Barotseland Revisited

In my ongoing research into the real facts behind the hot-button Barotseland Agreement (BA) issue here in Zambia, I recently went back to the Think Tank debate archives that our company (Moneynet Enterprises Ltd) introduced on Zambia Online 13 years ago (1999-2001). I have not seen a better discussion on this issue anywhere else before or since. Some of the questions I am pondering are:

1. Why hasn’t the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) sued the Zambian government all these 40 years plus?

2. How did first Zambian president Kenneth Kaunda manage to pull this off (ie removing the BA from the Zambian constitution)?

3. If the abrogation of the BA by the Zambian government technically invalidates the existence of Zambia with Barotseland as part of it as some have argued, then what is the way forward?

4. If the Zambian government is unwilling to restore the provisions of the BA, will they go as far as using military force to crush an apparently legitimate claim, especially if they lose the case in court?

5. How would the international community react to Zambia invading Barotseland?

6. What are the implications of having a separate state (Barotseland) from whatever will remain of Zambia with respect to Lozis that have grown up in areas outside Barotseland? Will they be kicked out of what remains of Zambia?

7. Is a new agreement the way forward to solve the legal quagmire of reverting back to the 1964 pre-independence status?

Here are some interesting excerpts from the Think Tank discussion:

Munga Munzi, 04 February 2000

On the 18th May, 1964 an agreement entitled “The Barotseland agreement 1964″ was concluded at the commonwealth Relations Office in London… The purpose of this agreement was to facilitate the integration of Barotseland into Zambia at the time of independence. It was therefore meant to legalise and solidify the status of Barotse people in the unitary state of Zambia. The Barotseland agreement of 1964 legitimised the existence of the independent country called Zambia, conversely its abrogation signifies the invalidity of Barotseland’s integration into Zambia….

Paragraph one of Article one of the international Covenant on Economic, social and cultural rights of 1966 states that,” All people have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”

Furthermore, Article 22 of the African charter on Human and people’s rights of 1991 states as follows:-

ALL PEOPLE SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO THEIR ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT WITH DUE REGARD TO THEIR FREEDOM AND IDENTITY AND IN THE EQUAL ENJOYMENT OF THE COMMON HERITAGE OF MANKIND. STATES SHALL HAVE THE DUTY, INDIVIDUALLY OR COLLECTIVELY TO ENSURE THE EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT.

Zambia and its Government happens to be a signatory to this arrangement.

The Barotseland Agreement has never been honoured by the Zambian government since it was signed in 1964. This agreement has been treated with contempt and out-right disrespect. It must be borne in mind that the agreement is an international treaty. No sooner had independence been attained than the Zambian government set out to undermine not only the agreement, but also the people of Barotseland and their government.

The Zambian government’s deceitfulness was clearly manifested by the passing of devious Acts solely bent on eroding the history of Barotseland. These acts were passed in bad faith, some of these were interalia; the 1965 and 1966 local government act, the mines and mineral Act of 1969, the 1970 and 1972 land acquisition changes. These manoeuvres have culminated into the 1995 land act and the white paper that categorically buries the Barotseland Agreement.

The people of Barotseland have prudently and patiently sought dialogue with the Zambian government. The intransigent party to this contract has always been the Zambian government . Since Barotseland voluntarily entered into this agreement, it is only logical for it to now voluntarily divorce itself from the aforementioned arrangement and revert to its original status.

The Barotse Patriotic Front is now challenging the Zambian Government to show cause why Barotseland should remain an integral part of Zambia. Our call for self determination is a democratic right which is enshrined in the United Nations Charter and legally binding since the contract between Zambia and Barotseland is no longer obligatory.

Barotse Cultural Association, 23 June 2000

Using its monopoly hold on the tools of propaganda, and taking advantage of the naiveté of the Barotse authorities in having believed that the ‘nationalists’ who formed government after independence were men of honour, the Zambian government has, over the years, managed to reduce the matter of Barotseland to the level of a tribal conflict which projects the Lozi as being unaccommodating secessionists.

The fact that it is the Barotseland Agreement 1964 which created the Zambian nation out of two distinct territories (and states) is conveniently overlooked. These are the territories which, as at mid-night 23 October 1964, were comprised in the Barotseland and Northern Rhodesia protectorates. The fact that the cardinal point of this Agreement was that Barotseland would retain its regional government under the regulation of the Litunga-in-Council, and that the central government would not interfere in the day-to-day running of the affairs of Barotseland is conveniently forgotten. Indeed, the fact that Barotseland became a part of Zambia through this Agreement is a matter that is rarely given thought by the anti-Lozi segment of our society. The fact that the action by the government of Zambia to frustrate and finally terminate the Agreement makes Barotseland technically cease to be a part of Zambia is a matter that suprisingly escapes the attention of the so called ‘anti-secessionists’.

It is unnecessary to belabour the point that the question of SECESSION does not arise vis-à-vis the matter of Self-Determination for Barotseland. It is clear that Barotseland ceased to be a part of Zambia soon after independence, thanks to the misguided actions of the corrupt Zambian authorities!

Barotse Cultural Association, 15 October 2000

Northern Rhodesia did not exist until 1924 when the territories then known as Barotseland-North Western Rhodesia and North Eastern Rhodesia were enjoined under one colonial administration. This was done through the Nothern Rhodesia Order-in-Council of 1923 which, though it established one Colonial Adminstrator for the territory, secured Barotseland’s status as a separate entity by styling it as a Protectorate-within-a-Protectorate…

Barotseland Map

The areas covering present day copperbelt province together with the land buttressed by the lower part of Kafue river and the lower Zambezi was treated seperately by the Secretary of State for the Colonies. In order to bring a semblence of order in this area, the British authority requested King Lewanika of Barotseland to hold the land by establishing control structures within the area. The British offered Lewanika mineral royalties as renumeration for this service. It should be stressed at this particular point that this land is not necessarilly part of Barotseland but was transfered to the Barotse King’s rule for convinience, in return for specific renumeration. This ‘transferred area’ and Barotseland make up the territory which was called Barotseland-North Western Rhodesia….

Through the Order-in-Council of 1909 North Western Rhodesia and North Eastern Rhodesia were merged to form Northern Rhodesia with the headquarters being moved to Livingstone in 1911. Barotseland retained its status as a protectorate with a Resident Represidentive at Mongu. Through the Order-in-Council of 1923 the British Government took over the administration of Northern Rhodesia from the company and appointed a Governor for the territory. This Order-in-Council affirmed the separate status of Barotseland by styling it as a protectorate within the British Protectorate of Northern Rhodesia. This provision was carried forward at all stages and phases of the political development of Northern Rhodesia including the period of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland (1953 – 1963).

At the end of Federation when Northern Rhodesia was to be independent of British rule, the authorities had to decide whether or not to split the two Protectorates of Northern Rhodesia and Barotseland. These authorities were the newly installed black majority government of Northern Rhodesia led by Prime Minister Kenneth Kaunda, the Barotse Government under the Litunga and the British Colonial Office. Negotiations were entered into which culminated into the signing of the Barotseland Agreement 1964 in London on 18 May 1964.

This Agreement provides for partial autonomy of Barotseland within Zambia. It is the basis for the unitary state of Zambia and the source of the national motto of ‘One-Zambia, One-nation,’ which forms a component of the Zambian Coat of Arms. It is reflected in the National Anthem under stanza No. 3 which reads ‘one-Zambia, one-Nation is our cry’ signifying the anxiety and desperation of Zambia’s founding politicians to have Barotseland within Zambia.

Mwelwa, 29 November 2000

Don’t use politics of the third term to give an excuse to secede. Do you know what the boundaries of Barotseland are?

Munga-a-munzi, 30 November 2000

MWELWA

FIRSTLY, its not an excuse to claim what is legally and rightfully yours.

SECONDLY, secession for Barotseland does not arise since Barotseland since “independence” in 1964 has never been a part of Northern Rhodesia Protectorate (alias Zambia)….

LASTLY, like BO INETE has pointed out the big question is when is Barotseland self-determination taking place. We also appreciate the fact that you acknowledge the fact that Barotseland existed as an independent sovereign state before “independence” in 1964, but your worry are the boundaries.

Martin, 10 December 2000

Its interesting to note that BCA and others who support his secessionist views seem to believe that on the issue of barotseland the “issue of secession does not rise since it was never part of zambia”. I seem to read this as meaning if lozis decided to secede the would not call it “secession” but rather something else. well, that seems to also justify some of the views chilango and others have advocated that we should also not appeal to the barotse agreement as “gospel truth” so that we as the people of zambia and africans have a right to accept or deny its validity. Do modern africans living in zambia today have a the right to accept or deny according to their COLLECTIVE self interest any rules and agreements the British colonial masters helped engineer?

Barotse Cultural Association, 13 December 2000

MARTIN, we are surprised that up to this point you have not grasped the basis for our stand that the term SECESSION is a misnomer when applied to Barotseland and Zambia. We further believe that your case is not really of failure to comprehend a situation but a desire to prolong an argument unnecessarily. However, for the sake of those who may be misled by your deliberate refusal to correctly read a straight forward matter, we take you through a step by step analysis of the situation as follows;

Legally, Northern Rhodesia comprised two Protectorates of Northern Rhodesia and Barotseland as separate territories up to independence in 1964, even though they had a Common Colonial Governor. This situation was not unique as it had been applied in the case of Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland which were administered by a Common High Commissioner. However, as opposed to these other countries which obtained independence separately, Barotseland and Northern Rhodesia, on account of geographical proximity and the fact that their peoples had intermingled through a shared Colonial Administration, decided to merge and proceed to independence as one country. The basis or foundation of that merger is the Barotseland Agreement 1964. This fact is highlighted and underscored by the Agreement which, in the first paragraph of the Preamble says;

“This Agreement is made this eighteenth day of May, 1964 between KENNETH DAVID KAUNDA, Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia, on behalf of the Government of Northern Rhodesia of the one part and SIR MWANAWINA LEWANIKA THE THIRD, K.B.E, Litunga of Barotseland, acting on behalf of himself, his heirs and successors, his Council, and the chiefs and people of Barotseland of the other part……….”

The second paragraph of the Preamble says;

“…Whereas it is proposed that Northern Rhodesia shall become an independent sovereign Republic to be known as the Republic of Zambia…”

The third paragraph of the Preamble goes on to provide as follows:

“….And whereas it is the wish of the Government of Northern Rhodesia and of the Litunga of Barotseland, his Council and the chiefs and people of Barotseland that Northern Rhodesia should proceed to independence as one country and that all its peoples should be one nation…”

The rest of the Agreement provides the terms and conditions of the merger detailing the rights and powers of each of the two parties to the Agreement. One important provision is Article 4 which entrenches the Barotse Regional Autonomy by providing for a legislative body called the Litunga-in-Council, the Barotse Government, the Barotse Courts, Local Authorities, the Treasury etc.

It is crystal clear that it is the Barotseland Agreement 1964 which makes Barotseland a part of Zambia. In other words, it is this Agreement which created Zambia. But, this treaty was torn apart by the Government of Zambia during the period 1966 to 1968 through unilateral and unconstitutional actions, rendering it unworkable. The Government is on record, particularly after the advent of the Third Republic, in saying that it considers the Agreement a dead issue. Under these circumstances would any sensible person insist that Barotseland, legally speaking, is still a part of Zambia? Does Zambia exist?

Barotseland coat of arms

Perhaps, for the sake of clarity, we should draw a near parallel from one of the common treaties in human society – the marriage. Consider a situation where one partner, in pursuit of selfish aims of escaping the obligations that go with matrimonial laws, nullifies the marriage certificate by tearing it and committing acts which breach the law governing marital relations. Would the marriage continue to subsist, in the eyes of the law, even if the two people continued to live under one roof. If the aggrieved partner, after several attempts to restore the marriage have failed, opts out, would this partner be accused of breaking the marriage? At what point did this marriage cease to exist? Was it at the point that the aggrieved partner walked out or at the point when the legal instrument of marriage ceased to apply?

With the foregoing analysis we now pose the question – if Barotseland today decides to restore herself as a self governing state would she, in legal terms, be considered to be seceding from anywhere?

As for you Martin, we challenge you to show where, in our submissions, we have argued for the discarding of entrenched constitutional, social and cultural developments of the colonial period. If anything, we have repeatedly said that our history determines who or what we are. It is very dangerous to wholesomely discard your history for you will end up by discarding yourself.

Ben, 5 December 2000

Can anyone give me a list of the litungas of Barotseland from 1968 to 2000? I know Godwin Mbikusita Lewanika II acceded on 15 Dec 1968, and Ilute Yeta IV died 7 Jul 2000. When was the transition between those, or were there any litungas in between?

Barotse Cultural Association, 13 December 2000

BEN in Germany, we give you the chronological order of the Litunga(s) of Barotseland. Firstly, it should be appreciated that the Aluyi (Ancestors of the Lozi) came from a tradition of female rulers. That is why they were led by a woman, Mwambwa, during their trek from the Congo. Mwambwa was succeeded by her daughter Mbuyu. After Mbuyu the people decided, for a variety of reasons, to transfer leadership to the male gender. Thus, her fisrt born son MUYUNDA (later called MBOO), became the first King.

Mboo was succeeded by his brother INYAMBO who was also succeeded by another brother, YETA (known officialy as Yeta I). Yeta was succeeded by Inyambo’s son NUMWA who was succeeded by a cousin, NGALAMA. The latter was a son of Iñalamwa, one of Mbuyu’s sons who did not ascend to the throne.

Ngalama was followed by two of his sons in succession, YETA (known as Yeta II) and NGOMBALA. Ngombala’s reign was so lengthy that his children and nephews were considered too old for the throne when he died. He was succeeded by his grandson YUBYA who was in turn succeeded by a brother, MWANAWINA ( Mwanawina I). Mwanawina was followed by two sons in succession, MWANANYANDA and MULAMBWA.

Mulambwa was succeeded by his son SILUMELUME amidst controversy as this succesion was disputed by another son, Mubukwanu, leading to disunity and civil war. It was at this time that the Kololo, a warrior tribe from Lesotho, invaded the Kingdom, overan and ruled the Aluyi (later called the Lozi) for 34 years from 1830. In the meantime, two sections of the Aluyi had managed to regroup and move away from the central plains. One group went to the Manyinga area, in Kabompo, where they built a stockade to barricade themselves from Kololo influence. The second group went to the western part of Barotseland in Nyengo area. These groups were led by IMASIKU and IMBUWA, both of whom were Mulambwa’s sons.

In 1864 the Lozi, under the leadership of LUTANGU (later called SIPOPA), who was Mulambwa’s son, rebelled against Kololo rule and overthrew it. It is said and believed that all Kololo men were executed while the women were shared among the Lozi aristocracy. Sipopa was succeeded by a nephew, MWANAWINA (Mwanawina II) in 1876. The latter was a son to Sibeso, one of Mulambwa’s sons. Mwanawina II died in 1878 and was succeeded by LUBOSI, another of Mulambwa’s grandsons (his father was Litia). In 1884 Lubosi was overthrown in a palace coup by his cousin, TATILA AKUFUNA who was Imbuwa’s son. Lubosi escaped and was exiled among the Kwamashi tribe ocupying an area along the present border with Angola. The following year, Tatila was overthrown in a popular uprising which saw Lubosi reinstated to the Kingship. Following his return, Lubosi strengthened his hold on power by purging his rivals. He further consolidated his hand throughout the Kindom by appointing personal representatives as overseers and tax collectors among the tribes. This earned him the name/title of LIWANIKA-la-MAFUCI, a luvale and Luyana term for ‘gatherer or conquerer of lands (nations)’. Thus he assumed the legendary name of Liwanika (corrupted to Lewanika by the British). Developments partaining to the Partition of Africa and colonialism heightened during his reign. He signed a Protectorate treaty and several concessions with the British between 1890 and 1910.

Lewanika was followed on the throne by four sons in succession. He died in 1916 and was succeeded by his son Litia, who ascended to the throne as YETA III. In 1945 Yeta III abdicted on account of ill health and was succeeded by his brother IMWIKO. Imwiko died in 1948 and was succeeded by another brother MWANAWINA III, who had been Knighted in 1959 for service in the first world war and carried the title Sir Mwanawina. He reigned up to the time of independence and led the Barotse Government into the negotiations for the incoporation of Barotseland into Zambia. These negotiations culminated into the signing of the Barotseland Agreement in London on 18 May 1964 which paved the way for the birth of Zambia as a unitary state with provisions for Barotse Regional Government. Mwanawina III died in 1968 and was succeeded by his brother, MBIKUSITA who reigned as Lewanika II. Mbikusita was the last of Lewanika’s sons on the throne.

Lewanika II died in 1977 and was succeeded by his nephew, ILUTE, who was a son of Yeta III. Due to distortions introduced by enchroachment into the Barotse system by the Zambian Government Ilute’s official name/title was mistakenly taken to be ‘Ilute Yeta IV’, just because his father reigned as Yeta III. This is wrong because a Litunga does not carry a surname to the throne but reigns in his own name or, if his birth name is considered inappropraite, it is replaced with one of the past Kings’ names on succession. Ilute succeeded as Ilute and was not Yeta IV. He died in July this year and has been succeeded by a cousin, LUBOSI, who is Imwiko’s son. After all succession rituals are done with, the current Litunga’s name/title should be confimed as either Lubosi II or Imwiko II, and not Lubosi Imwiko as we read from the press.

In all, there have been 23 Litungas since Mboo the first King. If the two who ruled the exiled groups during the Kololo interregnum are included, then the total is 25.

THE BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT 1964

Following talks in London between the British Government, the Government of Northern Rhodesia and The Litunga of Barotseland, an Agreement regarding the position of Barotseland within independent Northern Rhodesia was concluded at the Commonwealth Relations Office on 18th May, 1964. It is entitled “The Barotseland Agreement 1964”. It was signed by Dr. K. D. Kaunda, Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia, by Sir Mwanawina Lewanika III, K.B.E., Litunga of Barotseland, and by the Right Honourable Duncan Sandys, M.P., Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations and for the Colonies, signifying the approval of Her Majesty’s Government. The Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia undertook, on behalf of his Government, that the Agreement would be reaffirmed by the Government of Northern Rhodesia at independence. The text of the Agreement is attached as the Appendix to this Paper.

19th May, 1964.

THE BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT 1964

This Agreement is made this eighteenth day of May, 1964 between KENNETH DAVID KAUNDA, Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia, on behalf of the Government of Northern Rhodesia of the one part and SIR MWANAWINA LEWANIKA THE THIRD, K.B.E., Litunga of Barotseland, acting on behalf of himself, his heirs and successors, his Council, and the chiefs and people of Barotseland of the other part and is signed by the Right Honourable DUNCAN SANDYS, M.P., Her Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations and for the Colonies, to signify the approval of Her Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom of the arrangements entered into between the parties to this Agreement and recorded therein:

Whereas it is proposed that Northern Rhodesia shall become an independent sovereign Republic to be known as the Republic of Zambia:

And whereas it is the wish of the Government of Northern Rhodesia and of the Litunga of Barotseland, his Council and the chiefs and people of Barotseland that Northern Rhodesia should proceed to independence as one country and that all its peoples should be one nation:

And whreas, having regard to the fact that all treaties and other agreements subsisting between Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Litunga of Barotseland will terminate when Northern Rhodesia becomes an independent sovereign republic and Her Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom will thereupon cease to have any responsibility for the government of Northern Rhodesia, including Barotseland, it is the wish of the Government of Northern Rhodesia and of the Litunga of Barotseland to enter into arrangements concerning the position of Barotseland as part of the Republic of Zambia to take the place of the treaties and other agreements hitherto subsisting between Her Majesty the Queen and the Litunga of Barotseland:

And whreas on the sixteenth day of April, 1964 a provisional agreement was concluded at Lusaka with this purpose and it is the desire of the Government of Northern Rhodesia and the Litunga, acting after consultation with his Council, to conclude a permanent agreement with this purpose: NOW THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH and it is hereby agreed between the said Kenneth David Kaunda, Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia, on behalf of the Government of Northern Rhodesia and the said Sir Mwanawina Lewanika the Third, K.B.E., Litunga of Barotseland on behalf of himself, his heirs and successors, his Council and the chiefs and people of Barotseland as follows:-

1. CITATION AND COMMENCEMENT – This Agreement may be cited as the Barotseland Agreement 1964 and shall come into force on the day on which Northern Rhodesia, including Barotseland, becomes the independent sovereign Republic of Zambia.

2. THE CONSTITUTION OF ZAMBIA – The Constitution of the Republic of Zambia shall include the provisions agreed upon for inclusion therein at the Constitutional Conference held in London in May, 1964 relating to:- (a) the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms of the individual; (b) the judiciary; and (c) the public service. and these provisions shall have full force and effect in Barotseland.

3. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE – (1) Subject to the provisions of this Agreement, the people of Barotseland shall be accorded the same rights of access to the High Court of the Republic of Zambia as are accorded to other citizens of the Republic under the laws for the time being in force in the Republic and a judge or judges of the High Court selected from among the judges who normally sit in Lusaka shall regularly proceed on circuit in Barotseland at such intervals as the due administration of justice may require.

(2) The people of Barotseland shall be accorded the same rights of appeal from decisions of the courts of the Republic of Zambia as are accorded to other citizens of the Republic under the laws for the time being in force in the Republic.

4. THE LITUNGA AND HIS COUNCIL – (1) The Government of the Republic of Zambia will accord recognition as such to the person who is for the time being the Litunga of Barotseland under the customary law of Barotseland.

(2) The Litunga of Barotseland, acting after consultation with his Council as constituted for the time being under the customary law of Barotseland shall be the principal local authority for the government and administration of Barotseland.

(3) The Litunga of Barotseland, acting after consultation with his Council, shall be authorised and empowered to make laws for Barotseland in relation to the following matters, that is to say:- (a) the Litungaship ; (b) the authority at present known as the Barotse Native Government (which shall hereafter be known as the Barotse Government) ; (c) the authorities at present known as Barotse Native Authorities ; (d) the courts at present known as Barotse Native Courts ; (e) the status of members of the Litunga’s Council ; (f) matters relating to local government; (g) land ; (h) forests ; (i) traditional and customary matters relating to Barotseland alone ; (j) fishing ; (k) control of hunting ; (l) game preservation ; (m) control of bush fires ; (n) the institution at present known as the Barotse Native Treasury ; (o) the supply of beer ; (p) reservation of trees for canoes ; (q) local taxation and matters relating thereto; and (r) Barotse local festivals.

5. LAND – (1) In relation to land in Barotseland the arrangements set out in the annex hereto shall have effect.

(2) In particular, the Litunga of Barotseland and his Council shall continue to have the powers hitherto enjoyed by them in respect of land matters under customary law and practice.

(3) The courts at present known as the Barotse Native Courts shall have original jurisdiction (to the exclusion of any other court in the Republic of Zambia) in respect of matters concerning rights over or interests in land in Barotseland to the extent that those matters are governed by the customary law of Barotseland: Provided that nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as limiting the jurisdiction and powers of the High Court of the Republic of Zambia in relation to writs or orders of the kind at present known as prerogative writs or orders.

(4) Save with the leave of the court at present known as the Saa-Sikalo Kuta, no appeal shall lie from any decision of the courts at present known as the Barotse Native Courts given in exercise of the jurisdiction referred to in paragraph (3) of this article to the High Court of the Republic of Zambia.

6. CIVIL SERVANTS – All public officers of the Government of the Republic of Zambia who may from time to time be stationed in Barotseland shall be officers serving on permanent and pensionable terms.

7. FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY – The Government of the Republic of Zambia shall have the same general responsibility for providing financial support for the administration and economic development of Barotseland as it has for other parts of the Republic and shall ensure that in discharge of this responsibility, Barotseland is treated fairly and equitably in relation to other parts of the Republic.

8. IMPLEMENTATION – The Government of the Republic of Zambia shall take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that the laws for the time being in force in the Republic are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement.

9. INTERPRETATION – Any question concerning the interpretation of this Agreement may be referred by the Government of the Republic of Zambia to the High Court of the Republic for consideration (in which case the opinion thereon of the Court shall be communicated to that Government and to the Litunga of Barotseland and his Council) and any such question shall be so referred if the Litunga, acting after consultation with his Council, so requests.

10. REVOCATION – The hereinbefore recited Agreement of the sixteenth day of April, 1964 is hereby revoked.

(Signed) K. D. KAUNDA Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia

(Signed) MWANAWINA LEWANIKA III Litunga of Barotseland

(Signed) DUNCAN SANDYS Her Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations and for the Colonies

In witness whereof the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands in the presence of:-

(Signed) E. D. Hone Governor of Northern Rhodesia

(Signed) IMENDA SIBANDI Ngambela of Barotseland

Signed by the Right Honourable Duncan Sandys in the presence of:-

(Signed) RICHARD HORNBY Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations and for the Colonies

ANNEX TO THIS AGREEMENT

1. The Litunga and National Council of Barotseland have always worked in close co-operation with the Central Government over land matters in the past, have agreed that the Central Government should use land required for public purposes, and have adopted the same procedures as apply to leases and rights of occupancy in the Reserves and Trust Land areas, where applicable. At the same time, the administration of land rights in Barotseland under customary law and practice has been under the control of the Litunga and National Council in much the same way as customary land rights are dealt with in the Reserves and Trust Land areas.

2. In these circumstances it is agreed that the Litunga should continue to have the greatest measure of responsibility for administering land matters in Barotseland. It is however necessary to examine the position of land in Barotseland against the background of the Northern Rhodesia Government’s overall responsibility for the territory.

3. The Barotse memorandum has indicated that Barotseland should become an integral part of Northern Rhodesia. In these circumstances the Northern Rhodesia Government will assume certain responsibilities and to carry out these out they will have to have certain powers. So far as land is concerned, apart from confirmation of wide powers to the Litunga over customary matters, the position is as follows:-

(1) The Northern Rhodesia Government does not wish to derogate from any of the powers exercised by the Litunga and Council in respect of land matters under customary law and practice.

(2) The Northern Rhodesia Government would like to ensure that the provision of public services and the possibility of economic development in Barotseland are not hampered by special formalities.

(3) The Northern Rhodesia Government recognises and agrees that full consultation should take place with the Litunga and Council before any land in Barotseland is used for public purposes or in the general interests of economic development.

(4) The position regarding land in Barotseland in an independent Northern Rhodesia should, therefore, be as follows:-

(a) There should be the same system for land administration for the whole of Northern Rhodesia including Barotseland, that is, the Government Lands Department should be responsible for professional advice and services with regard to land alienation in all parts of Northern Rhodesia and that the same form of document should be used for grants of land

(i) for Government purposes and

(ii) for non-Government and non-customary purposes. The necessary preparation of the title documents should be done by the Government Lands Department.

(b) The Litunga and National Council of Barotseland will be charged with the responsibility for administering Barotse customary land law within Barotseland.

– THE END –

—