Proponents of Barotseland secession write to Attorney-General

NO MORE BAROTSELAND

Proponents of Self Rule- Barotseland

 

The Attorney-General

Ministry of Legal Affairs

P.O. Box 50106 LUSAKA

Your Honour,

EMANCIPATION OF BAROTSELAND

It is beyond any doubt that our relationship (with Zambia) was intended to be based on the Barotseland Agreement 1964, but it has been rejected by the Zambian government.

Considering that it was the Attorney-General, who had asked the Zambian Parliament to abrogate the Barotseland Agreement 1964, (ref GRZ Gazette No. 513 of Friday, 29th August 1969) we, the People of Barotseland, and indeed Patriots and Nationalists of Barotseland have undertaken to write to you, with a view of enabling your government to put on record, that as people belonging to a nation that has been unjustly plunged into black colonialism by artifice, after due consideration ,and consultations among ourselves, we now wish to give vent to our feelings at this point in time, and would like to strongly . and categorically state that we are longing for our total political, economic and social independence, true identity and real nationhood.

Looking at Barotseland from a broader spectrum, namely, biblically, rationally, politically, culturally, economically and legally, we note that Barotseland was destined to be ruled by her own people and not to be occupied illegally by Zambia as a new found land without people.

Really, there is no rational or justifiable reason for the subjugation of Barotseland by Zambia. Occupation and colonisation of one country by another is outdated, unworkable and totally unacceptable in this age, era and time.

A. DETAILS (MUNIMENTS)

i) For those who believe in Christianity and uphold Christian values by proclamation or declaration should read their New Testament, Acts 17 verses 26 -, “God made all nations of men, and has determined the boundaries of their territories.” Deuteronomy 27 verse 17 -, “Cursed is {he one who moves his

neighbour’s landmark.” Deuteronomy 28 verse 49-, “The Lord will bring a nation against you from the end of the earth as swift as an eagle flies, a nation whose language you will not understand ” (Note: eagle- Zambian Flag).

ii) Foreign Office, London instructions to Coryndon No. 184 of 1st May 1897 acknowledges Barotse as a nation…

iii) Esq. Youe, the Nigerian Political Analyst, in his book, “Politics of Collaboration” 1810 – 1914 states that Barotseland emerged in the 20th Century with more sovereignty than any other groups in the sub-continent, what he called Barotse Social Order.

Esq. Youe rightly described Barotseland as an empire (Journal of Empirial and Commonwealth History). iv) Both the pre-colonial and colonial era speak volumes about the Sovereignty of Barotse Inter alia: the Secretary of State for Colonies, Sir P.Cunliffe Lister wrote in December 1931 as follows: – “…..the intention of the Agreement of 1900 must be kept clearly in view. There can be no doubt that the essence of this Agreement was that the Barotse Nation should preserve their individuality, their territory and their self-government…. ”

B. INTEGRATION

1. To claim that Barotseland merged with Zambia in 1964 is to exhibit one’s folly as a result of failing to understand what really, happened. Barotseland entered into Agreement in 1964 to secure her autonomy side by’ side with the Zambian government. The Northern Rhodesia Independence Conference Report of 1964

reads in part as: – .

2. “The conference held 14 plenary meetings between 5th May and 19th May, under Deputy Chairmanship of Mr. Richard Hornby MP Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations and Colonies and decided on a number of Provisions to be included in the Independence

Constitution (Annex B) …..”

3. At a final session, the Secretary of State noted that it was the general wish in Northern Rhodesia that on attaining independence, the new state should be a member of the Commonwealth…. ”

4. The Secretary of State in conclusion informed the conference, that “having regard to the settlement of constitutional matters reached at the conference and to the separate Agreement reached outside the, conference between Northern Rhodesia Government and the Litunga of Barotseland, on the future position of Barotseland within Northern Rhodesia, the British government had decided that Northern Rhodesia under the name of the Republic of Zambia should become independent on 24th October1964.

NB: The Separate Agreement outside the constitutional conference determined the future position of Barotseland.

C. OBSERVATION

i) The British, granted independence to Northern Rhodesia not to Barotseland.

ii) What became Zambia was Northern Rhodesia.

We do not accept the misleading interpretation that future position of Barotseland within Zambia alluded to unitarism.

The Barotseland Agreement 1964 just intended to preserve Barotse autonomy, but if the interpretation of the Barotseland Agreement is that it made Barotseland part of Zambia, then it is essential to realize that the same Agreement did not enter into force, the legal axiom is that the Agreement that has not entered into force is not legally binding; besides, its abrogation means rejection of Barotseland and the

corollary of abrogation is Barotseland independence. ‘

Zambia’s geo-political context and social-cultural context are evident enough to prove illegal occupation of Barotseland by Zambia. At his press conference on 26 August, 1969 Dr.Kaunda, deeply entrenched in power as President of Zambia declared: “…. We cannot have a nation within a nation. Barotseland is to become Western Province.” Dr.Kaunda was absolutely right. Indeed no two nations could make one nation, but falling short of common sense, he allowed his Parliament to regulate against Barotseland instead of letting Barotseland go to establish its nation as he had rightly observed. ‘

D. CONCLUSION

The Zambian government inherited the obligations of the Queen of Great Britain over Barotseland at Northern Rhodesia’s independence, and it still does so today. Inheriting the Queens obligations by Zambia makes Barotseland a de facto Protectorate or a colony of an African stat hence, the need for decolonisation.

Having turned back 180O out of phase with the Zambian views, we are standing at the threshold of Zambia’s establishment and have now begun the process of Barotseland’s independence from Zambia.

What is enigmatic, puzzling and baffling is Barotseland’s forced assimilation into Zambia. Administering our territory by force, coercion or artifice is not synonymous with unification. The Barotse people and Barotseland itself, have no wish to be colonised perpetually by a fellow African nation.

We, the people of Barotseland, wish to make and implement our collective desire to take care of the political, economic, cultural and traditional issues of our country.

This can only come about when we form government.

We remain yours,

The citizens of Barotseland,

Ilukena Mukubesa

Saeli Mwiya

Samuel Kalimukwa

Anakoka Mufungulwa

Mushabati Mwananyambe

Siyunda Mwangala

Mombotwa Afumba

Nayoto Lyamba

 

CC.

The Ngambela of Barotseland, Mongu-Lealui

United Nations, New York

UK Government, London

SADC

AU

Embassies, Lusaka Commonwealth

Amnesty International, London

Share this post