The above subject matter refers.

Kindly receive our sincere compliments to His Majesty King Lubosi Imwiko II, and greetings to all the Kutas and all the peoples of Barotseland.

We, the BIs, applaud the Saa-Siikalo Kutas for rejecting this demonic proposal from the enemies of Barotseland.

We demand an immediate apology from Agape and advise them to take a leaf from the recent civilized United Kingdom/Scotland issue. If Agape really wants to find a sincere solution to the Barotseland impasse, they should pressure the current Zambian government, under the Sata regime, to sign the PCA submission agreement in order to allow for an independent and impartial international arbitration tribunal to determine the validity of Zambia's actions as well as the current legal status of Barotseland statehood under public international law in a pacific manner, as proposed by Barotse National Freedom Alliance together with the peoples of Barotseland and to vacate Barotseland territory in the shortest possible time.

Having read the said letter authored by a non-descript conflict resolutions organization called Agape Associates, addressed to His Majesty the Litunga (King) of Barotseland, the letter proposed a summit that should have been be held in Mongu to discuss the annulled Barotseland Agreement 1964 (BA’64), under the Zambian motto of one Zambia one nation. The letter's narration of the evolution of the Barotseland impasse speaks volumes of the lack of knowledge of the subject by the authors and ignorance of the facts contained in the BA’64 itself—simply put, there is no unitary state called Zambia without the BA’64. Therefore, the rest of Zambia now exists as a state separate from Barotseland and need to legally reconstitute themselves because the BA’64 is no more.

My Lord, the Agape proposed summit is a well calculated move by our enemy to burry and forget Barotseland under the rest of Zambia’s municipal laws, in a similar manner to the Rodger Chongwe commission of inquiry report that is now gathering dust at Zambia's state house, which recommended a minority view in order to safe guard the rest of Zambia interests against the interest and view of the majority Barotse peoples. Given the fact that the Barotseland statehood is legitimate and backed by history and international law, the peoples of Barotseland believe that the BA’64 is an international treaty and cannot be replaced by resolutions of a bogus summit organized and attended by people with no locus standi on the issue.

The people of Barotseland are no longer interested in discussing the merits or demerits of restoring the annulled BA’64. The people of Barotseland are only interested in discussing the disengagement of the oppressive Zambian administration from Barotseland in the shortest possible time, in line with the Barotse National Council (BNC) resolutions of 27th March 2012. At the BNC meeting, the people of Barotseland resolved to come to terms with the prevailing realities by accepting the unilateral abrogation of the BA’64 by the Zambian government in 1969 after 47 years of futile attempts to restore it and declared to exercise their right to self-determination and self-rule, thereby, formally commencing the separation process of the two territories (rest of Zambia and Barotseland). Therefore, no person or any other body, including Agape, can reverse Barotseland’s declaration of self-determination and selfrule.

My Lord, Agape's proposed Mongu peace and unit declaration, is not only a reflection of the rest of Zambia’s continued deception, lack of respect of and continued insults to the peoples Barotseland. How can we replace an international treaty with bogus Mongu summit declarations? Where was Agape when the people of Barotseland have been grappling with the Barotseland impasse since 1965 to date, yet they don’t even understand what is going on? How can Agape falsely accuse the former Ngambela of Barotseland, Honorable Clement Wainyae Sinyinda (now Chairman General of Barotse National Freedom Alliance (BNFA)), of leading Linyungandambo and imposing himself as Prime Minister of Barotseland when in fact not? Where is the honest of Agape? Agape's aim and pre-occupation is to deceive Barotseland, the rest of Zambia and the international community to celebrate the rest of Zambia’s failed unitary Golden Jubilee. We see yet again, a rest of Zambia agent attempting destroy the annulled legal and international BA’64 before 24th October 2014 through the proposed Mongu summit. What kind of dullness is this? How many times are you going to kill something that is already dead in order for you to realize that Zambia no longer exists as a unitary state—it died with the Zambian government’s unilateral abrogation of the BA’64 in 1969 by which action the rest of Zambia ceded itself from Barotseland? Now the same people turn around and accuse Barotseland of ceding and treason. Who committed secession and treason, the one who abrogated the union Agreement 47 years ago or the one who accepted that abrogation 47 years later after futile attempts to restore the union Agreement? What kind of lunacy is this? We even have state agents enforcing this lunacy, church bodies and rest of Zambia supporting this lunacy and lawlessness. Agape's further insulted our King by addressing him as His Royal Highness.

My Lord, Agape's deception over the issue of Barotseland is further depicted in several ways. As indicated already, Agape itself is an organization from a territory occupying and oppressing Barotseland; and composition of the groups and people invited to the Mongu summit largely come from the occupying and oppressing rest of Zambia territory whose participation in the summit is simply to endorse the perpetual illegal occupation of Barotseland by successive Zambian regimes. The issue of members of parliament invokes sad memories in the minds of the peoples of Barotseland concerning the highly detested 1969 Lifu la Ndambo (referendum). It was the parliament that rubber stamped the Zambian governments’ unilateral abrogation of the BA’64, under the Kaunda dictatorship. What did mother church bodies from the rest of Zambia do at the time and what are they offering now? What did they do before and thereafter? What has changed for them to intervene now in a matter concerning a now separate state? The echo of their silence over the cries of the peoples of Barotseland can still be head up to now. Not even the killing of our un-armed innocent people could stir their noble call to speak for the voiceless. They only stir into action only when it involves protecting and perpetuating the Zambian government deception and oppression of the Barotseland territory. Further, to add salt to jury, Agape invited a former Chipoloplo football player to play with the Barotseland issue.

My Lord, Agape’s insincerity is further reflected by the claim that interpretation of the BA’64 was the issue when the issue was simply that the Zambian government acted in bad faith when signing it. This is demonstrated by their failure to implement the BA’64 and enactment of various pieces of legislations, which violated it, starting with the local government Act of 1965. Interpretation of the BA’64 was never a problem. If it was a problem then, the three parties to the Agreement—the Barotse government, the Zambian government, and the British government—would not have proceeded to sign it in the first place. If interpretation was a problem thereafter, then the parties to the BA’64 would have taken each other to court, but they did not. Instead, we now witness one party to the BA’64 taking the other to court over its commissions and omissions against the BA’64—resulting in the two territories now being separate states. We also witness the other party failing to provide counter evidence and running away from the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) process—a clear admission of guilty. In both cases, the issue of interpretation never arose. For Agape to insinuate that the obligation of the Zambian government was to fulfill the interpretation of the BA’64 again reflects its ignorance or insincerity over the Barotseland impasse–simply put, it is null and void.

Yours,

For immediate implementation of the BNC Resolutions.

Signed