Let Barotseland Judge—The embattled BRE must go
by Mwananyandi Mukunyandela Mukuyoyisa
Going through the latest embattled Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) position statement unleashed to the press and published by two daily tabloids on October 22, 2015, the intention is really to deceive—deceive Barotseland, rest of Zambia and the international community—for the country known as the unitary state of Zambia was born out of deception and it exists out of deception while BRE itself is a deception. Therefore, it is time for the embattled BRE to go. The heading of the statement and its preamble intends to clarify the embattled BRE’s position on the Barotseland Agreement 1964 (BA’64) following press statements in the Daily Nation Newspaper. However, the position statement neither clarifies the embattled BRE’s position nor the press statements in the named tabloid which ironically were attributed to one, referred to, as BRE spokesperson. The embattled BRE was in effect distancing itself from its own Barotse National Council Resolutions of March 27, 2012 and pronouncing a new policy statement to start fresh discussion with the Edgar Lungu regime on the restoration of the BA’64 without the authority and mandate of the People of Barotseland. The position statement goes round skating the real issues and making no reference to the press statements it wishes to clarify—for none existed. The embattled BRE is really a smoke screen entity which vacillates and changes according to the coins tossed at it, in the same way that a chameleon changes colour in order to deceive predators. However, glaring deceptions stand out, which I point out in order to help you make your own judgement as follows: Firstly, the embattled BRE have completely ignored the People of Barotseland’s policy directives regarding Barotseland’s forward motion as enshrined in the 26th-27th March, 2012 BNC Resolutions following the Zambian regime’s unilateral abrogation of the BA’64 and Barotseland’s acceptance thereof—Barotseland self-determination and self-rule—the only outstanding discussions is the disengagement process, of which only two years are remaining for the Zambian regime to vacate Barotseland. The People of Barotseland cannot take kindly or lightly to anyone who trivializes the role and place of the epoch-making BNC of 2012 because it is the watershed, in as far as, Barotseland’s relationship to the rest of Zambia is concerned. Secondly, the embattled and undemocratic BRE calls itself a principle party to the BA’64. Yet it was not in existence at the time the BA’64 was negotiated, concluded and signed. It is a creation of Kenneth Kaunda regime after he dismantled the ‘real McCoy’—the real thing, the democratically elected Katengo Legislative Council from which the Barotse Government was constituted. There is no mention in the BA’64 of the BRE. What is recognised in the BA’64 is the Barotse Government and speeches of the time, including those by KK refer to the Barotse Government. We still have surviving members of that Government among whom is Hon W. Mucala Situtu who was in charge of Education. This is why the BNC of March 2012 recognized the Barotse Government and not the BRE. Thirdly, a close look at points 5 and 6 of the BRE position statement confirms the deceit of its embattled spokesperson, constantly quoted by the Daily Nation, that it is neither part to the UNPO membership of Barotseland nor to the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) Banjul process. This is a blatant falsification of facts on the part of the embattled BRE and whoever drafted the statement for them—it begs the question, why withdraw from a process to which you were not part from the beginning. This clearly shows the flip-flop kind of entity that we have to deal with. It is noteworthy to mention that the embattled Litunga and his crop of Indunas prefer to call our Nation by the slave name of ‘Western Province’ instead of the real name of Barotseland. This is nauseating and repulsive to every Mulozi worth his/her salt. Note that the boundaries of Barotseland are distinctive. I present herewith some documents to help you make your own informed decision. Can the embattled BRE today deny the authenticity of the BNC of March 2012, the application to UNPO and the ACHPR process? I have overwhelming evidence that they did convene the BNC and ratified its resolutions, they made the application to UNPO, which application was signed by Hon. Clement W. Sinyinda and co-signed by Lubasi Nalishuwa and Moowa Zambwe, but these last two have again jointly signed the embattled BRE statement of today questioning the ACHPR process, which was endorsed by 8 Indunas representing all the District Kutas and the Saa-Sikalo Kuta plus four persons representing the key Civil Society Organizations or Activist Groups. They are such a bunch of bad liars and, consequently, no longer have the moral right nor the legitimate mandate to represent the People of Barotseland. Attachments: