairs. This is an explicit testimony of hegemonic dominance.
38. Zambians are for the republic whereas Barotzis are for the Kingdom; two disparate systems cannot co-exist in a designed territory.
39. The essence for seeking for protection of Barotseland by King Lewanika was to preserve the territory for the future generations of which we are.
40. No country can sign a treaty with it-self.
41. Barotseland and Zambia cannot be one; these are two foreign countries.
42. Any developmental project that may appear in Barotseland is donor funded, this being the case; we ought to meet donors directly without any intermediary ourselves.
43. We have the ability, the intellect and knowledge to develop our country Barotseland.
44. The Barotzis do not enjoy the freedom of assembly and expression under the colonization of Zambia.
45. The Zambia Police shall continue assassinating people of Barotseland, if the yoke of Zambian hegemonic is not broken in Barotseland.
46. The Barotzis have never enjoyed their peace of mind since 1964.
47. The abrogation of the Agreement releases Zambia of her responsibility arising from treaty obligations.
48. That which is not in conformity with law is illegal. N.B. there is no legal tie between Barotseland and Zambia.
49. Mr Kaunda took away all the powers of the Litunga (King) he had without consent of the people viz another testimony of domination.
50. There will be no harmony as long as aliens want to have control of our land or rather take it away.
51. The social and political struggle to reconstruct our nation out of various ethnic groups of Barotseland and to liberate Barotseland from Zambian oppression is a right.
52. We cannot afford to continue celebrating the colonization of Barotseland by Zambia because it is a mental torture.
53. Barotseland was not a colony of Britain; so there is no justifiable reason for her to be colonised by a fellow African Nation.
54. What the British did not obtain by conquest Zambia want to possess by artifice.
55. Barotseland has been engaged in struggle against hegemonic dominance since 1965, hence she deserves freedom now.
56. The demise of white colonization did not signal the end of domination and subjugation of weaker by the stronger in Africa; hence Mr Sata President of Zambia told the Barotse Activists at State House “you are in a weaker position.”
57. The Agreement was terminated; we cannot continue to associate ourselves with Zambia anymore.
58. Our relation was artificial or not real and the condominium agreement we entered into has been rejected.
59. West Nyasa (Northern Rhodesia) Zambia was a British crown colony whereas Barotseland was a British Protectorate; the two are not compatible.
60. Zambian Government has been meddling in the internal affairs and interfering in the cultural and traditional activities of Barotseland; that is something detestable.
61. Legal axiom states “a thing is made and destroyed by one and the same means” viz Mr Kaunda made the relation and the same Mr Kaunda destroyed it; so things have fallen apart.
62. Barotseland as a Nation should enjoy the rights accorded to other nations.
63. Our lives as Barotzis are in danger and our community is likely to face extinction as soldiers have been ordered to kill those they identify as Lozi language speakers.
64. Barotzis are charged with treason even for talking about their history.
65. Barotseland is cited to be backward in terms of development by Zambia Central Statistical Office, and our country has been impoverished by design.
66. If we are the owners of Barotseland and everything in it, then we must be the ones in-charge of our resources, control and manage it without restraint.
67. We are fed up with divide and rule tactics of Zambian Governments where a dog is set to eat another dog.
68. The Barotse plains or Lealui has been declared a world heritage site viz a place of historical and cultural importance; for this reason Barotseland cannot be swallowed but be revived.
69. There is absolutely nothing that compels or binds Barotseland to Zambia.
70. President Kaunda arrested and detained Barotzis; President Banda’s Government did not only arrest but killed; President Sata found it fit to declare war and ordered soldiers to kill as did Mr Banda. There seem to be a deliberate policy worse than that of white colonialism.
71. We are treated as rebels and criminals by Zambian Government for the knowledge of our rights.
72. The Zambian Constitution Review Commission 2003 stated that “Zambian Government derives its authority over Barotseland from the Barotseland Agreement 1964” further stated; failing to honour the Barotseland Agreement raises a question as to where the Zambian Government derives its authority from.
73. We want to be in a position where we can face Zambia on the atrocities she has committed; because they have been arrogantly saying “you cannot bite the finger that feeds you”.
74. The Zambia Government has already betrayed us; we don’t want the Rwandan situation to occur.
75. Africa currently uses the principle of “uti possideto” viz the permanence of inherited colonial frontiers safe-guarding existing boundaries; this being so, we too have to guard our boundaries.
76. We are against forced assimilation.
77. After dissolution of the federation, there could be no Zambia in Malawi; similarly after termination of the Agreement we could have no Barotseland in Zambia only senseless people can condone that.
78. Since the original idea that intended to preserve Barotseland’s autonomy within Zambia was curtailed, this time we cannot dream of fresh Agreements to be an enclave that would be as good as taking one step forward and one step backwards.
79. By advocating for inclusion of the Agreement in the Zambian constitution; some Barotzish were begging to be part of Zambia; which is a clear testimony that they have realised that they were excluded.
80. Administering a territory is not synonymous with unification. Period.
81. We wish to be conducting memorial services freely for our beloved ones who were butchered by Zambia.
82. No part of Barotseland was ceded to any country by consent of her inhabitants.
83. Our national anthem still remains “Barotseland is the land of our forefathers" and not anything else.
84. It is contrary to Human Rights norms for Barotseland to continue being colonised.
85. Barotseland was not destined to be ruled or governed by aliens (Zambians).
86. We are a country with an African identity.
87. The situation of Barotseland and her people demands social justice for peace to prevail.
88. The Barotzis have been trying to be realistic with their state of affairs; whereas Zambians are idealistic and full of injustice.
89. If trying to bring two disparate nations of Barotseland and Zambia to make one was an experiment, then the observation of killing and declaration of war conclude that the desired transformation can never take place.
90. The Barotzis cannot be transformed into anything else (c.f. Musasa Musiwa’s Lozi song) just as paraffin and water cannot mix though both are liquids.
91. The applicability of the right to self-determination cannot be limited to cases of Africa struggling against white rule.
92. The building block upon which Zambia was constructed and extended to Barotseland was deceit, lies, treachery, delusion, dishonest and unfaithfulness.
93. Sometimes a rider may feed a horse nicely and fatten it, and wash it, but that does not change situation of a rider and a horse.
94. Of all the British Protectorates only Barotseland was cast into the den of Zambians to be devoured by her.
95. It is a deliberate policy that Barotzis have to be arrested and detained without any offence and then released on Nolle Prosecui so that they cannot be compensated.
96. We are in a situation where Judges are suspended if they dispense justice fairly.
97. After killing people in Barotseland nobody in Zambia ever thought of reconciliation or redress instead people of Barotseland were teased with Chongwe Commission, an exercise in futility.
98. We are not tamed as animals even if we were, when a tamed animal revert to its natural habitat or jungle life, nothing is wrong; it is in order.
99. We are human beings with dignity, we deserve to be respected and not taken for granted or for a cheap commodity.
100. Our people could not shed blood and die in vain if what they died for cannot be accomplished. They lost lives by the order of the diabolic government.
While president Lungu seeks to blind Zambian and Barotse nationals, as well as the international community, by ordering the national publication of the abrogated pre-independence Barotseland Agreement of 1964, many Lozis continue to suffer state reprisals and persecution for merely possessing various Barotseland literature, including the same Barotseland Agreement of 1964, Barotseland National Anthem, Barotseland National Flags and many such Barotse national symbols already in the public domain.
Earlier last week, Zambia’s sixth president, Edgar Chagwa Lungu, became the second republican president to order the national publication of the abrogated Barotseland Agreement of 1964, the first having been his predecessor Michael Chilufya Sata, who accomplished the similar feat in 2012.
However, one Livingstone Lozi national’s life, a teacher and educationist whose house was besieged and raided by Zambia state police the night of 12th March, earlier this year in search of what was termed ‘seditious’ materials, suddenly turned into a worse nightmare as he now got suspended from his public service job as a teacher.
Erich Akakandelwa Lubasi (55), was arrested and incarcerated and charged with ‘seditious practices’ after his mobile phones and other electronic devices seized during the abrupt night police ‘raid’ were allegedly found to contain the Barotseland Agreement 1964, Barotse National Flag, Barotse money caricature and other undisclosed documents deemed ‘threatening’ to the Zambian presidency in various electronic and digital formats.
Nevertheless, over three months after his arrest, trial in Lubasi’s court case is yet to take off. Instead, he has now been slapped with suspension from his teaching profession and denied his full emoluments until his case is disposed of in the Zambian courts of law. When that will happen can only be a matter of speculation because, although he enjoys momentary bail, Zambia’s Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) is yet to issue instructions to the courts on how he wishes to proceed with Lubasi’s case.
Such has been the fate of many other Lozis facing several similar court processes, whom the state has sometimes either left to languish in Zambian jails like ‘common’ criminals only to be released many months later without trial or compensation through Nolle prosequi, or have had their personal human freedoms and entitlements curtailed.
When asked for a comment on progress in his case, Akakandelwa lamented that the ministry of Education had now suspended him following his arrest by the Zambia Police Service for alleged possession of Seditious materials on 12th March, 2016 contrary to section 57(2) of the Penal Code Act Chapter 87 of the Laws of Zambia, and that his suspension will last until his case has been fully determined by the courts of Law.
Besides now being barred from leaving the country without express permission from the provincial Education Officer, Lubasi’s professional entitlements have also been slashed into half.
While non-Lozi Zambians are often free to debate, discuss or even make public pronouncements about Barotseland, their Lozi counterparts however, do not enjoy the same freedom of expression on the subject matter without arrest and prosecution under Zambia’s archaic seditious or treasonous laws.
Zambian politicians, especially when seeking the Barotse vote have even gone to the extent of declaring themselves leading ‘members’ of the Linyungandambo, the leading Barotseland independence movement, just to woo unsuspecting Lozi voters.
Meanwhile, all Zambian human rights watch groups such as the Human Rights Commission (HRC), the Zambian church mother bodies, civil society organizations (CSOs) and mainline media sit by and watch the Barotse suffer repression at the hands of Zambian state agents, and maybe it is now time to declare #BarotseRightsMatter.
Mbinji Mufalo, popularly known as ‘The Teacher’, a University of Zambia lecturer and Consultant on Human Rights, Governance and Development, has expressed shock at what has been reported in the mass media as President Edgar Lungus’s latest public sentiments on the Barotseland Agreement of 1964, while on a tour of duty in Mongu on Wednesday 27th April, 2016.
As such he turned to social media to express his shock. However, he is not the only one in shock as friends and fellow academicians, Zambians and Barotse, home and abroad joined in giving their take on the matter.
Here below are some excerpts of this particular discourse:
“I am shocked to hear that the President of Zambia, Edgar Chagwa Lungu, made a statement attributed to Amos Chanda, on ZNBC TV 19:00 hrs news, saying that the Litungu (Barotseland) signed the BA 1964 (Barotseland Agreement 1964) on behalf of the BRE alone.
Perhaps, they have never read the agreement? Here is what it states (in part).
‘THE BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT 1964’
This Agreement is made this eighteenth day of May, 1964 between KENNETH DAVID KAUNDA, Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia of the one part and SIR MWANAWINA LEWANIKA THE THIRD,K.B.E., Litunga of Barotseland, acting on behalf of himself, his heirs and successors, his council, and the chiefs and people of Barotseland of the other party is signed by the Right Honourable Duncan Sandys, M.P Her Majesty's principal secretary of state for common wealth relations and for the colonies, to signify the approval of her majesty's government in the united kingdom of the arrangements entered into
between the parties to this agreement and recorded therein."
INTERPRETATIONS: The Litunga and the BRE (alone) cannot discuss or negotiate the BA 1964, without the people of Barotseland, as the President of Zambia is implying. That is not how Barotseland is governed.
We advise they learn how Barotseland is governed; else all efforts at resolving the BA 1964 will be in vain.
Barotseland is not a 'duck and ducklings' governance system. It is a 'hen and chicks' system.
Thought, I once stated this.
Ora pro nobis.” END of Social Media Post.
PEOPLE COMMENTS ON HIS SOCIAL MEDIA POST:
AKASHAMBATWA MBIKUSITA-LEWANIKA (Prince in Barotseland)
"SIR MWANAWINA LEWANIKA THE THIRD, K.B.E., LITUNGA OF BAROTSELAND, ACTING ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF, HIS HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS, HIS COUNCIL, AND THE CHIEFS AND PEOPLE OF BAROTSELAND". - Barotseland Agreement 1964.
IF WE CANNOT AGREE ON WHAT THESE WORDS MEAN, WE CANNOT AGREE ON ANYTHING!
ELIAS MUNSHYA (Lawyer, Zambian based in Canada – MBA, LLM, M.A., M.Div.) https://eliasmunshya.org
Litungas have been out of touch with their people on this Barotse question. In fact, Mwanawina and Kaunda both miscalculated the people of Barotseland in 1964. Imwiko must be very careful with the words he uses now. The Barotse question cannot be answered by the Litunga alone. He is one of the actors, but the question must be put directly to the people of Barotseland.
MUYUNDA MAKALA (Barotseland Independence Activists - or is he now former as he has turned BRE functionary) - attempts to oppose the motion as he agrees with Lungu.
Yes Dr. Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika the BNC is the highest policy making body in Barotseland , but you can’t talk about Barotseland statehood minus the Litunga; Barotseland is not an animal farm, it's a 'NATION' which has a leader and that leader is the Litunga.
The Litunga and the Ngambela are the principal parties to the Barotseland Agreement, the Litunga and his council are the only recognized Barotse authorities and rulers since 1800s when Lewanika started signing concessions and agreements with the whites.
Dr. Aka, even the Barotseland Agreement of 1964 reflects the Litunga of Barotseland and the Ngambela as being Principal Signatories to the Agreement. Provisions 4 (2) and (3) of the BA 1964 clarifies the status of the Litunga; and the Barotse National Council Resolutions Number. 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 mandate the Barotse Government to implement those tasks. No other authority, organization, individual or groups of people were mandated to undertake those tasks.
Also president Lungu has not stopped anyone to comment or discuss the Barotseland question he said; he is not ready to discuss the Barotseland issue with individuals or groups of people, instead Barotse with concerns to the Barotseland issue should Chanel them through the Litunga and the BRE. Let us just work with our Litunga for the betterment of Bulozi as a whole.
Bo Muyunda Makala, you seem to imply that I said what I did not say. And what was not said by even the writer of the posting I shared. I have certainly never talked- and I shall never talk- about Barotseland minus the Litunga. I have never even imagined Barotseland as an animal farm. I have no quarrel with your statement, except where it implies or may mislead readers towards associating me with ideas and pronouncements that are not mine.
MBINJI MUFALO (Original post)
Muyunda Makala, the contention is not that the Litunga is not the authority. The contention is he cannot make unilateral decisions without due recourse to the Barotse consultative structures. Your post is misplaced as neither Aka nor I argued that the Litunga is not a factor in the BA’ 1964 question. Thank you.
MWANANGOMBE LUBINDA (Barotseland Independence activist, academician)
Makala sa lyangana. It seems to me that his well being is on these groups. mabani uli nibo sinyinda kachenu niba BRE. We all know BRE is only interested in limba zabona....Muyunda Makala started very well kono kubonahala kuli tala yashupa. Just eat quietly please dont mislead the populace about your new found friendship. I and others say Barotseland is not for the Litunga or the Ngambela; Its for everyone.
CHRIS LUBASI LUZONGO KALALUKA (Barotseland Independence activist)
As people of Barotseland, we do not need Zambian opinions to determine OUR destiny. We believe in a legal norm, "WHERE THERE IS A RIGHT, THERE IS A REMEDY" and as such, the BA64 was the only legal instrument that was intended to safeguard our interests, once a Protectorate of Zambia.
When dealing with this issue, the understanding, analysis and interpretation of Zambia's leading legal minds of the BA64 is very critical. However, all Zambian professional and highly respected lawyers have questioned the legitimacy of the Zambian Government administration over Barotseland in default of the Agreement. They further interpret the Agreement as the only means through which the Zambian Government inherited the obligations (Protective obligations, not colonial) of the British Crown in relation to Barotseland [Mungomba CRC pg 509]
Now, if you inherit the Protector's obligations, you become a Protector. Therefore, the idea that Barotseland was intended to make one Country with N. Rhodesia is a rebuttable presumption.
AND THE DISCUSSION CONTINUES…
More of Mbinji Mufalo’s writings on the subject matter can be found on his personal blog at: http://mbinjimufalo.blogspot.nl/2012/02/barotse-question-my-anthology.html?m=1
President Edgar Lungu of Zambia has sought to deceive his nation, Barotseland and the whole world by claiming that the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) and the Zambian government are the only signatories to the Barotseland Agreement 1964, therefore, urging all the people with issues on the agreement, to engage government through the BRE.
The fact, however, is that the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) was Kenneth Kaunda’s creation as Zambian president years after the 1964 agreement, and therefore, could not have been a signatory to the agreement signed before it.
Sir Mwanawina III, K.B.E, as Litunga (King) of Barotseland, signed the now defunct pre-independence agreement which guaranteed Barotseland political autonomy within the newly independent state of Zambia on behalf of HIMSELF, his HEIRS and SUCCESSORS, his COUNCIL and the CHIEFS and PEOPLE of Barotseland. This is not BRE but the Barotse National Council (BNC) Structural composition, and Sir Mwanawina was fully sanctioned by the people through the BNC.
That the PEOPLE of Barotseland are a legitimate signatory to the 1964 agreement should not be too hard for a lawyer like Lungu to deduce.
However, the Zambian president claims that the Litunga (King) of Barotseland ONLY signed on behalf of the BRE while former President, Kenneth Kaunda signed on behalf of the Zambian government, emphasizing that as a Lawyer, he understood what he was talking about.
This gross misrepresentation of FACTS from Lusaka is often aimed at excluding the PEOPLE of Barotseland from the process of peaceful resolution to the decades old controversy because government knows that the BRE, as a Zambian government funded creation, would be open to easy financial manipulation, rendering it toothless against the finger that feeds it.
But Barotse National Freedom Alliance (BNFA) Chairman General, Clement W. Sinyinda, recently wrote to the Zambian president cautioning him that any efforts made to try and address the Barotseland question devoid of inclusiveness were bound to fail.
“As you know, the Barotse government is one that is open, where major decisions are made publicly in broad daylight (like was the March 2012 BNC). Therefore, the Zambian government is well advised to adopt a wide consultative approach embracing all major stake holders as opposed to selective engagements with only a HANDFUL OF ARISTOCRATS who do not even represent the aspirations of the people if indeed they mean well and intend to find an amicable solution to the Barotseland question.
“Anything else will not do,” cautioned Hon. Sinyinda, stating clearly that the people of Barotseland considered the March 2012 Barotse National Council (BNC) Barotseland independence resolutions sacred so much that deviating from them would be the same as treachery and betrayal of the highest order.
The President has further said that he will not allow those who want to ignore the BRE to use political parties to comment on the matter.
President Lungu explained that he has in the past avoided to comment on the matter because of its sensitivity.
He said his government, the BRE and Zambians are willing to continue to promote peace and unity in the country.
President Lungu is in the contested region of Barotseland to commission a number of completed donor funded ‘development’ projects, which he hopes will woo the disenchanted Barotse to not only vote for him in the imminent August 11th 2016 Zambian general and presidential polls, but also that the projects will stand as a sure testament of how much the Zambian government at Lusaka cares for the people and territory of Barotseland.
And speaking when he welcomed the President, Zambia’s Western Province Minister, Poniso Njeulu, assured the Zambian head of state that the ruling Patriotic Front (PF) will win more seats at local government level, in the August 11 general elections.
President Lungu has since proceeded to Limulunga Royal Palace to meet the Litunga, before embarking on his ‘working’ visit to the contested region.