This question is cardinal as Barotseland's self governing is about to commence. As such the question requires a candid answer in order to remove a lot of unnecessary misgivings by cobwebs in the wider spectrum of society of Zambia including those who peddle lies and hold the worst consideration about Barotseland.
In this exercise, the following details are brought to light as they offer contradictory views by people who lack knowledge of the subject, while others take it as a deliberate move to satisfy their evil egos. Therefore, the information produced in the publication of the weekly Post of 31/12/1992 to 7/01/1993 is good enough and is given as follows:-
Personality (Arthur N. L. Wina , First Minister of Finance in 1964), Utterance,
"Somebody must produce receipts, we must have evidence of money , how it was taken, when it was taken and where it was taken"
Personality (Sikota Wina, first minister of Local government), Utterance,
"what does the ordinary Lozi man stand to gain from the Agreement of £78, 500,000 if it won't used for housing in 1964 but into pockets of just a few people?
“The decision to take over all the treasuries was made by the government collectively and not by a few individuals;
“To say that the Wina brothers did this or that is a lot of rubbish; If the Barotse people were granted what they were asking for, they would practically be a separate state from Zambia; If that is not an independent Republic that is secession that is backbone of a Government and independent Republic in control of its land, treasury, judiciary, forestry, legislature and local Government" end of quote.
According to another publication of the weekly post of 22/01/1993 to 28/01/1993 stated:-
Personality, (Kenneth. D. Kaunda, first president of Zambia and the signatory to the Barotseland Agreement 1964 and the key figure in the abrogation of the Agreement), utterances,
"The government hasn't asked me to state my side of the case, but there should be no need for them to panic. History can be re-written but facts cannot be altered; If our brothers and sisters want the matter to be settled in the courts of law, I will help the government lawyers explain the case as it is I signed the Agreement and is a well known fact;
“There was no way one province could have been treated more special or important than others in the same country; There had been a lot of native treasuries from various provinces which government collectively incorporated and not as Kaunda; The treasuries included those from the mineral rich Copperbelt which, as a result of an agreement between the Lozi Establishment and the British were going to the British South African Company" end of quote.
Nonetheless, since a lot of information is hidden from the public, it is better to explain some salient points to show the ignorance of the concerned people who have made such useless utterances.
According to the publication of the Times of Zambia of 5th November 1965, it was reported that:-
"About £411,000 representing assets and cash of the Barotse Government Treasury are being distributed to the district councils"
According to the publication of the Daily Mail of 17th November 1965, it was reported that:-
"In at least one aspect, the province dubbed the 'Cinderella' during the colonial era is now leading all other provinces in Zambia; Under the 18 months transitional development plan, Barotse province receives £111,450 in grants for capital development works. An additional £42,000 is to be made available from the Rural Councils own resources" end of quote.
The details given above demonstrate that the Barotse Native Government had money that was properly acquired.
It is further demonstrated that the Barotse Native Government had a variety of sources from which it had acquired money through Native tax rebate, Investments and Veterinary. According to a letter reference No. MC/B/LA/FIN/22 dated 15th November 1965 by Mr. M. Sheldrake, who was signing for the provincial local government officer in Mongu, a sum of £14,000 was allocated to each district. Since there were five districts in Barotseland, the amount under this head was £70,000.
It should be emphasized that there were immovable properties owned by the Barotse Native Government which were inherited by the Government of Zambia without arrangements for either compensation or sale and these are under the utility of the Government some of which include:-
1. The structures forming the Barotse National School which was termed Kambule secondary school following the decree by former president Kenneth Kaunda to change the name of the school since "there could not be a state within a state", according to his myopic thinking.
2. The building housing the High Court in Mongu,
3. The building housing the Ministry of Education in Mongu,
4. Liwanika General Hospital,
5. Suu local court building and many more scattered all over Barotseland, etc, etc.
One point worthy noting was that there were investments owned by the Barotse Native Government from which interests were accruing such as the Mulobezi Mills.
It will be interesting to know how the Zambian Government will account for their disposals.
One important question that may be asked is what was used to expropriate those treasuries including "those from the mineral rich Copperbelt" , as was claimed by former president Kenneth Kaunda, since the Local Government Act was meant to cover Barotseland through the establishment of the Barotseland Local Government Fund?
In consequence of the foregoing, the people of Barotseland are entitled to claim for the loss sustained due to the spoliation of their properties in line with the provisions of Article 21 of the African Charter on Human and Political Rights.
"The delay should not in any way be viewed as a point of failure but as a sign of law abiding nation that has taken the diplomatic process to resolve the standoff issues with Zambia."
The political dimension in Barotseland nation is characterized by misinformation and lack of proper communication link from the top leadership of various liberation groups to the grassroots. The political independence liberation of Barotseland territory is proving to be slowed as the Zambian government continues to hold grip by manipulating the minds of the poverty stricken majority, such as enticing them with job positions. This is the saddening side of poverty because it erodes the moral fiber and diminishes the organic social growth and clumsy liberty struggle.
Some have commented that pointing to the Zambian presidential bye election campaigns sweeping successfully across the 2012 declared independent territory as a sign of weak bilateral relationship between the BRE and Activists groups. However, as much as I respect other people's opinions, it is better to understand that the declaration of independence is usually followed by another process known as disengagement, the latter not being a day's event but it takes time to come to the agreement terms of international acts and orders. The delay should not in any way be viewed as a point of failure but as a sign of law abiding nation that has taken the diplomatic process to resolve the standoff issues with Zambia.
The implications of the illegal occupation of a territory are well challenged in a diplomatic way, that is, to engage international community through international courts and continental bodies. We must remember that the Barotseland Agreement 1964 was an international treaty that was concluded peacefully, in like manner, the acceptance of its abrogation, was done peacefully by Barotseland, as the other party and in a lawful process through the Barotse National Council in 2012, after having had exhausted all the channels. To this effect, the people of Royal Barotseland should be encouraged to reject political statements and maneuvers from our soon to be neighbor, Zambia, if not in conformity with the 2012 BNC resolutions, for immediate disengagement.
The most far provoking issue is the destroying of government structures in 1975 by the Zambian government which move was not well accepted by the Lozis as it was the genesis of the loss of sovereignty of our God given territory to a fellow sister African country. What were called customary law, customary land-rights, customary political structure and so on were all invented by Zambia codification by passing laws aimed at fixing Barotseland people. This and other maneuvers against sovereignty of Barotseland, have caused great loss of economic opportunities varying for five decades , leading to the impoverishment of a once rich and self sustaining territory.
Zambian politicians that are campaigning in Barotseland should avoid provoking further the already volatile situation by commenting on the Barotseland status quo as the BNC 2012 independence resolutions have solved it all. The 2012 BNC resolutions still stand and must be the only one to be referred to for implementation other than the non applicable process of referendum in Barotseland impasse.
What applies now is article 70 of the Vienna Convention on the law of international treaties which Zambia’s Attorney General is aware of, hence their reluctance and refusal to appear before international bodies to resolve the matter and commence the disengagement process.
Tukongote Litunga Ni lyetu
My Fellow Compatriots,
The independence struggle for Barotseland has delayed to this far due to certain elements amongst the leadership of activists portraying to be saviors for the people while harboring selfish motives to use the issue for personal monetary gains. This and other selfish vices have characterized the Barotseland independence struggle so far and it leaves much to be accepted as it raises many questions than answers of what type of leaders Barotseland will have in charge of people's affairs! We have witnessed the docile and apathy syndrome amongst Barotse citizenry due to the unpredictable manners being exhibited by the senior citizens brought about by the BRE which in this regard has not being inspirational.
A miscalculated independence calculus can be attributed to a number of mushroomed self proclaimed liberation groups which is a cause of disunity witnessed so far in our struggle, instead of talking with one voice, we end up talking in disjointed knots. This calls for serious consideration of hosting a reconciliation meeting to bring our scattered leaders to one amour of united force. The question is who should be the right persons to host the reconciliation meeting, and how much in terms of cost is needed to have a successful hosting of such meeting?, etc, etc. Avoiding this issue of reconciliation, I can assure you that the year 2015 will end up in limbo, without achieving our desired independence. It is better for BNC to have not declared independence in 2012 than betraying the conscience of the people who are convinced with the legality of the independence call!
If this trend of cowardice, unresolved, unfocused and non patriotic behavior continues, it risks igniting a revolution, as people might think that the BRE are in fact not working for the good and wishes of the people. We will not allow any maneuvers to wash away the efforts and aspirations of our people of Barotseland who have so far experienced loss of their beloved ones due to long detentions in Zambian filthy prisons, maiming and bullet gun shots because of Barotseland's century independence struggle.
May God bless all the people of Barotseland, a happy and prosperous 2015 as we review our failures and successes of 2014 in regard to implementation of Barotseland's independence resolutions of 2012, which declaration was born out of legality.
The Barotseland Freedom Movement (BFM) Office for International Relations demands the immediate release of Barotseland Administrator General, Hon, Afumba Mombotwa and his comrades from Zambian detention. Their arrest and continued incarceration are not only a violation against human rights but a scorn on international law and civility. We believe that the four broke no Zambian or international law just as the acting Zambian President had himself conceded to this fact. Therefore, their detention may only be viewed as barbaric and an insult to Zambia’s claimed democratic values.
The Zambian Government has nothing to worry about the Barotseland issue since it is the one, through its late president, Michael Sata, that had acknowledged the legality of the terminated Barotseland Agreement 1964, and had, in January 2012, gone as far as publishing the same Agreement in Zambian print media to prove its point. It was the same Government that had blessed our first commemoration of the Barotseland shootings in the same year and had further sent its representatives to the now historic March 2012 Barotse National Council Conference at which Barotseland formally and finally accepted Zambia’s 1969 unilateral termination of the same Agreement. Based on that acceptance, the people of Barotseland unanimously declared Barotseland independent of Zambia. Formal communication which included proposed disengagement guidelines regarding this inevitable stand was sent to the same Zambian Government from which there has been no formal response to date; either in opposition or otherwise. The decision that Barotseland arrived at was necessitated by decades of Zambia’s hostility to our calls to honour the Agreement as had been promised before and soon after it was signed by our king, the British and Zambia’s founding father. It is this unwillingness to find a lasting solution to the Barotseland impasse and other poignant factors that led to our decision to revert to our original position and not secede from Zambia as it has been wrongly held by those who have deliberately chosen to remain permanently ignorant of the issue. As a result of this denial, our people have been repeatedly subjected to untold human rights abuses which include killings by successive Zambian governments.
The Zambian Government has further refused to cooperate by, at least, responsibly responding to even the indictment from the African Union Humans and Peoples’ Rights Commission. This and several acts bordering on persecution, intimidation and manipulation only leave us with a belief that the Zambians may be lacking the capacity to legally engage the issue with respect to its exegesis. Malicious arrest of our leaders, as in the Hon Mombotwa and all previous related cases, only prove this point. The Zambian government has miserably failed to even hold any sensible trial based on the claimed accusations. The truth is that such accusations are impossible to prosecute as they do not violate any Zambian law. Instead, it is our people’s rights that are continuously violated, and so, in an outright provocative manner.
Indeed the Zambians have no legal argument against Barotseland’s independence. Their behavior only consolidates our stand and further builds up a much more serious case against them. Not even the regional Southern Africa Development Community would find any reason to support the Zambian argument. Based on these and other facts, we call for the unconditional and immediate release of our leaders because they are being accused for what was publicly decided upon by Barotseland’s highest policy making body, the BNC. The Zambian Government was represented by its most senior officials at that conference. Hon Mombotwa is only acting in obedience to dictates of the BNC Resolution. His arrest and incarceration does not even serve the interests of any sound minded, let alone peace loving, Zambians. As the Zambian Government did in publishing the BA’64, it must now stand up to the challenge of our declared independence in a civilized and not outdated medieval manner of threats and intimidation. The Barotseland issue is an ideal that cannot be put to rest by arrests or killings. Let Hon. Mombotwa and his comrades be released in the name of the Lord. We are for peace and not war. We joined Zambia peacefully and we have left Zambia in the like manner. If the Zambian Government argues to the contrary, let us then have a date in court over this issue and not on drummed up charges of a treason that was actually committed against us. Hon. Mombotwa and company are vulnerable individuals only acting on the BNC’s mandate. Barotseland is our country. We call upon Dr Guy Scott to release our leaders.
The recent developments in Barotseland call for a rethink and change to the approach in Barotseland’s quest for total independence.
It is clear that Zambia does not respect or recognize the 2012 BNC resolutions and will never let go of Barotseland peacefully just like Barotseland joined Zambia in 1964.
From 1965 when Zambia through Kaunda begun to dismantle the Barotseland Agreement, barely a year after it was signed, to the present time 50 years later, several Barotse nationals have been arrested and killed yet not a single one has ever been successfully tried and jailed on the issue.
Those that are jailed have always been incarcerated for lesser and trumped up charges of riotous behavior and publication of false information, whatever it means.
The Zambian authorities know very well that they cannot handle the matter before a neutral arbiter and continue holding Barotseland hostage because courts do not order estranged spouses to continue in a broken marriage.
They have resorted to pretending that all is well so as to mislead their citizens and the international community while secretly they eliminate dissenting Barotseland voices through poisoning.
Several gallant Barotseland men and women in the struggle for Barotseland’s freedom who at one time found themselves in Zambian prisons are dying at an alarming rate and this will even be worse if not stopped.
Our approach of dialogue and peaceful disengagement won’t work, how can one dialogue with people who won’t listen to you and do not even know what disengagement means in this situation?
The very person who led us in this situation, Kaunda said about a year ago that if you fight for freedom from the British you use dialogue but if you seek freedom from any other power you use your gun.
We should never be cheated that we are at peace; we are already at war because the enemy is killing us and they are determined to force us into submission to their strange and uncivilized way of doing things.
International law is very clear on the consequences of termination of a treaty. Article 70 of the Vienna Convention states that ‘Unless the treaty, otherwise provides or the parties agree, the termination of a treaty under its provisions or in accordance with the Convention;
a. “Releases the parties from any obligation to, further, perform the treaty.”
It is becoming a highly considered view that time has come to consider to pursue our struggle for independence differently as it is now clear that we are not dealing with Bishops and Pastors but highly dangerous and violent pretenders hiding under the guise of a peaceful Christian nation.
They will probably only respond to our quest for freedom once they see and hear us speak the language they understand – the offensive!
KI NAAKO, LIYWA LINEKI (TIME HAS COME AND IT IS NOW)
“An opportunity freely given may be misused”, a feature written by Hon. Wamu brought tears to my sad eyes. Tears; not of hopelessness but of sadness at how things have played out since the March 2012 BNC Conference. I sincerely hope that what I am going to write in response will answer some of the questions posed and help shed some light in the minds and hearts of those among our people who may be losing hope.
Firstly, I am not surprised at what has unfolded thus far since that historic 2012 day in our modern history. My main concern is what would happen to our people and our country if credible action was not taken soon. We can no longer live a life of make believe clouded by lies and wild imaginations where Barotseland is concerned. Our enemy’s reaction towards us only shows how serious the Barotseland issue is. Starting off as we did with the Barotseland Freedom Movement and Linyungandambo was the best way we could have stood up to our nationhood challenge. However, we missed an earlier opportunity for unity merely due to mistrust mixed up with past misunderstandings among the senior cadres. Here I refer only to those who believed in the immediate and total independence of Barotseland like most of us do. On the flanks were those who thought they knew even better than everyone else and, for a while, had exclusively negotiated for a restoration of the Barotseland Agreement 1964 clandestinely, only coming out to the masses in a calculated manner whenever they needed signatures for their exclusively worked out petitions. This latter group, largely made up of Lozi people from Lusaka and enjoying unequaled support from the Barotse Royal Establishment, was always against Barotseland’s total and immediate independence; particularly if that independence did not have them at the helm of control. They had sworn to fight, at all costs, against our external self-determination even if it meant selling us who believe differently to the enemy. These are the same people who advised BRE to force BFM to work with them; a venture that almost killed the struggle had we not momentarily broken rank and reached out to the actual owners of the matter, the Lozi masses in a bold manner.
Although we managed to make some irreversible gains, aided by the emergency of Linyungandambo, leading to the 2012 BNC, the ‘restorationists’ reappeared on the scene with an unworkable and irrelevant “alliance” which they only used as a front to push their own selfish agenda. This “alliance” was meant to “unite” activist groups and work towards our independence despite the fact that the BNC had already declared us free and that its resolutions only called for the formation of a Barotseland Government (not an alliance) to lead the proceedings of disengagement with the Zambians. As has now turned out, the “alliance”, was only a paradox designed to divide us, slow and eventually kill the very BNC declaration. We are presently in this, seemingly, limbo and confusion all because of the involvement of a small but very powerful group of those who believe in a restoration of an Agreement that never even operated.
I trust that the foregoing does answer, even in part, some of the valuable question posed by Hon. Wamu.
It is immaterial for Zambia to understand the 2012 BNC resolution if we the ones who came up with it do not comprehend it in the first place. The people of Barotseland are the only ones who can emphasize (binding) its seriousness. Zambians and the international community can only follow.
Concerning the king’s “silence”, this writer was reliably informed that His Majesty the Litunga had called upon the Zambian acting President to unconditionally release Hon. Afumba Mombotwa and the rest. Given the confusion and the power struggle currently taking place in that country, one would believe that Dr. Guy Scott is almost powerless to a greater extent. If it were not so, our leaders were going to be released as soon as it was learned that there had been an attempt to kidnap them for diabolical reasons. It is actually reported that Dr. Scott had even articulated that Hon. Mombotwa and company did not commit any crime. Why would they still be detained then and made to appear in Zambian courts without any supporters, relatives or well wishers? I believe the king has and is still possibly doing something about it although it is impossible to count on BRE given their track record.
It will not be far fetched to state that BNFA is actually NOT what it represents itself to be. This is the “alliance” I refer to above. It is actually not an alliance but an extension of ‘restorationist’ group with a self explanatory name. That is why they would not hesitate to insult the victimized people of Barotseland, labeling them the “semi-illiterate hiding in holes holding the wrong end of the stick”. That is not talk one would expect from a unitary body. Recently there were some activists who broke away from the BNFA and formed a “congress”. This only shows that the BNFA is simply not for Barotseland’s independence and some of its members will not hesitate to betray their own brothers. This is in spite of some acknowledgeable positive efforts the group has made. However, we shall do ourselves good service not to count the BNFA as being genuinely bent on the BNC resolution because not everyone claiming to be in the struggle is sincerely in it.
About participating in the Zambian elections; honestly speaking, we do sympathize with them on what has befallen their presidency and we pray that all goes well with their elections. However, we realistically have nothing much to do with Zambian elections based on the 2012 BNC Resolution. After all, we have never benefited from whatever government sits in Lusaka. This is a fact. That is why we are the poorest compared to other Zambian regions. This is also much against Clause 9 of the BA’64. Lozis who will participate will do so due to fear or their own selfish ends, period.
We believe that a lot has been done by the Royal Barotseland Government, Linyungandambo, BFM and actually by the BNFA too. It is only that seemingly, the latter is still working towards its selfish goal. However, a number of countries are now aware of our situation with Zambia. Anyone who would even attempt to reverse our declared independence will be attempting to bring a catastrophe that we have thus far managed to avoid. The BNC has never reversed its resolutions and it will not do so with the 2012 one.
I also personally have a weird belief that we find ourselves in this predicament today because of our fore-fathers’ sins. I also believe that God has heard our prayers, like the children of Israel (Exodus 3:7-9) and has forgiven us because we have asked Him to do so (1John 1:9). However, we also need to be intelligent enough to know the power of unity and perseverance. A nation’s freedom does not normally come easy. Much has been done already and against all odds, we shall soon be independent in the actual meaning of the word. We need to break down the walls that divide us.
I believe that in convening the 2012 BNC conference, His Majesty the Litunga did all that he could. He actually voiced his support for an independent Barotseland when we met him on 24th January 2012 in Kashandi. He said it was all going to depend on the BNC’s outcome and that he hoped that that year’s Kuomboka ceremony was going to be the happiest. The king being sincere or not, the fact is that Barotseland is now supposed to stand united on our independence regardless of who calls himself Administrator General or Prime Minister. The enemy only takes advantage when we are divided. We shall hold the Zambians accountable for all crimes committed against our people. No human being dies without God’s knowledge. God will always judge for spilt innocent blood. Barotseland is ours and we have nothing to fear. We shall not lose hope because from where some of us stand, we see our day. The songs and dances are already prepared.
Kozo. (Shuwanga Shuwanga)
“The sovereignty of Barotseland is not a matter of illusion or favor but of law as such the fight for independence is a noble and honorary thing that is backed by legal documents.”
It is now time for the people of Barotseland to get united and fight for the total independence of their God given territory and serve the territory from being annexed by Zambia, otherwise posterity will judge us harshly. The docile attitude will not serve the desired goal of having independent Barotseland unless we become focused or no one will ever take us seriously. I doubt if it is the desire of the Malozi to continue to be exploited and trampled upon by small men with small brains!
My fellow compatriots, we shall never rest until we reclaim what is rightfully ours for our children and our children's children. We will not be shaken or intimidated by the on-going arrests of Barotseland transition government leaders by Zambia, for executing the mandate and the will of people.
The history of Barotseland has always been shrouded in secrecy by the rogue state of Zambia so as to deceive successive generations, however, we should note that the following treaties, recognize Barotseland as a separate territory and not as a province of Zambia that should remain enslaved and subjected to untold misery by denying the Lozi nationals their inalienable right to self-determination:-
1. The Lochner Concession of June 1890
2. The Lawley Concession(A) of June 1898
3. The Barotseland - NorthWestern Rhodesia Order- in - Council of 1899
4. Concession B of 1900
5. Concession Agreement of August 11,1909
6. The Northern Rhodesia Order- in- Council of 1911, which amalgamated North Eastern Rhodesia and Barotseland North-Western Rhodesia into Northern Rhodesia.
7. The Northern Rhodesia Oder-in-council of 1924(British Govt Rule take over from B.S.A.C)
8. The Barotse Fund ordinance Act of 1925 , in terms of which a special Fund was established to finance the running of Barotseland Government
9. The Barotse Native Authority Ordinance and Barotse Native Courts Ordinance, both of 1936
10. Special Order-in-council of 1953
11. Sections 57 and 80 of the Northern Rhodesia Order-in-council of 1962, and sections 59 and 112 of the Self -Governing Constitution of 1963, which both affirms and recognizes Barotseland as a separate state within Northern Rhodesia; and
12. The Zambia Independent Act and the Zambia independent Order of 1964 which gave recognition to the Barotseland Agreement of 1964.
Why is Zambia so adamant that even the existence of historical and legal facts at her disposal cannot change her policy towards Barotseland? The sovereignty of Barotseland is not a matter of illusion or favor but of law as such the fight for independence is a noble and honorary thing that is backed by legal documents. Therefore the present generation should actualize the desired independence of Barotseland, otherwise we are doomed as a nation and the next generation will never forgive us.
An appeal to all Lozi nationals home and abroad is to identify yourselves with your genesis and turn out in good numbers to give solidarity and patriotism to the noblemen of Barotseland transitional government held by Zambia on trumpet up charges of treason felony, on 6th January, 2015 at Mumbwa magistrate court where they will appear for mention pending instructions from Zambia's DPP for committal to the High court.
We acknowledge that independence is not given on a silver plate by the oppressor but demanded by the oppressed even in face of the barrel of a gun.
Tukongote, kopano ki mata.
By Saleya Kwalombota
Reading Hon. Shuwanga s piece of writing should make all those who truly love Barotseland to raise their heads to review the post BNC 2012 resolution events – the way forward, the killings, the factions and the arrests. BNC 2012 blessed by the King of Barotseland surely gave confidence to all of us Rotse people.
“Mr. Sata who made the March 2012 Barotse National Council Conference possible. He had promised to accept any outcome. An irreversible decision to be independent of Zambia was unanimously arrived at.” Hon Shuwanga
Barotseland activities are all based on the belief of BNC 2012 resolutions. Putting Zambia aside, Barotseland should sought issues out.
I have the following questions;
1. Are we as Barotseland understanding and respecting the BNC 2012 resolution?
2. Does Zambia understand it either?
3. Is the BNC 2012 resolution binding on both Zambia and Barotseland?
4. Why is the King and the Kuta quiet over the current arrest of Hon. Afumba and others?
5. Why is BNFA, if truly an umbrella of all groupings also quiet?
6. The Zambian Government now does not even allow any one going near the court just to listen or support our own blood. Will this continue and people watch dance and vote for them?
7. BNC 2012 resolution was the strength of all Barotseland, BUT, count how many people have lost their lives over this issue? Some are still dying today from suspected poisoning. Is this going to continue?
8. People are dying, arrested, families displaced, children and women are suffering, people live in fear. How do the leaders of BNFA, LINYUNGANDAMBO, THE KUTA (BRE) AND THE KING feel?
9. Will Barotseland be a place without human rights?
10. “The late president had clearly articulated his willingness to allow Barotseland go free of Zambia if only our elders supported such a conclusion”. Is any elder in support?
11. Is it possible that the Barotse leadership can issue a statement and its respected by Zambia?
12. Is every one claiming to be in struggle really in it?
13. Will Barotseland happily participate in the Zambian presidential elections in the light of BNC 2012 resolution?
14. Are we one, two or three?
15. Is the BNC 2012 resolution closer to be reversed?
16. What sin have Barotseland committed which cannot be forgiven?
Reports that Patriotic Front President, Mr. Edgar Lungu, had sent security personnel to Mwembeshi maximum prison to kidnap unjustly arrested Linyungandambo leaders are not only of grave concern to the people of Barotseland but also provide an informed idea of the man who may become the next president of Zambia. What has so far been reported about Mr. Lungu since the passing of President Michael Sata only suggest that Zambia may be led by a man who could be equated to the Idi Aminis and Sani Abachas of the gone-by days. It is apparent that Honourable Afumba and the comrades he was arrested with are not safe at all.
Perhaps to emphasize this feeling is a report on Zambian Watch Dog that alleges Mr. Lungu’s knowledge of the cold blooded murder of Zambia Air Force Deputy Commander, General Muliokela Muliokela, a Lozi, and Colonel Mwene by ZAF Commander Erick Chimene and former Director Intelligence Xavier Chungu. More worrying still is the fact that the acting Zambian President, Mr Guy Scott, has clearly stated that the Barotse quartet committed no crime and yet he, as the head of government, has not used his authority to have them released. As if to confirm our concerns, Mr. Masiye Musialeti and others who attended the court hearings in Mumbwa were suddenly arrested. This is nothing else but deliberate provocation. These grim concerns may explain why the Barotse leaders were taken to Lusaka, far away from their relatives and comrades. Acts like these can only be associated with tyrants who have no slightest respect for human rights and cannot be acceptable in this age; worse still in a society that claims to be Christian and one of the beacons of democracy in Africa. The Bible teaches that God will judge all unrighteousness regardless of whether one believes or not. It does not change what the Creator Has ordained in eternity (Hebrews 9:27).
History has always proved harsh to all so called leaders who transgress other people’s rights. We have not forgotten those who murdered our people in cold blood in 2011. Kabayo Kabayo and the bodies of other Barotse activists who died in Zambian prisons or after their release from jail will be exhumed and be subjected to forensic post mortem to determine the actual cause of their death. We have not forgotten the missing five and we shall leave no stone unturned to get to the bottom of what became of them. Culprits will eventually be taken to the International Criminal Court. Mr. Lungu and any other power hungry Zambian leaders who may want to go and join Pierre Bemba and the rest at The Hague are at liberty to do so. No one will ever get away with crimes committed against our people.
The late Mr. Sata was sensible enough to understand the gravity of the Barotseland impasse. He had clearly stated to us on 28th December 2011 that he never wished to be taken to The Hague at any time, hence his unconditional release of all Barotse activist and the setting up of a commission of inquiry. Any aspiring Zambian president who would want to violate Lozi people’s rights must not be encouraged by the Uhuru Kenyatta case in that the Kenyan and Barotseland positions cannot be similar in any way. Indicted Zambians will have no one to bribe or intimidate on the Barotseland case.
It was Mr. Sata who had advised us to meet our elders in order to map out the way forward on Barotseland. The late president had clearly articulated his willingness to allow Barotseland go free of Zambia if only our elders supported such a conclusion. Although his promises turned out to be like the ones Pharaoh had earlier made to Moses, it was essentially Mr. Sata who made the March 2012 Barotse National Council Conference possible. He had promised to accept any outcome. An irreversible decision to be independent of Zambia was unanimously arrived at. It is, therefore, short sightedness and irresponsible for any Zambian authorities to victimize our peace loving people in this manner. Detaining Hon. Mombotwa is not in the interest of peace loving Zambians either. Whoever authorized the arrest did so for his own selfish and diabolical ends. Being elections time, one cannot avoid believing that the arrests were all made for political mileage sake. That will not work.
It is, furthermore, a paradox of some sort for the acting president to announce that Hon. Mombotwa and company had committed no crimes and yet perpetuating their detention. Such actions only expose the incompetence of post Michael Sata Patriotic Front and its incapability to progressively rule Zambia.
Hon. Afumba Mombotwa must be released forthwith for the sake of peace and progressive disengagement with Zambia. Barotseland is a free nation. Zambian presence in Barotseland is only an occupation against our will. Mr. Scott, who is actually a Lozi by birth since he was born in Livingstone, must exercise his prerogative and free Hon. Mombotwa and company before power hungry wolves bent on anarchy add more calamities to the Zambian presidency. Barotseland will not reverse the March 2012 BNC resolution.
The concern about Barotseland's security should now take center stage because Barotseland has the right legal framework to do so, therefore, it's right time now for Barotseland to constitute a national Defense Force to defend the territory from external threats. This time around Zambia will be held responsible should this issue spill into armed conflict, if Zambia persist to control Barotseland territory contrary to the dictates of public international law.
Even before recognition Barotseland state has the right to defend its integrity and independence. For any country to effectively and authoritatively command control of her territory, it should have established defense force. According to Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States Signed at Montevideo, 26 December 1933 and Entered into Force, 26 December 1934 article 3 starts that ,
"The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts."
Therefore, there is nothing wrong for Barotseland to exercise her right under the Rights and Duties of States by establishing national defense force to stand against external threats especially from Zambia the occupying force in Barotseland territory.
Legal interpretations and knowledge are at our disposal, to enable us to stand against Zambia's uncalled violation of Barotseland's right to self-rule. States signatory to the Geneva Conventions undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the Conventions in all circumstances.
The Barotseland transitional government through the Acting Administrator General is expected to take appropriate action to take Zambia to the international Court of Justice if Zambia thinks they can use domestic Zambian jungle laws to hold the people of Barotseland captive. The question at hand now is how far the Barotseland government is prepared to stop this extra territorial operations by Zambia? We understand the defense force requires good funding to procure necessary military hardware and to sustain personnel through salaries and training.
Of course with the efforts put so far these are non challenges for Barotseland as a state to constitute a defense force.
The people, who are the citizens of Royal Barotseland, have already spoken and opted for independence through the BNC of 29th March 2012 , whose resolutions insisted on an urgent government formation and peaceful independence struggle to prevail even if it faces stiff opposition from the occupying force.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 15 (2)) stipulates
“No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his Nationality nor denied the Right to change his Nationality.”
Indeed we are Barotzhish, and as nationals of Barotseland, we are ready to defend our country if pushed too far.
Zambia's persistent and violation of various international conventions on the rights of people to self-determination is regrettable, and it will cost Zambia in compensation to pay Barotseland for the lost economic opportunities for five decades.
The recent arrest of the Administrator General Rt. Hon. Afumba Mombotwa and two transitional government officials may best be seen as the arrest of an ex‐diplomats of a foreign State, and is viewed as hostile acts on the part of Zambia against unarmed people of Barotseland.
Tukongote Litunga Ni lyetu.
I would like to shed light on the genesis of the Nkoya tribal group of Barotseland, in order to disprove the innuendo being peddled that certain tribal extractions are under subjugation of other tribal groupings in Barotseland. This incorrect assumption is being engineered by political stewards who are our brothers and sisters from the group that professes to be of the "Nkoya" extraction which claims not to belong to Lozi nationality. They have argued that Nkoyas are not part of the Barotse-speaking people. According to a Nkoya traditionalist, Robert Litungu.
It is better to explain this issue because the matter is being exaggerated and fuelled by forces outside Barotseland who are Zambian politicians aiming at bringing division among the diversified ethnic groupings of Royal Barotseland Kingdom. It is therefore, proper to discuss this matter honestly in order to remove the unnecessary innuendoes on this argument. To start with, let us examine who the "Nkoya" people are?
It is stated that the "Nkoya" people are descendants of Sioka Nalinanga and that this argument is not carried forward beyond this level.
The fact is that the name "Nkoya" was adulterated from the name Ñoya who was a sister to Mwambwa and both of them being daughters of Noshaa.
On the occasion of the death of their mother while residing along the "Loi" River in the present day Congo DR, the first dispersal took place which saw the moving away of notables like Inyunyi, Mbukushu, Yutoya, Ngambwa, Imanga, Kayawe, Nyimbwamoyo, Mbakala and many, many more. The dispersal was ignited by the desire to change leadership from women to men and that there were problems of disposal of the chattels of the departed leader (their mother Noshaa). Notables, among others, like Isimwaa had resisted the idea to replace the leadership from women to men. Following this episode, the first group went away leaving others including Mwambwa and Ñoya with their children.
After sometime, the group decided to take a similar movement which brought them to the present settlement of "Ului" which was derived from the name "Loi" River in present day Congo DR.
While on the trek, incidentally, they found or stumbled on Yutoya while others had gone in different directions, which were later located. During this time, Mwambwa was the leader who was supported by Ñoya and the other people. Ñoya had daughters by the names of Nalinanga and Nolea who latter had sons by the name of Sioka and Imatakwana who later became famous and got known as Mange.
Sioka, being a nobleman, was given responsibility to look after the royal regalia during the reign of Mwambwa. In the meantime, Ñoya had moved to settle in a land which became known as Ñoya which is sandwiched between Mwito under Induna (chief) Mayankwa in Lukulu district, Luambuwa under Induna (chief) Kabilamwandi in Kaoma district while the other side is in the area of Sikusi under Induna ( chief) Iloke and Luena / Sitoya under Induna (chief) Sibetta in Mungu district respectively.
The land of Ñoya is eulogized by people who truly confess to be members of the Ñoya stock. As to the position of Sioka, true members of the Ñoya stock, will say:-
" Ami Kankoya ka Shihoka Nalinanga, bantu ba tula mikabo baka kulya nshima kuanga. Ba Mununga, ba nungile mpanda mwilu", meaning, “I am a Nkoya of the line of Sioka Nalinanga, one who eats nshima having climbed a tree".
The differences between the Nkoya people and the rest of Barotse tribes does not arise and is a non issue which should not be politicized. The insinuation of this matter is too dangerous to Barotseland and Zambia as a whole. The BRE is more democratic than the Zambian government. The Zambian government is democratic in theory, but for the past 50 years has marginalized and abused power. Kenneth Kaunda Zambia's first president was a semi-dictator under one party participatory democracy, whatever that means?
Before Zambia’s independence in 1964, the people in Barotseland were voting their Legislative council in power, representing their constituencies. The Litunga does not rule by decree or creed. There is no force.
Also note that the Litunga does not speak. This is how decisions are made and not by the Litunga.
There are three chambers in the Kuta, Bana Ba Malena, Commoners and the Indunas. This is how Barotse Royal Establishment is composed of. Also it is good to note that all tribes in Barotseland are in the governance systems of Barotse Royal Authority (BRA) or Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) according to Zambian imposition.
The BRA is not intending to go back to the days of slavery and enslave Nkoyas.
As a matter of fact, Litunga was the first African leader to end slavery. The name Litunga ‘Mulambwa’ signifies people should stop slavery but buy and sell dogs instead. This was way back in 1830. Lewanika upheld anti- slavery tendencies.
To add a bit on the relationship between the Luyis’ and the Nkoyas’, Mankoya/Kaoma had also been invaded and subjected to Makololo rule and was only reclaimed by the Luyi impis who wiped out the Makololos.
Makololos are the ones who imposed Lozi language across Barotseland and Mankoya had equally been headed by the Makololo, just like all other ethnic groupings of Barotseland.
This, therefore, should surely explain the connection between Mankoya and the rest of the people of Barotseland. As explained from the historical narration, the Nkoya people are from the root of Ñoya who was a blood sister to Mwambwa, therefore, the children of them are relatives of the same stock.
Finally, the Nkoya people should not violate historical and ethical codes of professional decency, thereby, being untrue to the History of their genesis in Barotseland by allowing themselves to be used by politicians with historical theory mixed with errors and polluted with political propaganda.
Tukongote Litunga Ni lyetu.
By Saleya Kwalombota
IN WHAT CONTEXT IS BAROTSELAND A STATE?
I would like to clarify the innuendo being peddled by enemies of Barotseland with intent to corrupt the less enlightened citizens in regard to the Act of INDEPENDENCE DECLARATION, the method Barotseland followed. In the first place the route of independence declaration is legal and the independence claim born out of it is legitimate. Barotseland is not the only country to have taken such a route but countries like USA, Kosovo, etc did the same.
According to the Montevideo Convention on Statehood of 1933 sets out several requirements for Statehood. The Convention, and prevailing law at the time, viewed States as a kind of sui generis legal entity operating and existing under its own authority and power.
Article 3 provides, the political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts.
Barotseland has done exactly the same , after the historic and famous 2012 BNC unilateral Declaration of independence, Barotseland did not go to sleep but organized herself by putting up government structures and formulating of Acts which were destroyed by Zambian regime of Kaunda in 1965.
The Montevideo Convention article 6 then goes on to state,
"The recognition of a state merely signifies that the state which recognizes it accepts the personality of the other with all the rights and duties determined by international law. Recognition is unconditional and irrevocable."
From stand point of international law Barotseland is a State and I know for most of Zambians it is news. I sympathize with them because Kaunda managed to brain wash them in his school of jungle thoughts still believed by elite Zambians.
Appeal to all Lozis , don't fail to assert to the repossession of your rightful property or ownership. Understand that by the act of declaration you have become a state and have right to legislate in your declared independent territory. Remember, it’s not Zambia to give Barotseland sovereignty but sovereignty is with the people of Barotseland and this is what the international law stipulates. What is remaining is to accomplish the recognition of an entity as a State in the international community to be able to function within the bigger family, that makes it so. One simple reason for this might be that States serve a regulatory function in the world. Their function is to administer a portion of the planet where people live.
The process of disengagement is another area that requires the input of international community, for implementation and supervision of the process. This is the task our transitional government is working on day and night to win diplomatic recognition of which I believe is not far from now. The recognition will mean that Barotseland will be able get support both military and economic while develop her own strength to resist international threat.
Tukongote Litunga Ni lyetu
By Saleya Kwalombota