• 27
  • Feb

INTRODUCTION

The subject of the Nkoya relationship with the rest of Barotseland has been in public domain for some time now, and because of the misinformation that is carried on about it by those that deliberately wish to use it as a tool to divide and rule Barotseland, we have decided to feature a paper that was written by Hon. Namushi Nyambe who is BRE Induna Yutanga. He is also the current Acting Imangambwa at the Naliele District Kuta of Kaoma, which is at the centre of the Intransigence of the Nkoya of Mwene Mutondo. This paper, in our opinion, is one single most contextualized writing on this matter, as it features not only the historical genesis of the problem, with references to correspondence between the Litungaship and the Zambian presidency, but also outlines the efforts made by the Barotse Royal Establishment to have this matter amicably resolved to date.

We publish it under the title; ‘Scramble for Barotseland: The Intransigence of the Nkoya of Mwene Mutondo.’ The original, however, was simply titled ‘The Intransigence of the Nkoya of Mwene Mutondo’ and was written in 2014.

We wish, therefore, to thank Hon. Nyambe Namushi most sincerely for his efforts in putting this paper together and for permitting us to reproduce it entirely, save for the slight change in the title. It is our hope that the public will use this material as a reference manual vis –a- vis the Nkoya subject matter, and be better informed about it.

It is a lengthy paper; therefore, we here publish it in page-break format to coincide with the original pages of the paper, and it is here filed under SPECIAL REPORTS. Click Next >> to continue reading OR simply select a title in the Article Table of Contents above to READ..


THE INTRANSIGENCE OF THE NKOYA OF MWENE MUTONDO

By Nyambe Namushi, Induna Yutanga (Acting Imangambwa), Barotse Royal Establishment, Naliele District Kuta, Kaoma - 2014

PREAMBLE

Imutakwandu (late King) Litunga Ilute Yea 1V did not economise in language when he made the following frank clarification to the late President of Zambia Dr. Frederick Jacob Titus Chiluba in a bold letter dated 1st February, 1994:-

“Mr. President if the Nkoya chiefs Mwene Mutondo and Mwene Kahare are not prepared to adhere to the customary law jurisdiction of Barotseland, then they should go elsewhere away from Barotseland where they can exercise their new found jurisdiction”. He continued; “the important thing to note is that Barotseland is a Kingdom even as of now and that should explain to you why the Chiefs Act Cap 479 (now Cap. 287) of the Laws of Zambia recognises the customary law jurisdiction of the Litunga throughout Barotseland; notwithstanding the fact that there are several tribes who are not strictly Lozi. In a kingdom one cannot find a chief who was independent and separate from the king because such a situation is untenable. The chiefs in Barotseland unlike elsewhere in Zambia are installed by us and they hold office by strictly following our tradition and custom”.

This statement underscored the traditional set up of governance in Barotseland. It also throws light into the official policy governing the management of affairs and relationship of the elaborate but clear line of command in the kingdom of Barotseland; which has survived political, legal, economic harassment and marginalisation by the colonial powers and the Zambian administrations from the first President Kenneth Kaunda to the current President Michael Sata.


NKOYA MIGRATION INTO BAROTSELAND

The history of the Nkoya speaking people in Barotseland is somewhat convoluted. This is because there is no authoritative written history about them and that they were in several groups entering Barotseland at different periods. The written documentaries which have surfaced recently contain narratives of historical accounts from doubtful sources. However, the migration of the most notable groups that migrated into Barotseland namely: - the Lushange (Mutondo), the Mashasha (Kahare) and the Lukolwe (Kabangu) is well known. These people were previously called “Mbweras” before they assumed their now famous name Nkoya; which is said to have derived from the siluyana name “Ñoya”.

The Nkoyas themselves have made wild and uncoordinated rumbling claims relying on myths and fables about their origins. However, what is not disputed is the fact that they came into Barotseland after the Humbu war which resulted in their expulsion from Kola. They were expelled because of their insubordination in that they did not adhere to the circumcision practices which the Nkoya-Lushange had abandoned. The Humbus, a Lunda sub-group, were the chief whip that ensured that all those within the kingdom of Mwatayamvu, adhered to the law on circumcision of all male children. That is how cousinship (simbuye) between the Nkoyas and Lundas developed, hence today their joking relationship.

Their expulsion saw them trek into Angola where they failed again to live side by side with the Luvale at Luena. They came to Barotseland to seek refuge during the reign of King Mwananyanda Liwale the 10th King. Upon arrival in Barotseland, they were welcomed and resettled accordingly. One group settled in Makoma area in Kalabo district under the leadership of area chief Lioko. Another group remained at Lukona, also in Kalabo district, under the leadership of area chief Katusi. These two groups are still found in Kalabo district today. The Lushange and Lukolwe groups lead by Kayambila, Kabonge and later Manenga preferred to settle in the eastern forests between the Makwangwa and the Kafue River (which the Luyana called Lwenge River). This area appealed to their appetite for hunting because they were great hunters. Prince Maimbolwa, who became King Mulambwa, was assigned to resettle these people by his elder brother King Mwananyanda Liwale. They joined the Mashasha who have distinct origins led by Mwene Kahare, who are recorded to have arrived earlier after their flight from Kaondeland. The Mashasha and the Lushange are two clans which borrowed the title Mwene from the Mbunda to identify their leaders, while the Nkoya-Lukolwe of Kabangu - Dongwe area does not use the title.
King Mulambwa was enthroned to succeed his brother King Mwananyanda in 1780. Mulambwa was famous for his anti slavery stance against the Arab slave traders; hence he was nicknamed Mulambwa which means (mu ule ambwa) “buy dogs”. Mulambwa reigned until 1830 just before the invasion of Barotseland by the Makololo from the south in 1835. King Mulambwa is credited for welcoming the Mbunda and related peoples from Angola after the arrival of the Nkoyas. It was during Mulambwa’s reign as King of Barotseland that the Nkoya-Lushange installed their first Mwene Mutondo named “Shinkisha Mate Lushiku” who, on assuming the title said the following “ami Mutondo mwana Manenga”. He is the first leader to assume the title “Mutondo”.

The Mashasha of Kahare claim to originate from Sioka Nalinanga, whom they corruptly refer to as “Shihoka”. Sioka is a Luyana ancestor who settled in Lukulu and Mongu areas. Archival records reveal that “Kahare the first chief of the Bamashasha is said to have been the younger brother or nephew of Shihoka and came with him from Barotseland”.. Sioka’s mother Nalinanga was a sister to Mwambwa the ancestor and originator of the Luyana royal dynasty. Sioka had stolen Mwambwa’s royal drum called “mutango” in an apparent claim that he should also be accorded royalty status. He escaped to Mwito in present day Lukulu district where Isimwaa, his cousin, retrieved the drum. Prior to that incident, Sioka was raided by Mwanambinyi, his nephew, who looted his cattle and drove them south to Imatongo in present day Senanga. A dejected Sioka drifted north to Dongwe then to Kabompo where he died. It is in Kabompo where he must have integrated with the Mashasha group, and became the ancestor and originator of their leadership.

During the Makololo occupation of Barotseland from 1835 to 1865 the various tribal and ethnic people in Barotseland were disorganised and displaced because their leaders had fled into exile at Lukwakwa in present day Kabompo district. This is where the Lozi government in exile was domiciled. The Nkoyas in particular were scattered and some of them had fled to Kaondeland. The Nkoya leader, Mutondo the 2nd, Shiyengi, had been captured by the Makololo together with Prince Lutangu, King Mulambwa’s son, (later called Sipopa). These two with the aid of agents from Lukwakwa led by Njekwa managed to escape in 1859 from the Makololo and joined their kith and kin at Lukwakwa in 1863. In 1865 the Makololo were effectively removed from the surface of the earth by the Luyana. Sipopa who became the King of Barotseland with Njekwa as his Ngambela had the task of restoring and reconstructing the Barotse Kingdom. Shiyengi was ordered by Sipopa to return to his people the Nkoya – Lushange but he was disowned and thus he died a dejected man.

After Mutondo Shiyengi’s death there was a serious vacuum in the leadership of the Nkoya-Lushange. Thus Sipopa had to find a successor and brought in Munangisha from Katusi in Lukona to become Mwene Mutondo. Munangisha at first declined in preference for his nephew Kashunkami who became Mutondo the third. Later Munangisha became jealous of Kashunkami. He plotted Kashunkami’s removal and Munangisha was installed Mwene Mutondo the fourth.

In 1892 the King of Barotseland Lubosi Lewanika received very disturbing reports about the suffering of the Nkoyas who had fled to Kaondeland during the Makololo occupation of Barotseland. One Mwene Kahare had been killed and skinned by the Nyamwezi, a predatory tribe from East Africa. The Kaondes were also reported to be co-operating with the Arabs to catch and sell Nkoyas into slavery. The Nkoya sought protection and asked the King to rescue them. Thus a battalion called likolo la Kabeti under the command of Mukulwakashiko was sent to rescue the Nkoyas at Munte which is today known as katumbwe ka musongolwa.

After the rescue operation in which many Lozis and Mbundas lost their lives, the Nkoyas were once again resettled with a view to give them further protection. Thus Mutondo was moved from Kalimbata in Kalumwange area along the Lalafuta River to Shikombwe. This is where Munangisha, the fourth Mutondo established his capital which he named Lukena meaning blessed in siluyana and in remembrance of the other settlement in Kalabo which is Chief Lioko’s capital at Makoma.

To safeguard the Nkoyas from further Kaonde raids, King Lewanika created the boundary between the Kaonde and Bulozi at Lalafuta River. In 1895 he posted Kafunya a Mbunda warrior and hero brother of Mwene Chiyengele, who fought in the Kaonde war, at Lalafuta and became the first Mwene Kasimba. The eastern border was allocated to Libinga and Kakumba to give further protection to Mwene Kahare as well. Kahare was resettled at Litoya the ruins of Mukelabai Simulyañumba who had decided to return to his original home in Senanga district. He named his village “Njonjolo”. Njonjolo is the name of the first Nalikwanda built for King Mulambwa by the Nkoyas of Katusi at Lukona!

In 1889, during the last raid on the Ila (Mashukulumbwe) at Bwengwa, Lewanika had noticed an active and brave young warrior by the name of Shamamano. On enquiry, he found out that Shamamano belonged to the Kahare dynasty. The King therefore decided to reinstate the Kahare chieftainancy which had gone into limbo due to lack of quality leaders. At first Kabwata was installed before Shamamano who is the grandfather of the present Mwene Kahare, Bollen Munguya.


INTERVENTIONS INTO THE NKOYA LEADERSHIP

We have stated elsewhere in this paper that the Nkoya speaking people came to Barotseland as refugees to seek protection after their flight from the Humbus and against the marauding Kaondes who were selling them into slavery. They were given land on which to settle and even allowed to establish their chieftaincy which they did not have when they entered Barotseland. The chieftaincy positions were not allowed to be independent of the King but were installed and functioned in accordance with the Lozi tradition and customary law. Therefore on a few occasions the Nkoya had to seek intervention from the Litunga in order to resolve wrangles surrounding successions. For instance King Sipopa resurrected the Mutondoship after the demise of Mutondo Shiyengi and Lewanika resurrected the Kahareship when he appointed Kabwata in 1889. Below we give a list of occasions which prompted interventions. In all cases it was for the good of the people that such action had had to be taken in response to their complaints and not otherwise:-

1. Mutondo 11 – Shiyengi - During the Makololo invasion of Barotseland Mutondo Shiyengi had escaped from Sekeletu together with Sipopa and joined the Lozi government in exile at Lukwakwa. In 1867 King Sipopa revived the Mutondoship and ordered the Nkoya to respect Shiyengi as their leader upon his return. Shiyengi, however, died a dejected leader.

2. Mutondo 1V – Munangisha - After Shiyengi’s death King Sipopa could have abolished the Mutondoship if he had wanted at the time when the chieftaincy went into limbo due to lack of suitable and willing leadership. Instead he despatched Munangisha from Lukona to take over the throne. Munangisha had at first declined in preference to game hunting; hence chance was given to his nephew Kashunkami who became Mutondo 111.

3. Mutondo V – Mushunga – Mutondo Mushunga was removed because of the people’s dislike for their new chief. They sent their appeal to Lewanika who removed Mushunga and installed popular Wahila who became Mutondo V1.

4. Mutondo V11 – Kanyinka – The appointment of Kanyinka as Mwene Mutondo by the District Commissioner was irregular. Thus the Nkoyas protested to Lewanika. Lewanika nullified this appointment and confirmed their choice Mushonto as Mwene Mutondo V111.

5. Mushonto V111 – was succeeded by Kanyinchya who became Mwene Mutondo 1X

6. Mutondo X – Muchaila succeeded his father Kanyinchya – Muchaila was clearly insubordinate and rebellious. The Litunga allowed freedom of expression and opinion provided that his government did not suffer. Muchaila was removed because he went against this dictum. After his removal in 1948 by statutory order of the Governor of Northern Rhodesia he was restricted in Kalabo for five years. He spent another five years in Lealui before he returned to Mankoya as a reformed man. He was succeeded by Mutondo Kalapukila in 1949. Muchaila became Mwene Mutondo again in 1980 after the death of Kalapukila.

7. As regards the Kahare chieftaincy, it had also gone into limbo through no fault of the people. King Lewanika revived it by appointing Kabwata in 1889 and later Shamamano in 1898.

8. Kahare V1 – the short lived deposition of Timuna who was Kahare the sixth was based on reports of the chief’s misdeeds and unfitness by his people. After investigations he was found not wanting, hence he was reinstated.


NALIELE

The Nkoyas have contested the legality and relevance of the royal establishment at Naliele as the headquarters for the senior chief for Kaoma district (now Kaoma, Luampa and Nkeyema). We shall outline below the structure of the Barotse traditional monarchical administration. As a prelude, we shall give a brief narration of the reasons which led to the establishment of Naliele in 1937.

The Nkoyas, unlike other tribes in Barotseland, were a disorganised and uncivil society because they were unaccustomed to administration and education. They are fundamentally disunited, fragmented, disconnected and lacking political organisation and judicial structure. Basically they are full of intrigue, unpredictable and barbaric. A civilised society can function well only when there is order. This required the administration of authority and good governance. The alternative is chaos and anarchy. The Naliele kuta therefore was established to provide proper organisation of good governance, good order, education, proper judiciary and public administration; and above all to set the Nkoya free from themselves. This called for the arm of government to be brought nearer.

In the early 1930s the colonial administration established various administration posts called British Overseas Military Administration, (acronym BOMA) at Mongu, Senanga, Kalabo, Mankoya and Sesheke. In these areas there were already princes or princesses who were running the affairs of the Barotse Native Government (BNG), except for Mankoya. The traditional affairs of Mankoya district were administered from Lealui. Therefore to complete the exercise, the Governor of Northern Rhodesia in consultation with the Litunga and the Resident Commissioner proposed the establishment of a similar position of a resident prince to provide leadership and uniformity in administration, more so that the Barotse Native Government was introducing the Barotse Native Treasury. A meeting was called which was addressed by the Governor in which all the area chiefs from Mankoya district were invited. Mwene Mutondo Kanyincha did not attend but he did send a representative. The Governor outlined the functions of the native treasury to be established which was an arm of the Barotse Native Government and how it would be applied. He explained the requirement to open a district kuta in the district to dispense law and order and provide effective public administration as was the case with other districts.

All the area chiefs welcomed the new arrangement as it would reduce the travel to Mongu/Lealui for their allowances and other duties; these would now be performed locally. In 1937 the Naliele royal establishment was opened and Mwanawina was appointed to be the new senior chief for Mankoya district. The Naliele Kuta got off to a good start. Mwanawina coordinated the affairs of the district very well, and Mutondo and Kahare were each given two positions on the kuta. Thus the administration of the Barotse Native Government was based at Naliele in line with other BNG regional posts at Nalolo for Senanga, Libonda for Kalabo, and Mwandi for Sesheke.

In 1947, Mwene Mutondo Mwita Muchaila, a young former district messenger who had succeeded his father, Kanyincha in 1944, rebelled against Mwanawina. Muchaila was summoned to Lealui and in view of his insubordinate attitude the Kuta recommended for disciplinary action. The Litunga accepted this advice and was supported by the Resident Commissioner and Government of Northern Rhodesia. By order of the Governor, Sir Gilbert M Rennie, dated 31st March 1948 Mwene Mutondo Mwita Muchaila, Mampila Timuna and Mayunka were ordered to leave the district within 30 days. Muchaila and his arch supporters were removed and sent into restriction to Kalabo for five years. He spent another five years of rehabilitation in Lealui before he was allowed to return to Mankoya in 1958. During the period of his restriction, Mutondo Muchaila was treated well and he was even paid his Indunaship salary by the Barotse National Government. The reformed Muchaila was reinstated as Mwene Mutondo after the death of Mwene Mutondo Kalapukila in 1980. The disciplinary action taken against Muchaila was because of insubordination and undermining the authority of chief Mwanawina.


TRADITIONAL SET-UP OF CHIEFTAINANCY IN BAROTSELAND

Barotseland is divided into seven major regions which are headed by a member of royal family except Mongu-Lealui region as follows:- Mongu-Lealui – Induna Inete (a commoner- current holder Mr. Akapelwa Silumbu); Senanga –The Litunga-la-Mboela, (current holder: Princess Mukwae Mbuyu Imwiko); Kalabo – The Mboanjikana, (current holder: Princess Mukwae Kandundu Yeta); Sesheke – Mulena Inyambo, (current holder:- Prince Lubasi Yeta); Kaoma – Mulena Amukena II, (current holder:- Prince Makweti Isiteketo Lewanika); Lukulu – Prince Anañanga Imwiko; Shangombo – Prince Meebelo Mutukwa. This level of leadership reports to His Majesty the Litunga through the Siikalo Kuta led by the Ngambela of Barotseland. Under these regales, they are followed by area chiefs called in Lozi ‘Silalo Indunas’. The majority of them are commoners but wield immense powers of public and judicial administration. It is this tier of administration in which the four mwenes fall; namely Mwenes Mutondo and Kahare (Nkoya) and Mwenes Chiyengele and Kandala (Mbunda). The last tier is that of village headmen and silalanda heads called ‘bo lyaminzi’.

There are more area chiefs in Barotseland than any other province in Zambia. All the tribes in Barotseland have a recognised area chief/Induna by Lealui. The Nkoyas for instance have been allowed to maintain their leadership in Lukulu, Kalabo, Kaoma and Sesheke as follows:- Kalabo district: chiefs Lioko and Katusi; Kaoma district: Mwene Mutondo and Mwene Kahare; Lukulu district: chief Kabangu; Sesheke district: chief Mungabwa.

In reference to Kaoma district, there are thirteen area chiefs or Silalo Indunas taking into account the various tribal groups which inhabit the district in order to dispense public administration not based on tribal affiliation. These are: chief Mwanambuyu (Kwangwa) for Lukute Silalo; chief Mwene Kasimba (Mbunda) for Lalafuta Silalo; chief Mufaya (Totela) for Mayukwayukwa Silalo; chief Kabilamwandi (Luyana) for Luambuwa Silalo; chief Libinga (Subiya) for Mulamatila Silalo; chief Kakumba (Kwangwa) for Shishamba Silalo; chief Mwene Kahare (Nkoya) for Litoya Silalo; chief Afumba (Luyana) for Liyunyi Silalo; chief Mwene Mutondo (Nkoya) for Shikombwe Silalo; chief Siwiwaliondo (Luyana) for Nalifalamba Silalo; chief Mwanatete (Nkoya) for Kahumbu Silalo; chief Kasabi (Luvale) for Kabaa Silalo and chief Kanguya (Luvale) for Mulwa Silalo. The district has a permanent representation by Induna Mbongwana at Lealui and had several representatives on the Katengo, the de-facto parliament for Barotseland.

During the period approaching the independence of Northern Rhodesia and Barotseland, the Barotse Native Government was reformed. After the reforms which excluded chiefs from participating in the National Council, each district was represented equally on the Katengo (Parliament) by five elected Councillors and nominated councillors. Mankoya (Kaoma) district had the following representatives: Mr.Kenneth Mbandu Kalyangu (Mbunda) Mr.Kashiwa Mutaima (Nkoya) Mr.Jevans Kapatiso (Luvale/Luchazi) Mr. Simon Liyoka (Nkoya) and Mr. Misheck Mutti (Mbunda). Mr. Simon Liyoka was appointed to Sir Mwanawina’s cabinet and held the portfolio of Minister for Transport and Communications. Among the nominated councillors were; Induna Imangambwa Mr. Munalula, Mwanamulena Imasiku, Induna Kabilamwandi from Naliele Palace and Mwanashihemi Ngwelela (Mutondo), Mwanashihemi Muleka (Kahare) and Mr. Kankolomwena represented the Nkoya community.


DEFINITION OF CHIEF AND INDUNA

The conflict between the English term “chief” and the Lozi word “Induna” appears to have brought some confusion in the application of the terms in relation to the meanings of the two words. We must explain here that the term chief does not denote royalty but leadership. The Roget’s Thesaurus gives the following synonyms for chief: leader, ruler, head, person in command, boss, captain, person in charge. From these synonyms it can be seen that there is no royalty connection. An Induna on the other hand is also described as a leader or ruler of a community. Thus, all the area chiefs are in effect indunas who receive high respect in recognition of their status in society. An Induna in the Barotse structure is a highly respected leader and ruler assigned to lead a community. Therefore the terms Induna and chief are interchangeable and mean one and the same.

As a kingdom, Barotseland has no chiefdoms in the really sense. The correct definition of a silalo is “county”. Silalo Indunas do not preside over chiefdoms, but counties and are supervised by a senior chief (Mulena) at district level. Tribal chiefs at Silalo Induna level are also “Indunas” and are installed by strictly following their family lineage just as is the case with regales. Notwithstanding this arrangement, they have authority to preside over the customary and traditional affairs in their areas by following the Barotse customary and traditional law.


PROBLEMS OF KAOMA DISTRICT

Kaoma region has been a haven of peace since the Nkoyas’ arrival in Barotseland in the mid 1700s. As mentioned earlier above, the first problems in the management of Mankoya district rose in mid 1940s resulting in the disciplinary action taken against Mwene Mutondo Mwita Muchaila in 1948. Nkoyas are born intriguers hence chances of continued peace were disrupted again in the 1980s after the re-installation of Mwene Mutondo Mwita Muchaila. In an address to the nation entitled “I wish to inform the Nation”, delivered on 25th August 1969, President Kenneth Kaunda stated the following policy statement concerning chieftainship in Barotseland among other anti-Barotse statements:

“I know that certain chiefs in Western Province have been performing the functions of chiefs without government recognition. I wish to announce that I am making investigations into the possibility of having more chiefs in that province.............All I am saying is that where my investigations reveal quite clearly that a chief has been acting as a chief but has been deliberately denied recognition such as Chief Mwene Mutondo in Mankoya, I would be prepared to give them recognition”.

This was the turning point in the sour relationship between the Barotse Royal Establishment and the Nkoyas of Kaoma supported by the Government. Kaunda recognised Muchaila vide Statutory Instrument No. 113 of 1981 without adhering to the provisions of the chiefs’ act which require recognition by the Litunga and council first before presidential recognition. As a result of this anomaly, there were no consultations between the Litunga and Government, with the result that this statutory instrument wrongly included Lalafuta and Luambuwa in the areas of jurisdiction for Mutondo. No protest is known to have been lodged by the Barotse Royal Establishment. Clearly the recognition of Mutondo by President Kaunda was preconceived and in tandem with his speech mentioned above. It was done outside the provisions of section 3(2)b of the Chiefs’ Act which requires that for a chief to be recognised as a chief that chief must first of all receive the blessing of His Majesty the Litunga of Barotseland. Therefore we hold that Kaunda acted outside the provisions of the law.

What followed was the publication of the Village Register for Western Province in 1985 which divided Kaoma district between chiefs Mutondo and Kahare. This publication listed all the area chiefs under either Mwene Mutondo or Mwene Kahare completely ignoring the structure of the Barotse Royal Establishment and the existence of the Senior Chief for the district as follows:-

MWENE

MUTONDO

MWENE

KAHARE

Area

Area chief Area Area chief

Shikombwe

Shikemi Litoya Muleka

Mulamatila

Libinga Liyunyi (Iluya) Afumba

Lukute

Mwanambuyu Nalifalamb (Chilanda) Siwiwaliondo

Luambuwa

Kabilamwandi Shishamba Kakumba

Kahumbu

Mwanatete Mulwa Kanguya

Lalafuta

Mwene Kasimba    

Kaaba

Kasabi    

Mayukwayukwa

Mufaya    

The General List of Chiefs published in 1978 and used by the Department of National Registration to determine and verify area chiefs, produced the following record which is at variance with the Village Register of 1985 thus throwing more confusion.

1. Chief Litia

– Naliele –

Imangambwa

 

2. Chief Kahare

– Litoya

Chief Mutondo –

Lukena - Shikombwe
Area Area Chief Area Area Chief
Lukute Mwanambuyu Luambuwa Kabilamwandi
Kaaba Kasabi Lalafuta Mwene Kasimba
Mwito Mayankwa (Lukulu!)    
Luambuwa Kabilamwandi    
Kahumbu Mwanatete    
Mulamatila Libinga    
Shishamba Kakumba    
Luampa Mululumi    
Mulwa Kanguya    
Liyunyi Iluya (Afumba)    

What boggles the mind is that even the geographical distribution of the areas listed under Kahare militate against reason as shown on the area chiefs’ map for Mankoya district produced by the District Commissioner in 1958. This map currently serves as the official recognised government document listing area chiefs and their boundaries. The two Government publications mentioned above have not been revised despite our protests pointing out the anomalies contained therein. For example the General List of Chiefs contains some non areas such as Luampa under Mululumi and an area located in Lukulu district – Mwito for Chief Mayankwa was also listed under Mwene Kahare! The government of Zambia has not shown either political or administrative will to make the corrections by publishing revised editions.


MUTONDO EDWARD MBOMBOLA MOYO

Mr. Edward Mbombola Moyo became Mwene Mutondo in 1992. Since his accession to the throne this district has seen the worst of intransigence by the Nkoya speaking people. He was gazetted as chief by President Frederick Chiluba in 1993 vide statutory instrument No.56 of 1993. Mutondo Mbombola Moyo has created the Nkoya royal council and the Kazanga cultural society. Both institutions have the professional mission to destabilise peace and promotion of Nkoya tribal hegemony, and outright rebellion against the Barotse Royal Establishment. He has attempted to create illegal parallel indunaships or what he terms “sub-chiefs”, in various sub-districts (lilalo) in total defiance of the 1958 area chiefs’ map which is the official government document for chiefs’ boundaries, and the statutory instrument captioned above stating his authorised areas of jurisdiction.

Concerning the procedures of installation of chiefs, it was clarified in an affidavit sworn by the Ngambela of Barotseland Mr. Griffiths Musialike Mukande. He stated that, following the death of the holder of Mwene Mutondo, Mr. Dominic Chipimpi in 1992, His Majesty Imutakwandu Litunga Ilute Yeta IV directed the Ngambela, and the KUTA to find a successor from the family of the deceased Mwene Mutondo in accordance with the customary and traditional practices of Barotseland. Thereafter consultations with the family members of the late Mwene Mutondo were made. The Ngambela and the Kuta were approached by elders of the late Mwene Mutondo in October 1992 who presented Mr. Edward Mbombola Moyo as the most suitable and acceptable person in the family to be installed. The Kuta and His Majesty the Litunga accepted the nomination and in accordance with the traditions and customs of Barotseland, the Kuta directed the Ngambela to carry out the initiation rites in order to prepare the candidate for formal installation and eventual recognition.

The initiation rites were by tradition carried out in two stages. The first initial rites are usually conducted after the prospective chief is introduced to the KUTA and are intended to put him under probation for about three months after which the Ngambela would then conduct the final traditional rites and subject to good behaviour and satisfactory conduct, the prospective chief would then be presented to His Majesty the Litunga. After the Litunga’s recognition, the candidate in then formally installed, thereafter it is the duty of the Ngambela to submit the name to the Government for recognition by the President in accordance with the provisions of section 3(2) b of the Chiefs’ Act pf the Laws of Zambia.

The procedures outlined above were followed. As stated earlier, Mr. Edward Mbombola Moyo was presented to the Kuta by elders of his family who were instructed to take him back to Lealui at the end of February 1993 to enable him complete the second stage of the initiation rites. Contrary to instructions Mr. Edward Mbombola Moyo failed or refused to return to Lealui, thus was the beginning of the insubordination by Mwene Mutondo supported by the Government who meddled in the traditional and customary practices of Barotseland. Soon thereafter the new uninstalled Mwene Mutondo began to issue press statements demanding the removal of the late Senior Chief Litia from Kaoma district and the creation of Kafue province by detaching Kaoma district from Barotseland. Furthermore reports were received that jointly with the late Mwene Kahare Timuna; they would use violence and cause bloodshed in Kaoma to achieve their tribally soiled objectives.

A barrage of adverse and violence threatening press reports prompted the Barotse Royal Establishment to summon both Mr. Edward Mbombola Moyo and the late Mwene Kahare Timuna to Lealui for discussions with the KUTA and His Majesty the Litunga on their demands but they both declined. In an apparent show of disloyalty and contempt of the Kuta and the Litunga, Mr. Mbombola Moyo fraudulently presented himself through the then Permanent Secretary in the Office of the President, Mr. Mulubisha (a Nkoya), to the Government to recognize him as Mwene Mutondo. Eventually the government of Zambia by acquiescence succumbed and gave him recognition vide Statutory Instrument no. 56 of 1993 by the President of Zambia Mr. F.T.J. Chiluba, without consultations with His Majesty the Litunga as required by article 3(2)b of the Chiefs’ Act Cap. 287 of the Laws of Zambia.

On 18th July 1993, following the recognition of Mwene Mutondo by the President, the Mulongwanji was convened by the Ngambela at the request of the KUTA. The Mulongwanji is the highest disciplinary body in Barotseland. It is composed of all the district regales or district chiefs and chieftainesses, and chaired by the Ngambela. According to the customary law of Barotseland, a decision taken by the Mulongwanji is final and irreversible. At this meeting it was resolved to dethrone Mwenes Mutondo and Kahare for gross indiscipline, misconduct, insubordination and undermining the authority of Senior Chief Litia and the Barotse Royal Establishment. This resolution was communicated to Government but was frustrated by President Frederick Chiluba who refused to withdraw the recognition of both chiefs. Instead the President threatened His Majesty the Litunga Ilute Yeta IV and the Barotse Royal Establishment with stern action.

On 24th December 1994 The Ngambela of Barotseland Mr Griffith Musialike Mukande filed an application in the High Court for Zambia to seek judicial review against the recognition of Mr. Edward Mbombola Moyo as Mwene Mutondo on the ground that he was not duly enthroned as he did not receive the blessing of His Majesty the Litunga as demanded by tradition and customary law of Barotseland and the Chiefs’ Act referred to above. The application also sought to quash the recognition by the President of Zambia on grounds that it was a nullity in law since it did not conform to the provisions of the Chiefs’ Act. This cause was discontinued for unknown reasons after applying for an injunction to restrain Mr. Edward Mbombola Moyo from performing the chiefly functions of Mwene Mutondo. The Barotse Royal Establishment may have decided to discontinue the matter because no Zambian High Court judge appointed by the President can be expected to rule against the wrongful act of the President who has flaunted the law.

Following the failure to conclude this matter in the High Court for Zambia, Mwene Mutondo Mbombola Moyo continued with his campaign to undermine the Barotse Royal Establishment as testified by the following actions by which he created parallel structures in all the lilalos adjacent to Shikombwe Silalo:-

a) Lalafuta Silalo: He appointed Yuvwenu and Malasa instead of Mwene Kasimba the legitimate area chief.

b) Luambuwa Silalo: He appointed Lumano instead of Chief Kabilamwandi the legitimate area chief.

c) Lukute Silalo: He appointed Mangothi instead of Chief Mwanambuyu the legitimate area chief.

d) Nalifalamba Silalo: He appointed Munyikwa alias Matanda instead of Chief Siwiwaliondo the legitimate are chief.

e) Mayukwayukwa Silalo: He appointed Muyani a Kaonde instead of Chief Mufaya, the legitimate area chief.

f) Mulamatila Silalo: He appointed Sintunya as area chief instead of Chief Libinga who is the legitimate leader of the area. He also appointed Derrick Moyo as sub chief Mulemena.

g) Kabaa Silalo: He attempted to corrupt Chief Kasabi to be answerable to him taking advantage of the boundary conflict between Kasabi and Mwanambuyu.

In an act of further defiance, irresponsibility and insubordination, in July 2003, the Mwanashihemi for Lukena Mr. D.S.Yowela issued a circular letter replacing silalo indunas in areas claimed to be under the jurisdiction of Mwene Mutondo namely:- Kabilamwandi, Mwanambuyu, Kanguya, Mwanatete, Siwiwaliondo, Kakumba, Kasabi and Afumba. Upon receipt of this letter the then District Administrator for Kaoma Mr. Ngombo, directed the Mwanashihemi to withdraw the letters for the following reasons among others:-

(i) His action was contemptuous since there was still a cause in the High Court for Zambia in which Mwene Mutondo had sued Senior Chief Amukena II.

(ii) There was already a resolution reached between the two Mwanashihemis and the Imangambwa arising from a meeting chaired by the District Administrator that all matters pertaining to land and the Royal Establishments must not be discussed or dealt with until after the disposal of the suit.

(iii) The history and appointments of the silalo indunas affected viz:- Libinga, Kasimba, Mufaya, Kabilamwandi, Mwanambuyu, Kanguya, Mwanatete, Siwiwaliondo, Kakumba, Kasabi and Afumba were well known.

Despite being cautioned by the office of the District Administrator, this behaviour was repeated each time a new District Commissioner is appointed. Hence it was repeated during the tenure of the following District Commissioners:- Messrs Kasempa, Chinyama, Nasilele and Manjolo.


EFFORTS OF THE BAROTSE ROYAL ESTABLISHMENT

In 1998, a meeting of the Barotse National Council was held on 16-18 August to discuss the problems of Kaoma district. This meeting was attended the Mwanashihemis (senior or chief Councillors) for Mutondo and Kahare. Among the resolutions reached, under resolution 3(a) rejected the Village Register Book of 1985 concerning the Kaoma district because it was badly edited and unsuitable for use and application by Government. This book ignored the presence of the Senior Chief at Naliele and divided the district between Mwene Mutondo and Mwene Kahare as the only chiefs. The rest of the area chiefs or Silalo Indunas falling under the two as has already been shown elsewhere in this paper.

In 1999 the resolutions of the Consultative Meeting of the Indunas of all Districts of the Barotse Royal Establishment held in Lealui on 12th – 14th February, 1999 on the Problems of Kaoma District made the following resolutions:-

1. That a meeting of all the ten (10) Chiefs of the Barotse Royal Establishment should be convened as soon as possible to resolve the problems of Kaoma district.

2. That Statutory Instruments No.63 of 1981 and No. 112 of 1996 and Village Register of 1985 should be amended because the meeting felt they were published in bad faith and therefore they were repugnant to natural justice.

3. The Naliele Chieftainship should remain.

In January 2010, the Naliele Kuta assembled all the eleven area chiefs in the district accompanied by their senior indunas to Limulunga where their grievances concerning the Nkoya chiefs, and the administration of Kaoma district were presented to the Saa-Sikalo Kuta and His Majesty the Litunga. The meeting lasted over three days and concluded by reiterating the same resolutions that had been made before. Significant resolutions however dealt with the dethronement of Mwene Mutondo and that statutory recognition of all area chiefs in Kaoma and by extension the whole of Barotseland was recommended to government. The latter resolution was arrived at in order to find a lasting solution to the Kaoma problem by gazetting all the area chiefs in the district so as to counter the Nkoya chiefs who have been selected by government at the expense of other tribes. These resolutions were never acted upon by Namuso.

In July 2010 the previously unknown Nkoya-Kaonde Royal Establishment in Kalumwange wrote to the District Commissioner for Kaoma that it was withdrawing the recognition of ‘sub-chief’ Kasimba in Lalafuta area for what was termed to be in the interests of ‘peace, order and good governance’. This letter was copied to His Majesty the Litunga. Following this letter, in September 2010, the Mwanashihemi for Mutondo wrote letters revoking the appointments and recognition of area chiefs Mwanambuyu, Mwanatete, Libinga, Mwene Kasimba, Mufaya and Kabilamwandi. These letters were ignored though the government of Zambia took no action against these rebellious activities. Namuso were informed as well, but as usual no action was taken against the so-called Nkoya-Kaonde Royal Establishment supported by Mutondo.


MUTONDO’S CLAIMS AGAINST SENIOR CHIEF AMUKENA AND THE GOVERNMENT

In the year 2000, Mr Edward Mbombola Moyo suing as Chief Mutondo filed a claim against Senior Chief Amukena II and the Attorney-General, seeking to remove him from Kaoma district as senior chief and that he Mutondo was the legitimate heir to the senior chieftainship of Kaoma district. The matter has not passed beyond interlocutory stage, since the action was commenced. A summary of his statement of claim states the following main claims among many others:-

(a) That Senior Chief Amukena was and has always been the Administrator of the Naliele Native Authority since its inception in or about 1937 and that Senior Chief Amukena was erroneously appointed by the Litunga.

(b) That upon the establishment of Kaoma District Council Senior Chief Amukena should have ceased to perform the functions of administrator of Naliele Native Authority instead continuing as a chief of the Lozi people.

(c) That the appointment of a senior chief based at Naliele is wrongful, null and void, and contrary to the provisions of the Chiefs’ Act.

(d) That Naliele royal village is in chief Mutondo’s area of jurisdiction and control.

Furthermore, Mwene Mutondo claims to have jurisdiction and control of the following areas:- Lukena, Shikombwe, Luambuwa, Mulamatila, Kaaba, Mayukwayukwa, Lalafuta,and Kahumbu.

This law suit is still pending in the High Court for Zambia awaiting trial; but we hope it will now finally take off as it is scheduled to take place from 6th to 10th October 2014 before Mrs. Justice M Mungomba.


THE SANGENJO SHINDIG

As though there is no case before the High Court of Zambia, in his desperation, Mutondo has continued to defy law and order by fomenting further acts of destabilisation. On Saturday 16th June 2012, over thirty (30) Nkoya tribesmen descended on Mr. Mupala Chipango who is Induna Mooto of Naliele Kuta at his home in Sangenjo area. Sangenjo is an area located in area Chief Siwiwaliondo’s Nalifalamba Silalo. The group was led by a self styled chief Matanda alias Innocent Munyikwa Lushato. The tribesmen had travelled some 12 kilometres away from Katunda. The purpose of their attack was to evict Induna Mooto and burn his homestead. They alleged that they had been instructed by Mwene Mutondo and Mwene Kahare with firm support from the Zambian President Mr. Michael Sata.

At 13.00 the Naliele Kuta received a phone call from Induna Mooto who reported the intruders at his homestead. This report was relayed to the Police and the District Commissioner, who acted promptly and police were dispatched to the area.

Meanwhile, the residents of Sangenjo, who are predominantly Luchazi, Luvale and Lozi speaking organised themselves to defend Induna Mooto. They quickly surrounded the Nkoya militia to prevent them from attacking Induna Mooto until the arrival of the Police. It is reported that there was a scuffle which resulted in Matanda being manhandled as he tried to escape and had his trousers torn to pieces.

The Police collected Matanda and a few others. To our surprise the insurgents were delivered back to their homes in Katunda, instead of arresting them, and they were merely ordered to report to the Police the following Monday since it was a weekend.

On Monday 18th June 2012, Induna Mooto and his people went to the police where they found Matanda and many Nkoya speaking people who included Mwitila Shumina (a former Member of Parliament), Kashandula ( then Patriotic Front District Chairman for Kaoma now District Commissioner for Nkeyema) and Greenwell Kakumba (Naliele Ward Councillor). The District Commissioner, Mr. Manjolo, ordered everybody to go to the Council Chamber where discussions were held. Among those who attended the meeting were senior Government officials, namely the Officer-in-Charge for Kaoma Police, Office of the President Intelligence Officer, and Army Officer of the rank of Captain from Luena Barracks, several government officials. Induna Malenga was assigned by the Kuta to accompany Induna Mooto.

In his statement Matanda proudly and with impunity told the meeting that he had been sent by Mwenes Mutondo and Kahare with the presidential sanction from President Sata to evict what he terms illegal settlers in Kaoma district. He described these to include all non-Nkoya speaking people. Arrogantly and rudely Matanda said that even Senior Chief Amukena II is a squatter and that he must go and leave Nkoyaland for Nkoyas.

The Naliele Kuta took action and lodged a formal complaint against Innocent Munyikwa Lushato that he should be arrested and charged accordingly with the following offences:-

(a) Criminal trespass and conduct inimical to public order and peace in Luampa district.

(b) Holding himself as a chief when not a chief in contravention of section 12 of the Chiefs’ Act Cap 287 of the Laws of Zambia.

The Kuta also recommended to government that Mwene Mutondo and Innocent Munyikwa Lushato alias chief Matanda should be considered for indictment for contravening Section 46 of the Penal Code of the Laws of Zambia which states that “Any person who, without lawful authority, carries on, or makes preparation for carrying on, or aids in or advises the carrying on of, or preparation for, any war or warlike undertaking with, for, by, or against any chief , or with, for, by, or against any tribal group, is guilty of a felony, and is liable to imprisonment for life on conviction”.

In relation to the second option, the Naliele Kuta had received intimation from the Kaoma Police that a directive from the Director of Public Prosecutions has been communicated to the effect that there must be an attempt to reconcile the two, because the dispute is purported to be embroiled in some tribally motivated political connotations. In the event that reconciliation is not achieved the Police should prefer charges of criminal trespass against Lushato and prosecute him accordingly. The letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions also stated that land in Kaoma district belongs to Mwene Mutondo but that he was given the land by King Lewanika. Here lies the misunderstanding and misrepresentation of facts concerning the issue of customary land administration in Kaoma district as interpreted by the Government! This is at variance with the policy on land administration in Barotseland, which states that all land in the province is under the custodianship of the Litunga. Area chiefs are agents of the Litunga in the management and alienation of land. Therefore Mutondo does not own land per se and does not have power over land above the district chief, but administers land through the district chief on behalf of the Litunga and Council who in turn holds it in trust for the people of Barotseland. The view expressed by the DPP is not correct and does not find support from historical facts and the traditional and customary laws of Barotseland.


NKOYA ROYAL COUNCIL PLOT TO ELIMINATE OPPONENTS

The Naliele Kuta stumbled on some minutes of the Nkoya royal council revealing a plot to eliminate certain personalities. Upon discovery of this document, the Kuta on Wednesday the 21st of May 2014 summoned the heads of security departments and the District Commissioners for Kaoma and Luampa. The purpose of the meeting was to bring to their attention security concerns orchestrated by the so-called Nkoya Royal Council; arising from minutes of a meeting held at Lukena village. The minutes which are self-explanatory reveal serious strategies aimed at assassinating politicians, area chiefs and Barotse human rights activists loosely identified as Linyungandambo.

More striking and mind boggling is the purported co-operation between the Office of the President and the Nkoya royal council; where the latter had requested the Office of the President to supply them with assault weapons (pistols). They had gone to the extent of identifying certain individuals as their targets, namely Hon. Josephine Limata member of Paliarment for Luampa, area Chief Mwanatete for Kahumbu, area Chief Libinga for Mulamatila, area Chief Mufaya for Mayukwayukwa, area Chief Mwene Kasimba for Lalafuta, Crispin Shumina a former diplomat and Member of Parliament for Mangango, and Collins Lifasi Kashweka. This co-operation between the Office of the President and the Nkoya royal council has not been denied by the authorities in Government circles.

This latest discovery of the unholy alliance revealed through the minutes of the Nkoya royal council has strengthened our suspicion that the Government of Zambia if behind the problems of Kaoma district by promoting Nkoya tribal insurgency, hegemony and supremacy.


LUAMPA INTRUSION BY MUTONDO

The Naliele district Kuta again stumbled on correspondence from three different sources in connection with the proposed visits to Luampa district by Matanda and the Mwanashihemi for Lukena as well as bye-laws from the Litoya royal establishment of Mwene Kahare as follows:-

(a) Letter dated 9th May 2014 from District Education Board Secretary signed by the District Standards Officer for Kaoma advising heads of schools that a (chief?) Matanda would be touring all the schools in Luampa district.

(b) Undated document from the Mwanashihemi Litoya royal establishment advising village headmen that they have devised bye-laws to enable them levy chickens and cash from villagers and farmers in Shishamba in Nkeyema district and Liyunyi in Luampa district.

(c) Letter dated 6th June 2014 from the Acting Mwanashihemi Lukena royal establishment. This letter advises that the Mwanashihemi intends to visit Luampa district on 28th June, 2014.

After consultations with the Kuta, the alert District Commissioner for Luampa did not allow Matanda to undertake his tour of schools in the district. We wondered how a government education Officer could have written the letter authorising the illegal chief to visit schools. On the other hand the meeting by Mwanshihemi for Lukena did take place. It is at this illegal meeting where he announced that Mwene Mutondo had appointed Innocent Munyikwa Lushato alias Mwene Matanda as chief for Luampa district. Area Chief Mwanatete is reported to have advised the police not to allow the meeting to go ahead. They did not take action reasoning that the meeting was traditional therefore they had no authority. Mwanatete who is the area chief for Kahumbu took legal action to sue both Matanda and Mutondo for interference in Luampa district. The Mwanatete also sued Matanda for holding himself chief when not a chief in contravention of the provisions of Chiefs’ Act. This action is supported by the Naliele Royal Establishment and has been reported to the Siikalo Kuta accordingly.


CONCLUSION

We have attempted to show in this paper the problems orchestrated by the Nkoya speaking people in Kaoma region which is Barotseland. We have concentrated to highlight the problems caused by Mwene Mutondo only but we intend to do the same for Mwene Kahare in a separate paper.

Kaoma, Luampa and Nkeyema districts are not inhabited by the Nkoya speaking people only. There are several others who include the Lozi speakers such as Makwamakoma, Makwangwa, Makwamwenyi, Makwamashi, Maluvale, Mambunda, Maluchazi, Machokwe, Matotela and Masubiya to mention just a few. All of them are bonafide citizens of Barotseland. The Nkoyas who are a minority are the main cause of intriguing demands for separatism. The talk of secession of Kaoma from Barotseland is unacceptable and untenable. The Nkoyas are themselves refugees who sought and received protection from the Lozi. They did not enter Barotseland through war, therefore there is no record that they ever captured any part of Barotseland; neither is there evidence that they had captured slaves or cattle, but were themselves traded into slavery by the Kaondes, save for the rescue operation at Munte by the Lozi. The Lozi went to war and many died for their sake yet today they exhibit hatred against their rescuers and protector. We hold that as quid pro quo it was a requirement that they paid the Lozi for the protection they received and the land they were given to settle but not to kick out the owner of the land. They paid tribute to the Litunga just as other tribes in the outlying areas were required in order to sustain the Barotse economy.

The Lozi have interacted with the Nkoyas such that their relationship is interwoven in culture and tradition. This is because they have lived in peace for centuries together as a united people moulded into a nation by Kings Mulambwa, Sipopa and Lewanika. There are more than thirty (30) tribes in Barotseland but only one tribal group revolving around the Lushange of Mwene Mutondo and Mashasha of Mwene Kahare is threatening to divide Barotseland. More recently they appear to have recruited the Mbundas of Mwene Chiyengele to join their rebellious and insubordinate attitude against Barotseland.

Some of the royal drums that grace the royal occasions at Lealui, Nalolo and Libonda and in the Nalikwanda during the majestic Kuomboka ceremony have their source from the Mankoya people. We are proud of this. However, we must make it clear to our Nkoya relatives that chiefdoms are created to serve the people, if they fail to satisfy this need they wane and wax no more. The Litunga is on record as having tolerated unbecoming behaviour of Mwene Mutondo in particular. This may not be allowed to continue for long. Let them remember that the Lozi had in the past played major roles in resuscitating their leadership otherwise if it was not for King Sipopa and King Lewanika, there would be neither Mwene Mutondo nor Mwene Kahare today.

We concur with Van Binsbergen in the concluding chapters of his book “Tears of Rain” that the Nkoya are trying to build their kingdom out of myths. Mythology spring from arrested and unsatisfied desire, wish fulfilment or fantasy gratification.

We note that Mwene Mutondo and his Nkoya-Lushange royal council have been shadow boxing for a long time; it is now time to follow the footsteps of their forefathers. When Mutondo 2, Shiyengi had a problem, he went to Sipopa for assistance; when the Mutondo throne was on the brink of extinction it was Sipopa who revived it; when the Kahare throne was on the wane Lewanika reinstated it; when the Nkoya protested against unpopular Mutondo V, it was Lewanika they appealed to who resolved the issue by removing him and installing popular Wahila; when the district Commissioner for Mankoya made an unorthodox decision to appoint a Mutondo, it was Lewanika who intervened by reversing the appointment; when Mwene Kahare Bollen Munguya had a problem reclaiming the chieftaincy in a legal battle against his maternal cousin of Kaonde paternity, Mayowe, it was to Senior Chief Amukena II and His Majesty the Litunga he went for assistance. We advise Mutondo and his royal council to do the same now and turn to the Litunga of Barotseland to resolve their unsatisfied wish fulfilment springing from their mythological desires.

We also advise and recommend that the government of Zambia should undo the wrongs done by previous administrations by revoking the Presidential statutory instruments which wrongly recognised Mutondo as chief of the Nkoya people of Kaoma district. Mutondo’s area of jurisdiction is Shikombwe only and does not extend to other areas. The violation of the 1958 map for area chiefs in Barotseland by the government of Zambia should be corrected.

Finally, the words of His Majesty Litunga Ilute 1V quoted in the opening remarks of this paper underscore the policy direction of the Barotseland Royal Establishment. We reiterate and conclude by quoting the Litunga from the same letter when he stated categorically that “It was decided to withdraw our customary law mandate from them so that they may go elsewhere away from Barotseland where they would exercise their new found jurisdiction”; adding “that the Lozis are not willing to force the Mwene Mutondo and Mwene Kahare to accept the customary law jurisdiction of Barotseland and therefore there is no way they can continue to claim the chieftaincy which they have disowned”.

The Litunga’s disciplinary action was frustrated by the President of the Republic of Zambia who refused to co-operate. Hence it is this government support which has seen the Nkoyas making wild statements concerning the campaign for the creation of Kafue province and to elevate Mutondo to paramount chief! This can only be achieved if Mutondo and his people can be relocated elsewhere away from Barotseland. The Nkoyas constitute a paltry 16% of the population in Kaoma, Luampa and Nkeyema districts combined. What justification is there for Mutondo to reign paramount over the various tribes who make up the remaining 84% with the Lozi, Mbunda /Luvale speaking people in the majority? Barotseland cannot allow former refugees to cause anarchy in a region which has seen peace, harmony and tranquillity for many centuries as a united people. This scramble for Barotseland is ill conceived, and designed to stimulate undesirable problems whose consequences will be too ghastly to contemplate. It shall be opposed with all the vehemence at our command.

Our Nkoya brothers would be wise not to underrate the people of Barotseland. To arrest this mentality, the other solution is for the Government of Zambia to stop meddling in the customary and traditional affairs of Barotseland. In the words of His Majesty Litunga Ilute Yeta IV in the same letter to President Frederick Chiluba,

“....Barotseland is a kingdom even as of now.......and in a kingdom you cannot find a chief who is independent of the King, because such a situation is untenable”.

The government of Zambia should not encourage Nkoyas to establish independent chiefdoms within Barotseland.

We conclude by reiterating the passionate appeal by Mwene Mutondo Edward Mbombola Moyo signing as Watunga Moyo in a letter to His Majesty the Litunga in 1995 in which he acknowledged that “No any other person would come up with solutions to problems of your families in Kaoma other than you, Sir”. Yes indeed Mutondo and the people of Kaoma district belong to the larger Barotse family under the undisputed rulership of His Majesty the Litunga. Therefore no decisions concerning the chieftainship leadership in this district should be entertained by the Government of Zambia including the President who should refrain from arbitrary recognitions without full consultations with His Majesty the Litunga and Council. We believe very strongly and with confidence that the Litunga is more than capable of solving problems in this part of his kingdom. For meaningful solutions to be found both Mwenes Mutondo and Kahare should not shun attending meetings called by the Litunga and the Council designed to discuss their artificial concerns on the traditional governance and leadership of the district. This has been the main stumbling block because both had declined to attend such meetings in the past.


REFERENCES

1. Letter to President of Zambia Mr. Titus Jacob Chiluba by H.M the Litunga Ilute Yeta 1V, 1st February, 1994.

2. Northern Rhodesia Government, Barotseland Protectorate, Provincial Administration – Mankoya Tour Reports, National Archives of Zambia, BSE1/2/102, 1958.

3. Barotse Royal Establishment, Minutes of the Barotse National Council, Lealui, 1998, 1999, and 2000.

4. Barotse Royal Establishment, Report of the Meeting of Silalo Indunas from Kaoma, Lealui, 2010.

5. Government of Zambia, Statutory Instrument No. 56 of 1993.

6. Government of Zambia, Statutory Instrument No.63 of 1981

7. High Court for Zambia, Griffiths Musialike Mukande {suing as Ngambela of Western Province} versus Edward Mbombola Moyo {sued as Mwene Mutondo}, Lusaka, cause No.1994/HP/127. Lusaka, 1994.

8. Sunday Mail, “Nkoya chiefs defy Barotse court”, 3rd April, 1993

9. The Post Newspaper, “Nkoyas warn of Bloodshed” 23rd March 1993

10. Kaunda, Kenneth David, President of Zambia, “I wish to inform the nation” an address to the nation 25th August 1969.

11. Government of Zambia, Village Register 1985,

12. Government of Zambia, General List of Chiefs 1978

13. Barotse Royal Establishment, Naliele District Kuta, The Institution of Chieftainship in Barotseland vis-a-vis Zambian Government, 2013

14. Barotse Royal Establishment, Naliele District Kuta, Report on Mwene Mutondo’s Activities in the District, 2010

  • 20
  • Feb

The time for the annual Kuomboka ceremony has come again after last years’ ceremony was cancelled as Barotseland was mourning the queen who died weeks before the ceremony was scheduled to be held.

The ceremony has always been graced by a guest of honour from the Zambian government mostly the President or Vice President.

This trend should however not be a routine as Barotseland declared independence from Zambia and is at liberty to invite a guest of honour from within Barotseland or any friendly country.

Since Zambians have refused to peacefully vacate Barotseland and have maintained their presence by force, they should not be invited to grace our ceremony because this will be tantamount to shooting ourselves in the foot.

The Zambian government has so far refused to listen to the people of Barotseland and has continued to arrest and terrorise our leaders and people but want to officiate at our ceremony to mislead their people and the international community that all was well between Zambia and Barotseland.

It is however time for the people of Barotseland through the Barotseland Royal Authority (BRA) to send a clear message to Zambia that we are no longer interested in their make believe (Mandwani) games by not inviting them to officiate at the ceremony.

If the Zambian government is interested in attending the ceremony, either through President Lungu or Vice President Inonge Wina, then they should attend just as tourists.

  • 17
  • Feb

We are determined to restore our country's self determination, even though faced with resistance, but the process of overcoming resistance is the beginning of freedom. We will forever shame our oppressors (Zambia) as we courageously contribute to Barotseland’s independence struggle, and make strides to statehood recognition among the international community. Just like climbing a high mountain, those who are committed to justice don't expect to get to the top in one climb. They recognize the need to establish a base camp and then a series of more advanced camps before the final push. If Barotseland lacked the fabric of justice, it would have been at war with Zambia by now because our oppressors walk not in the interest of peace and justice but of deception and treachery.

Barotseland independence campaign will not be silenced by oppressive measures taken by our enemy by prolonged detention of Barotseland's Administrator General and three members of his cabinet. We draw our motivation logically from moral principles that govern our conscience and actions. The sad part is that the Zambian authorities together with their Zambian civil societies think that the occupation of Barotseland is "irreversible". That word - "irreversible" - is not in the vocabulary of Barotseland people because people are well enlightened on the issue.

Yet - thanks to the important work of citizens journalism and members of freedom movements through our platforms like Barotsepost, Linyungandambo secretariat, Barotseland broadcast network, Barotse voice, Barotseland free state and mutomo for their informative articles - the "irreversible" will soon be reversed.

Despite being faced with extraordinary challenges, including resource constraints to expand our communication platforms and paying for our own programs, isolation from media coverage (especially Zambian controlled media houses) and 'overwhelming odds'. The people of Barotseland have remained resolute and continued to campaign for independence focused on internationally agreed principles, eschewed ideology and non violent methodology. It will be a good gesture for every Mulozi to contribute to the struggle at all levels to maximize use of the international systems, media and civil society networks.

It is of importance too, in our independence demand to draw attention for justice. The Barotseland independence struggle should be embraced by all people who precisely believe in justice and rule of law. Unity is the foundation of achievement, in like manner; it is difficult in the absence of unity to attain our desired independence. We are dealing with a rogue state that does not respect the sanctity of human rights and preservation of public international law. I am of the view that it is important to call things by their correct names. It's not wrong to call "Zambia a rogue state and the genesis of Zambia is founded on lies". We must call an end to the ongoing illegal occupation of Barotseland by Zambia with affirmative "NO" demand. Barotseland must be free.

It seems Zambia has failed to adhere to our demand to release all our people detained on Barotseland related matters and have the impasse settled before the impartial court i.e international court of Justice. Nevertheless, we are thankful to our international lawyers’ standing- in for the Barotseland provisional government on behalf of the people of Barotseland to take Zambia to the international court of Justice despite Zambia's unwillingness to corporate.

Barotseland must be free. Tukongote wa Mwana Nongolo.



  • 16
  • Feb

The entire history of the freedom movements is replete with the saga of bravery, sacrifice and political sagacity of great men and women from all walks of life. Their stature often gives us an erroneous impression that it is only a man's movement. But it is not so. Many prominent women in some parts of the world played a leading role in the freedom movements. In Barotseland, the first name that comes to mind is that of the famous Grace Muyangana (M.H.S.R.I.P). She led her campaign for Barotseland liberation against the Zambian brutal government that landed her in Zambian prison. Even her enemies (Zambia) admired her courage and daring. She fought valiantly even after her release, she refused to surrender but chose to fall as a warrior should, fighting the enemy to the last. Her remarkable courage inspired many men and women in Barotseland.

As such, I wish to recommend strongly to the freedom movements to review the contents and spirit of the 2012 BNC resolutions, with a view to accurately and objectively reflect the sacrifices and contributions of all who have lost their life opportunities due to maiming and arrests by Zambian security.

We should take cognizance of the 2012 independence declaration as our compass and navigate within the right attitudes and longitudes of the resolutions, bearing in mind that BNC is the highest policy making body in our motherland.

Seriously, this calls for genuine participation as patriotic advocates for our country’s freedom. Women no exception! Women stand up and be counted. Join the ranks of our young men who contributed immensely to the extent of losing their lives and some even incapacitated due to bullet woods and torture.

Women should brace for bravely participation at various resistance movements levels in the rural or urban Barotseland, illiterate or literate it doesn't matter. All can play a passive or active contribution as comrades of their men folk.

Everyone and anyone has the right to play a role based on his or her values and the passion he or she has for Barotseland.

Tukongote litunga ni lyetu

By Saleya Kwalombota

  • 16
  • Feb

Media, especially the Print Media, has all along been the backbone of all mass movements or popular upsurge in other countries as a vehicle to total liberation and Barotseland independence struggle is no exception. Right from the time of BPF of Mutangelwa in the 1990s. In fact, many of the leaders of the Freedom movement themselves turned into journalists too, and used the press to propagate their ideas to the masses.

The value of the media in the development of nation-state campaign is prominent in nationalism against subjugation and colonialism. As such, as the struggle intensifies, we should inaugurate a process of tactical dissemination of information to reach the rural populace through any form of communication for proper awareness. However, I am of the view that;

1. During our Independence struggle, the media and newspapers should not be established as profit-making business ventures but should be seen as rendering national and public service to the people.

2. The media Impact should not be limited to towns; but aim to reach remote villages from North to south and from East to west of Barotseland territory.

3. The media should serve the purpose of not only political education but also of political participation where every Mulozi should be free to express his or her political views.

4. Government act and policies should be put to public awareness through the established media platforms.

5. In a scenario where most people are illiterates, even the press can hope to achieve only partial success; hence, theatrical drama could be of useful alternative.

Since media is synonymous with dissemination of information, the Acting Administrator General should look at the following raised concerns by our people at the grassroots for possible consideration;

a) Establish information center at Regional / constituency levels

b) cabinet to be pro-active - each government minister must function.

c) There must be harmony between the Royal Barotseland Government and the Barotse Royal Authority in order to foster liaison committee to be set (established).

d) Strong, patriotic, courageous and down -to-earth youth wing.

e) International relations and media liaison committee to be set (established).

f) Seriously engage the BRE to change the name to Barotseland Royal Authority (BRA), to remove an ethical divider of Zambian creation -BRE.

g) Consider putting the Radio on free to air satellite dish to improve our reach to a wider audience and cover news in all districts of Barotseland.

h) Launch the football league even at amateur level.

i) Organize peaceful demonstrations against Zambia at the UN HQ, Zambia embassies in UK USA and Botswana for international media attention of our issue (and SADC HQ).

Finally, the overwhelming critical features of the press in its relationship to the information dissemination can no longer be ignored at this crucial time when we are faced with fake propaganda from the Zambian side that is trying to project to be in good relationship with Barotseland to the international community when in fact it is the other way. The misinformation and half truths have characterized our independence struggle within and outside our territory due to lack of platforms where we can debate, discuss and layout our achievements towards Barotseland emancipation. The rational interest is however, to unfold the proper character at the point at which the media is acknowledged as a social force and tool in the promotion of political agenda, especially where peaceful approach is concerned.

  • 10
  • Feb

Self determination is no respecter of persons. It leaves no stone unturned. Royal or commoner, it comes with a challenge, and this is the challenge that the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) and all of us are meeting face to face today. By the way, whose face is it putting on?

Therefore, BRE has no option other than making itself relevant to this unstoppable process of self determination. Doing otherwise will mean BRE will join other royal foundations who never liberated their territories. This happened when the African freedom fighters realized early that their kings / chiefs were turned into colonialist agents, and so they opted to move on to independence without them. Thus today there are very few countries headed by kings or queens, instead the commoners rule these states, and kings/chiefs are now monumental citizens needing governments to recognize and gazette them.

Similarly, Barotseland's self determination is not wholly dependent on BRE, but rather we the people. However, this process can be accelerated exponentially with the full participation of the BRE and the Litungaship. BUT it will not stop (without them.) It may just be delayed by key stake holders. Otherwise the process thus far is impressive. The mood in the people of Barotseland is a key indicator that we are going home.

It may not be today or tomorrow but believe me, we as a people, even in our commonness, will get there.

This period, therefore, gives an opportunity for BRE to provide their age old leadership and launch another constitutional monarchy in Africa like Lesotho. I have no doubt in my mind that BRE is definitely in touch with the realities on the ground and are definitely doing the best for Barotseland. They may not beat their own drums of praise but suffice to say that this activism we are enjoying today is evidence of their able patriotic leadership.

Long Live HRM Litunga Lubosi Imwiko II, Long Live Royal Establishment, Long Live Royal Barotseland Government. Long Live all Activist movements, Long Live you and me, Barotseland nationals.

  • 09
  • Feb

The Editor,

Please publish this on our popular front, the Barotseland Post.

As usual I periodically take time to remind each one of us most importantly we the youths. We need to take part in making sure we are not enslaved by Zambia. We need new tactics, new ideas and new thinking! This can only be done by us, Fresh thinkers.

I read in the media that President Lungu wants to engage BRE to chat Barotseland Agreement,

This is wrong and unacceptable. BRE should redeem itself by engaging the Barotse populace, I am reminding you that Zambia do have a standing Army aimed at annihilation; this Army is stationed in the entire Barotseland with many in our Nations' Capital, Mongu. They want to wipe us out should we voice out, again you have a chance and you want to waste it! We must tell President Lungu that everyone wants out!

To the youths of Barotseland, secession is our hope. Some Zambians say we can't secede, Isn't that like telling your wife she can't divorce you? We are not equal partners. Our neighbors have an agenda of perpetual enslaving us. 'We are equal before the Creator and it’s so insulting to be downtrodden by fellow individuals.' Arise Barotse! Barotseland is our Land and we know, no other, lets brave on. Aluta!

To the BRE, Its common knowledge around Barotseland that everyone wants to leave this treacherous union. Since 1969 we have cried foul to have the BA 64 recognized. My plea is be true to yourselves and to your children, we together with you the BRE have been going down this road for far too long; we are grown ups and you the BRE can no longer fix this, your people (including Nkoyas and Mbundas) want to leave this treacherous union no one wants to stay with Zambia. Of course I know some would want to cash in on us but please, look at the bigger picture.

My advice is to include all the activist organizations: Moreba, the Linyungandambo - Government In-Waiting, Mr. Sinyinda and his BNFA, The Barotse Patriotic Front under Mr. Mutangelwa, and other senior Citizens. I myself support the numerous organizations because I fear that because of the love of money, a few will compromise our resolve of leaving Zambia for a few pieces of silver. I know some people are getting wealthy by falsely representing us and getting resources from the colonizer! This is shameful. We do not want to be in misery at your expense. Itaba maswabisa kuli munge kapene nikusinya taba nikulibala bana bamba bao batamilwe ni bao seba pumuzi kataba ye!!!

To the Zambian Government, I am ashamed that you forcibly want us to stay when you are the same people through your Nyasa brother, Mr. Kaunda that abrogated our Union Treaty. You say the treaty doesn't provide for secession. Does it provide for abrogation you? We are not claiming any land outside our borders; we are claiming our land not claiming peoples. If there are people who are dissatisfied then better they move to those areas considered friendly because as far as me and others are concerned Barotseland is a Lozi Nation to which all these peoples fall and are equally LOZIs as long as they are within the borders of Barotseland.

To President Lungu, kindly release all our Political detainees, call back your standing army currently in Barotseland and then sit at the table, and chat the way forward. Barotseland shall be free.

Mwanangombe Lubinda.

The author is an Agriculture Consultant in Huambo, Angola. Holds a Bsc in Agriculture from the Wageningen University, The Royal Netherlands.

  • 09
  • Feb

I would like to dwell on Kaunda's speech of 26th August 1969 to the nation dubbed "I WISH TO INFORM THE NATION", where his unquenchable desire to "fix" the people of Barotseland was manifested two years after the independence. It is disheartening to note the level of visible hatred the Kaunda regime made against the people of Barotseland as a whole. The incidences of hatred are traced way back before independence of Northern Rhodesia (Zambia) in 1964 and continued to date.

IN REFERENCE TO 1969 BAROTSELAND REFERENDUM

The people of Barotseland had utterly rejected the maneuvers under the referendum as indicated below but Kaunda's deceptive manners could not honor the true figures but instead opted to manipulation of the outcome

"All these reforms which have had been announced affecting the political, economic and social fields are possible now, thanks to the referendum, thanks to the support which the people in this nation gave me, the party and government." END OF QUOTE.

It was an aberration in the act of referendum for Kaunda to have cheated that the people of Barotseland had voted in favor of government reforms to have control over Barotseland natural resources and possessions, when in fact the results indicated that they had given an unequivocal NO vote representing 62.08 percent against a paltry YES vote representing 37.92 percent.

UNDER CUSTOM AND WILDLIFE

"Hitherto, under custom, wildlife and indeed fish, in certain areas have belonged to individuals, Indunas and other traditional leaders." END OF QUOTE.

It must be emphasized that these insinuations were directed at the leadership and the people of Barotseland because this is the only area where people own natural resources such as "Masa" (Weirs), "Mishitu" (thickness of forests), "Likuma" (thickness of papyrus), "Masimu" (gardens) etc, etc. This position was acknowledged by Professor Max Gluckman (commonly known as Makapweka) who had stated that the Lozis are the only people, in the world, who own and know the extent of their land without the aid of beacons.

IN REFERENCE TO BAROTSE NATIONAL SCHOOL

In his, insatiable, appetite to destroy the property of the people of Barotseland by removing all the known vestiges and in reference to the Barotse National School this is what he said;

“The Barotse National School is to assume another name, for we cannot have a nation within a nation.” END OF QUOTE.

Let it be explained that this school (now known as Kambule secondary school) was built from the money arising out of 10 percent of the collections which was committed to the development of education in Barotseland at the signing of treaties in the 1880s.

IN REFERENCE TO BAROTSELAND NAME

In his misguided outbursts and in reference to Barotseland he had this to say;

"Barotse province is now to become Western province. The present western province, which bears no relationship to the direction, will become copperbelt province." END OF QUOTE.

Let it be explained that the purpose of renaming Barotseland and changing her status was intended to down grade her to levels of other provinces in order to justify the denial of her proper share of entitlement which was accruable as a result of being a "territory" like her equal partner, the “territory" of Northern Rhodesia.

UNDER CHIEFS

In his endeavors to disturb the affairs of Barotseland, had this to say with respect to “chiefs",

“I know, for example, that certain chiefs in the Western province have been performing the functions of chiefs without Government recognition. I wish to announce that I am making investigations ..." END OF QUOTE.

It is surprising that former dictator president Kenneth Kaunda could infer that there were only six chiefs in Barotseland when they are more than 100 silalo indunas or "chiefs" as they are referred to within Zambian terminology. These are responsible for certification of documents for the purpose of obtaining national registration cards. Personalities such as the Litunga, royal highnesses the Litunga la- mboela, Mboanjikana, Prince Inyambo, prince Anananga, Amukena and Lukama are not chiefs in Barotseland context but are sitting princes and princesses while His Royal Majesty, the Litunga is King heading the kingdom. This is why you will never see the aforementioned reflected on the national registration cards as required under the Zambian National Registration Act because they are princes and princesses under the Kingdom and territory of Barotseland, and not chiefs in Zambia. So, while you may find a Zambian national registration card (NRC) holder with chief Mpezeni, chief Mwatakazembe or Chief Chitimukulu, for example, you will never find any Zambian NRC holder with Chief Inyambo, Amukena, Anangana, Lukama (let alone 'Chief' Litunga).

The Barotseland equivalent to the Zambian chiefs are the Silalo Indunas, who equally perform the functions which other "chiefs" do in parts of Zambia, although, unfortunately, they are not catered for in terms of benefits such as enumerations, houses (palaces), motor vehicles etc, like the chiefs in other provinces of Zambia.

In conclusion, the people of Barotseland should come to the realization that this discriminatory tendency of the Zambian government against Barotse nation was the backbone of Kenneth Kaunda's (Zambia's first president) treacherous acts that led to the abrogation of BA64 (an honorary and binding treaty), and his atrocities, arrests and detentions of over 200 Barotzish that were to follow from 1969 to this day!

This, therefore, calls for serious consideration to redeem ourselves from these conditions of slavery, servitude and bondage that we find ourselves in today. The people of Barotseland should accept the reality that the Zambian government hold the worst consideration of Barotseland as a country and worse still, considers the Lozi nationals as subservient citizens of Zambia.

The struggle to liberate Barotseland is the only valuable spirit that encompasses all, therefore, a journey started is a journey completed, Barotseland must be free.

Tukongote Litunga Ni lyetu

By Saleya Kwalombota

  • 05
  • Feb
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean LOSS OF YOUR LEGALLY ACQUIRED WIFE, HUSBAND, CHILDREN or FAMILY, whether they be Zambian, Barotzish or any other nationality
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean LOSS OF YOUR LEGALLY ACQUIRED PROPERTY in Zambia, Barotseland or anywhere else in the world
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean LOSS OF YOUR LEGALLY ACQUIRED JOB in Zambia, Barotseland or anywhere else in the world 
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean YOU WILL BE CHASED from Zambia, Barotseland or any other country of the world
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean LOSS OF YOUR TRIBE or ETHNICITY whether that tribe is Zambian or Barotzish and regardless of where you chose to live
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean YOU WILL BE FORCED TO CHOOSE to be Zambian or Barotzish. CITIZENSHIP will be by choice and in accordance with prevailing Citizenship Laws. A Lozi can choose to be or remain Zambian and a Zambian can choose to apply for Barotseland citizenship and be a LOZI or BAROTZISH. In case of DUAL NATIONALITY, one will be able to choose to be a citizen of both Barotseland and Zambia
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean WAR and BLOODSHED between Zambia and Barotseland
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean LOSS OF FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT between Barotseland and Zambia
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean LOSS of TRADE and COMMERCE between Barotseland and Zambia
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean No more MUNGU or NAKONDE rice
  • Barotseland Independence Does not mean...Please, add to this list all your fears?

There are LAWS that govern and will continue to govern Barotseland just like there are LAWS that govern Zambia. THIS CHANGE WILL BE GRADUAL rather than INSTANTANEOUS. Time will be given for everyone to make decisions about what to do with their life, families, businesses and property.

So RELAX as we look forward to a HEALTHY and HARMONIOUS bilateral relationship between Barotseland and Zambia. After all Barotseland and Zambia will be neighbors forever, hopefully.

  • 04
  • Feb

Having looked at the background of the Barotseland Agreement and the origin of Zambia as a unitary state in the last article, we will now look at the thorny issue of the boundary of Barotseland and whether there is need for a referendum.

We will also sample some quotations from the man who created the problem before us, Kenneth David Kaunda.

The boundary of Barotseland proper has always been maintained by the Barotse though the boundaries of Barotseland North-Western Rhodesia kept changing through the numerous Orders-In-Council.

The boundary currently under claim is that of Barotseland proper as it was from 1900 to 1947 without taking areas that were regarded as her subject or dependent territories into consideration. (See Th Barotseland Boundary Case of 1903-1906 [Britain Vs Portugal] under the arbitration of Italy here: http://barotsepost.com/images/important_barotse_documents/The-Barotseland-Boundary-Case.pdf) or on the United Nations website: http://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/vol_XI/59-69.pdf

The eastern boundaries stretch from Itezhi-Tezhi to the confluence of the river Chiababi with the Zambezi (Longitude26 degrees East) (East of Livingstone) and northern boundaries shall stretch from the confluence of Lufupa river with the Kafue river, westward, to the Lungwebungu river (Longitude 22 degrees East) The boundary on the west shall stretch from Lungwebungu river (latitude 13 degrees 28 minutes south) then southward to the Cuando river, down to the confluence of the Cuando with the Luena river extending to the Katima Mulilo rapids, running along the Zambezi, eastward to its confluence with river Chiababi (Longitude 26 degrees east.)

This boundary is roughly the current Western Province but with the entire Kazungula, Livingstone and the Kafue National Park west of the Kafue river falling within Barotseland and small areas of North Western Province bordering the current Western Province.

The boundary between Barotseland and Angola, Namibia, Botswana and Zimbabwe remains the same as it is currently with Zambia.

Before we consider the implications on Southern, North Western and part of Central provinces, we shall first look at the issue of holding a referendum.

Holding a referendum on the lines of the one recently held by Scotland does not apply to Barotseland because there is currently no treaty in force between Barotseland and Zambia as the agreement or treaty was abrogated by Zambia and Barotseland accepted the abrogation on 27th March 2012 at the Barotseland National Council.

A referendum only applies were a treaty is in force like in the case of Scotland or Tanganyika and Zanzibar in the union of Tanzania but one of the parties wants to pull out.

Barotseland does not need a referendum to withdraw from the unitary state of Zambia because it does not exist. Both Zambia and Barotseland have no treaty obligations because of the 1969 abrogation.

Southern, Parts of Central and North Western Provinces

The dependent areas that fell within the control of Barotseland, (Trust and reserve Land) for which Barotseland was being paid by the British for taking care of them, include Southern Province, parts of Central and North western provinces.
These areas fall outside Barotseland proper but have the right to hold a referendum to choose where they want to belong whether to remain with Zambia or pull out.

Barotseland and Zambia should now commence the disengagement process which will see the exchange of defense forces and civil servants willing to relocate.

The sharing of government assets, repaying the &78.5 million pounds that Zambia looted from the Barotseland treasury,(with interest from 1965) loss of revenue from the mines, reparations and other damages will be handled by the International Court of Justice since Zambia has so far refused to cooperate.

But what will happen to those who have intermarried?

Marriage does not affect someone’s citizenship in any way; Zambians who are married to people from Rwanda or Zimbabwe still remain Zambians.

But I have properties in Zambia, what happens?

You can belong to any country without affecting your property. There are so many people with properties in Zambia like the many Chinese nationals in Zambia yet they are not Zambians but continue running businesses.

What about the Nkoyas?

The Zambian government has for a long time been using the divide and rule formula by sponsoring a few Nkoya brothers to create division.
The 1964 treaty however was signed between two countries and not tribes. It was signed between the government of Northern Rhodesia, the government of Barotseland and the British government as witnesses.

Kenneth Kaunda however later dissolved the Barotse government and renamed it as Barotse Royal Establishment and later changed the name of Barotseland through degree at a rally in Matero and named it Western Province and changed what was then called Western Province to Copper belt.

Kenneth Kaunda said the following on 26th August 1969 at Matero in a speech dubbed ‘I wish to inform the nation.’

‘Barotse Province is now to become Western Province. The present Western Province, which bears no relationship to the direction, will become Copper belt Province. Logically, Barotse Province should have been Western Province in view of the geographical location of North Western Province.’

Even before the change of name to Western Province , Kaunda defied his own Attorney General’s legal advice, the most respected legal adviser, Mr James John Skinner who, when delivering a Ministerial statement in Parliament on 18th September 1965,had advised that:

‘The legal name of Barotseland was Barotseland and not Barotse Province.’

Kenneth Kaunda had made the following assurance when he addressed the Litunga and Barotse government at Lealui on 6th August 1964:

‘I am glad that the basis of the agreement is that Barotseland is an integral part of Zambia and I can assure you, Sir Mwanawina and all members of the Barotse Royal Family and of the Barotse government, that government has no wish to interfere with the day to day running of the internal affairs of Barotseland. This is the responsibility of the Barotse government and the intention of the central government will be to give the Barotse government maximum assistance and cooperation.’

In one of Kaunda’s earlier visits to Barotseland to beg the Barotse government to proceed to independence as one with Zambia (Northern Rhodesia) Kaunda knelt down and cried before the Litunga and it was out of this action that the line ‘One land and one nation is our cry’ was picked and crafted in the Zambia national anthem.

Kenneth Kaunda has however elected to remain mute on the problem he created through his love for power

  • 03
  • Feb

TODAY, 3RD FEBRUARY 2015 witnesses the 110th anniversary of the birth of Mbikusita Lewanika, the Founding President General of the Northern Rhodesia African Congress and King of Barotseland. And, by the way, he was an unsurpassed Barotse African traditional paddler, drummer and dancer, before kingship inhibited him.

MBIKUSITA LEWANIKA was a Prince, by occurrence of birth at Lealui, on 3 February 1905. He was enthroned as King of Barotseland at Lealui, according to centuries-old tradition at Lealui, on 15 December 1968. He had died at Lewanika General Hospital of Mongu-Lealui, on 7 February 1977. He was buried as per tradition for a Barotse King, on 11 February 1977. However, contrary to uninformed perceptions and popular presumption, the royalty factor in his life has been more often a spear thrusting into his flesh. His distinguishing life service factor is that he lived and worked with this spear eternally injuring his every service endeavour and constantly obstructing every step paving people’s way forward. His life was a stipple jump race over spikes of hindrances at every turn, rather than being born with a silver spoon in his mouth, as some imagine of Royalty. The events and circumstances of Mbikusita Lewanika’s royal birth and kingship is not of substantive concern. The unremarkable factor of being a prince or being enthroned and buried as a king is not a distinction. History records are full of unworthy princes and kings and full of worthy persons of regal associations.

THE LIFE SERVICE OF MBIKUISTA LEWANIKA IS OF NOTE, in the context that an earlier generation of Western educated African natives, born around the turn of the 20th century, founded African freedom movements, thus sowing the seeds of independence. They had intensive upbringing in, and life time unbroken linkages to, African traditional leadership, to whose values, culture and governance they were positively predisposed at pre-colonial formation level. They made effort to acquire and understand what they could from Western education, Christianity, modernisation and governance systems at conglomerate colony level. They embraced this duality comfortably, but with determination to retain and recover traditional Africa and its lost autonomy, while steadily mastering and taking charge of new skills, operations and institutions of European colonialism. They strived to reach a happy medium outcome combining the best of European modernity and even democracy, while preserving what is anchoring and pleasing from traditional Africa, where possible and positive. Members of this generation were pathfinders, long distance runners and cautious petitioners for African sovereignty. Of these, John Langalibelele Dube (11 February 1871 - 11 February 1946) of South Africa and the Zulu Kingdom and Dr. Joseph Kwame Kyeretwie Boakye Danquah (December 1895 – 4 February 1965) of the Gold Coast and the Ashate Kingdom, among others, correspond to Mbikusita Lewanika (3 February 1905 – 7 February 1977) of Northern Rhodesia and Barotseland, all of them deserve full and positive recognition as planter of Africa’s trees of independence.

MBIKUSITA LEWANIKA’s life start with the distinction of having overcome the perils of being tossed about as an infant and out growing mal-adjustment in early school years at Luatile School. Thereafter, it is distinguished further as he became a good academic performer at the Barotse National School and, through his own stubborn insistence, he managed to get a South African Lovedale College education. He followed this by taking an independent minded path leading to becoming Founder Secretary of the Livingstone African Welfare Association in 1929, at the age of 24.

In the 1930s, in his youth, he was a principal participant at the Kafue first attempt to found an African National Congress north of the Zambezi, served as Private Secretary of the King of Barotseland, wrote the first full length English language book by a native in his part of Africa and embarked on translation of the Bible into SiLozi and the classic Pilgrim’s Progress.

In the 1940’s, he refused to be destroyed or incapacitated by the astounding shock banishment from the summit of the capital of Barotseland on bogus and malevolent charges. He marshaled the strength of mind to move on to another world and different life at Nkana-Kitwe, which did not depend on royalty. From a prince, he became a proletariat, owning no functional means of production but selling his services to capitalist for wages. He labored, for twenty years, as Senior African Clerk, Senior Welfare Officer, Personnel and Public Relations officer for an Anglo-American Corporation copper mine. At the same time, he became a leader of his fellow African proletariats, and served in a voluntary capacity as Founder President of the Kitwe African Society, proposer of the formation of the Northern Rhodesia Federation of African Welfare Association, pioneer promoter of trade unionism and Founder President-General of the Northern Rhodesia African Congress. Not only this, he also took wrote several other books and publishing newspaper and magazine articles, in Africa and overseas, in addition to man voluntary civic services for Africans, when there were few people available to do so.

In the 1950, in one of his many firsts, as President General of the Northern Rhodesia African Congress, he met Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and consummated what has become the Indo-Zambia bilateral relationship at state and people levels. He initiate programmes for sending young future leaders for overseas higher education, at least three of who were to be in the first post colonial Cabinet of Ministers. He followed this by becoming the first and only African from Northern Rhodesia and Barotseland (and even Zambia since) to address a meeting attended by Members of both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, at Westminster, in London – he spoke against the proposal to establish the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland. He also corresponded with Kwame Nkrumah, in the run up to, and after his appointment as Prime Minister of the Gold Coast (Ghana) and met with leading African nationalist leaders in Kenya, including Mbiyu Koinange and Jomo Kenyatta, hence, pioneering cross border consultation and cooperation among leaders of the African freedom movement.

During the rest of the 1950’s he was Founder President of the Mines African Staff Association, a student at the University College of Wales at Swansea, a Member of Parliament of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland and a facilitator for domestic and foreign higher education for hundred of Zambians and Barotse individuals, both men and women. In the 1960’s, he as a Parliamentary Secretary in Ministry of External Affair of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland; undertook a couple of years post retirement job in the personnel department of Wankie (Hwange) Collieries; and engaged in some Limulunga village and Wusakile Township retail trading business to finance his children’s education and make an independent living, in an unfriendly post-colonial environment. As if to complete the circle and bring closure to his life, three decades after expulsion from the capital of Barotseland, he has resurface and returned to be enthroned as King of Barotseland, in December 1968.

Despite all this, Mbikusita Lewanika is a victim of a cultivated campaign of history denial, which is motivated by three intentions. The first is the urge to justify the propaganda that architects and heroes of African independence are only those who inherited the button on the last stretch of the relay race to new African nation-statehood, who are actually harvesters and not planters of independence. The second is to avoid any challenge to the established denigrated portrayal and, sometimes, double standard condemnation, of the earlier generation of political leaders representing a different approach to independence and governance. The third is justify the decolonisation dispensation that retained both the colonial geographical and governance legacy, while effectively preventing the return power to the African governments and peoples from whom European colonialism took it. In effect, it obstructs minds and actions of Africans from reviewing and reconstituting the independence dispensation. This is unacceptable, because independence has failed to liberate Africa and Africans from vestiges of European colonialism and to set it unto the path of truly independent, effective sovereignty and human dignity. This lack of factual and well digested history hides and causes problems.

Distorting history poses problems for the present and is a fundamental stumbling block for Africa’s future. It erases and misrepresents contributions of those who planted African independence. It negates opportunities of establishing internal inclusiveness and consensus in the formation of the externally designed new African nation-states. It discourages consideration of optional paths towards overcoming impediments to political advancement, economic development and social liberation. Furthermore, it blind leaders and citizens from seeing whatever wisdom and positive guidance that may be in the legacies of the fore-runners of post-colonial leaders. In short, it creates and endorses an incorrect history that misinform and handicap people’s enlightened freedom for the self-determination and sovereignty that is the promise of independence.

In the case of Zambia, it is portrayed as if the freedom movement begins and ends during the last five years before Independence, under the sole leadership of UNIP and its office holders, which is a distortion of history. It like doctoring the Bible by rewriting the Exodus story, with all credit to Joshua and none to Moses! This topic is being raised now, in the light of unfolding anniversary cerebrations highlight and ignore selected parts of history with consistent partiality. The year 2017 marks the 40th Anniversary of the passing away of Mbikusita Lewanika. 2016 marks the 100th anniversary of the demise of his father, King Lewanika the First of Barotseland. 2015 shall witness the 110th anniversary of his birth, while 2014 witnesses the 50th joint-anniversary of his labours’ fruits, which are Zambia’s Independence and the Barotseland Agreement 1964, which provided for Barotseland to be an integral part of Zambia after independence.

In reflecting upon these anniversaries, it is instructive that the subject personality is Mbikusita Lewanika is founding President General of the Northern Rhodesia African Congress from 1948 to 1951. He reigned as the last son of King Lewanika the First to seat on the throne of Barotseland, from 1968 to 1977. His place in history has been denied and distorted, for personal, partisan and sectarian reasons. He has a record of outstanding broad, varied and pioneering public service, from 1929 to 1977. The history and essence of the establishment and independence of Zambia is incomplete, unbalanced and unintelligible, in fact unacceptable, without appreciation and taking positive account of the life service of maligned figures, such as Mbikusita Lewanika. This is part of Zambia’s undoing through personal, partisan and sectarian history denial and distortion. It may be too late to say it, now - BUT THE WRITING HAS BEEN IGNORED ON THE WALL FOR FIFTY YEARS!

Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika

  • 31
  • Jan

Barotseland here we are at it again, the sixth Zambian republican president appearing so innocent soft but cunning, fashioned in strategic hate, wickedness is his desire, nothing hopeful for the children of Barotseland.

So dangerous is his strategy to harm and silence Barotseland forever. Look at the three strategies he plans to employ this time;

1. His hate desire to call for referendum is to apply the same rigging strategies he used to ascend to his throne…. So; rigging strategy….

2. Separate Barotseland on tribal lines by supporting the Nkoya brothers to feel marginalized by the rest and revolt against Barotseland…. So; Nkoya conflict-separation strategy….

3. Creating a wide boarder of Barotseland to mask the opinion of the true Rotse ….. So; wide voter strategy…..

As noted and resounded by most Barotseland intellectuals, we are way beyond referendum and not necessary. The BNC Limulunga declaration should be responded to not fooling us and think we can be excited… NEVER! …..The Rodger Chongwe commission of inquiry to be released, nothing more…. First in first out.

First, Barotseland should move fast and ahead to legally and intelligently seal all the gaps of suspected strategies to weaken the struggle. All I know is that the Litunga has declared his support over this issue through the Kuta. Therefore, THE LITUNGA, KING OF BAROTSELAND, THE BRE AND THE KUTA, BNFA and LINYUNGANDAMBO should be seen to be ONE with one voice and only one spokesperson …. It is war and needs to be managed well… this time around.

Second, THE GOVERNMENT OF ZAMBIA SHOULD UNCONDITIONALLY RELEASE ALL THOSE ARRESTED OVER THE BAROTSELAND FREEDOM.

Third, the people of Barotseland should all understand that the declaration for our independence was done and the Zambian Government decided not to respond to it.

Fourth, all the Barotseland activists and Barotseland people should guard themselves against saleouts and those who want to pretend to be on our side yet not. The call for separation of north western, southern provinces together with Barotseland should not blind our mission already attained.

Finally, this is just the same devil putting on a different small jacket. It’s time to pray.

BULOZI KI NAHA SHANGWE!!!!

The Barotseland Post, also known as The Barotsepost, is an online media platform, for now, that is dedicated to reporting stories and news around Barotseland and beyond, giving exclusive coverage and access to the people and the nation of Barotseland to fully express themselves in their aspirations for self- determination.