He says that this development has saddened and broken many Barotse hearts including that of the Royal establishment and the King.
He has further wondered why the brothers and sisters in the unitary state of Zambia are fond of provoking the Barotse people and the royal establishment by issuing such reckless statements when it is they who have always refused to dialogue over the longstanding matters of the pre-independence Barotseland Agreement of 1964.
He was speaking this afternoon on Channel Africa SiLozi program for Tuesday, 29th October 2019 monitored by Barotseland Post.
Meanwhile, Induna Mukuluwakashiku, Mowa Zambwe, has revealed that, consequent to Namugala’s reckless statement, a Privy Council has been scheduled this week to ensure that of all the regional and district royal highnesses will together chart the way forward and conclude a resolution that will be forwarded to the Lusaka government in response to Catherine Namugala’s latest parliamentary ruling.
He has further dispelled as fake some social media reports alleging that the BRE were the ones to blame for the current impasse on the Barotseland Agreement 1964.
He said the BRE has always been willing to dialogue with the Lusaka government but that the unwillingness has always been from the Zambian government.
Therefore, Mowa Zambwe has stated that the royal establishment has concluded that the privy council must go ahead this week to finalize a national stand and response to Namugala’s careless statement in parliament recently and formulate the way forward for Barotseland.
This is the first response the BRE has given since Catherine Namugala made a ruling in parliament that has incited outrage from many Barotse nationals who took to social media and private media in angry response.
Among those that have officially responded to the Namugala ruling are Barotseland’s main independence movements, the Linyungandambo, Barotse National Freedom Alliance (BNFA) and the Barotseland National Youth League (BNYL).
Others are veteran politicians, Prince Dr Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika and BNFA trustee member William Harrington who have all concluded that if Barotseland did not exist in Zambia, it must then follow that Barotseland now must exist independent of Zambia, as it must continue to exist in the world.
On Tuesday 8th October 2019, Chipangali Member of Parliament and Minister of Housing and Infrastructure Development, Vincent Mwale, had raised a point of order to stop Sikongo constituency lawmaker Mundia Ndalamei from referring to Western Province as ‘Barotseland’ and argued that the word was unparliamentary.
In her ruling on Thursday 17th October 2019, the First Deputy Speaker said Hon Mundia Ndalamei was not to refer to Western Province as Barotseland and further explained that Barotseland was a former British protectorate which no longer exists and hence should never be used in parliament as there was no place called Barotseland in Zambia.
She pointed out that the Provincial and Districts Boundaries Act Chapter 286 of the Laws of Zambia has no place and does not recognize any place called Barotseland.
She further guided that Presiding Officers have in the past rendered the same ruling in the house and Members of Parliament must desist from using the name.
However, in the run-up to the 2011 general elections which the Patriotic Front (PF) party won, the PF leader at the time, late Michael Sata, had said at a rally in Mongu that only a dictator, crook and dishonest person could dispute the existence of Barotseland, and further promised to restore the 1964 Barotseland Agreement which brought Barotseland into Zambia.
Once in power, Sata rejected a report from the 2012 Roger Chongwe Commission of Inquiry Report which had recommended that the name of Western Province is replaced with Barotseland and that necessary legislation be amended to grant semi-autonomy to the territory of Barotseland.
Instead of implementing the Chongwe Commission recommendations, Sata’s government, however, went on to arrest over 80 Barotseland activists among them former Barotseland Prime Minister (Ngambela) Clement Sinyinda, for merely reminding him of his electoral promises.
They later released, after spending over three months in deplorable incarcerations, as the state claimed it had no evidence against them.