Amusaa Mwanamwambwa  (R)
Amusaa Mwanamwambwa (L) (R)

The anticipated voting over the Barotseland Agreement of 1964 at the national Constitution Convention in Lusaka yesterday failed to take place after architects of the motion decided to have the voting called off.

Former Speaker of the National Assembly Amusaa Mwanamwambwa, just before the voting started, sought permission from chairperson of the convention Muyunda Mwanalushi to say something over the voting on the Barotseland Agreement.

Mr Mwanamwambwa moved a motion that voting on the Barotseland Agreement should not take place and that the matter should instead be referred to the parties concerned, the government and the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE).

“The BRE and the government should dialogue over this matter and find a lasting solution. That is the reason I am asking that this gathering should not vote on it. This meeting can facilitate for a speedy resolution of this matter,” Mr Mwanambwambwa said at the Lusaka Mulungushi conference Centre where the convention has been held since April 10, 2013.

Mr Mwanamwamba’s motion was seconded prompting chairperson Professor Mwanalushi to put it to a vote.

Those against taking a vote overwhelmingly won against those for voting and Prof Mwanalushi called on the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) officials to instead conduct elections on three issues namely, the death penalty, the academic qualifications of the Speaker and deputy Speaker of the National Assembly and the age qualification of a presidential candidate.

The voting led by returning officer Lawrence Mulenga started just before 18.00 hours and by press time, the counting had not yet finished.

Earlier, the convention rejected a proposal that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) should seek permission of the courts before entering a nolle prosequi as prescribed under Article 244 (4) of the first draft Constitution.

This was after Solicitor General Musa Mwenya had argued that there were instances that members of the public in a criminal matter approached the DPP with a complaint that the court was colluding with suspects and wondered how in such instances, the DPP could seek the court’s clearance before entering a nolle prosequi.

Heritage Party leader Godfrey Miyanda said he was a victim of the nolle prosequi himself but supported the proposal from the thematic group that the DPP should be making independent decisions on the nolle prosequi without consulting any authority.

He said while in political matters the nolle prosequi could be abused, he still maintained that the DPP’s office should be left to operate independently.

The convention was expected to be officially closed soon after the results of the voting were announced.

[Read 19 times, 1 reads today]
Loading...

23 COMMENTS

  1. Whenever did amusa mwanamwamba become white……..he is on the right and not left as you have indicated…..

    0

    0
  2. Way to Go. One Zambia One Nation, chapwa. The next time a Lozi will be our president, this thing will never arise. Meaning, this BA thing has a tribal TAG hanging around its neck. Drop it for good please.

    0

    0
  3. This issue should have been concluded here. Some people just want others to take the blem in case things don’t go well.

    0

    0
  4. Here we go again. How long shall we continue to skate around a matter that shall not leave us. The BRE and government cannot resolve this matter without consitutional support.

    0

    0
  5. Zambians very dull as usual. The BAROTSE issues cannot be voted on and think that is the way to go. The truth is the LOZIS have a point and I have not heard any lawyer dispute it except dull *****s like Winter Sex Kabimba. The only people who have a legitimate vote are the BAROTSE people themselves. Show me one country where such a regional issue has been voted on by a Committee or a whole country! Never it is only people either from or in that region that determine their destiny. examples are plenty Eritria, South Sudan, Northern Ireland and most recentlyThe Fulcan Islands! The problem is the LOZIS are and will remain a unique people with clear and admirable ageold Governance structures. Sata himself said a lot about the LITUNGA and insulted Lozis thinking he will get away with but alas!

    0

    0
  6. BA should have been included to solve it once and for all. An article should have been introduced. It us said The Enemy you don’t defeat today will defeat you tomorrow

    0

    0
  7. Our own learned Amusaa Mwanamwambwa and Professor Mwanalushi among others are truly intelligent and very rational men of mother Zambia. They have come to realize that integrity in all things shall always be better than selfish desires. Zambia needs more of such thinking men to see its glory. It is only through rationality, integrity and honoring promises can we as a nation see true excellence. These values are old, these values are true as they have been a quiet force of progress throughout history.
    Trading on the path of selfish desires, irrationality, inconsistency, dishonoring promises and making decisions for expedience sake, is dangerous and lasts not an ounce of time. Only truth and fair play shall deliver us, prosper us and make us free moral beings.
    God help learn!

    0

    0
  8. Agreement is an agreement. The Barotseland agreement will still remain valid unless both parties involved decide to revoke it in written as it was created in written. Why involving people that I not part of it? And they shall never be part of it.

    0

    0
    • THE BA64 IS A VERY GOOD PIECE OF AGREEMENT. BUT THE FORMER NGAMBELA “SHINDA WAINYELAWILA” WANTED TO ABUSE IT TO ADVANCE HIS POLITICAL AGENDA. TIME HAS SHOWN US THAT THE LITUNGA IS NOT INTERESTED IN SECESSION. UNDER DEVOLUTION OF POWERS THE BA64 ACTUALLY FITS IN VERY WELL. SOME FRUSTRATED UPND SYMPATHISERS WANTED TO RIDE ON IT WITH SHINDA WAINYELAWILA.

      0

      0
  9. no part or any provisions of this agreement shall be changed without consultations with the litunga.

    in other words, it does not matter, whatever the zambian government does, all is worthless unless the litunga gives a go ahead in relation to any provisions in the barotse agreement.

    that is why amusa asked that it be withdrawn because any decision made in that meeting would not have held water.

    lozi people are clever. wait and see.

    0

    0
  10. Bury the Barotseland Agreement 1964, otherwise you will exhume the Bembaland Agreement 1895.

    0

    0
  11. Thaty is very good. The BA is an international treaty which can only be resolvedby parties to it and not a convention of illetrates convened by an illiterate dagga smoker from Muchinga. It was a mistake in the first place for it to appear in the draft constitution.The final decision can be be only through a court process guided by the Viena Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969 through the International Court of Justice. For now there is still room for dialogue between the parties to the BA. This is also supported by Cusdtomary International Law AS A SOURCE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW. The NCC is not party to the BA and therefore it is a misrepresentration of facts to ask it to resolve the saga.

    0

    0
  12. Let the lozis go they think they are so superior to any other zambians anyway we are are tired of the same old story

    0

    0
  13. Whatever the agreement, it should be done for the good of Zambia for we are all Zambians. This should not result in a war against tribes. We are all one and we are all Zambian whatever tribe we belong to. These men are intelligent and let’s hope they are thinking about Zambia as a whole because this could lead to bad times in the foreseeable future. We don’t need what happened in Rwanda to repeat history here in zambia

    0

    0

Comments are closed.