BAROTSELAND'S FIRST CABINET SHOULD BE MEN AND WOMEN OF LEADERSHIP SKILLS ABLE TO BRING EXPECTED ECONOMIC SUCCESS
Leadership is defined as the ability of an individual to influence, motivate, and enable others toward the effectiveness and success of the organizations of which they are members. Leadership directly impacts on the effectiveness of the country's governance in terms of inculcating intra-party democracy, public outreach, gender parity, election campaigns and the constructive management of the country's economy.
I will briefly run through categories of leadership that will enable us to identity type of leaders heading our liberation groups in Barotseland.
1. VISIONARY LEADERSHIP; it inspires, believes in own vision, empathetic, explains why and how people’s efforts contribute to the dream. This type of leadership moves people towards shared dream.
2. COACHING LEADERSHIP; it promotes harmony, boosts morale and solve conflicts. This type of leadership connects people’s dreams with organizational dreams.
3. AFFILIATIVE LEADERSHIP; it listens, encourages and delegates. This type of leadership creates harmony and connects people to each other.
4. DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP; Good listener, team worker and collaborator. This type of leadership appreciates people’s inputs and gets commitment through participation.
5. PACE-SETTING LEADERSHIP; Strong edge to achieve, Low on empathy and collaboration and micro-managing. This type of leadership realizes challenges and exciting goals.
6. COMMANDING LEADERSHIP; ‘Do it because I say so.’ Threatening, tight control, Contaminates everyone’s mood and drives away talent. This type of leadership decreases fear by giving clear direction in an emergency.
Having described categories of leadership it will be necessary to explain some salient features of good leadership in terms of skills. The skills that a true leader should possess should include the ability to:
- Debate, clarify, and enunciate values and beliefs;
- Fuel, inspire, and guard the shared vision;
- Communicate the strategic plan at all levels;
- Recognize the problems inherent in the planning process;
- Ask the big picture questions and “what if”;
- Encourage dreaming and thinking the unthinkable;
- Engage in goal setting;
- View problems as opportunities;
- Set priorities;
- Be a critical and creative thinker;
- Set the example (walk the talk);
- Celebrate accomplishments.
Thus, the secret behind the successful leadership is not to allow own thinking to be contained and limited by imaginary boundaries of the ideology of the organization. Thinking outside the boundaries and limitations is what creative thinking of leadership is about. Barotseland as a state would require a cream of good cabinet that should be able to propel the newly independent country to economic heights. Let the people at every level of their own understanding develop interest to deliberate on the expectation of leadership they would prefer to comprise the first cabinet.
It is a matter of fact that every society is divided through lines of ideologies brought about by type of leadership in charge of political parties or liberation groups. Challenges will always exist but the ability to address them is what will bring much needed harmony in every democratic society. Personal qualities of a leader should be measured in terms of passion, humour and empathy, strength of character, general maturity, patience, wisdom, common sense, trustworthiness, reliability, creativity and sensitivity. These are some of the ingredients the leader should possess to effectively lead the people. I believe Barotseland has the people capable to take Barotseland to the heights of economic prosperity as leading a newly independent country is a big task and above partisan politics, that would require the input of technocrats.
Tukongote Litunga ni lyetu
By Saleya Kwalombota
By now we are confident that the relevant legal authorities have attended to and submitted their legal observations on Zambia’s submission to the African Commission of Human and Peoples Rights (ACHRP) the case; THE NGAMBELA OF BAROTSELAND & OTHERS VS THE REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA
However, here below, is my understanding, OBSERVATIONS AND MATERIAL IN ANSWER TO SUBMISSIONS OF REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA ON ADMISSIBILITY
1. The initial complaint that the Communication presented to the Commission does not set out the specific provisions of the OAU Charter or the African Charter under which human rights have been breached is correct in so far as it goes. However it does not provide a basis for declaring the case inadmissible before the Commission under Article 56 (2) of the African Charter.
2. The 10 (substantively 8) complaints in the communication to the Commission all entail breaches of human rights which clearly are protected under individual provisions of the OAU Charter or African Charter.
3. Complaints numbers 3 – 6 inclusive and 8 are all aspects of the general and principal thrust of the Ngambela’s communication namely that:
a) the only basis on which the separate and distinct sovereign nation of the Kingdom of Barotseland agreed to become part of the unitary Republic of Zambia was the Barotseland Agreement of 1964, and the savings reserved thereunder to Barotseland and its institutions;
b) from independence Zambia by administrative acts and statutory enactments in breach of it repeatedly breached and abrogated the Agreement: in 1969 Zambia purported to repudiated the Agreement altogether by Constitutional Amendment Act No. 5;
c) logically and legally Zambia should have followed the purported repudiation by removing from Barotseland entirely as it had itself purported to abolish the only lawful reason it had for occupying and exercising sovereignty;
d) instead it remained in occupation of and governance over the territory and natural assets of Barotseland and purported to exercise powers of sovereignty over the Kingdom in what must one of the most blatent and obvious attempts to approbate and reprobate in respect of the same Agreement that there has ever been in international law;
e) finally in March 2012 the Barotseland National Council in a nationally convened meeting resolved to accept the repudiation of the 1964 Agreement. From that date the Agreement finally ceased to have effect even from the Barotseland side.
4. Further and in any event the Ngambela respectfully submits that the Barotseland is not a mere domestic agreement but an International Treaty with three parties not two, one of whom is of course not subject to the jurisdiction of this honourable Commission.
5. As an International Treaty the Agreement was supposed to be performed by all parties in good faith.
6. Additionally all of the purported legislative Acts and Orders were caught by the rule of International Law that a State cannot raise a provision of its municipal law to defeat its obligations under an International Treaty. Before 1969 this was an accepted customary rule but the 1969 Constitutional Amendment No. 5 Act was purportedly enacted in October 1969, 5 months after Zambia had without reservation ratified the Vienna Convention on International Treaties 1969, so it and later statutes were caught by Article 27 thereof.
7. It follows from the above that the continued occupation and purported governance by Zambia of and in the territory of Barotseland is unlawful and that the human rights of the people of Barotseland are being breached under Articles 13 (i), 19, 20 (1), and 20 (2) of the African Charter, further or in the alternative under Articles 20 (1), 21 (1) and 21 (3) of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights as adopted by the OAU Charter.
8. The complaints numbers 7 (first part) and 9 under the Communication are simply manifestations of the impossibility of getting any Zambia Government to address the material situation seriously.
9. The complaint numbered 7 (second part) is of Arbitrary arrest and thus that the human rights of the persons involved have been breached under Article 6 of the African Charter, further or in the alternative under Article 9 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights as adopted by the OAU Charter.
10. The complaint numbered 10 in the communication is of brutality by Zambian authorities against peaceful gatherings of supporters of Barotseland Independence and therefore that their human rights have been breached under Articles 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, and 13 (1) of the African Charter, further or in the alternative under Articles 19 and 20 (1) of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights as adopted by the OAU Charter.
11. The Zambian Submissions assert that Zambian territorial integrity should not be compromised. It is submitted has Zambia has territorial integrity only in respect of the former Northern Rhodesia. In respect of the Kingdom of Barotseland it has no legitimate authority and the Commission should with respect be primarily concerned with the territorial integrity of Barotseland.
12. The Zambian Submissions assert that local remedies should be exhausted before approaching the international tribunal. In the particular case it is not clear what those remedies might be, and in dealing with a failure to comply with a tripartite International treaties municipal laws and remedies are irrelevant.
13. It is submitted that the Zambian complaint based on the Barotseland Agreement having been signed in 1964 prior to the coming into effect of the African Charter o 1986 is misconceived. The situation was that there was a purported unlawful unilateral repudiation of the agreement by the Zambians in 1964 which was not accepted by Barotseland. Precisely that same situation continued to exist in 1986 and thereafter until 2012.
14. The Zambian complaint of the complaint 10 of violence being supported only by newspaper reports is not correct. The evidence in respect of these events is in each case the evidence of scores of witnesses, not susceptible of presenting on paper. There was a Commission of Enquiry set up under the Chairmanship of a prominent Zambia Advocate, Dr R Chongwe SC, to enquire into the 2011 Zambia Police attocities at Mongu.
15. That Commission issued an 80 + page Special Report which the Zambian Government has since been at pains to suppress. The Ngambela respectfully invites that Zambian Government to make the same Report available to the Commission.
16. The Ngambela must accordingly respectfully submits that, as previously found by the Commission, the communication is admissible.
Legal opinions by Lubinda Kunangela
IMPLEMENTATION AND CONSOLIDATION OF BAROTSE CHANGE PROGRAMME – by Lindunda Wamunyima
So far we have established and seen from various preceding publications in our national communication media that change management process in our country Barotseland is a process and not an event, designed to move our state and nation from its former state, current state to the desired future state, as an independent sovereign and democratic monarch. That the process accepted that there would be a transitional stage consisting of conditions and activities that our emerging nation and state must go through in a sequential manner in order to attain our future aspired glory and change agenda. Therefore, the apparent delay must be seen as a process AND NOT all delay per se. This article attempts to show our dear readers some four basic principles of change and the ten universal keys to successful change management, both applicable to us, so that you and I understand, appreciate and identify with our change effort fully.
BASIC PRINCIPLES OF CHANGE
Perhaps it is worth stating here that the ten universal keys to successful change management are grounded in four basic principles. This is due to the fact that for every planned change to be successful it must be rooted in sound and clear principles; otherwise, it results in uncontrollable chaos and frustration. These principles happen to be the foundation upon which the planned change method is grounded and violation of any one or more of them will mean that the prospects of successful change will be seriously compromised. These principles include the following:
1. GLOBALITY: refers to the all encompassing nature of organizational change. That is our change agenda must be seen to be acting holistically and geographically on both the physical components (land, people, strategy, structure, systems, etc.) of our nation and state as well as its psychological aspects (vision, values, culture, climate, style, etc.). In other words, the change needs to embrace both the body and soul of Barotseland to be more effective now and then.
2. DISLOCATION: referring to the destabilizing effects of change and the necessity of maintaining a state of positive destabilization throughout the change process. Once the initial dislocation has taken place,(Transitional) change can only take place if a reasonable degree of positive instability is maintained. This means giving no room to resistance to change syndrome in us. As soon as the process of change ceases (at our full independence) the situation must re-stabilize. This means that as long as Barotse citizens are not willing to be displaced from their comfort zones that will remain an impediment to the accelerated timely achievement of our change goal for Barotseland. We must be ready to resonate with the change cycle; unfreeze, move and finally refreeze (stabilize) upon achievement of our espoused change core business.
3. UNIVERSALITY: the principle that demands that all Barotse citizens be involved in the change process, in one way or another, and that we make suggestions, take decisions and assume responsibility for our actions in accordance with our citizenship statuses within our motherland.
4. INTER-DETERMINACY: referring to the fact that while change is not altogether uncontrollable, it is by no means controllable either. Managing change is just a matter of guiding, directing and steering the process, while leaving enough space for responsiveness and flexibility, also ad hoc improvement as need be along the way to goal realization. This is what the interim government has been endeavouring to do in implementing and now consolidating the Barotse Change programme.
We have seen this happen so far in our land, against all odds! Credit is due indeed to all of you the stakeholders of our dear change. Our change agenda is not as easy as changing cloths but rather an intricate interplay amongst the four principles of effective change management.
THE TEN KEYS TO SUCCESSFUL BAROTSE CHANGE MANAGEMENT
The ten keys to successful change management are simply a description of the skills, activities and competencies that are requisite for the successful change management, especially so in Barotseland now, as we near the conclusion of the first phase of our change programme – TOTAL(POLITICAL) FREEDOM to embark on the second phase of Barotseland DEVELOPMENT (ECONOMIC FREEDOM); our CORE BUSINESS.
1. DEFINING THE VISION: our initial vision as a nation and state prompts and justifies the change and acts as a reference point and landmark to define the domain of the change programme and broadly identify the major issues and highlight possible difficulties. This vision needs to be formalized and publicized and be found in every government office and department now in waiting and then, to serve as a constant reminder. It is the duty of every Mulozi to know the national vision, mission, values and objectives thereof without waiting for tomorrow.
2. MOBILIZING: this creates the dynamics for change to take place. Its objectives are to sensitize the citizens to the requirements for our imminent change phase, to reinforce the critical issues identified in key 1, to select the appropriate change initiatives and to overcome the initial inertia and maintain the necessary momentum hereafter and thereafter.
3. CATALYZING: catalyzing aims at fighting resistance, overcome inertia, create support and reorganize the validity of the proposed changes as laid down in the Interim Government’s Manifesto and other related goal imperatives. This may require the involvement of a number of key groups within and without Barotseland, in implementing and consolidating our change agenda.
4. STEERING: this key focuses on the system that guides the process and keep it on track, forecasting and avoiding problems and resistance as well as using our resources effectively. Some activities to do here include monitoring receptivity to change of key officers to ensure unity of purpose and avoid dissidence, identifying and providing key resources, ensuring appropriate application of the entire change effort and initiating and following up on relevant training.
5. DELIVERING: this key aims at effecting the vision and actual transition from the current situation to our planned state. Among other activities it involves putting in place the systems that ensure that our change is lasting, putting together a comprehensive analysis of the status quo and identifying all of the change opportunities thus identified, and so on.
6. OBTAINING PARTICIPATION: this is the active involvement of all citizens as an essential element to the success of the change process. This will enable Barotseland to exploit the full diversity of citizen expertise and experience and help to overcome resistance to change by directly involving worker citizens, expatriates and investors and making the change enduring, for unity of diversity is power not weakness.
7. HANDLING THE EMOTIONAL DIMENSION: the full diversity of Barotzish citizens is reflected in their typical reactions to change exhibited so far! These have varied from outright rejection on one hand to partial rejection, partial acceptance and through to full-acceptance on the other hand, of our change agenda. Generally, these reactions are logical from individual viewpoints, and can hinder the change process or even totally obstruct it as it has been observed in some of our experiences to date. Some of the priorities in handling the emotional dimensions include identifying the emotional factors that have a bearing on the change (emotional intelligent leadership), evaluating the dysfunction created by resistance and psychological barriers during the implementation phase we are in and also effectively treating these emotional dimensions. Apparently, there is need for reconciliation and healing mechanisms to cure the emotional injuries emanating from the change process and ideological differences so far encountered.
8. HANDLING POWER ISSUES: it is a well known fact that change frequently upsets the balance of power within any organization. Typically, every organization will consist of an official power structure like our Interim Government headed by Linyungandambo and, in addition, several power coalitions that exist in parallel with the official structure. Our change programme has been no exception to this phenomenon. Change usually tends to make these coalition structures feel threatened. The objective of this key is to ensure that balance of power evolves consistently with the vision of the change, in this case, the March 2012 BNC resolution and ensuing official power structure. Usually there are three stages that need to be addressed and these are: recognizing the power issues, dealing with the power issues effectively, and then modifying the balance of power in line with our change objectives. We are pleased with what is happening so far to this end though room for improvements is still available.
9. TRAINING AND COACHING: all change programmes mostly require of all organization members to acquire not only new skills but also new ways of thinking and behaving. A crucial part of the change process then, is the training, mentoring and coaching issues. Activities we can do or keep doing may include
• Carrying out training needs analysis to establish training and coaching needs in Barotseland now not tomorrow at the dawn of free motherland.
• Identifying and presenting training for the acquisition of technical job skills and responsibilities and interpersonal and change support skills.
• Mentoring and coaching and instruction in such techniques.
• Self-improvement methods and techniques to support the change initiative and driving from it maximum benefit for Barotseland’s sake.
This is time for our key leaders to grapple every opportunity for personal development by taking up short enrichment courses while in the formative or brooding phase to skill or re-skill for public and national duty. We have a lot of opportunities at Bethel University and Barotseland universities in Mongu, Victoria University in Livingstone and even in Zambia. Tomorrow will be a very busy day for you to study effectively.
10. COMMUNICATING ACTIVELY: the last but not the least key to effective and efficient implementation and consolidation of Barotse Change agenda is effective communication, throughout the change process and is essential to our ultimate and full success. This entails informing our people about the progress of change initiative to keep them motivated and reassured, as well as facilitating the proliferation of ideas needed to enhance and accelerate the change process. We salute the Acting AG Dr. Matengu Situmbeko for national updates and Legal Team accordingly. The various roles, methods and responsibilities for communication must be defined not only to facilitate the change process but also to put a lid on possible negative influences. At least so far so good.
Aluta Continua! TUKONGOTE WA MWANAA NONGOLO! LITUNGA NI LYETU! Far spent is our night of servitude to Zambia and imminent is our day of freedom and sovereignty.
Nelson Mandela affirmed: “I DETEST RACIALISM, BECAUSE I REGARD IT AS A BARBARIC THING, WHETHER IT COMES FROM A BLACK MAN OR A WHITE MAN.”
Mandela was convicted and sentenced to five years’ imprisonment. While serving his sentence he was charged, in the Rivonia Trial, with sabotage.
Mandela’s statements in court during these trials are classics in the history of the resistance to apartheid, and they would be a great inspiration to the people of Barotseland too, who are in independence struggle against black-on-black colonization to bring to an end Zambia's subjugation and illegal annexation of Barotseland.
Mandela's statement from the dock in the Rivonia Trial ends with these words: “I HAVE FOUGHT AGAINST WHITE DOMINATION, AND I HAVE FOUGHT AGAINST BLACK DOMINATION. I HAVE CHERISHED THE IDEAL OF A DEMOCRATIC AND FREE SOCIETY IN WHICH ALL PERSONS LIVE TOGETHER IN HARMONY AND WITH EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES. IT IS AN IDEAL WHICH I HOPE TO LIVE FOR AND TO ACHIEVE. BUT IF NEEDS BE, IT IS AN IDEAL FOR WHICH I AM PREPARED TO DIE.”
Let us underline the last sentence, "BUT IF NEEDS BE, IT IS AN IDEAL FOR WHICH I AM PREPARED TO DIE." This is the kind of spirit our leaders incarcerated by Zambia at Mwembeshi state prison uttered recently in reference to the developed partnership between the sitting Zambian president, Edgar Lungu and former president Rupiya Banda. Given the legacy of Rupiya Banda's policy towards the people of Barotseland in his three years rule that climaxed in the 2011 Mungu massacre, where 19 souls were lost, the quartet vowed to remain in prison. The quartet have further rejected the jurisdiction of Zambia over them as they are not citizens of Zambia and worse still, the trumped-up charge happened in Barotseland! The quartet is prepared to remain in incarceration until the illegal authority that arrested them on 5th December, 2014, release them on principle of justice.
Mandela was sentenced to life imprisonment and started his prison years in the notorious Robben Island Prison, a maximum security prison on a small island 7km off the coast near Cape Town. In April 1984 he was transferred to Pollsmoor Prison in Cape Town and in December 1988 he was moved to Victor Verster Prison near Paarl from where he was eventually released. While in prison, Mandela flatly rejected offers made by his jailers for remission of sentence in exchange for accepting the Bantustan policy by recognizing the independence of the Transkei and agreeing to settle there. The same happened to the four incarcerated Barotseland transitional government leaders who were offered to accept the "legality" of Zambia's occupation of Barotseland and to denounce the 2012 BNC independence resolutions in exchange for their release (freedom) but thank God, they emphatically rejected the floated offer and cursed the deal. The quartet borrowed Mandela's words in the
eighties when again Mandela rejected an offer of release on condition that he renounced violence. "PRISONERS CANNOT ENTER INTO CONTRACTS. ONLY FREE MEN CAN NEGOTIATE".
Mandela was released on 11 February 1990, he plunged wholeheartedly into his life’s work, striving to attain the goals he and others had set out almost four decades earlier. In 1991, at the first national conference of the ANC held inside South Africa after its decades-long banning was lifted, Nelson Mandela was elected president of the ANC while his lifelong friend and colleague, Oliver Tambo, became the organization’s national chairperson.
Nelson Mandela never wavered in his devotion to democracy, equality and learning. Despite terrible provocation, he never answered racism with racism. His life has been an inspiration, in South Africa and throughout the world, to all who are oppressed and deprived, in a life that symbolizes the triumph of the human spirit over man’s inhumanity to man. Nelson Mandela accepted the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize not to himself but on behalf of all South Africans who suffered and sacrificed so much to bring peace.
Thus is the spirit exhibited so far by former Ngambela, despite having been once arrested over the chairing of the 2012 BNC that unanimously reverted Barotseland back to its pre-independence status and move forward to an independent state, has never logged-off. The same true heroism has been exhibited by Hon. Mulasikwanda, still holding on despite too having saved a six months jail sentence over the tearing of Zambian draft constitution in protest against illegal Zambia legislation in Barotseland, and further demanded for the political freedom of Barotseland. True leaders are never shaken even in the face of death.
To the families of those arrested; the Barotseland National Youth League Leaders and the Barotseland transitional government leaders, let the political struggle of late Nelson Mandela be an exemplary inspiration and a source of strength to all. Freedom comes not on a silver plate but with great sacrifice. It is our desire as the people in struggle to continue demanding for the release of all the arrested, the convicted, and above all, the independence of Barotseland. The greatest achievement in life is to detest all forms of oppression and deprivation of human rights.
Allow me as I conclude to borrow the words of the 2012 BNC's key speech note by former Ngambela Hon. C. W. Sinyinda, "AND I WISH TO ADD THAT CHANGE IS A NECESSITY WHEN EVERY OTHER WAY BECOMES IMPOSSIBLE. IN OUR PURSUIT TO RESOLVE THIS MATTER, WE PASSED THROUGH TURBULENT TIMES. .... WE PAID WITH OUR BLOOD FOR SIMPLY REQUESTING TO CONSOLIDATE OUR INTEGRATION WITH ZAMBIA".
Let us understand that as the people of Barotseland living today, we are the generation appointed to accomplish the liberation and bring about the long awaited freedom to reality and it is indeed coming soon.
Compilation and comments by Saleya Kwalombota
REFERENCE: ANC http://www.anc.org.za
“The people should not be deceived, Barotseland has a transitional government already in place and people should not be misled by acolytes and political hangers in the name of 'alliance'. Barotseland is not in a state of political turmoil to have an alliance, the true alliance PIZO (BNC) already gave a policy direction of putting in place a government that has to take over running of Barotseland as a constitutional Monarchy. It is the same self- exhorted politicians at the political root becoming a problem that threatens the peace of even the Barotse Monarch.”
Just like the liberation movements of Angola which failed to unite the coalition of forces to govern when the Portuguese pulled out of the territory, largely for selfish reasons, the pro-independence movements remain weakened divided on which group to govern. The People's Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) which managed to reach Luanda first claimed to have inaugurated the government, the idea that Savimbi of the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) group refused to accept and took years of guerrilla warfare. We do not like such situation to take place in Barotseland should Zambia decides to withdraw today! Divisions and suspicions amongst liberation groups just do not help in anyway but derail any chances even for the minimum collaboration to move forward.
Accordingly, in the absence of collaboration, the political costs will continue to accumulate and everyday misunderstandings of ideologies will only exacerbate human life standards in our territory. The benefits for pulling political and material resources, collective mobilization and a broad based movement against the weakened state of Zambia, far outweighs any possibility of any failure in actualizing our independence. Other than laying a strong foundation for a more monopoly, broad based movements than providing irrefutable capacity for building a critical mass, ready for action to defend the people‘s will against any possible military machinations from occupying force.
Acolytes and political hangers who by default find themselves in some privileged positions in the liberation groups have escalated the political costs of the independence struggle that has been derailed by pitching against unity within the territory. However, leadership should be exercised to bear fruit in convincing these and other sectors whose loyal sacrifice will keep the struggle on course at certain critical points. Indeed the success that Barotseland would benefit from combined efforts by nurturing resilient democratic impulses should be enough to convince true participation to commit all the territory to liberation cooperation if not unity. True national leaders should detest the ‘faction leader tag’. It is a matter of fact of our history that Barotseland was conquered by the Makololos at the time of succession wrangles. Therefore, the leaders and followers of the BNFA ( which are in minority) should learn to work with progressive liberation groups, albeit ideology syndrome of " BA64 restoration" under MOREBA and demanding for a transitional government formation which is already in place is unprecedented anywhere in the world. People are very much aware of the transitional government's existence under the capable leadership of His Excellence Rt. Hon. Afumba Mombotwa, the sworn-in Administrator General who the government of the occupying force has incarcerated to this day at Zambia’s Mwembeshi maximum state prison.
The purported negotiation between Zambian president E.C. Lungu with BNFA cannot go without a comment; no substitute for alternative strategizing yet viable or political alternatives can provide solid reinforcement negotiations for all forms with Zambia without the involvement of Barotseland transitional government leader Rt. Hon. Afumba Mombotwa. People should not ignore the past acts of bravado publicly paraded by BNFA actors when Linyungandambo formed and announced the inauguration of Barotseland transitional government in 2013. There was clear uncertainty and anxiety within that group as evidenced by their inconsistencies in their political ideology by rushing to the media of our oppressors (Zambia) to issue a derogatory press release against the launching of the Sicaba's government (Barotseland Transitional Government). The people should not be deceived, Barotseland has a transitional government already in place and people should not be misled by acolytes and political hangers in the name of "alliance". Barotseland is not in a state of political turmoil to have an alliance, the true alliance PIZO (BNC) already gave a policy direction of putting in place a government that has to take over running of Barotseland as a constitutional Monarchy. It is the same self- exhorted politicians at the political root becoming a problem that threatens the peace of even the Barotse Monarch.
Tukongote Litunga ni lyetu
By Saleya Kwalombota
As the ‘wind of change’ was blowing across Africa, frantic efforts were being made to hammer out an agreement that would bring independence to Northern Rhodesia to ensure that Barotseland does not remain dependent on the British Crown in accordance with the treaties between the British Crown on one hand and the Barotse Monarch y on the other . Late on 18th May, 1964, ‘The Barotseland Agreement 1964’ was signed. The opening paragraph of the preamble of The Barotseland Agreement 1964 stated,
“Following talks in London between the British Government, the Government of Northern Rhodesia and the Litunga of Barotseland, an Agreement was concluded at the Commonwealth Relations Office on 18th May, 1964. It is entitled ‘The Barotseland Agreement 1964. It was signed by Dr. K. D. Kaunda, Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia, by Sir Mwanawina Lewanika III K.B.E., Litunga of Barotseland and by the Right Honourable Duncan Sandys M.P ., Secretary for Commonwealth Relations and for the Colonies, signifying the approval of her Majesty 's Government.”
The preamble further stated,
“The Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia undertook on behalf of his Government that the Agreement would be reaffirmed by the Government of Northern Rhodesia at Independence.”
It is an open historic secret and fact that this undertaking was not fulfilled and remains unfulfilled today, fifty plus one years, since it was made. This is the genesis of a legacy of trickery, mockery and treachery that has prevailed since the still birth of the Unitary State called Republic of Zambia.
Three months later, in a very flowery speech delivered in the Kashandi at the headquarters of the Barotse Government in Lealui on Thursday 6th August 1964, Mr. Kenneth David Kaunda said among other things,
“ ... I can assure you, Sir Mwanawina, and all members of the Barotse Royal Family and of the Barotse Government, that the Government has no wish to interfere with the day to day running of the internal affairs of Barotseland.”
Again, the truth on the ground supported by documentary evidence and history is that the Kaunda regime made it its prime responsibility to interfere in the day - to - day affairs of Barotseland. This was done by destabilizing the Katengo Legislative Council soon after Zambia’s independence in 1965 when he replaced it by District Councils that were answerable to the Minister of Local Government and not the Litunga anymore. They went as far as looting the Barotse National Treasury in order to cripple the operations of the Barotse Government. On 6th August 1964, Kaunda in a speech to the nation, nicknamed Barotseland Government as Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) and rob bed it capacity to stand on its feet until it was barely crawling on its belly, such that, the first popularly elected Ngambela, The Right Hon. Hastings Ndangwa Nooyo, had to abdicate for lack of capacity to sustain his day to day needs.
The syndrome of trickery, mockery and treachery continue d as the Kaunda regime enacted legislation after legislation mutilating the Barotseland Agreement 1964, contrary to its own provisions. This started with the enactment of the Local Government Act 69 of 1965. The last nail in the coffin was the enactment of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment No. 5) Act 33 of 1969 which completely abrogated and literally threw in to the refuse bin The Barotseland Agreement 1964. Noteworthy, is the fact that all this was done without the consent of the people of Barotseland, the other party to the Agreement.
Twenty - one years down the line Mr. Kaunda realized that his castle - empire built over 27 years was crumbling down and tried to use his last trick in the bag to save himself from the eminent collapse by using flowery language to the Barotse people. He promised to re - think The Barotseland Agreement 1964. He went as far as promising the BRE the best legal representation at the expense of GRZ. Of course even that turned out to be too little, too late as the Kaunda days were numbered and his empire was found wanting and lost the 1991 elections.
The Movement for Multiparty Democracy whirlwind which led to the tumbling of the Kaunda regime was principally founded and spearheaded by some fine Barotse brains such as Mr. Akashambatwa Mbikusita and it promised to redress all the ills of the Kaunda regime, which was draconian by the time it tumbled from power. Among the serious ills that were to be redressed was the trampling underfoot of The Barotseland Agreement 1964. At the eleventh hour , the MMD ’ s march to take over government was hijacked by a self - confessed political engineer and trickster , Fredrick Jacob Titus Mpundu Chiluba, who dribbled everyone else to position himself for the top job (MHSRIP) . Consequently, much to the frustration and disillusionment of many within the rank and file he abandoned the fine tenets of the founding members’ dream. The Chiluba regime declared The Barotseland Agreement 1964 ‘statutory stale’, the Litunga was threatened w ith arrest and it took the Barotse people to literally protect their King as human shields. Senior Chief Inyambo was thrown behind bars and the ‘ divide and rule ’ tactic was entrenched into the trickery , mockery and treachery legacy by inciting the Nkoya people against their own brothers , gazetting chiefs contrary to Barotse norms and tradition s as well as the Zambian Constitution , and refusing to gazette rightly enthroned Senior Chief Amukena II.
Mr. Kaunda tried to play the BA’ 64 card again in 1996 but was outwitted by the political engineer through a constitutional amendment that appeared to bar him from contesting presidential elections.
This prompted an election boycott by UNIP, which delivered an easy victory to the trickster and master dribbler late Mr. Chiluba. Mr. Chiluba was succeeded by his chosen successor Mr. Levy Mwanawasa SC who tried to appease the Barotse with a balance d development agenda and equitable distribution of the national cake. He referred to the territory by its rightful name of Barotseland, which was treason under both the Kaunda and the Chiluba regimes by the bare mention of the name. This softened stance resulted into the bouncing back o f popularity of the MMD in Barotseland in 2006. Riding on the same wave of popularity Mr. Rupiah Bwezani Banda , won the Barotse vote during the election after Mr. Mwanawasa’s demise in 2008 (MHSRIP)
Mr. Banda quickly took on the garment of his old mentor and brother in - law, Mr. Kaunda embraced the same legacy of trickery, mockery and treachery. First and foremost he insulted the Barotse by saying he never asked for their vote. It was under Mr. Banda that the Barotse anger against this legacy of trickery, mockery and treachery almost reached a crescendo and was met with brutality and iron fists. For this reason we shall not forget the January 14th 2011 massacre of unarmed and peaceful people of Barotse land butchered in cold blood. May their souls rest in peace?
Mr. Michael Chilufya Mwango Felix Katongo Sata (MHSRIP), the King Cobra , on the other hand took full advantage of the situation and true to his nature as a snake in the grass played to the gallery and declared himself Linyungandambo member and that the BA ’ 64 was an honourable and sensible Agreement which was still alive . He promised to restore it within 90 days if elected in to power. The sweet tongue of the serpent played the trick and earning himself a reasonable number of votes from Barotseland to him a marginal edge over his principle rival, Mr. Banda, to win him the Zambia presidency and two parliamentary seats in Barotseland. The only reward Barotseland got was the release of Barotse detainees, a window dressing meeting at State House with some Barotse activists and scorning the Litunga as well as establishing a commission of inquiry to investigate the 14th January 2011 massacre of innocent Barotseland nationals, whose report and recommendations have never seen the light of day, and the publication of the BA’ 64 in the three main newspapers. Further, t he King Cobra arrested more Barotse nationals, increased state sponsored brutality, more venomous threats , more divide and rule , more trickery , mockery and treachery as well as declaring war on an unarmed and peaceful people of Barotseland
The 20th January, 2015 presidential elections demonstrated the national significance of the BA’ 64 as presidential aspirants tried to outwit one another by making this or that statement over the Agreement. We ended up having a catalogue of the most balanced and sane positions on the issue as well as the most absurd and irrational ones.
Perhaps what is not publicly known is the fact that among other things the candidate who emerged victorious , Mr. Edgar Chagwa Lungu, actually made sweeping promises over the issue to a group of Barotse youth activist s . Among the promises he made was that he would allow the people of Barotseland to determine their destiny and would immediately engage all the stakeholders to that effect. Further, he would release the Rodger Chongwe Commission Report and he would immediately change the nickname of Western Province back to Barotseland as well as release all persons incarcerated on Barotseland related allegations.
Information in the public domain is that within 24 hrs of his swearing in as Zambia ’ s 6th Republican president, Mr. Lungu was in receipt of a letter from the BNFA Chairman General Mr. Clement Wainyae Sinyinda challenging him to among other things:
“... immediately engage the people of Barotseland and Barotse civil society organizations for the sole purpose of working out transitional arrangements towards self determination and self rule for Barotseland.”
What is also common knowledge is that t he President of Zambia communicated his desire to engage the Barotse Authorities and activists through the BNFA Chairperson General. He further announced the same to the international community while in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia at the AU Heads of State summit, to be undertaken upon his return to Zambia.
It has been more than three months since the AU heads of state summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and Mr. Lungu has remained mute on this matter. This has prompted the BNFA Executive Committee to submit to him a ‘ Position Statement ’ on the matter of the Actualization of Barotseland Statehood on Thursday , 23 rd April 2015 , which is indeed the Position Statement of the people of Barotseland as a whole. The president ’ s ‘ very audible ’ silence on this crucial matter especially after the buoyancy with which he approached it at the onset of his presidency reeks of the legacy of trickery , mockery and treachery that have dogged and bedeviled the matter over the past fifty plus one years.
It remains to be seen whether indeed as per suspicion the current president will be just like the rest of his predecessors or he will break and depart from the tradition of his predecessors by demonstrating political will to ensure that the matter of the actualization of Barotseland statehood receives the due attention it deserves from the Zambian government , including subjecting it t o international interventions because the Barotse people believe they are not making any strange or unreasonable demands but only what is rightfully their RIGHT , falling within the perimeters of logic and legality in accordance with universally accepted international norms. It remains to be seen whether Mr. Lungu, who prides himself as being a seasoned lawyer, will make good his earlier commitment in line with his campaign promise that he will be a listening President.
Yet when all is said and done, the responsibility to break this vicious circle of trickery, mockery and treachery by successive Zambian regime s lies squarely in the hands of the Barotse themselves. It is up to all the Barotse to stand up and be counted and say enough is enough; we are fed up of this legacy and put it to an end once and for all. It is called a revolution. A revolution in the past meant ‘blood and iron’ but in this day and age it doesn’t need to be. That is why there is talk of the velvet revolution also referred to as the Arab spring. The Barotse r evolution does not even need to get to that level of hostilities. It is a peaceful r evolution of a people refusing to be trampled upon, tricked, mocked, and treated with disdain and in a treacherous manner. Refusing to remain silent, cognizant of the fact that, in Martin Luther King Jnr’s words,
“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter”
Believing the words of Nelson Mandela,
“No people are perpetually too weak as to fail to stand up for their rights”
Tukuongote shaa! Wa mwana Nongolo kapa wa mwana Muka, if need be, until freedom reigns from the highest mountain top to the lowest valley!
From Parentage of the Evangelical Church of Lesotho to the Calvary Treatment by the United Church Of Zambia, and its Broader Political, Economic and Social Context
Although, I should by now be immune from manifestation of self-interestedor otherwise imposed ignorance, I am surprised by the total eclipse of knowledge over the history and even existence of the Church of Barotseland. Rather than roast in this shocking state of affairs, may I still attempt to throw some light on this aspect of European Christian church history in Africa.
In this I shall cover both the positive and commendable pan-African aspects of it, as exemplified by relations between Lesotho and Barotseland, as well as it negative and rather unimpressive aspects, as exemplified by the ill-fated integration of the United Church of Zambia. I approach this dark and controversial topic, merely to lay out history facts to those open-minded enough to face them. I do this as a Pan-Africanist and advocate of the democratic and human rights principles of freedom of conscious, freedom of association and self-determination for every person, community, faith group and nation in the world.
On 19th November 1853, Dr David Livingstone, the Scottish national of the London Missionary Society, conducted the first Christian assembly in Barotseland at Mwandi in Sesheke. Livingstone was named by the Barotse as Munali, after a pink plant - for he was seen as a pink man not as a white man, as Europeans think of themselves. He became the first European Christian missionary in Barotseland and north of the Lyambai (Zambezi) River, south of Lake Tanganyika.
In 1859-60, Roger Price and a Mr. Helmmore, together with their wives and children, from the London Missionary Society took an initiative to set up a mission station in Barotseland, based at Linyati, which was the capital, during the 1838 to 1864 period when much of Barotseland was under Sotho conquest rule. However, this initiative was not sustained due to fatal illness among the group.
On 6th September 1881, a Catholic Jesuits mission arrived at Lealui, which had been reinstated as the capital after the liberation and restoration of Barotseland under Barotse self-governance. However, even though they had been shown a site at Katongo for possible location of a mission station, they were not permitted to settle and establish themselves, as was later to be the case to the Mission that was to establish the Church of Barotseland.
The Church of Barotseland was a product of the Evangelical Church of Lesotho. In 1863, while, itself, only 30 years old, the Evangelical Church of Lesotho, under Adolphe Mabille, proposed to "one day" bring the gospel to the people of the Zambezi (Barotse people).
In 1878, with the facilitation of King Khama of the Mangwato (Botswana), and sanction from Lesotho and Paris, a message was sent for introducing Francois Coillard to King Lewanika of Barotseland. This message sought permission to enter Barotseland, which was put off for the time being, on account of Lewanika having then only been made King.
On 12 December 1882, the Missionary Frederick Stanley Arnot of the Plymouth Bretheren arrived at Lealui. He unsuccessfully seeking permission to establish a Christian mission amon the Tonga people, in what is now Zambia’s Southern Province, but was allowed to start a school and have a go at evangelizing the Barotse leadership. He left in May 1884 because he was not very successful and illness took its toll. But, he left with a confirmation of King Lewanika’s invitation to Francois Coillard’s mission.
Thus, in 1884, a Paris Missionary/Evangelical Church of Lesotho left Leribe for Barotseland. This team included 12 Sotho, including 3 evangelists as well as two Barotse (Sachika and Kalumba), who had undergone schooling at Morija and a Pedi. They brought with them seven horses that were gifts to King Khama and Lewanika from Sotho Chied Jonathan (son of Moshoeshoe) of Leribe. This first Coillard mission, although given person to enter Barotseland and come to the Barotseland capital of Lealui, was much compromised and delayed because its timing coincided with the political upheaval leading to the temporal overthrow of King Lewanika, for seven months, from September 184 to April 1885.
However, after King Lewanika had regained his throne, there was uninterrupted progress towards the Evangelical Church of Lesotho and the Paris Missionary Society establishing the Church of Barotseland, which was administered through the Paris Missionary Society.
On 4th November 1885, the first mission station was opened by the Evangelical Church of Lesotho and Paris Missionary Society at Mwandi in Sesheke. In this regard, in the Book The Spread of the Gospel in Barotseland, it is recorded that:
“Although the Lesotho Church had not been able financially to support the mission to Barotseland, and although this mission is a new field of activity of the Paris Mission, it does not lessen the fact that – without the support of many Sotho (evangelists and their families and men to work for the transport) – the expeditions of François Coillard and the first missionaries would have been difficult, if not impossible. The Lesotho Church continued to to send evangelists until 1913.”
On 11th October 1886, with the permission of the King in Council, François Coillard and his team took the first step to establish Sefula Mission. For this purpose he had Europeans for construction works, by the Sotho evangelist Aaron Mayoro and his wife Ruth for teaching and evangelism. On 4th March 1887 a school was started at Sefula, with 20 pupils, including Litia Lewanika (future Litunga Yeta III) and Mukamba (a future Ngambela.) As per insistence of the Barotseland Royal Government, each mission station was required to establish not only a church, but also a skills training centre and medical centre.
On 26th September 1964 attained self governance and autonomous existence, separate from the Paris Missionary Society, after two years of transition under Rev. E. M. Ngula as Chairman/Moderator. On 17th January 1965, the Church of Barotseland, the Methodist Church and the United Church of Central Africa (UCCAR), with the later including what was termed as the Free Church on the Copperbelt of Zambia.
Moderator Rev. Ngula retired in December 1965. He was replaced as Moderator of what had been reduced to Barotse Presbyter, on 1st January 1966, by Gilbert Musialela.
A number of other changes took place. What had formerly been the Church of Barotseland youth training centre at Sefula, under Barotse traditional land tenure system, was transferred to a Mongu Township location, on lease under Zambian Law, in January 1966. What had been a Church of Barotseland medical dispensary at Lukona was taken over by the Zambian Government, during the same year. In January, 1967, for the first, since the Church of Lesotho ended its technical assistance of sending Sotho evangelists in 1913, in July 1967, the United Church of Zambia sent two non-Barotse ministers to take charge of the former Church of Barotseland churches in Mongu and Sesheke. On 30th October 1971, the Paris Missionary Society, itself, was dissolved, and replaced by a new Community of Churches in Mission, which now stopped direct relations with what had been the Church of Barotseland. In the end, what had been the Church of Barotseland was renamed as the Western Presbytery – in line with the Zambian Government unilaterally decreed attempt to rename Barotseland as Western Province. In 1972, former medical officer provided for the Church of Barotseland were taken to become tutors at the Zambian Government Nursing School at Mongu.
The 1964 Barotseland Agreement that had established Barotseland as an integral part of an independent Zambia had been unilaterally abrogated by the Zambian Government, in 1969, with the passionate urging of some Barotse people. The multiparty system enshrined in the independence constitution had been cast away and replaced by a dictatorship of the One Party state, from the end of 1972, again with some Barotse people in the cheering circles. The point of note is that it is would be an unnecessarily dangerous mistake to fail to appreciate that these development that depict failures to establish mutually acceptable and fair integration in freedom and justice are not a matter of Barotse people verses non-Barotse people. This about honesty and integrity in leadership, political freedom and economic justice across national and religious groupings, and what has been called for is a universal struggle for universal democratic and human rights principles, which cannot allow unity through lies and terror.
The struggle is not over, but a few and small steps in the corrective direction have been witnessed. In November 1991, after over seventeen years of an imposed One Party system, a sharp and focused democratic campaign succeeded in re-introducing the freedom of plural competitive politics under a multi-party constitution. In 1992, after many years of disharmony in the integration, two of the founding churches, the Church of Barotseland and the Methodist Church reverted to their original autonomous status. However, despite even in this process of reverting back to the original status, the Church of Barotseland got a raw deal, including loss of original church buildings, school and skill training centre infrastructuresas well as income generating projects, such as wood working operations, and, in addition, the Church of Barotseland also lost whatever funds were contributed to or from the Church of Barotseland. As elsewhere in post colonial Africa, it is “a luta continua” in for the struggle for genuine democracy and respect for the civil and human rights of everybody. This shall continue until free and equitable social, economic and political integration become the rule rather than the exception.
This situation shall remain so, until the reigning political culture truly upholds and respects the democratic principles of freedom of conscious, freedom of association and self-determination. It shall not come to an end, until the prevailing economic dispensation brings an end to the economic disarticulation, external dependency and social underdevelopment that have outlived “Independence.”Above all, this struggle shall continue as long as we continue with the predominance of ignorance of historical facts and current concrete realities among a critical mass of Africans, and as long as we continue to failure to identify, choose and follow teams of servant leaders rather than populist demagogues in state, faith based institutions as well as structure of societies and economies in general.
A cohabitation Agreement detailing the relationship rules, which included that the lady was not to take diet pills and body enhancing pills was made, between a man and woman in South Africa. Any contraventions would render the Agreement null and void.
The Durban High Court Judge (name withheld) adjudicated over the Cohabitation Agreement in South Africa, March 2015. The case read: Relationship was over after breach of Agreement; but the other partner did not want or refused to leave the house. Finally the verdict was that she should leave the house after breach of Agreement.
LESSON FROM THE AGREEMENT
In the foregoing case, when the Agreement was breached and became null and void, the relationship came to an end too.
Surprisingly such knowledge can hardly be found in Zambia either in their police or government because they may be demon possessed with insatiable power gripping over the organic nation of Barotseland. The Problem that Barotseland faces today is because it has been dealing with people intoxicated with hashish of insincerity.
Whereas the High Court in Durban was competent to handle such a case, we doubt if the High Court in Zambia can handle the similar case of cohabitation of Zambia with Barotseland that is null and void after termination; seeing that Zambia still has the audacity to cling to Barotseland like a tick on a dead animal’s skin; despite Zambia’s president Edgar Lungu having acknowledged the issue in Ethiopia and Mrs. Inonge Wina his vice president having acknowledged the same in Zambian parliament last session.
Therefore, I wish to state that no Zambian Judge, except an independent Judge, could be favorable to adjudicate in Barotseland case, the people of Barotseland should never, never be fooled!
By Hon. Likando Pelekelo
Victim of injustice
Thrilled by the inspirational report from Mwembeshi as reported by Bo Saleya Kwalombota I could not hold myself but felt the need to share this screed with our Ngulutayutoya readers. Great is the work you our teachers are doing! Probably this Japanese proverb will put it better: that “Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher.” I have no doubt this was the Mwembeshi visiting team’s experience. Those men are teaching us great lessons of self-sacrificing and self-denial! Right away I was reminded the words of Kuan Chung who once said, “If you plan for a year, plant a seed. If for ten years, plant a tree. If for a hundred years, teach people. When you saw a seed once, you will reap a single harvest. When you teach people, you will reap a hundred harvests.” Planting and teaching have much in common. That is how great a teacher is in life though often underappreciated.
First and foremost I wish to personally extend my heartfelt gratitude to all those gallant Lozi men and women who took time off to visit our incarcerated leaders and teachers. That is the spirit bahesu! Ni kamuso hape!! Whatever you did it was in our behalf as a nation of Barotseland. May the Good Lord, who knows best how to bless mankind bless you accordingly, even as you fulfill the words found in the Holy Writ “Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I WAS IN PRISON, AND YE CAME UNTO ME. “Matthew 25: 34-36, NKJV. This is something that we need to do to each other regardless of our barriers: whether we are biologically related or not, whether politically /ideologically related or not. As long as we have the Barotzish blood flowing in us we are members of one web of Barotse Nation. As such, it does not help me to stand aloof because like rings in a chain the misfortune of one ring renders the whole chain useless until replaced or mended. Similarly, what befalls one of us indirectly or directly affects the entire web of Barotse, whether we want it or not, whether we like it or not, whether we know it or not.
Of particular interest is the following quotation which I want to follow up further, in my screed; Bo Mutompehi Mombotwa “further, emphasized the need to remain focused, resolute, resolved and never to lose sight of our vision." He mentioned that where there was no vision people perished. (Proverbs 29:18, verse supplied) “The underlying factor,” he said was to “extend and strengthen the ties among the provisional leadership, the Monarch and all the people of Barotseland in order TO CULTIVATE AND CONSOLIDATE THE MUCH NEEDED MINDSET CHANGE.”
Allow me right from here dear compatriots to categorically discuss the story of Barotseland freedom into three parts. This time around I strongly believe that Barotse teachers need to come on board seriously and help entrench this much needed mindset among our people, in the quest for total liberation of Barotseland from Zambian servitude. Surely to undo the nearly 50 years of Zambianized mindset in our people requires the services of our teachers too, to acculturate us into our true identity; for Education is light and lack of it is darkness. One of the purposes of a good teacher is to develop learners who can create or find their own identity and not to be mere reflectors of the teacher’s image. As a peace loving people this will prove to be one of the most effective instruments we can use to drive home our agenda. By teachers here I mean the tri-une of the TEACHING AGENT; at home, church and formal school.
Dan Rather once said “The dream begins most of the time, with a teacher who believes in you, who tugs and pushes and leads you on to the next plateau, sometimes poking you with a sharp stick called truth.” One such truth is the fact that there is no life without death, looking at great agricultural lessons of seeding and germination. You will notice here that the process is irreversible once it has started. What am I trying to say? The deaths of our fallen heroes and heroines since 1969 have given life and impetus to our struggle and in as much as their deaths are not reversible so is our freedom struggle. Isn’t this the reason why Christians cerebrate Easters? The death of Jesus Christ brought victory as well make it certain. Or using Bo Mungandi’s train experience and analogy, once the train has started off it is either one gets on board, alights, or gives way. Paraphrasing Mr. Mukunyandela’s words – our total independence can only be delayed but will surely come to pass at the fullness of time. That is the certainty of our present truth
and national destiny.
The second truth to learn from our liberation struggle is that the BNC 2012 was the climax and official time for germination or birthday of Barotse nation from Zambian yoke and as such, now is time to rejoice and not to cast down our faces in despair. We see here once again that birth is irreversible. Even when the vestiges of gestation still linger on (e.g. placenta usually follows birth of baby) there is usually jubilation; a family exude joy that a baby is born and will not go back into the womb.
BA'64 restoration is impossible! Consequently, we should not be dismayed by the remnants of Zambianship in us for old habits die hard. It is the work of the teacher to help us grow up through the process of unlearning the past in order to learn our new way of life; character building or reformatory is not an overnight job. If only our people could understand that this is time to "exude the change; to eat change, act change, behave change, smell change, wear change, sing the change, dance the change, communicate change, walk and travel the change, think change, speak change and last but not the least, it is time to plan the change, organize the change, coordinate change and lead the change.” In other words, it is time to fully embrace the change in every way of our being malozi without fear, remorse or any upbraiding. In our desire to realize this mindset in the nation we need to challenge ourselves as individuals to change our mindset foremost. Charity begins at home; Namuso, Provisional Leadership and Commoners at large.
The third truth to learn from our freedom struggle is that ‘we have to cry out’ like a newly born baby to sustain our new way of life. From the baby’s viewpoint it is very cruel of a nurse to ‘slap’ the baby to cry. Ironically, it is a necessary activity if the baby is to start breathing and survive. Mwana ya salili ushwela mwa tali! What relevance has this analogy to our freedom struggle? In as much as the activities of Zambia toward us are painful or fatal we must see them in the sanity of the path to freedom; it is not flowery and will never be. The more these acts are committed against us the more we should cry out in the innocence of our peaceful protests and other similar activities, against the insidious acts by the occupying forces and the government thereof. Surely our leaders have been in illegal detentions for too long at the expense of justice! Our crying out means carrying out meaningful, effective and efficient activities on our part the newly born Barotse citizens. Some of these include growing up and developing, being on the move on Barotse errands, filtering out any dangers to our newly found nationhood, showing and radiating energy for the movement, being sensitive to change around and within us, reproducing fellow compatriots in deed and spirit as well as feeding ourselves with information and news about our story all "to cultivate and consolidate the much needed mindset change.”
Apart from holding peaceful protests, teaching our neighbours or employing the teaching social network (TSN) can also be very effective; the Jesus model, after His resurrection en route to Emmaus. Teaching is effective because it is an activity that involves learning, where learning is permanent change in behaviour (thoughts, action and/or words), the mindset we crave in our people. This means that learning is something that learners do (both the reflective and un-reflective response to teaching) and not something done to them (teaching); learning is not teaching and teaching is not learning, as different sides of the same coin called education! Therefore, let learners do their work as teachers do theirs in our struggle for total independence. Wherever change has taken place mostly it has not been without the process of learning and teaching. Bulelela ndambo wa hao kwa hae, keleke, musebezi kapa banana kwa sikolo niti ya Bulozi. This is self-assertion written about in this forum before by our able scholars.
Teacher! You have a great responsibility because, among other reasons the future of Barotseland is in your ‘classroom’ today, a future with the potential for good or bad depending on how you play out your commitment. I need not remind you that several future leaders, teachers and doctors are learning from you today, so are the great writers of the next decades, and so are all the so called ordinary people who often times will make the decisions in our democratic monarchy by voting or other means. You must never forget that these same people could be the thieves, betrayers and murderers of tomorrow, just because of you the teacher! Say thank you to God for giving you a call to the greatest profession of all! Therefore, you must be vigilant every day, lest you lose one fragile opportunity to improve future Barotseland.
Remember also that God gives opportunities but success depends on the use made of them. If you want to be a mediocre teacher you will only tell about our freedom struggle. If you want to be a good teacher you will explain it, and if a superior teacher you will demonstrate what it means to be Barotzish, but a great teacher you are if you can inspire your learners to be free Malozi! In other words tell it, explain it, demonstrate it and inspire it in us, all because you are the Teacher!
If you want to reach a child’s mind as a teacher you must capture his heart. This is because only if a child feels right can he think right! The formula works better that way. When our prodigal, dissident, diffident and doubtful people begin to feel the darkness of being second class citizen in your own land then will they begin to think aright homeward bound! It is not easy for anyone who is still in the denial stage of our change agenda to just accept it. Teachers exist to make the desired learning outcomes to occur in every Lozi learner. SO YOURS IS CHARACTER BASED (CB) FIRST AND THEN OUTCOME BASED (OB) EDUCATION IN BAROTSELAND! That is, our struggle requires first and foremost the passion of compatriots who have a native character to affect the desired national outcomes. In my view this is why the issue of mindset change is so crucial this time around, in God’s great clock of our reckoning and time.
When all will have been said and done it will not be important to ask what kind of teacher you will have been. Rather, it will be more important to ask: What kind of human Lozi have you been to your learners who are also human lozis? Were you a lozi ‘character’ first and then a teacher? Your Lozi humanity should clothe your teaching. When this happens, your learners are built and empowered into the future citizens envisaged of the free Barotse state. When our teaching clothes humanity, our learners will fail to grow as individual and patriotic Lozi citizens; that is, if we reverse the formula of CB – OB to OB - CB.
PEACEFUL INDEPENDENCE STRUGGLE; THE OVERVIEW OF BAROTSELAND INSIGNIA
It has now clocked three years down the line from the time people of Barotseland declared independence on 27th March, 2012, during this period many things have taken place such as arrests , torture of the Activists, division of tribes on ethic lines by the occupying power, luring some activists to trade the independence resolutions for government job offers, oiling of the hands of some activists with Zambian money to work against the resolutions, emergence of underground cartel to disorganize the liberation groups by weakening the BRE and Lozi royalist , deaths, arrests and long detentions of activists etc.
The Mongu saga of 2011 was not a riot but police brutality, and must be seen in that light. We cannot treat those incidences like the smashing of police vehicle windscreen on 16th March, 2015 in Mongu by alleged Barotse Activists in isolation from the Barotseland Agreement 1964. Riots and protests do not just happen unless there is something simmering on the ground. The 2012 BNC resolutions talked of pursuing our independence struggle through a non violence and peaceful approach. In this regard I will sort of look at non violence resistance (NVR or nonviolent action) in the Barotseland insignia. It is also important to bear in mind the background that led to Barotseland independence declaration of March 2012 in order to have a broader picture of the issue regarding peaceful sentiments of independence struggle. Furthermore, it will add value to specify actions considered nonviolent in any independence struggle and the possibility to achieve independence without some degree of violence in such actions! Is it possible to attain independence on a silver plate? This question would require serious input of considerations in order to agree or disagree to the highly preached undefined peaceful independence struggle by some of the Barotse Activists as a shield for their failed rational.
I may fail in my responsibility if I overlook to define the word “VIOLENCE". Violence is an act of aggression; it means actions that can cause damage to property, injuries or death. Violence is defined by the World Health Organization as "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, mal development, or deprivation." It is worthy to note that the inclusion of "the use of power" in its definition expands on the conventional meaning of the word. Non violence action is the practice of achieving goals through symbolic protests, civil disobedience, economic or political noncooperation, or other methods, without using violence.
Do the people of Barotseland do the exact? Contrary, what is witnessed in Barotseland independence struggle is undefined docility methodology mingled with the element of cowardice. Where on Earth is independence given freely without demand in Diplomacy and Non violence resistance actions such as civil disobedience?
Civil disobedience is the active, professed refusal to obey certain laws, demands, or commands of a government, or of an occupying international power in the case of Barotseland, Zambia. Civil disobedience is sometimes, though not always, defined as being non-violent resistance, however, I will not dwell much on its connotations. It is true to mention that independence struggle with non-violent uprisings is more likely to emerge in a democratic state.
There are plenty of examples in history that show that violence is not necessary in order for change. One of the most famous examples is Gandhi in India whose non-violent civil disobedience movement was able to push for independence from the British Empire. Another example is Martin Luther King Jr. in the United States who was able to push for civil rights without ever resorting to violence by non-violent tactics, like sit-ins, to change Jim Crow laws. Given these two successes, it is clear that violence is not required to cause change in our independence struggle. History is full of examples of people who have effected change non-violently. Throughout history, non-violent resistance has often been a catalyst for change and this is possible in Barotseland too.
The merits for NVR are:
i) Can often cause a crisis of legitimacy of Zambian government, which can in turn cause the government to fall in Barotseland. Despite that the Zambian state always has the military force at its disposal to crush just about any uprising.
ii) A violent struggle can end up polarizing people in support of Barotseland legitimate independence demand while NVR can augment the people’s resolve as they work together.
iii) Whereas a Zambia government crackdown against the Barotseland non-violent freedom struggle will often reduce public and international support for the regime and pity the oppressed.
vii) Look at hunger strikes and labor strikes. These can be successful even without violence
viii) Change can be obtained with compromising or avoiding situations where violence can happen. Violence only causes more and more violence and, in the end, people get hurt and no achievement occurs.
In Zambia - Barotseland case, peaceful methods have not really been employed to force the Zambian government come to terms of disengagement. However, in the absence of fear the people of Barotseland can still use NVR such as:
a) Peaceful protests. This occurs in democratic nations the world over, and it is not classified as violence.
b) Mass resistance and labor strikes can force even oppressive states like Zambia to change and accept the dictates of international law. This led Poland to democracy against the Soviets, and it led to change in India in the time of Mahatma Gandhi.
c) Public workers withholding their labor can force Zambian governments to fail to govern Barotseland territory and eventually frustrate its illegal administration of the territory. When too many public workers boycott reporting for work, the signal will be strong to catch the attention of international media.
It is true to mention that peaceful resistance does not work when those in power have no problem killing those who disagree, who organize any type of protest or who strike. This is the problem mostly in countries where the minorities’ human rights are not respected. See North Korea, Iran and Zimbabwe for modern examples of this. Barotseland has been impoverished to such alarming levels that our territory is full of Zambian government boot licking loyalists and cowards, and I will not mince words in mentioning that!
Violence is undoubtedly sometimes the only choice, but it is not always and in all cases the only choice.
Violence can be a dreadful thing that most people avoid, however, it is sometimes required to solve big problems. Of course violence sometimes can be the answer, but not the most efficient choice even at the best of times. The leaders of such a cause then become just common criminals who use violence as a method of control or to gain headlines for their said cause. People may agree with me that Zambia police are a tool of the state to maintain a monopoly of violence on the general population of Barotseland. The people of Barotseland should not fail or avoid protests as a way of disagreeing with the occupying power's continued detentions of Barotseland National
Youth League executive leaders and Barotseland transitional government Administrator general and three members of his cabinet.
Peaceful methods do not mean sitting idle, wondering what comes next; it rather involves the use of legal pursuit and physical expressions of NVR. It is time people and members of liberation groups in Barotseland woke up from the ‘docility’ syndrome and use the power of demonstrations and strikes to achieve the goal of independence. Freedom struggle does not classify physical expressions of a peaceful nature as violent actions. Independence struggle is twofold; use of brain and physical expressions without use of force. Failing to ‘Protest’ for the right cause, yet believing you can do it peacefully is why those in Zambian government classify Lozis as "disorganized people" and they laugh at our docile peaceful attitude in our independence struggle because they KNOW it will do nothing to threaten their presence and illegal occupation of Barotseland while they are free to come down harder and harder on our Activists.
Tukongote Litunga Ni lyetu
The fundamental principle of democracy is the freedom of expression and right to affiliate or associate freely with any group or organization without violating the tenets of freedom. I hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men (women inclusive) are created equal before the law and have equal RIGHTS; and the fact that all HUMANITY is endowed by the Creator with the power of decision making, should be understood and embraced as UNITY in DIVERSITY.
Allow me, therefore, to discuss the issue of ‘Transitional Authority’ verses ‘Transitional government’ and highlight which is appropriate for Barotseland at this stage. I sincerely respect people's views; therefore, I would like to run over the issue in a simplified and logical manner to draw the attention of the subject closer to its visualization.
One may have been confronted with the question (s) relating to the word ‘Government’, its meaning and how Governments are formed. According to Advanced English Dictionary (AED), it is:
I) the organization that is the governing authority of a political unit OR
II) The system or platform by which a community or other political unit is governed.
Going by the above definitions government is a group of people that governs a community or unit through which public policies are set out. In addition, the government exercises executive, political and sovereign power through customs, institutions, and laws within a state.
I must, firstly, emphasize here that the people of Barotseland want nothing less than being governed by a CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY type of government, in an independent state of Barotseland separate from Zambia, and not Federalism arrangement of some kind within Zambia. Indeed, the people of Barotseland have a long train of abuses and usurpation afflicted on them by the Zambian authority, especially the Barotse activists who are pursuing the implementation of 2012 BNC resolutions, the same issue that some Elite Lozis schemed to have these true patriotic advocates for government formation arrested by the Zambian authorities. I wish to urge that it is everyone's duty to throw off such leaders who scheme to dilute the efforts and contributions of others who have provided new hope for tangible governance of Barotseland.
It is interesting and encouraging to note that some group leaders who were not in support of inaugurating the government in Barotseland have now revisited the matter and realized the need of ‘government formation’ in line with the 2012 resolutions of Barotseland independence declaration.
It will be better to look up at the words ‘Transitional’ and ‘Authority’! The word ‘transitional’ speaks of the stage between and before being fully independent, especially when applied in the context of politics, while ‘Authority’ is:
I) The power or right to give orders or make decisions OR
II) (Usually plural) persons who exercise (administrative) control over others.
Therefore, ‘Transitional Authority’ is a group of people who exercise administrative functions over others by making decisions and giving orders, but lacks political element to sustain or spearhead the territory’s interaction at international level among sovereign states to lobby for the territory's recognition.
In simply terms a ‘Transitional Authority’ in the case of Barotseland would lack the leverage to interact with other sovereign states of the world for Barotseland’s state recognition.
The BNFA are reported to be proposing an agenda to establish a ‘Transitional Authority’ for Barotseland. Firstly, one is made to wonder as to what would have changed for the BNFA to encompass the idea of government formation to take control of the territory now, when the same leadership was against the idea of inaugurating the government, such as the current transitional government, in place advancing the argument that Zambia has not yet ‘withdrawn’ from the territory. I wonder whether Zambia has now ‘withdrawn’ so much that the BNFA is now planning to set up their kind of "government" in the form of a ‘Transitional Authority’!
The proposed Barotse Transitional Authority is not only ambiguous but its ideals contravene the political principle to facilitate the day to day governance in the territory where a ‘Transitional government’ is already established.
It is also surprising that the terminology of the phrase; TRANSITIONAL AUTHORITY is being advanced in a territory where the Royal Authority already exercises the same Authority in the name of the Barotse Royal Authority (BRA) or the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE)! We, therefore, cannot have Authority over another Authority. Similarly, we cannot have ‘dual’ governments, unless the law and order has been suspended or there is a discontinuity of the hierarchical monarchy system.
Accordingly, the question may arise as what will happen to the Ngambela (Traditional Prime Minister)'s position as a member of both the Privy Council of the Litunga as well the cabinet council? Besides the idea of forming government has already been taken care of through the current Afumba led transitional government that is already in place, and it takes care of the above ambiguity.
Secondly, the proposed BNFA transitional authority seems to gravitate more to ‘Absolute Monarchy’ type of government where roles of governance are totally controlled by the royal authority. If the Induna in charge of Education, for example, is included in the Ngambela’s cabinet as secretary of State for Education or as a minister of Education, I foresee an old arrangement resuscitated in Barotseland, the very system of government that failed to advance the idea of statehood in 1964. Therefore, the unfolding scenario will not only bring the old system of government we had in Barotseland that failed to negotiate for Barotseland independence in 1964, but may also cause us to remain subservient citizens of Zambia, against the wishes of the people. What is more puzzling with this proposal is that it will be going against the majority of the people in Barotseland who have now opted for a CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY, and not an ABSOLUTE MONARCHY where the Royal and government roles are not separated.
Government is very important to oversee the smooth running of a country. It will be right to revisit the definition that a government is the system by which a state or community is governed. In Commonwealth English, a government more narrowly refers to the particular EXECUTIVE in control of a state at a given time--known in American English as an ADMINISTRATION.
As alluded to under Transitional Authority the word Transitional means or may refer to the process before COMPLETION.
Transitional governments the world over are not born out of popular ballot elections but by politically organized group or groups through mere consensus. In August 2013, the Barotseland Transitional Government was inaugurated through a public swearing in ceremony that was made available to many media houses locally and internationally. The willing and politically organized groups in Barotseland at the time participated in this transitional government, while others, either due to lack of understanding or due to fear of Zambian government reprisals, opted to refuse the idea of government formation, arguing that such a government would not be considered ‘legal’ because Zambia had not yet withdrawn her administration from Barotseland! It must be emphasized here that the LEGALITY of what Barotseland does now and in future does NOT lie with Zambia or any other country because Barotseland is now free to pursue her own Political destiny in accordance with the BNC declaration of Independence of 2012. Consequently, Barotseland is not in crisis of governance. We have both the Transitional Government and the Royal Authority in place, and the two are coordinating well together so far.
The transitional government in place is already working and has already achieved some success in advancing the cause of Barotseland, among these being the forging and pursuing of bilateral working arrangements with other countries which is has already achieved implied recognition in some cases, ratification of the Katengo legislative council, appointment of constituent assembly, formulation of government Acts and Orders, delimitation of constituencies, legal process against Zambia at ICJ is underway, establishment of media such as Barotseland post and Radio, etc.
It is now, therefore, hoped that the BNFA’S proposed Agenda, if pursued, is not going to be another way of ‘grinding rice with a stick of carrot.’
The process of government formation occurs most commonly following an election, but may be understood that even during independence liberation each and every group is a government in waiting, and can come up with a shadow government. Once the political parties have reached an adequate accommodation, and a government is able to be formed, it is expected that the parties will make appropriate public statements of their intentions.
The process of forming a government is political, and the decision to form a government must be arrived at by politicians and not the Monarch. Therefore, it is unacceptable that the proposed BNFA Agenda of the BTA wants to bring on board the Indunas as members of the constituent assembly and cabinet council.
By convention, the role of the Monarch in the government formation process is to ascertain where the confidence of the people lies, based on the parties' public statements, so that a government can be supported. It is not the Monarch’s role to form the government or to participate in any negotiations under the Constitutional Monarchy type of government (although the Litunga in his role as the Head of State might wish to talk to party leaders for clarification).
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments established in good faith like the current Transitional Barotseland government, led by His Excellence Rt.Hon Afumba Mombotwa, should not be changed for light and transient causes.
Therefore, the BNFA should endeavor to prevent the population of their membership from being misguided away from the present truth that the Transitional government is in place and working because it has commenced the process of taking Zambia to the competent court of ICJ on a Government to Government basis. Further, the BNFA should not make their members to be dependent on their wishful thinking alone for the tenure of forming governance body.
Equally important is our hope that the BNFA should not obstruct the administration of unity by refusing to recognize and embrace the Transitional Government in place. If their concern now is lack of adequate representation in the current transitional government, having snubbed it before, they could pursue representation by cooperating with the already established government, and therefore, be a part of the reconstruction of the Barotseland Kingdom, or simply consolidate themselves for checks and balances as they organize themselves to participating in the general elections and seek people’s mandate to form future government.
If by any cause, the ‘Transitional Authority’ proposed is to be formed is a ‘Government’, a question may arise about the current Barotseland Transitional Government we have in place since August 2013, and how many governments Barotseland will have in place? However, if it is not a government but just an ‘Authority’, questions will similarly arise as to where the current Barotse Royal Authority will be placed, because the BTA is the authority we already have in our land in the form of BRE.
If the proposed March 26th – 27th 2015 BNFA sponsored conference is dubbed to be a Barotse National Council (BNC), a question may arise, as to who sanctioned its hosting? To my best knowledge, only the head of state can sanction the hosting of BNC.
As things are now, the document proposing the March 26th – 27th 2015 BNFA sponsored conference has neither been disowned nor assented to by the BNFA. It could not be attributed to Linyungandambo as its source, either, because to my best knowledge Linyungandambo is not part of the BNFA ? Therefore, it can only be assumed that this BNFA Agenda is really alive. It is with this in mind that this opinion has been written to highlight what I believe are weaknesses of this BNFA Agenda.
Nevertheless, I believe that a united Barotseland is the only hope forward to independence and peaceful co-existence among political players and followers. Let us, therefore, avoid "Moya wa ka kundukundu" (going with the whirlwind of confusion) and move forward together in UNITY.
Tukongote Litunga Ni lyetu.
As an independent observer allow me to categorically express my utter dismay at what BNFA is reportedly trying to do. Where is Kopano ki mata if what is reported here is something to go by? After having come this far in our political struggle and then they just want to undo everything this way! Do they really understand the implications of their move? If the BRA allows this to take place then they should know that
1. They are condemning to death those who are already still for this same cause by Zambia. They need the same BRA's support to stand by the Transitional Government progress so far and the ideals of our land they stand for.
2. The world will not take us serious and will not trust us with their cooperation in this regard. It will be like we do not know what we want! Are we politicking for self glory or that of Barotseland?
3. The legal case for ICJ will be nullified in effect until the warring parties come to good terms with each other in purpose, methods and goals.
4. We will all believe that indeed BNFA is Zambian sponsored because they do not seem to champion the same cause Linyungandambo is holding for motherland Bulozi.
Otherwise why the hurry and frustration when your counterparts have not tired up yet at it?
How else can we interpret their miscalculated move (after the poorest Lozi has struggled and sacrificed to contribute toward the litigation in ICJ) other than that of trying to sell off our land again to the opponents of our Total Independence, a second time.
BNFA will not lose anything by waiting for the final resolution of the Linyungandambo agenda in ICJ and participate in the general election thereafter. Otherwise, whatever reasons are being advanced for their move they are ill-timed and subject to be viewed just like the AGAPE agenda.
I, therefore, wish to appeal to all peace loving Barotzish not to allow this to happen. May all the elders of the land sit down with the BNFA leadership and find better ways of resolving this problem. Personally I see the Lungu-Inonge government behind all this saga to try and thwart our hard earned progress and goal so far.
Litunga ni lyetu.