“Zambians who come from the other provinces, who do not wish to understand that the ‘Western Province’ has a legitimate claim to be part of Zambia on a DIFFERENT BASIS to the rest of us.
“We cannot in good conscience try to gloss over and arrogantly dismiss this fact, as has been the practice in the past.
“We, as the rest of Zambia, made a deal with the Barotse Kingdom. We must now in all good faith acknowledge that we did not keep the agreement. Our partners in the broken agreement have clearly not been happy with our behavior for a long while. Let's come together and put it right in our time.” – Eminent Zambian Constitutional Lawyer, Dr. Rodger Chongwe, 28 October 2010.
THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 (General Assembly resolution 217 A) as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It sets out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected and it has been translated into over 500 languages.
There was drama in magistrate Webster Milumbe’s court on November 15, 2016 in Kaoma as two Barotseland Imilema (BI), Malamo Malamo and Situmbeko Mbumbo who are victims of Zambia police assault and brutality on defenseless Barotseland nationals, were instead defending themselves against a trumped - up charge of assaulting a gang of armed police officers in an office at the police station in Mongu. In addition, the accused were further charged with an offence of contempt of court for not being able to appear before court on November 7, 2016. The cash strapped Judiciary used the opportunity to charge both the accused and their sureties K5,000.00 each or face simple imprisonment of three Months . This was despite the fact that the sureties took the trouble to inform and bring the accused for court hearing at their own cost more than 300 kilometers from the location where the alleged offense took place.
Zambian state cases against Barotseland nationals are conducted hundreds of kilometers away from the alleged crime scene for fear of the people.
Facts of that matter were that Malamo could not attend court because he was in police custody in Mongu which is more than 200 kilometers away from Kaoma while Mbumbo was unwell in the village called Nakayembe and both Magistrate Milumbe and the Prosecutors were informed accordingly. The case was then adjourned to November 15, 2016 but both the accused were not informed of this new date. As such, the sureties stepped in to inform and ensure that the accused appeared before court.
However, for all their trouble and to their astonishment, they found themselves being locked behind bars, and relatives had no choice but to frantically scamper in all directions very far away from their homes in order to raise the ransom as demanded by Magistrate Milumbe.
The Magistrate has since revoked the bail of the accused persons and remanded them in custody where they will be subjected to all kinds of abuses until the case is disposed of.
A Barotse activist who witnessed the court drama wondered why the Zambian state was getting so desperate.
“I think Barotseland nationals must be encouraged to stand fast and not to despair on account of these last acts of desperation by the oppressive, bankrupt and failed state. I also wish to ask Barotseland nationals to record and collect evidence of all these acts of human rights abuses for the successful prosecution of the perpetrators and transgressions of the Zambian regime,” said the Barotse activist, appalled by the events of the day.
This official update on the Barotseland ICJ process is for the information of all Zambians, Barotseland Nationals, Friends, Supporters and observers in the KINGDOM OF BAROTSELAND v REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA AND GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND process at the ICJ.
Although JURISDICTION is still under determination in this case, we wish to inform all concerned that the Final Submission by the Royal Barotseland Government on behalf of the Kingdom of Barotseland was received by The Registrar of the International Court of Justice.
The Barotseland ICJ process is litigation against the government of Zambia for illegally occupying Barotseland, and not to ‘request’ for independence from anybody. It is premised on the fact that Barotseland already declared independence on the 27th of March, 2012 and that this declaration was not and has never been contested by Zambia, therefore, any further occupation of Barotseland by Zambia is deemed illegal as it violates the sovereignty of the independent nation of Barotseland.
On the other hand, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is jointly sued for being a principal beneficiary of an agreement (The Barotseland Agreement 1964) which is no longer in force after it was unilaterally abrogated by Zambia in 1969 without any contest from the United Kingdom.
Here below introduced and linked are the thirty four paged submissions that were made by the International Attorney, MOABI MADANDUME, engaged by the Royal Barotseland Government in this matter.
Consequent updates will follow periodically and when required.
TO: The Registrar, International Court of Justice
I, the undersigned, MOABI MADANDUME, being duly authorised by the Royal Barotseland Government, have the Honour to submit the present Application which concerns the unlawful occupation of the territory of and exercise of sovereignty over the Kingdom of Barotseland by the Republic of Zambia, and general breaches of Zambia’s obligations to the Kingdom of Barotseland under
a) the Charter of the United Nations;
b) the Universal Declaration on Human Rights;
c) the African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights;
d) an International Treaty entitled the Barotseland Agreement 1964;
e) the Vienna Convention on International Treaties;
f) other applicable rules and principles of international law.
THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT
The Court has jurisdiction over the present dispute by virtue of:
The Declaration dated 15th May 2015 of the Royal Barotseland Government pursuant to Resolution 9 of 1946 of the United Nations Security Council, the Declaration filed by the United Kingdom pursuant to Article 36 (2) of the Statute of the Court, the fact that the Republic of Zambia is a State party to the Statute of the Court.
REFERENCE TO THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE SITUATION OF THE KINGDOM AND PEOPLE OF BAROTSELAND FOLLOWING THE BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT, 1964, THE CONDUCT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA AND THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM
KINGDOM OF BAROTSELAND v REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA AND GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
INTRODUCTION – THE APPLICATION IN BRIEF
1. This Application is brought by the Royal Barotseland Government on behalf of the the Kingdom and people of Barotseland against the Republic of Zambia. For reasons which will hereinafter appear, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland must also be joined as a full party to this Application.
2. The Application arises primarily out of the Barotseland Agreement 1964. This was an agreement between the Government of the then British Protectorate of Northern Rhodesia, the Litunga (King) on behalf of himself, his Council and the chiefs and people of the then separate British Protectorate of the Kingdom of Barotseland and the Government of the United Kingdom, in terms of which the two former Protectorates agreed to become independent as a single Republic of Zambia, subject to various provisions preserving intact within the single Republic the position and powers and most aspects of the protection formerly provided to the separate and distinct Protectorate of Barotseland, which were to be recognised and upheld by the Government of the single Republic.
3. In fact the Government of Zambia never made any attempt to comply with the said Agreement. After Independence in 1964 they breached it so obviously by municipal statutory enactments and administrative acts inconsistent with the reservations in favour of Barotseland from 1965 onwards that they had in effect abrogated it by the end of 1965. However, in 1969 they placed the abrogation beyond all question by another municipal statute – the Constitution (Amendment) Act No. 5, 1969 – purportedly enacting that the said Agreement “shall cease to have effect, and all rights and liabilities arising thereunder (whether vested or otherwise) shall lapse”.
4. In 1969 – 70 the Kaunda Regime in flagrant breach of the said Agreement seized the assets – including the contents of the National Treasury – of Barotseland and has never accounted for the use of the same.
5. For many years – and several changes of regime – the Litunga, his Council and his people sought to have Zambia reinstate and honour the Agreement, but with no success. Rather the Zambian Government not only failed and refused to do so, but also took to treating the Lozi people with brutality, denying their right to self determination, and abusing the human rights particularly of those active in the Barotseland cause.
6. Finally, in March 2012, at a meeting of the Barotseland National Council duly called by the Litunga for the purpose and appointed in accordance with tradition by the people from across Barotseland, the Council resolved that it finally accepted the repudiation of the said Agreement by the Government of Zambia and inter alia that it no longer wished to be part of Zambia but resolved instead for its people to exercise their own right to self determination as an independent nation.
The rest of the submission can be found as here copied and linked: http://barotselandpost.com/images/important_barotse_documents/final_submission_to_icj_2015.pdf