THE Barotseland Agreement of 1964 yesterday brought about mixed emotions to delegates attending the Constitution-making National Convention where some delegates wanted the Agreement embodied in the preamble while others were against.
Chairperson of the whole House Muyunda Mwanalushi had a tough time to control proceedings prompting him to call on the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) to conduct elections over the matter using a secret ballot.
The elections were however, stayed after the chair again ruled that the matter was emotive and the voting should be deferred to a later time.
Former Speaker of the National Assembly Amusaa Mwanamwambwa, in kicking off debate on the matter, said one party to the agreement progressively abrogated it without consultation with the other party.
Mr Mwanamwambwa said he was a nationalist himself in 1959 and now over 50 years down the line, the issue of the Barotseland Agreement had not been forgotten and there was no sign that it would be forgotten in the near future.
“That is why it is important that the Agreement should be in the preamble of the Constitution,” he said.
Heritage Party leader Godfrey Miyanda proposed that the Barotseland Agreement matter should be taken to government so that at other fora, through extensive consultations, the issue can be discussed and an amicable solution found.
But Kembe Member of Parliament Ronnie Shikapwasha disagreed with General Miyanda and maintained that the Agreement should be in the preamble of the Constitution.
This opened a pandora box as almost all the delegates wanted to participate in the debate while others were interjecting through points of order.
The voting over the Barotseland Agreement of 1964 has since been deferred as the last item on the agenda on the on-going constitution convention.
The Barotse Agreement of 1964 played a significant part in Zambia and should be included in the preamble… This Angreement should not be forgotten at any time because Zambia was born from this.. If at school teachers teach pupils about David Livingstone, why forget about where your country is coming from?
Ladies and Gentlemen,we did not choose to be ‘Israel’ it was an Honour given to us by Jehova!
I know most people thought that the Barotse Agreement was for Disgruntled people but alas with the former speaker Hon Mwanamwambwa coming in the open the tide is changing!
Watch the space as the Chosen ones (Lozis) are regrouping and going back to Israel(Barotseland) leaving traitors who are afraid behind!
Thank Hon Shikapwasha even though people thought you were fast asleep not knowing that you knew what is required. And Mr Mwanamwambwa too. Well done bana bahesu.
Give the people of baroste what they want ! if bembas are powerful and in majority, am sure they wont mind to part away with weak and minorities like lozis.. so YES please do the right thing
B.land agreement of 1964,why not only involve the Lozis to determine its fate. Democracy on this matter shall be like having 69 wolves and five lambs having to decide what to take for lunch!
viva Shikapwasha..we want it in there..!
When is the Church of Barotseland coming back?
This is a non starter, and it shud not be encouraged. What is going to happen if each province or area of Zambia wants or demands a preamble in the constitution. We should learn to interact and live side by side. We shud be courageous to coexist. We should not start going backwards. Our forefathers secured our country at independence. They were wise enough to make compromises. Our Zambia depends on our coexistence. Let us be courageous and continue to carry the touch. One zambia one nation
WE WANT THE CHURCH OF BAROTSELAND BACK THERE WAS NO UCZ IN BAROTSELAND
Backwardness, instead of moving forward with civilised people in a civilised world towards a civilised future, Africans are busy discussing remaining in the dark ages!
@ me: I think you dont understand issues or you are one of those who trivialise important issues to suit yourself. Zambia is a creation of two nations .i.e. Northern Rhodesia and Barotseland. You may not like it but the truth is that they made an agreement to become one based on certain conditions. therefore, to remain one those conditions need to be met. if not the aggrieved party has a right to ceased or renegotiate. What moving forward are you talking about when USSR and Yugoslavia recently broke up into smaller nations. Haven’t you heard many nations in the EU trying to back out of the Euro Zone? read brothers and sisters for you to participate in debates meaningfully. Have you forgotten Eritrea and Ethiopia? What about Somalia, Puntland and Somaliland? Any bell ringing here?
Bo Mwanamwambwa, you had been in govt before but you were mute on barotse issue……..! why now? Please, my fellow lozis, lets forget about this agreement and live as one Zambia, one Nation!!!! Na nihanile!!!!!!
The BA64 cannot be put aside like any other agreement as this was the cornerstone of the current country called Zambia today. If you are a historian you will recall that Tanzania today is a make up of the mainland Tanganyika and the Island of Zanzibar and up to this current day the President always comes from the mainland while the vice or prime minister comes from Zanzibar.
Why is it difficult for Zambia to do the same as before independence there were two protectorates of Northern Rhodesia and Barotseland. The fact is that there is no other province in Zambia today which had the same status like Barotseland.
So the new constitution should embrace the BA64 in its preamble.
Zambians are so blind! The Kenyans have a campaign right now called ‘I am a Kenyan’, while we are trying to identify ourselves as Lozis, Ngonis & Bembas. Some pathetic fools even bring up Eritrea – Ethiopia & Somalia, Puntland & Somaliland situation as if these are very successful references.
One day, your selfishness will destroy you and you will have no one to blame but yourselves. Remember Rupiah shooting a few of the Lozis and as it stands this is not even one of the charges he is facing in the courts of law. The GRZ should negotiate with only the BRE for how to include this in the constitution. This is because it is the same BRE that signed this agreement to form Zambia at Independence. Her majesty Queen Elizabeth II is still alive and should be invited for the witnessing.
Barotse Agreement is valid, says Sata
By George Chellah
Sat 08 Jan. 2011, 04:02 CAT
“The Barotse Agreement is still a valid agreement,” Sata said. “How can you ignore an agreement that was signed, sealed and delivered almost 47 years ago?” “There is no honest person who can deny the existence and validity of the Barotse Agreement. And those with honour and integrity honour valid agreements they have entered into whether they still like them or not,” Sata said. “The Barotse Agreement united and brought together what was not united; what was divided. It is an agreement that brought unity in diversity to our people and as such must be honoured and respected.”
Barotse Agreement is valid, says Sata
By George Chellah
Sat 08 Jan. 2011, 04:02 CAT
“Only crooks, dictators who want everything to be controlled by them from Lusaka can fear the Barotse Agreement.” “How can an agreement that brought our country together as a unitary sovereign state, be seen to be a divisive instrument; to be about secession and treason?” Sata wondered.
one Zambia one nation together we shall stand forever
@ heya, I hear what you are saying. But correct me if im wrong. The map of northen Rhodesia always included barotseland. So it was not like two countrues coming together, rather it was making compromises and negotiating so that so that the new country, Zambia inuded all in Northern Rhodesia. Our forefathers saw it fit to establish this, and i agree with them, it waa the best and still is the best.