THE FALLACY OF THE BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT
By Patriotic Zambian
The Barotseland Agreement has been in the news for many years now but I feel there are many issues which are not taken seriously when
looking at this issue by both the pro- and anti- groups.
When approaching the BA64 one needs to understand that this issue does not begin in 1964 when it was signed but has much deeper roots. It must be remembered that the British pushed for the BA64 because they had obligations towards the Barotseland Protectorate which they wanted to get rid of.
Herein comes the Lochner Concession.
On 27th June 1890, Lewanika and his son Litia, Ngambela Mwauluka and 38 indunas signed the concession, which ‘shall be considered in the light of a treaty between my said Barotse nation and the government of Her Britannic Majesty Queen Victoria’.
It needs to be pointed out here that the BSAC misrepresented that they were signing on behalf of the British government when in fact they were signing for a commercial concern.
The company was not granted administrative rights but received ‘the sole, absolute, exclusive and perpetual right and power’ to ‘search for, dig, win and keep’ any and all minerals in Barotseland.
Francois Coillard recorded what the Litunga and his council considered to be the extent of his territory; they made the very dubious claim that Lozi authority was recognised by the Lunda and Luvale to the North, the Kaonde to the North east, the Ila to the East and the Tonga and Toka to the South East.
[pullquote]Thus Barotseland ceased to be a separate entity in 1911 contrary to what a lot of people are saying today.[/pullquote]
In effect then, through the Lochner Concession, the BSAC assumed the whole of what was to become North-western Rhodesia; it’s authority and control over all the peoples named by Lewanika rested solely on its agreement with the Lozi; no independent agreements were ever signed by chiefs of the Lunda, Luvale, Ila, Tonga or Toka, who nevertheless had to submit to BSAC overrule. Talk of being sold down the river.
Lewanika’s copy of the Lochner Concession reveals that he hoped to obtain development aid and external protection without any reduction in his internal authority. ‘The company shall not be allowed or obliged to interfere in any matter concerning the Litunga’s power or authority over any of his own subjects.
In the companys copy of the Treaty, the emphasis upon development under Lewanika’s supervision and authority falls away; secondly, it is merely noted that the ‘Company shall not be obliged to interfere’ in the internal affairs of Lewanikas state while nothing is said about the Company not being allowed to do so by the Litunga.
When George Middleton, a lay preacher, revealed that Lochner was an agent of the Company and not the British crown, Lewanika was livid with anger. He wrote for assurances to Queen Victoria.
‘I am troubled by this and should the report spread, there will be trouble and excitement in my country and people.’ His protestations and his
repudiation of the Lochner Concession were not taken seriously by the Bristish authorities in Cape Town and London.
The official view was that the Secretary of State did not have to express approval or otherwise of the Lochner Concession since it did not concern any
exercise of powers of government or administration by the BSAC.
Lewanika’s protestations reveal not only the extent to which he was influenced by missionaries , but also raises the question of the extent to which he understood what was involved in the concession and its significance.
Lewanika claimed that he granted the concession because he was made to understand that it was the equivalent of a treaty with the Queen.
As a result of the North-western Rhodesia-Barotseland Order-in-Council of 1899, the BSAC soon exercised overweening influence in all of North-western Rhodesia and, specifically, in Barotseland.
By this Order in Council of 1899, Lewanika and the Lozi state had lost their sovereignty to the Queen and Her Majesty’s Government. No evidence has come to light to suggest that at the time Lewanika was formally told of the Order in Council and of its significance to him as king and to the Lozi state. But the Colonial Office informed the BSAC of this in very clear and direct terms.
The order superceded the Lawley Concession, and through it Lewanika’s negotiations and his concessions were operative only in as far as they are ratified by Her Majesty or are not inconsistent with the Order in Council.
In the second place Company rule steadily ate away at Lewanika’s power inside Bulozi and he suffered humiliation after humiliation and made protest after vain protest.
The operation of the BSAC had great effect on the social and economic structure of Bulozi. Slavery, tribute labour and tribute were abolished and instead paid labour and taxation were introduced. The missionaries pointed out that the instrument of change in Bulozi was no more Lewanika but the ‘new Government which has become the instrument of transformation.’
By an Order in Council of 4 May 1911 Barotseland/North-western Rhodesia; North-eastern Rhodesia were amalgamated as one territory-Northern Rhodesia, still administered by the BSA Company.
Thus Barotseland ceased to be a separate entity in 1911 contrary to what a lot of people are saying today.
On 1 April 1924 the Administration of Northern Rhodesia became the direct responsibility of THE COLONIAL OFFICE. Herbert Stanley was appointed as Governor and Northern Rhodesia became an official Protectorate of the United Kingdom, with the capital in Livingstone.The capital was moved to Lusaka in 1935.
When the Crown assumed full power of Government over Northern Rhodesia in 1924, the Order-in- council which constituted the administration of the territory, enjoined that nothing in the provisions conferring power to regulate the natives shall be deemed to limit or affect the exercise by the King of Barotseland of his authority:{1911,1924,1929,1936,1953 Laws} N.B. Article 41 of the Northern Rhodesia Order – in – Council of 1924 reads:
1. It shall not be lawful for any purpose whatever except with the approval of the Secretary of State to alienate from the Chief and people of the Barotse, the territory reserved from prospecting by virtue of the concessions from Lewanika to the British South Africa Company dated the 17th day of October, 1900 and the 11th of August 1900 and the 11th of August, 1909.
2. All rights reserved to or for the benefits of natives by the aforesaid concessions as approved by secretary of State shall continue to have force and effect.
This, in theory, was how it was agreed to work but as can be observed above, neither the BSAC nor the British Crown saw need to adhere to this agreement as signed.
Thus in 1924, the British government inherited the responsibilities of the BSAC and the attendant issues accompanying the Lochner concession.
The Zambian independence issue caused apprehension since Lozi’s claim to a special status within Zambia as within Northern Rhodesia depended on the nineteenth century treaties with the BSAC and the British Government.
In 1964, at the time of independence, the British wishing to absolve themselves of their obligations towards Barotseland and knowing the unviability of a stand-alone Barotseland state, pushed for the signing of the BA64 so that the new nation of Zambia would take over their responsibilities.
Although given special dispensation for local government administration from the date of signing of the Lochner Concession, Barotseland was never considered as a separate country from first North-western Rhodesia and later Northern Rhodesia. It was a protectorate within another Protectorate, Northern Rhodesia.
As a British Protectorate, it was governed from Livingstone and later Lusaka.Geographically, Barotseland has always been drawn within the international boundaries of Northern Rhodesia and its boundaries have always been shown as provincial boundaries by the British. This is unlike Basutoland, Swaziland and Bechuanaland which were always shown within separate international boundaries. The present boundaries of Western Province are more or less the same as the old Barotseland contrary to the claims of people today who want to extend them to the railway line and Copperbelt
Lewanika’s granting of rights to the BSAC to the extent he did was illegal and cannot stand up to international scrutiny by today’s standards. It is not acceptable that he could have granted rights in areas where he had no jurisdiction and expect that the people in those areas are just going to accept with their arms folded.
In calling for the restoration of the BA64, the tribes which came under BSAC rule as a result of the Lochner Concession must categorically be taken as
separate from the old Barotseland. The BA64 is a by-product of the original deceit by Frank Lochner on behalf of Cecil Rhodes and the BSAC. With the knowledge we have now, we cannot allow an injustice of 1890 to be legitimised by an agreement of 1964.
