BAROTSELAND – A NATION CAUGHT BETWEEN THE SCYLLA AND CHARYBDIS

By Namakando Nalikando Sinyama

The matter of Barotseland is undoubtedly one that is bound to play out longer than we would want it to. When one recalls the colonial land apportioning process which brought about the boundaries of the British Protectorate of the Nation of Barotseland and its eventual total traditional and regional geo-political sphere of influence, what springs to my mind is the argument embodied in this Latin maxim, “Nemo Dat Quod Non Habit”. The explanation of which is that, we could not have given any land to any foreign power as we had no legal title to it in the first instance. For more reasons, than I care to go into right now, this argument is indeed laughable and can not warrant to engage my mental processes. More recently however, gallant sons and daughters of our Nation who have in the past struggled to champion the Cause for Barotseland have reached a painful realization that as a people we lack the gusto, serious ability and collective resolve to give them support for the reclamation of what is rightfully ours (Great Barotseland). This, coupled with the sad situation where on most critical points we seem to be in discord with the Barotse Royal Establishment on charting the way forward on this issue. The apparent internal power struggles between the existing Barotse Royal families has and will only serve to weaken us further as a people. The gaping welfare disparities between Indunas, the loyal sons and daughters of the Nation and the ruling class is indeed much cause for great concern and dissonance in our Kingdom. What is felt is that, the obligations of the Zambian central government in accordance with Barotseland Agreement 1964 seem to accrue mostly to the Royal court and not to every Mulozi. This potentially, may explain the near tepid and almost indifferent disposition of the Royal elite when it comes to matters affecting the populace or fighting for the collective good of the Marotse. To some measure then, it may be said that, in some areas, Zambia could actually be honoring, albeit shrewdly, the letter and spirit of the Agreement.

These Barotse Patriots have since opted to see which side of their bread is buttered and have since chosen to pursue their own narrowed life objectives, after all ,their sacrifices were not supported let alone appreciated. My realization over the Barotse Question has been that, the agreement which made possible the formation of the country called Zambia today was to an extent entered into under some degree of duress originating from the Ma Lozi themselves. Now that we signed it(Barotseland Agreement 1964), though either party to it still legally reserving the right to withdraw and proclaim self-determination when one of the parties abrogates the terms like it has happened, the logical choice should be to co-exist in accordance with those conditions set in the clauses of The Agreement. Self-determination is defined as free choice of one’s own acts without external compulsion; and especially as the freedom of the people of a given territory to determine their own political status. In other words, it is the right of the people of a nation to decide how they want to be governed without the influence of any other country. The latter is a complex concept with conflicting definitions and legal criteria for determining which groups may legitimately claim the right to self-determination. What constantly sparks off this issue is the current political marginalization and shocking levels of economic neglect in Barotseland.

I hope am not being overly pessimistic on the matter to state that, to romanticize the total restoration of the Mighty Nation of Barotseland with its borders extending into parts of Namibia, Angola, DRC, Botswana, Zimbabwe and effectively cutting Zambia in half along the main line of rail (which installation by the way, was erected with a Barotse King signing on the contract/treaty or concession), going westwards, would be to say the least naivety of the worst sort.

Since calls for the conclusive resolution of The Barotse Question are mostly spurred on by years of economic neglect, to gain support has become hard. This picture becomes all the more uglier and is in turn compounded by the worst case scenario where only Western Province (The bastardized name for Barotseland minor) is making the loudest calls for equity. This is on account of it being the worst hit by a deliberate and subtle economic blockade imposed on it by the successive central governments. The other parts of Barotseland now annoyingly called North Western and Southern Provinces respectively, are enjoying slightly better economic fortunes than ‘The West’ and thus may not be so keen on any calls for federalism and some semblance of relative autonomy from the central government what with the discovery of copper and petroleum deposits in the former and a booming tourism industry in the latter.


As things stand, Barotses will always play second fiddle in the Zambian political arena. Kindly allow me make a profound statement here,
"No openly known Barotse/Murotse National by name and decent will ever contest and for as long as The Barotseland Question remains unresolved . There has been far too much divisive and corrosive Poison of misinformation that has been fanned by successive Zambian governments which has permeated the societal fabric and the thinking of ordinary citizens alike. The highest point of which was reached during the chiluba administration. This unfortunately, has been out of utterly shocking points of sickening ignorance of the collective aspirations of the Barotse as a people. This, to me is the most disturbing effect of our having almost willingly surrendered our Nationhood to join Northern Rhodesia and form Zambia as envisaged and penned down in The Barotseland Agreement 1964." - Namakando Nalikando Sinyama

I have always pitied several Barotses that have and still think they can make it in Zambian politics. If their aim is to be content on just being social agitators or to be mere appendages to already established and entrenched hegemonic body politic, and be parasitically ridden on like sea urchins in an unfair but purported symbiotic existence ,they should realize that all these Rhodesians do is feed off our brains but can never allow us to take lead. Without having to cite names most Barotses have always baffled me as to what exactly they have felt they would achieve in Zambian politics. I would have loved them to sit me down and enlighten me. Sadly,though they have no idea what we encounter in our various individual co-existences with Rhodesians. They do not know what each Barotse university student has had to go through during campus politics. These tertiary institutions have provided a fertile ground where this poison of misinformation germinates hatred for Barotses and what they stand for as a people. I may just bore you too much. But what am merely asking from you honorable sons and daughters of Barotseland is your input on the matter. Where do we go from here? Should we disengage, capitulate, approach them tail tucked in with a begging bowl for real political inclusion thus get subdued so that we fully and psychologically integrate. Finally accepting to be ruled forever as subservient nationals?

During my pre-pubescent years I had rather ignorantly regarded Kaunda as a great statesman worthy of international recognition and adoration. After adulthood however, upon discovering what was inflicted on the Nation of Barotseland with his machinations, my impressions of the individual have been revolutionized. He was surprisingly helped in his schemes by our own people. How do/should we treat erring Barotse families that have historically clearly betrayed the Nation of Barotseland? These have and are selling us out in their many ego-centric dealings with the Zambian central government. The weakening discovery I have made is that, we as Barotses are our own worst enemies!

How many sitting's, tumi kopano kopano nyana are we going to have talking and discussing the same old issue ad infinitum even to ad nauseam with little result? You should see how most Ma Lozi hastily excuse themselves when in the company of one who is brave enough to publicly raise The Barotseland Question! They have been fed with this almost morbid fear of nothing really. The matter is so straight forward that despite the many threats of treason or sedition to Barotses you will never be taken to court for talking about it because you will win as there is absolutely NO case against you even in any international court. Bu pyeha Ma Lozi, Bu pyeha!!!

In my heart of hearts what I feel is, having or winning back our homeland as Barotses is riddled with a multiplicity of social intricacies that need realistically looking into if we are to clearly define our path towards reclaiming our respectability and decency as a people in or out of the entity called Zambia.
Firstly , many a Mu Lozi, contrary to the dictates of our fore fathers, has opted to break the elitist taboos decreed onto us by the gods that as far as matrimonial engagements go, as much as it can be managed, should only get yoked to a Mulozi period. No known exceptions to this Golden Rule. Unfortunately, for a long time I had been locked in an internal psychological and physiological struggle where I wrestled with a real feeling that any Mu Lozi princess (female) no matter how beautiful or well endowed I seemed to have had an innate strong filial connection with them. This effectively made it near impossible for me to harbor any affection for them other than those of the plutonic sort. They were in mine eyes practically sisters. This I found rather queer until elders whispered in my ear that it is our national state secret, “ALL Barotses are actually related!” I have since overcome this feeling gladly. Being the pragmatic individual that I am, it was not long than I started dating a beautiful Barotse Princess who i will be united with in holy matrimony even when I feel brotherly connection with her. Long live the Kingdom of Barotseland!

Those that have dared challenge the Golden Rule have since regretted by going through unnecessary frictions with marriage partners from other parts emanating from the stack cultural differences and reasoning. The reverse of which has been that, through what is deemed modernity and the unsighted nature of the prevailing emotion(love); most Barotses have broken the cultural divide and married from other cultures and bare testament to blissful unions. When these families are confronted with the suggestion that they live in a separate state, Barotseland, to them seems the re-enactment of an existence akin to the East and West Germany separation with uncomfortable, unfamiliar, unforeseen future consequences for most. Secondly, purely for economic reasons, I have noted that through years of co-existence in Zambia, most Barotses have managed to carve up a respectable life by investing in all corners of Zambia and as such may not be so willing and keen to dessert all their established assets and businesses in a foreign country!

I would want to forgive anyone who would ridicule this piece of exposé as I have noticed that continued non peaceful resolution of contentious issues particularly the Barotseland Question may explain why there is lack of true national unity, which is such an important precursor to meaningful economic, cultural and political development.

If a people as individuals or a group fail to relate to their own ethnic and cultural identity, and choose to masquerade as another tribe for fear of being laughed at by those who think are better than others this will spell doom. Then as any sociologist of some repute will tell you, it may partly explain why this country will take long to attain equitable development. In a show of a rare form of ‘lunatic fringe’ they do not seem to make any efforts whatsoever at learning other people’s languages but instead opt to impose theirs on any unassertive groups whom they find with their backs already bent to be ridden on. Dr. King was right when he said, " No man can ride your back unless it is bent." I have hypothesized that, an individual’s linguistic dexterity is directly proportional to their intellectual acumen. Theses characters are either too proud and feel other languages are unimportant or inferior and thus do not even merit learning or they just merely lack the capacity to learn. I have immense respect for other tribes or individuals that have learnt my language because I know or would want to learn theirs as well; with them I have no problem speaking their language.

As Barotseland, we have the most number of tribal cousins all over Zambia. This is a measure of how vast the Barotse Empire extends. Historically, one will find that tribal cousinship results from periods of conquest after past armed encounters and thereafter when peace is reached by which ever means(regardless of who the victor or the vanquished was in the historical battles, cousinship results). We have respectfully under our care ,Kaondes,Lambas, Tongas,Lenjes,Solis,Ilas,Lalas,Salas(only to an extent) etc As Barotses however, I have noticed that we have been poor at cementing these relations which I find extremely crucial and serve as a fuse of sorts to stabilize any potential conflict situations. Most of us do not reach out to learn our cousins’ languages even when some of them are quite fluent in Si Lozi this I find disrespectful and rather bossy of us. This has to change if we are to remain united with them forever. We have also miserably failed to marshal this unity by utilising it as an influential voting block of people of like mind and virtues so that you shape the destiny of this country instead of leaving it to the whims of people with a propensity for thieving.

As Barotseland, we should learn from Scotland and Ireland that are working hard to revive or promote the use an ancient language called Gaelic as they have made commendable strides in this direction. We have our Si Luyana language to preserve before it is lost forever as it is the original dialect used by the off shoot of the aluyi during pioneering migrations of the ANU or ANNUNAKI as spoken of in the Sumerian tablets by David Icke. To this effect, I would like more than anything to see the promotion of the use of the individual languages in Barotseland which are intersected by Silozi, a unifying lingua franca of sorts. Here I speak of Barotse languages such as Sisubiya,Totela,Mbukushu,Nyengo,Luchazi,Makwandi,MaMbowe Chokwe,Mbunda,Lunda,Luvale,Kwangwa, Nkoya and many more. These should be encouraged to attain prominence because Silozi is only a uniting language in Barotseland we all have indigenous languages where we hail from in its length and breadth. Here is a strong caution or warning, call it what you may, which goes to all those sons and daughters of Barotseland who out of unforgivable ignorance have unwittingly divided this Great Nation of Barotseland by going about thinking and saying they are more Lozi than other tribes within Barotseland. This is a criminal mistake; a cruel and misplaced sentiment that has worked to divide our nation so much that outsiders have even used it to incite internal insurrections which caused us to rise against each other(Kindly Read about the Kafue Province Petition). I beg to be corrected here, but there is NO tribe in Barotseland called Lozi. Si Lozi(sotho, kololo) is but a language spoken by the many tribes therein. Although, outsiders think us a united people what they do not realize is we have never been so divided as a Nation with every Mu lozi pursuing their own issues. Time has come when merely the privilege of being an oarsman in the King’s Royal barge is scarcely enough anymore to make one a proud Mu Lozi. We need to step up and do more for each other and for the Kingdom. Truly you are Kings and Queens!! To this effect I propose that Barotseland starts to honour its people who make remarkable contributions towards the development of the Kingdom be it economically, intellectually, culturally or otherwise. This may be done in the Knighthood conferring fashion of the Brits or which ever way Ma Lozi will deem fit.

If not put to a nation wide referendum, yes just as Scotland is doing to determine if they should continue being in the Union of Great Britain, the Barotses may not know the full extent and height of nationalistic zeal. The referendum idea thankfully can not happen anymore because we decided to revert to our original staus in the light of the unilateral abrogation of the unity treaty that was B.A 1964. The monarch form of governance in Barotseland has persisted for millennia but whether this is the way we still want to go is a matter that needs to be addressed. The way the Royal families have educated themselves and their children at the expense of the ordinary citizens has long been a source of much dissent.


To have a horde of citizens walking around with a dangerously low self-esteem is a sure recipe for disaster. This country rather naively has chosen not to see that most Barotses though not openly showing it have not fully integrated in the entity called Zambia and go about their business with their hearts heavily laden with discontent which they efficiently pass onto their children’s children. The cycle will continue. This issue means so much to me otherwise I would not be expending any intellectual thought and energy on it if it were not.

What I dread or rather find disconcerting more than anything else is the almost inescapable prospect which stares every Barotse in the face, that of creating or begetting offspring’s who would be born with a stigma not of their own choosing where they are effectively condemned to living in a state where they are treated as second class citizens.

In Zambia today whenever Barotses go about their business and they peacefully converse in their tongue (Si Lozi) they are called selfish. What has happened is that ,some subjugated ethnic minorities have become so minicule in their selfworth that they are more than glad to pass as another tribe. To do this, they are not ashamed to speak a language other than their own even if they met as brothers and sisters. In retrospect, I think this is exactly where our problem is as Barotses, we are not a minority. In public offices, as we go about performing our duties, diligently I might add , speaking Silozi is our trademark but this is always looked at with scorn and rather ignorantly labeled tribalistic. Literacy levels in Zambia are so low that some even call it racist of us! We are sometimes painfully asked, “Why can’t you just speak a language we can all understand?”(Their Language) Which then they would deem perfectly acceptable even if it is not the official language either! They seem so insecure that we could be talking about them even when we have other far better themes to engage us. My skin craws with revulsion and I shudder to think of a day I will knowingly speak another language to a Barotse National, other than Si Lozi or English of course. What these detractors fail to appreciate is what it means to be from the Mighty Barotseland and to be a Mulozi. The climax of what am belaboring to say was reached when it was observed that some community Radio stations and churches in Barotseland were almost slowly found to be using a language other than Si Lozi like they have done in other parts of Zambia. Enter The Language Debate!

Barotses have been found not to be as malleable as other tribes hence their being labeled stubborn, selfish, greedy, and very proud (quite guilty on this score!) For this country to truly continue enjoying the relative ‘peace’ they sing about, this status quo has to be boldly challenged, confronted and changed. This is the job for civil society which they must commence to do with greater urgency.


It is indeed saddening to learn of a situation where in parliament to mention the word Barotseland is almost a taboo subject. Some MP had the rude audacity to say, ‘Barotseland or whatever it is’ in such a rude and insolent tone during parliamentary debates. The dangerous situation which persists where successive constitutional review commissions have simply glossed over the matter of The Barotseland Question and prevented the publication of volumes of written matter presented as Barotse submissions to see the light of day is a dangerous tactic with potential dire consequences. The education system in Zambia has deliberately failed to make such an important historical document like The Barotseland Agreement 1964 which made Zambian independence possible a subject of learning in schools by their children’s children. Who is responsible for the preservation of Zambian heritage?

Its worth mentioning that on a countless number of times I have encountered individuals who have said or stated in no uncertain words that a Mu Lozi no matter how intellectually brilliant will never rule Zambia as President or attain any meaningful political ascendancy. In this, we find we are not alone, as the Tongas have equally been victims of this kind of stereo-typing in the political arena. Even when as an individual am pretty much apolitical, this sentiment regrettably I have since learnt is shared by a scary many Zambian electorates due to many years of ‘state’ encouraged misinformation. We have seen how some political aspirants have secretly fanned this kind of mental disposition in the electorate and sought to gain political capital from it. This feeling has since gotten a foothold and has been implanted in the Zambian social psyche.

It maybe argued that in a democratic political landscape such as the one embraced by Zambia, these would be fairly entitled to having such a mind set no matter how flawed and dangerous. The closest that Ma Lozi ever got to high office was during the first republic when we saw the emergence of Nalumino Mundia,Kebby Musokotwane, Munukayumbwa Sipalo et al. I do not want to seem too gloomy in my analysis as Zambia is fairly a young democracy by comparison to other long established ones. We therefore may be suffering from eliciting our data from an insufficient sample space and displaying a child’s impatience when a toy has been grabbed from them! The truth about the Zambian landscape however, is such that (this you sense and hear from the social circles that comprise the electorate) the only president that would be acceptable has to come either from the North or East. The others may make it only by default. As a country Zambia may take a long time to grow out of this mental limbo.

The so called ‘national’ motto of ‘One Zambia One Nation’ has its origins in the desire to reiterate the fact that the founding of the country called Zambia was by the coming together of two previously autonomous and different entities of Northern Rhodesia and The Kingdom, Protectorate of the Nation of Barotseland hoping they would be a united Nation. It should not be surprising then that when ever Barotses air nationalistic sentiments this motto is thrown and slammed into their faces. To us it is so empty because the people who parrot it have not the foggiest idea of its origins and we have come to know it is meant to anesthetize us into submission so that we do not question the status quo.

I would like to urge any interested sociologist to study why there are a lot dread locked ‘Rastafarians’ among Barotses than any other ethnic group in Zambia. The essence of a Rasta life style is one that seeks to challenge any form of social injustice and manifests itself as revolt or rebellion against a persistent social tyrannical system. Barotses have long done this in more quite ways but for how long?

There are some Barotses I have encountered in my brief existence who can not utter a word of Si Lozi and from these I must confess I have walked away and not given them the time of day. It is however perfectly understandable for some who have been born away from Barotse influence; others I have realized have consciously decided not to have any connection with Barotses possibly due to having had an abusive heavy drinking parent who later deserted them or due to having experienced some other potentially traumatizing event inflicted on them by a Barotse. The sad thing is most of our young Barotses think not knowing how to speak Si Lozi is a status symbol or is a measure of how modern and typically town-like they are. These consider it backwardness (or being a villager) to speak the language of their fathers and mothers and ancestors, it is these I really pity. What these young people should realize is that it is hardly funny or cool but shameful to know other people’s language and not know your own. It is not being modern, far from it. There are exemplary Barotse men and women with Ph.D and MSc degrees who have traveled the globe, interacted with different cultures but still proudly speak Si Lozi. The others due to having lost both their Lozi speaking parents in death have not been able to learn it, these are forgiven.

I would like to commend all those parents who have not allowed their children to speak any other language except Silozi in the home. These children, when outside their home playing with their ethnically diverse friends, are more than free to speak in any language they please after all they are intelligent enough to learn their friends’ languages. What I find worrisome is Barotse children speaking very good English but NOT knowing or mastering Si Lozi to the same level of proficiency. This situation should not be treated lightly but be addressed as a national cultural emergency as it is a sign of gross embarrassing failure on the part of their Barotse parents or guardians. Barotse families in this situation run the risk of what I have come to coin ‘Bastardized Barotse Cultural Surrogacy’.

In Zambia there are folks who even take offence when you insist on conversing with them in English which is the only official language. The reason, I have come to learn is that most of them are not conversant in the official language. They disparagingly call you, ‘some of us’ whatever that means! It is advisable that one exercises some degree of forbearance with them as their inability to speak English may explain why they quickly gravitate into speaking their mother languages. If they ever tried to carry on in English usually what comes out is a language very similar to that of the Angles, one that would make Shakespeare turn in his mausoleum.

An example of what am writing about will help make the point. An independent panel of university lecturers in Zambia carried out a survey and found that the quality of written work from their students was below expected standard. The reason they discovered was because the students speak too much of their local dialects. While at university, passing time in the library, I got hold of one of those Path Finder guide books which strangely enough was quoted in one of its country profiles that in addition to English, Zambia had one other official language. One wonders where they got their information. I fully take cognizance of the fact that my piece of writing will be branded Tribalist, Dangerous, Inciteful, Divisive,Right Wing,Left Wing ,Agitative, Biggoted,Centrist, ‘Racist’,Seditious and what not, but I really do not mind much because its non of the above. I have every confidence that some one will find it eye-opening and useful in fostering true national unity which is what every Barotse desires and will get in the end. So ‘One Zambia One Nation’, maybe not quite yet, unless of course we want to live in a fool’s haven!


The sickening feeling I got when I went to Mungu (Capital of Barotseland) is indescribable. Shock is what I experienced and saw, that due to infrastructural interconnectivity made possible by the road network and the resulting social interaction, there has been an emergence of other Non Barotse languages on the streets, at the markets and at the harbour. This has unfortunately brought with it the attendant increase in criminal activity and some socially undesirable behaviour from characters that have appeared in Barotseland. These have no qualms about showering one with alphabetical obscenities in their mother tongues at the slightest infuriation. We find it difficult, almost impossible to hear the insults you get on the copperbelt province of Zambia in Barotseland. This is something rare and heavy to accomplish in Si Lozi because our culture does not permit it. Do not get me wrong we are not used to the current levels of criminal activity in Mungu and Livingstone.

It should be fairly easy to make an assessment of the origins of the majority of the inmates in Zambia’s prisons and holding cells. I would like to urge all the people of Barotseland to avoid taking what does not belong to them (stealing) because it is not in our nature. I further commend them for not having involved themselves in rampant corruption in Zambia as can be confirmed from those who are facing high level corruption charges. This is a clear testimony that unlike others we are not ‘blessed’ with a propensity for thieving that is why we may be considered ‘sleepy, dwanzy, sheepish’ etc.

In the field of academia we hear comments passed by students and lecturers that Barotses are naturally intelligent. As to what extent this is due to the fact that the first schools were built in Barotseland is something yet unproven. Unfortunately I have encountered very clear contradictions or exceptions to this rule of purported divinely bestowed intelligence on us. This is a notorious myth which has misled many a playful Barotse student. While at university I had seen some mischievous Barotse students not studying much but instead opting to become playful by going on unplanned and unwise drinking binges and other unthinkable orgies banking on the theory above. I am sorry to report that for most of them school was not quite as smooth sailing as anticipated. Myth Busted!! My conclusion is, in academic circles who ever applies themselves and works diligently will make it regardless of their ethnicity. The fact that Barotses are some of the very best brains around or most educated people in Zambia has unsettled certain quarters of society. I wonder what became of ‘PROJECT ZABADU’ (Zambezi Basin Development University) in Barotseland. We should realize that everything is used to distract Barotses from uplifting themselves even ministerial appointments can do if their vision can only take them so far.

We are not strangers to clandestine projects where the cut off points in Barotse schools have been raised so as to disadvantage our children from entering university. How they have lowered the grades in their schools so that their children flood university as a way of equalizing or countering Barotse dominance in the number of learned people. To verify my revelations just get hold of any newspaper issue showing a listing of university admitions then you will know what i mean. We also know that the head of the above project recently passed on, ‘bless his soul’ M.H.S.R.I.P! We also know how they send their teachers to Barotseland in a calculated relentless wave of cultural invasion to dilute or confuse our language and tradition.

Kindly forward this piece to every Barotse National you feel should see it as i may not know the emails of those who may need to read it. That is if you find it worth brain storming over as BAROTSELAND.
These issues are of great import if we are to change are current state of being.


Sa ng’ole sibe siile kwaule!

Kozo Sicaba Sa Mulimu,

Namakando Nalikando Sinyama
Barotse Patriot
Barotseland, Central Africa
“I tell you a truth, liberty is the best of all things, my son, never live under a slavish bond.” – Sir William Wallace’s Uncle

THE LOCKERBIE AFFAIR AND SCOTLAND THE BRAVE

From the outset may I state that what I will say(albeit on a touchy subject) does not, can not and will not be in any way intended to anger and disrespect the memory of those who perished in the Lockerbie bombing and their relatives. Their deaths where extremely unnecessary and I would like to thank and commend the families that have found healing and have since moved on. As for those that are still hurting, I can not say I understand what they feel because they are well within their rights to continue feeling that way for as long as is necessary. Our condolences are with them always as they grieve.
The release of terminally ill Al Basset Megrahi is exactly what I meant when I said Scotland deserves to be its own Nation. The decision by the justice ministry to free the Libyan captures the very essence of what I had said on this forum about Scottish independent thinking, morality and ultimately its ever beckoning political autonomy. What you have done as Scotland has not taken anything away from you but with it you have made and left an indelible mark on history and have won a lot of respect allover the globe(from well meaning, decent and humane societies) due this magnanimous deed. If that Libyan was held in England and the Americans ordered them not to release the Libyan, it is a no-brainer what they would have done. The truth about his guilt or innocence and the suspected Libyan government involvement in the bombing will come out sooner or later. May I pose a prodding question here, is anyone familiar with this motto, “By Deception Thou Shalt Do War”? I encourage all right thinking and analytical people to find time to research its source and full implication. However, the point lest we inadvertently or willfully choose to miss it is the fairness, compassion, logic and reasoning behind the Scottish system of justice and governance which should be envied. The universal mantra that immediately springs to my mind is, “an eye for an eye leaves the whole World blind!” The Scottish government has chosen to take a very high moral ground and should be emulated. The pressure they received from blood thirsty governments and its people who exalt the death penalty was enormous but they did not falter in their resolve to do what is morally right in accordance with the dictates of their mores. This action if the world does not realize it has the potential of helping yet grieving families to find true healing and possible closure in this matter.


By Namakando Nalikando Sinyama
Barotse Patriot
Barotseland, Central Africa
“I tell you a truth, liberty is the best of all things, my son, never live under a slavish bond.” – Sir William Wallace’s Uncle

THE OFFICIAL SITTINGS BY HONOURABLE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ON THE BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT 1964

HANSARD 1803–2005 → 1960s → 1964 → July 1964 → 10 July 1964 → Commons Sitting → ZAMBIA INDEPENDENCE BILL
Clause 8.—(AGREEMENTS RELATING TO BAROTSELAND.)

776
§ Question proposed, That the Clause stand part of the Bill.
§ 11.54 a.m.
§ Mr. Ronald Bell (Buckinghamshire, South)
I was very sorry that I was not able to take part in the debate on Second Reading, because it ended earlier than I had expected and I thus lost that opportunity. During that debate things were said about this Clause with which I would not have been in full agreement.
I should now like to say that I regard the outcome of the negotiations which led to the Barotseland Agreement of 1964 as one which was very happy both for Barotseland and for the new country of Zambia. I do not wish to go back to mention the things said on Second Reading, if only for the reason that I have not given notice to the hon. Members who said them, but it would be most unfortunate if the impression were to go out of the House that what has taken place with regard to Barotseland is in any degree a disappointment and disadvantage to the people of that country.

It was said on Tuesday, for example, that the Litunga of Barotseland had been brought in at ten o'clock at night to sign an agreement by which he lost the control of his country and which, in effect, abolished Barotseland and completely changed the situation of that country. That is very far from being the truth.
I do not want to mix up the two functions in which I am concerned in Barotseland, but the fact is that the negotiations which took place over a period of 11 months, and which finally ended in the Barotseland Agreement, 1964, were negotiations of a particularly happy character in that all those who 777 took part in them had as their final objective the discovery of a method of association which would allow their country and Northern Rhodesia to go forward happily together in harmony, not starting with recrimination, and arriving at an agreement between two Protectorates which would not be an armistice line in a long-drawn struggle, but which would allow them to go forward together as one country making the best use of their resources, human and material.
I would be most unhappy if anything said in the debate on Tuesday, after the success of that long effort, should lead in Northern Rhodesia to doubts and disharmony and to a feeling that the sacrifices made on both sides were not profitably made and would perhaps better not have been made. I am sure that the contrary is true and that when the Litunga of Barotseland signed that Agreement at ten o'clock at night it was merely a formal and ceremonial ending to 11 months of hard and extremely useful negotiations. I find no particular significance in the fact that the Agreement was signed at ten o'clock at night. This Parliament reaches most of its important decisions at that hour.

In case there should be any lingering doubt about that, I should like to say that the Agreement signed at ten o'clock at night: in London, which is the subject of this Clause, was virtually identical in all its terms with that which had been signed in the full light of day and in complete harmony in Lusaka three weeks before. It would be quite untrue to say that by that Agreement Barotseland passes away its rights and will lose its distinctive way of life or cease to exist as a significant part of Zambia. The contrary is true. Anyone who reads the Agreement, which has been published as a Command Paper will see that on the contrary not only the Litunga and his National Council, but also Dr. Kaunda and the Ministers of the Northern Rhodesia Government, were all most anxious that Barotseland should continue to make its distinctive and in some sense separate contribution to the total life of the new country.
Hon. Members will find preserved in that agreement all the traditional rights of the Litunga, all the traditional ways by 778 which the Lozi people have lived their lives so successfully as one of the most significant parts of the territory of Northern Rhodesia. They are all safeguarded in the form of a solemn agreement which was signed by the Litunga, by Dr. Kaunda and the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations. At the time Dr. Kaunda gave a solemn promise on behalf of himself and his Government that after independence had come into force, after the passage of this Measure, he, on behalf of his Government, would solemnly and publicly reaffirm as an independent country their adherence to this agreement and their observance of its terms.

When that is the case, when all the traditional life of Barotseland is incorporated in this Agreement, when the whole thing has been done in an atmosphere of complete good will and they all want to go forward together happily, and when, as I say, this is no mere armistice line but a genuine fusion of entities, it seems to me tragic that words should be spoken which might stir up forgotten disagreements in Northern Rhodesia.
12 noon.
That is why I have taken this opportunity today, as one who has had some knowledge of what has happened, to say that this Agreement, and Clause 8 which embodies it, is something of which everybody in Barotseland, from the Litunga to the humblest of his subjects, and everyone in Northern Rhodesia, from the Prime Minister to the members of tribes other than the Lozi, can all be very happy and in which they can rejoice.
I am sure that in passing the Bill with this Clause in it we shall not be doing anything which is in any way derogatory to the undertakings which have been given over half a century to the Litunga of Barotseland on behalf of British Governments, but that, on the contrary, we shall have joined in a wise and fruitful Agreement. I trust that that will be the message which will go out from this House on the deliberations of the Bill, rather than some of the things which were said—I am sure in good faith, but not perhaps in full knowledge of the facts—by some hon. Members in the debate on Tuesday.

§ Mr. A. Fenner Brockway (Eton and Slough)
I support the observations of 779 the hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, South (Mr. Ronald Bell). There have been controversies about Barotseland in which probably he and I have taken different points of view. But new agreement has been reached, and I agree that nothing should be said today or on a future occasion which would in any way revive the controversies which have previously taken place about the future of Barotseland.
I know Prime Minister Kaunda very well, and I am sure that he will carry out this Agreement in the letter and in the spirit. I am sure that there will be a similar response on the part of the Paramount Chief of Barotseland, and I hope very much that this Bill will go from this House today with unanimous agreement and that we will put behind us the controversies which may have led to division in the past.
§
Sir Frank Soskice (Newport)
I should like to re-echo what has been said by the hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, South (Mr. Ronald Bell) and by my hon. Friend the Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway), and I hope that the Minister will be able to adopt a similar course.
We have had this morning the advantage of two speeches which could not have been better informed. The hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, South spoke with personal knowledge of the negotiations extending over many months, and my hon. Friend the Member for Eton and Slough has a knowledge of Africa, and in particular of Zambia, for which I would think we all have the deepest respect and in which we have the fullest confidence.
Both hon. Members have said that they feel that the Agreement which has been entered into reflects the settled will of the three parties to the Agreement. If one examines it, it seems to balance nicely the interests of those concerned on each side. I profoundly hope that the Agreement, which I am sure will be honoured by Dr. Kaunda, will put an end to differences which, unhappily, have arisen in the past over a considerable period of time, and that Barotseland and its inhabitants and the rest of Zambia—for Barotseland is an integral part of Zambia—will live happily together 780 in future and that this Agreement will promote concord over many years.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations (Mr. John Tilney)
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Buckinghamshire, South (Mr. Ronald Bell), to the right hon. and learned Member for Newport (Sir F. Soskice) and the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway) for what they have said.
The Committee will know that certain agreements were entered into between Her Majesty and the Litunga of Barotseland, which is part of Northern Rhodesia, with respect to the administration of Barotseland. Her Majesty also formally assumed obligations under agreements concluded between the British South Africa Company and the Litunga during the period that the company was responsible for the administration of the Territory. Undertakings and understandings connected with these agreements have also from time to time been entered into.
These agreements, undertakings and understandings did not in all cases clearly distinguish between the rights and obligations of the Crown and the rights and obligations of the Government of Northern Rhodesia in relation to Barotseland. But, following the conference, a new Agreement, to which hon. Members have referred, the Barotseland Agreement, 1964, was entered into between the Government of Northern Rhodesia and the Litunga, which was intended to define the relationship between the parties when Northern Rhodesia becomes independent and to supersede all existing obligations.

The purpose of this Clause is to terminate all existing rights and obligations both of the Crown and of the Government of Northern Rhodesia under the existing agreements, undertakings and understandings, except those arising under this Agreement. Similarly, provision was made in the Uganda Independence Act, 1962, terminating agreements between the Crown and the kingdoms in Uganda. The possibility of giving Barotseland the same sort of status within Zambia as the kingdoms had within Uganda was considered, but the parties to the 1964 Agreement 781 decided otherwise. Under that Agreement, Barotseland, as the right hon. and learned Gentleman said, is part of the unitary State of Zambia.
I was very pleased to hear what hon. Members have said. I repeat what I said in the Second Reading debate. We have not deprived the Litunga of power. It was a freely-negotiated Agreement. We have honourably discharged our obligations. I have never visited Barotseland—I have only seen it in photographs and on film—but I hope that in the months or years to come I may be able to go there.
I am sure that this Committee will wish to the Lozi people, under the rule of the Litunga, increasing success, prosperity and happiness, and that in the unity of Zambia all will go forward in progress.

§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
§ Clauses 9 to 11 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
§ Schedules 1 to 3 agreed to.
§ Bill reported, without Amendment.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
§ 12.11 p.m.
§ Mr. Brockway
I am sure that I shall be expressing the views not only of my right hon. and hon. Friends but, on this occasion, of hon. and right hon. Members opposite in welcoming the Bill and wishing the best of all possible futures to Northern Rhodesia. Northern Rhodesia will begin its independence, under its new name of Zambia, with great hopes but also with some dangers.
It has great hopes because, under the very wise leadership of Mr. Kaunda, there is now, to a quite extraordinary degree, co-operation and good will between the African and European races in the Territory, and this extends also to the Asians who are there. It is an act of some generosity—perhaps that is too strong a word—it is certainly an act of great statesmanship that Mr. Kaunda has agreed to the representation of the European race in a special way in the Legislature of Northern Rhodesia.
In this spirit, a spirit which has very happily been expressed also in the neighbouring territory of Kenya, we can say 782 that it is possible to solve the problems of independence of these nations with the co-operation and good will of all races in the territories, and our great desire is that in Zambia this co-operation and good will will grow in the experience of independence.

I have said that there are not only hopes, but there are dangers. There are dangers because of the geographical position of Zambia, one of the three territories emerging separately again after the dissolution and dismemberment of the Federation. Only this week, we have welcomed the independence which has been granted to Malawi and the attendance yesterday of Dr. Hastings Banda at the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference. Yesterday, at the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference, a welcome was accorded to the fact that Zambia would be independent and that its Prime Minister would be a partner in future conferences.
But the danger for Zambia obviously lies in its proximity to Southern Rhodesia, which presents such an issue of controversy at this time. I do not wish, on this happy occasion, even to refer to the problems which arise in Southern Rhodesia, but I hope that our Government will, in these difficult circumstances in Zambia, give every possible aid to the stability of the new independence which that country has gained.
I hope that they will give an assurance to its Government that we will seek to aid it in every way we can so that its stability may be assured and it may go forward in independence not only to contribute to the Continent of Africa good will between the different races, but to contribute in its economic advance, the improvement of the standard of life of its people and the progress of its education an example to those countries which have already attained independence and to those which are marching towards that goal.

§ 12.15 p.m.
§ Mr. H. Hynd (Accrington)
We all have our opinions about what has been achieved or has not been achieved during this Parliament, but one fact which will stand out in its history is the number of territories which have achieved self-government during this Parliament. When the right hon. Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill) once said that 783 he did not conceive it his duty to preside at the dissolution of the British Empire, or words to that effect, even he could not have foreseen the rapidity with which self-government has been achieved by so many countries and the old Empire has grown up into the Commonwealth which, we hope, will be a very much greater conception than the old Empire ever was, great as was its history.
As Zambia is, I believe, the last of the territories with which we shall deal in this way during this Parliament, it might be worth while if the Government were to publish a complete list of all the territories which have been given independence during this Parliament, showing to the world thereby the process by which Britain has peacefully made this great transformation. Sometimes we are accused of imperialism by other Governments, and I think that a complete list of the countries which have achieved self-government in complete agreement during this one Parliament would be an object-lesson to the rest of the world.

§ 12.17 p.m.
§ Mr. Ronald Bell
I join in what has been said by hon. Members opposite and I extend my good wishes to this new country at its inception.
Many perils face newly independent countries in Africa today, and Northern Rhodesia will have its share of them, but I am fairly optimistic about the way in which they will be handled. One cannot say more than that. It would, in any case, be presumptuous and, perhaps, not altogether appreciated if one sought to offer advice on an occasion like this; it is better to confine oneself to good wishes. I say only that patience and tolerance are two of the hardest qualities for a newly independent country to learn in Africa today, but I am sure that they are the conditions for success.
I feel some confidence for Northern Rhodesia because I think that not only Mr. Kaunda personally, but many of those who surround him, within and without Barotseland, have personal qualities which could give Northern Rhodesia a good chance in the difficulties which lie ahead. I venture to hope that they will not spend too much
784 of their time bothering about being next door to Southern Rhodesia. But I do not want to talk about that subject today. I have views on it which might very well not agree with those of the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway). I am sure that it is much better for people to give their best attention to building up their own country when there is so much to be done rather than bothering about what goes on around them.
In my view, there are two kinds of national leader for emerging countries. One is typified by Kemal Ataturk, who raised his country to the position which it is in today by sheer hard work and by pressing the doctrine of sheer hard work and of building it up by self-help and concentrating on the tasks in his own country which lay immediately ahead. There is the opposite kind of national leader, like President Nasser, and, I am sorry to say, a good many others in the world today who rely heavily on the emotional aid of xenophobia to keep control over their country, and do not press constantly the doctrine that greatness, independence and prosperity come by bending over one's last and giving one's best attention to the problems within oneself and one's country.
I hope and believe that Northern Rhodesia will follow the example of Kemal Ataturk rather than that of the nationalist leaders so that it will keep itself out of the dangerous whirlpools of emotion and African nationalist sentiment which are causing so much distress and tribulation of mind in that Continent today. Because I have some confidence that it will have that good sense, I am optimistic about the future of the country which we are inaugurating by the Bill.

§ 12.21 p.m.
§ Sir F. Soskice
It would be supererogatory on my part to add much, but we have almost come to the end of our consideration of this Measure. It is one of great significance in the changing pattern of Africa.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Accrington (Mr. H. Hynd) said, the movement towards self-government and the growth of the number of independent countries in Africa is one of the great 785 changes in the modern world. The Commonwealth of Nations is, after all, one of the greatest groupings of people for peace throughout the earth—over 700 million people of different races.
We should all welcome the advent of a new country—when I say "a new country" I mean new in independence, but old in history—to take its place with the existing members of the Commonwealth in the great struggle to solve the human problems which face the world. I would simply add my hope for the future prosperity of this new country and my best wishes for its happy development and a peaceful and prosperous future.
I do not think that it would be right for me to add more, but I am sure that in what I say I voice the feelings of the whole House on this most auspicious occasion.

§ 12.22 p.m.
§ Mr. Tilney
I join the right hon. and learned Member for Newport (Sir F. Soskice) in what he has said. I agree that this is an occasion of great significance, and I am glad that the hon. Member for Accrington (Mr. H. Hynd) urged that a list should be published of what has been achieved in this Parliament.
We can be proud when we look at the picture in, I think, The Times today and see Her Majesty surrounded by the leaders of the Commonwealth countries and when we look, too, at the list not only of the heads of Governments who are attending, but of those whom they have brought with them. We remember, when we were taught history at school, some of the great conferences in Europe in the past, but they pale in significance in the number of people represented compared with the number of people whose leaders are here in London today. I think that it is proud-making for this country that we have been able to become partners in this great Commonwealth experiment.
I agree with the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway) and with my hon. Friend the Member for Buckinghamshire, South (Mr. Ronald Bell) that there are difficulties which Zambia faces, land-locked as she is with her communications going through other lands. I trust that she will be able to overcome these difficulties and that, like
786 their great Zambesi River, the Zambian people will go forward to great prosperity to the benefit not only of themselves, but of mankind elsewhere as well.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed.
HC Deb 10 July 1964 vol 698 cc776-86
Next sectionHOUSING BILL Previous sectionZAMBIA INDEPENDENCE BILL
Development blog
Google Group Project issues list
Search Help
HANSARD 1803–2005 → 1960s → 1963 → July 1963 → 25 July 1963 → Lords Sitting
AGREEMENTS WITH BAROTSELAND CHIEFS

825
§ 3.6 p.m.
§ LORD CLITHEROE
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether a further assurance can be given that all the agreements and Treaties with the Barotseland Chiefs will be fully respected and implemented.]
§
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD DILHORNE)
My Lords, in the discussions on the future of Barotseland, which have now been initiated, Her Majesty's Government recognise the special relationship with Barotseland based on the agreement made with Paramount Chief Lewanika in 1900, as amended from time to time by later supplementary agreements.
§ LORD CLITHEROE
My Lords, I have been asked by my noble friend Lord Boyd of Merton to say that he has the liveliest recollection of the explicit pledges he gave, with full authority, when he was Secretary of State. May I ask my noble and learned friend whether this means that Barotseland will continue to be a Protectorate of the British Crown?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
My Lords, the Litunga has been given repeated assurances that no constitutional changes affecting Barotseland will be made without prior consultation and agreement with the Litunga and Council. It is against this background that the forthcoming talks between the Northern Rhodesia Government and the Barotse Native Government are being arranged, with the object of finding an acceptable and workable solution.

826
§ THE EARL OF LISTOWEL
My Lords, does not the noble and learned Lord agree that the right way to deal with this matter is in the way the Government propose—namely, to leave it to be dealt with by the Government of Northern Rhodesia and the Government of Barotseland? Does he not also agree that the position of Barotseland is comparable to that of the Princes' states in India, and that they took a wise course by negotiating their future with the Governments of India and Pakistan before those two countries became independent?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
My Lords, there would be, of course, very serious difficulties if Barotseland were to be entirely separated from Northern Rhodesia, with which it has been intimately connected since the early days of British protection. But we are confident that the forthcoming talks between the Northern Rhodesia Government and the Barotse Native Government will take full account of the position arising from the existing agreements.

§ LORD COLYTON
My Lords, may I ask my noble and learned friend whether we can ask for something more? Can we ask here, in the case of Barotseland, for the same rights as we asked for in the case of Bechuanaland, Swaziland and Basutoland: that they shall be able to pursue their way to independence as a separate unit, quite apart from anything that happens in Northern Rhodesia?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
My Lords, that is not the Question on the Order Paper, nor does it appear to me to be related to it.
§ THE EARL OF SWINTON
My Lords, might I ask this question, which I think does directly arise out of what is on the Order Paper? First of all, are not any Treaties which exist with Barotseland not Treaties with Northern Rhodesia or with anybody else but the British Government or the British Crown? Secondly, if that is so, will it not be necessary to deal with this by an Order in Council dealing with the Constitution of Northern Rhodesia? Also, will this Parliament have the opportunity of approving or dissenting from or amending 827 any provision with regard to Barotseland that there may be in that Order in Council?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
I am grateful to the noble Earl. The position is that there can be no change in the constitutional position of Barotseland without consideration by Parliament, because this Parliament of the United Kingdom alone is competent to effect legislation affecting its constitutional status.

SECOND READING

Search Help

HANSARD 1803–2005 → 1960s → 1964 → July 1964 → 20 July 1964 → Lords Sitting
ZAMBIA INDEPENDENCE BILL
HL Deb 20 July 1964 vol 260 cc455-71 455
§ 3.19 p.m.
§ Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.

THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS AND FOR THE COLONIES (THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE)
My Lords, I have it in command from Her Majesty the Queen to acquaint the House that Her Majesty, having been informed of the purport of the Zambia Independence Bill, has consented to place Her prerogative and interest, so far as they are affected by the Bill, at the disposal of Parliament for the purposes of the Bill.
My Lords, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time. The Zambia Independence Bill makes provision for the ending of Her Majesty's protection over Northern Rhodesia on October 24 of this year, on which date the territory will become the independent sovereign Republic of Zambia, when, at her Government's request, we look forward to welcoming Zambia as a member of the Commonwealth. Northern Rhodesia has enjoyed internal self-government since January this year. During this period the country has continued its steady development, and I am sure the House will agree that Dr. Kaunda and his Cabinet have displayed an impressive combination of energy and responsibility, and have demonstrated their ability in wide fields.
Shortly after the territory became self-governing, Her Majesty's Government were in touch with the Government of Northern Rhodesia in regard to the further steps necessary to move forward to full independence, and it was eventually agreed that the Independence Conference should open in London on May 5. The Report of that Conference has been published as a White Paper (Cmnd. 2365). In all its sessions, except the first and the last, the Conference met under the chairmanship of Mr. Richard Hornby, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary. As some noble Lords may be aware, tributes have been paid in another place to the way in which he helped forward the work of the Conference and I wish to associate myself fully and most warmly with these sentiments. With the exception of Cyprus, which was of course sui generis, 456 all our territories have hitherto gone into independence with a monarchical form of government, and with the Queen represented by a Governor-General. We are, therefore, breaking new ground in that Zambia, will move straight from its present status as a protectorate to that of an independent sovereign republic. I am quite sure that this should not be taken in any way as an indication that our friends in Northern Rhodesia have any antipathy to the connection with the Crown. Rather it should be seen as a realistic acceptance, right at the outset, of what many African countries have found, after only a brief period of independence, the medium best adapted to their political aspirations.
I might perhaps mention at this point that Dr. Kaunda asked Her Majesty whether she would agree to be represented at the Zambia independence celebrations. Her Majesty asked Her Royal Highness The Princess Royal to undertake this representation, which she very gladly agreed to do.
The Constitution of Zambia will provide for an "executive" President. There may be those who feel that, as this new Constitution is one which does not embody the particular checks and balances which we enjoy in this country, for that reason it is less than democratic and thus a step on the road to eventual erosions of liberty. I feel that any such fears would be without foundation. I think it should be remembered that there are to be a number of important features in the Constitution, amendments freely and readily agreed by the Northern Rhodesian Government, which are specifically designed to preserve the liberty and rights of the individual, to limit the powers of the President, and to ensure that the Judiciary will be independent of control by the Executive. Perhaps most significantly, the Bill of Rights in the present Constitution is to be carried forward into the Independence Constitution. It will be entrenched by a special amendment procedure requiring a referendum, and there will be special provisions for its enforcement. The Constitutional Council which was established by the self-governing Constitution is not to be retained. The Council has, in fact, never met; but it has been agreed that broadly parallel functions shall be exercised, if needed, by a special Judiciary tribunal.
457 The Judiciary is to be independent, and any amendment of the provisions in the Constitution relating to the judiciary will also require the referendum process. The control of public prosecutions is to be in the hands of an independent Director of Public Prosecutions, whose relation to the Attorney-General will be comparable with the corresponding relationship in this country. There is to be a Public Service Commission for the Civil Service and there will also be a Judicial Service Commission. This new Constitution will contain many features which do not conform exactly with the Westminster pattern, but I sincerely believe that it is a workable Constitution to meet the special circumstances of Zambia. Most important, because it reflects in essentials the wishes of its people and has been freely negotiated, it is a Constitution which we may be confident will continue.
I turn now to the position of Barotseland. There has been a special relationship, as many noble Lords may know, between Her Majesty's Government and the Litunga of Barotseland since the earliest days of the British connection with Central Africa. The British protection of Barotseland has been exercised since 1911 through the Government of Northern Rhodesia, and as that Government has greatly extended its services generally through the whole territory it has similarly provided increased services in Barotseland.
The approach of independence made it necessary to consider new arrangements; and, following talks last summer with the then First Secretary of State, the Litunga agreed to take part in discussions with the Government of Northern Rhodesia on the question of the future relationship of Barotseland with Northern Rhodesia. Following lengthy negotiations the two parties agreed to sign a new agreement to be known as the Barotseland Agreement of 1964, which would replace all the old agreements and which would regulate Barotseland's special position as an integral part of the new Zambia. This agreement was signed in London by the Litunga and Dr. Kaunda on May 18, and has been published as a White Paper (Cmnd. 2366). This was a freely negotiated settlement, and one which will provide very considerable safeguards for the special interests of Barotseland.
458 As we know, independence presents many economic problems, and Zambia will require both advice and, despite its copper revenues, substantial economic assistance not only from Britain but from other developed countries. The British Government have recently announced a gift of £2¾ million to assist the Northern Rhodesia Government with the funding of the short-term debt which was taken over from the Federation at the beginning of this year, and in addition a long-term loan of £3 million, to enable the territory to provide its share of the compensation for overseas officials in Her Majesty's Overseas Civil Service. There are also to be talks this coming autumn on aid for general development purposes.
Before commenting on the clauses of the Bill which is now before your Lordships' House, I should like to pay very warm tribute, in which I know noble Lords on all sides of the House will join, to the work carried out by the Northern Rhodesia Civil Service. This Service, together with the Northern Rhodesia Police, has long had an exceptionally high reputation for efficiency and devotion to duty, and I am glad to say that the figures we now have available indicate that a very large proportion of the expatriate officers in these services have shown their readiness to continue to serve the Government of Zambia after independence and to make their contribution to the building of the new Constitution.
Noble Lords may have noted, perhaps with some relief, that an Explanatory Memorandum has been provided with this Bill. It has, as noble Lords know, been customary in the past not to attach these to Independence Bills, and I hope that noble Lords will find this a helpful, if modest, innovation. Clause 1 establishes the Republic of Zambia on October 24, 1964. Clause 2(1) provides for the continuance of existing law until otherwise provided by the Parliament of Zambia. Clauses 3 and 4 deal with nationality matters consequent on Zambian independence and are on the same lines as the Malawi Independence Bill. This is the usual pattern when a British protectorate becomes an independent Commonwealth country. Clause 3(1) adds Zambia to the Commonwealth countries listed in Section 1(3) of the British Nationality Act, 1949. Zambian 459 citizens will therefore be British subjects or Commonwealth citizens in United Kingdom law. This clause also provides that Northern Rhodesia will cease to be a protectorate for the purposes of the British Nationality Acts. The effect of Clause 3(2) is that persons who are British-protected persons because of a connection with Northern Rhodesia will not lose that status until they acquire citizenship of Zambia. Clause 3(3) withdraws citizenship of the United Kingdom and Colonies from persons who acquire Zambia citizenship on October 24, 1964, and is subject to the exceptions contained in Clause 4. Clause 4 preserves the citizenship of the United Kingdom and Colonies of persons who become citizens of Zambia on independence, but who have a substantial connection with the United Kingdom, by which I mean any person who himself, or whose father or paternal grandfather, was born, registered or naturalised in the United Kingdom or a remaining colony.
Clause 5 enables Her Majesty in Council to provide for the jurisdiction, powers and procedure of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in respect of appeals from the courts of Zambia. Provision may be made under this clause, both in the law of the United Kingdom and in Zambian law, to give effect to the arrangements agreed at the Independence Conference by which the Judicial Committee can be used as an appeal court for Zambia. Clause 6 deals with appeals to the Queen in Council from the Court of Appeal for Northern Rhodesia which are pending immediately before independence. If arrangements are made between the Government of the territory and the British Government for continuing and disposing of these pending appeals, an Order in Council may be made by Her Majesty to give effect to these arrangements. Clause 7 terminates the divorce jurisdiction of courts in Zambia in respect of British subjects domiciled in the United Kingdom.
Clause 8 terminates all rights and obligations of the Crown and the Government of Northern Rhodesia which arise under any of the existing agreements, undertakings or understandings with the Litunga of Barotseland. I would add that the clause does not of course affect the Barotseland Agreement of 1964, to which 460 I alluded a moment ago. Clause 9 enables any necessary adaptations to be made in United Kingdom legislation consequent on the independence of Zambia. Clause 10 makes supplementary provisions in respect of Orders in Council made under Clauses 6 or 9 of this Bill or other Acts of Parliament. Clause 11 provides a Short Title for the Bill, and repeals certain provisions of the British Nationality Act, 1958, which become obsolete with the dissolution of the Federation.
Before I conclude, I should like to express, on behalf of Her Majesty's Government, the great pleasure we have in being able to bring forward this measure. We wish the Government and people of Zambia a prosperous and peaceful future. We sincerely hope that the present warm and friendly relations we enjoy with Northern Rhodesia will continue with the new State of Zambia. Zambia is the latest addition to the family of the Commonwealth. It will be the nineteenth country of the Commonwealth. I know that I have the support of all Members of your Lordships' House in wishing Zambia, in this final step on the road to full sovereignty, every success in future.
§ I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.
§ Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
§ 3.32 p.m.

§ THE EARL OF LISTOWEL
My Lords, I am sure we are all grateful to the noble Duke for the clear and effective way in which he has presented the Bill to the House, in spite of the fact that he himself did not take part in the Independence Conference or in the negotiations that led up to the Bill. I think the House always welcomes these Independence Bills. They are indeed in danger of becoming a sort of formality, but the good wishes they evoke to the new countries they bring alive are none the less warm and sincere, in spite of the fact that they are becoming something like a well-worn pattern of legislation.
I think that this Bill is of greater Parliamentary interest than other Independence Bills which your Lordships have dealt with during the current year—for two reasons. In the first place, as the noble Duke pointed out, Zambia 461 will be the first British Dependency to become a republic on independence without any intervening stage of constitutional development. Secondly—and this the noble Duke did not point out, but I would draw his attention to it—the discussion of the Bill in another place showed a sharp difference of opinion between the Government and Members on both sides of the House about the proper treatment of certain European officers now employed by the Northern Rhodesian Government. I will come back to that point later on in the course of my remarks.
The Republic of Zambia will become a new African State on October 24. This, of course, is United Nations Day. I am sure we are all glad that Zambia wants to be associated with the United Nations as well as with the Commonwealth family. By joining both international organisations, it will have the maximum influence on world affairs. And it is satisfactory to see that in Clause 3(1) of the Bill, Zambian citizens will also become Commonwealth citizens after independence.
But I believe that Zambia's greatest good fortune is that independence will see the continuation of the leadership of Dr. Kenneth Kaunda. Everyone, I think, realises that in a new country it is the quality of leadership that matters more than anything else. I know, both personally and by reputation, all the leaders of our former Dependencies in Africa, and to my knowledge there is no one with a finer character or more balanced political judgment than Dr. Kaunda. I think this needs to be said, and to be said here, because in the past Dr. Kaunda has been subjected to much harsh and, I think, unjustified criticism, even in your Lordships' House. The choice by Zambia of such a leader is a wise one, because he has exactly the qualities that will be needed after he takes up the much heavier responsibilities entrusted to him by the new Constitution, on the assumption, which I think it is fair to make, that he will become the first President of Zambia, for an American-style President is an even more powerful person in the decision-making processes of government than an English-style Prime Minister.
The Secretary of State has said, referring to the new Constitution of Zambia: 462 The Government, in practice, will be responsible to Parliament in much the same way as here in Britain. With respect, I disagree. I think this is mistaken. No doubt the noble Duke will defend his right honourable colleague, but my interpretation of the Constitution is that Zambian Ministers will not be responsible to Parliament, either in theory or in practice, as they are here. They will be responsible to the President, who will be under no obligation whatever to resign after an adverse vote in Parliament. That is to say, the situation will be the same as it is in the United States, where, if the President finds that a Bill is thrown out by Congress, he does not resign. Surely this is the whole essence of the difference between the new Zambian Constitution and our own.
The new Constitution has been described as a mixture of Washington and Westminster, but, in fact, it leans more heavily towards Washington than towards Westminster. In my opinion, this is entirely right, because the first requirement of the Constitution in a new African country is a strong Executive. What is happening in Northern Rhodesia is that that country is going straight from a Westminster Constitution to a typical African Constitution under an African Head of State, without any intervening period of independence within the Westminster framework. I am sure that Northern Rhodesia will take this big plunge successfully. I agree entirely with what the noble Duke said. I thought he put it very well, indeed, when he said that it was a workable Constitution, that reflects the wishes of the people of Northern Rhodesia. We must, of course, expect—and this is something that we should all bear in mind—that this African country, though it will be the first to go into independence in this particular way, will not be the last. Our remaining Dependencies in Africa, when the time comes for them to reach independence, will expect to follow Mr. Kaunda's example.
I think it is more than a little hard that Sir Evelyn Hone, the Governor of Northern Rhodesia, who has shown that a Colonial Governor can be just as good a negotiator as a political Governor, will not end his service there as Governor-General. I hope that the Government—and this perhaps the noble Duke will 463 bear in mind—will not allow this accident (because it is an accident of fate) to affect their recognition of a great career in the public service. I myself knew Sir Evelyn Hone when he was in South-East Asia and I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, met him in his travels when in the Colonial Office. Every job he has filled he has filled with great distinction, to the greater glory of the Commonwealth Service.
I am sure that your Lordships' House is as delighted as everyone else by the noble Duke's statement that Her Royal Highness the Princess Royal will represent Her Majesty at the Independence Celebrations. I believe that this is the first time that a member of the Royal Family will be present at the inauguration of a republic within the Commonwealth. What a splendid thing this is! Surely nothing could do more to underline the fact that becoming a republic is entirely consistent with all the affection and regard which both republican and non-republican countries of the Commonwealth have towards Her Majesty and members of the Royal Family.
I will now pass on for a few moments from these non-controversial matters, about which he all agree, to the some-what more controversial subject of the so-called non-designated officers in the service of the Northern Rhodesian Government. In times past your Lordships have always insisted that civil servants whose careers and prospects are damaged by independence should receive compensation, and should be given a good chance, if they wished to do so, of taking alternative employment. We are entirely satisfied that the 1,200 (I think that was the figure given in another place) members of the Oversea Civil Service in the employment of the Government of Northern Rhodesia, the so-called designated officers, will receive thoroughly adequate compensation, and that for the younger men this compensation will serve as a resettlement grant which will enable them, if they wish to do so, to seek and find alternative employment.
What many of us are not satisfied about is the position of the 400—it is only a small number, but still they are people with just as much right to our consideration as the others—so-called non-designated officers of British or 464 Rhodesian origin. These men, of course, are not members of the Overseas Civil Service and, therefore, do not qualify for lump sum compensation in addition to their earned retirement pension. But because they are European, their careers are just as much prejudiced as those of the Oversea Civil Service officers by the Africanisation of the Northern Rhodesian Civil Service. This Africanisation is a very right and proper thing, which has happened in every single African country after becoming independent.
The Government of Northern Rhodesia have made these officers a generous and, indeed, unique offer of half the compensation received by the Oversea Civil Service officers, on two conditions: that is, if they are superseded for promotion or replaced by an African officer. This is quite admirable, so far as it goes, but it does not cover a man whose post is abolished or who wishes to resign to find alternative employment while he is still young enough to start a new career. Most of these men, if they are 40 to 45 or under, who feel that their careers are prejudiced, want the opportunity (thinking, quite naturally, not only of themselves but of their families) of being able, if they get the chance, to take alternative Government or private employment. At the present time, if these men were to leave the Civil Service of the Northern Rhodesian Government, they would take nothing with them except their retirement pension. Many of us feel that this would be a grave injustice. They have given the same service as the designated officers, and their careers have been cut short by the same policy—a perfectly justifiable policy, which we all welcome—of her Majesty's Government. They, too, surely are morally entitled to full compensation if they want to make a fresh start.
I am raising the matter this afternoon because, so far, the Government have not been willing to make any concession. Last Monday a delegation from all Parties and both Houses put the case for these officers to the noble Duke. He listened to us with his usual courtesy, but he gave nothing away. The Government's attitude in the debate on this Bill in another place was equally unyielding. This is why I am repeating this afternoon a plea to the Government 465 on behalf of these men. May I ask the noble Duke two questions which perhaps he would be good enough to reply to when he comes to wind up the debate? First, will Her Majesty's Government consider asking the Government of Northern Rhodesia to widen their offer of compensation to the non-designated officers to cover both voluntary retirement or abolition of office? Secondly—and I think this is equally important—will they consider offering to lend the Government of Northern Rhodesia the whole or part of the additional cost of compensating these officers, which would be a very small sum indeed? I would remind your Lordships that Her Majesty's Government are already lending the substantial amount of £3 million towards the cost of compensating the Oversea Civil Service officers, and this I think covers 50 per cent, of the total cost of their compensation.
I hope the noble Duke will not try to ride off this afternoon on the argument that these officers are the responsibility of the Northern Rhodesian Government and, therefore, we here have no responsibility for them. Surely we cannot wash our hands of these men, just because they were recruited in Northern Rhodesia and not in Britain. They are as much a British responsibility as the officers of the Oversea Civil Service.
I do not want to end what I have to say on this note. The last thing I want to do is to give the impression that we are more concerned about the future of these officers than about the future of Northern Rhodesia. Far from it! Zambia, as it will be on October 24, like the quality of mercy, is twice blessed: it has wise political leadership and exceptional economic resources—exceptional, that is, for any African country. With these assets, Zambia should certainly have a happy and prosperous future, and that is our fervent wish for all its inhabitants.
§ 3.46 p.m.

§ LORD OGMORE
My Lords, I should like to welcome this Bill and to thank the noble Duke for his clear exposition of its contents. I should also like on behalf of myself and my noble friends to welcome the news that Her Royal 466 Highness the Princess Royal is, on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen, to attend the independence celebrations.
This Bill is the first Independence Bill to come before the House after the recent Commonwealth Conference and, therefore, it has considerable significance. In fact, as your Lordships will know, the probability of this step was mentioned in the communiqué at the end of the Conference. I was rather surprised to hear the noble Duke to-day referring to the compliments that have been paid to his right honourable friend the Prime Minister in another place. We here also paid him some compliments, and I think that should be noted by the noble Duke, who I believe was here at the time. If I misunderstood him, I withdraw what I am saying, but I gained the impression that he referred to compliments to the Prime Minister in another place. If he did, I should like here and now to say that I, for one, and my noble friends, are very appreciative of the work of the Prime Minister at the Constitutional Conference, and of the staff of all those who took part in it. The noble Duke is looking rather puzzled, and we shall see from Hansard whether or not I am mistaken.
The significance of this Conference is very great for us all. It emphasises a completely new era in the Common-wealth. In fact, at this Conference, to a large extent, the new States took over and made the running; and I was delighted that they did. To take one example, the question of the Secretariat; for years and years those of us interested in the Commonwealth have been pressing for a Secretariat, but the older members, including, so far as I am aware, Britain, would not agree. Now this time the newer members have realised the need for a Secretariat. We shall have an opportunity of discussing these things at greater length on July 29. One thing I want to emphasise is that those of us on all sides of this House and elsewhere who refuted the idea that the Commonwealth is a farce and at an end have been proved right, and that the dismal Jeremiahs who have been preaching the imminent dissolution of the Commonwealth have been proved wrong. I hope that this will be realised in all quarters, whether anonymous or otherwise, where the Jeremiahs may be.
467 I notice that they have been very quiet since the end of the Conference.
Up to now, it so happens that many of the links between the Commonwealth countries have been more with this country and the various Commonwealth countries than between the other Commonwealth countries themselves. This has been described as, or likened to, a wheel, the hub being this country and the spokes being the various other members of the Commonwealth, some of whom are independent and some are not, and there being no rim. In other words, there was little contact between the various Commonwealth members themselves. That is one reason why I look with great favour on this idea of a Commonwealth Secretariat. I hope that Zambia will be one of those countries which will take great advantage of this Secretariat and will correspond and have contact with countries in the Commonwealth other than Great Britain.
The new countries of the Commonwealth tend naturally to be absorbed in their own problems. One of the great advantages for them of the Commonwealth relationship is that they are able to obtain a wider outlook on world affairs than they could obtain in their own territories. They have to realise that they must give as well as take. There is a great opportunity for them to take an active part in Commonwealth and world affairs, but that means, of course, that they have to think of other problems than the ones which particularly affect their own territories.
With regard to Zambia, our relationship with them is a comparatively recent one. In fact it comes within the memory of the older Members of this House; or if not the memory, at any rate the life time of them. It is to me amazing that Zambia should have been able to make such immense steps forward in the comparatively short time that they have been in contact with what we now call the Western World, when compared to South East Asia, India or West Africa. This means, of course, that their need is all the greater, and is particularly great because the change over to the present situation from a tribal society, such as the Matabele and the Mashona, has gone so smoothly. As the noble Duke has said, in this smooth transition we must not 468 overlook the work of the European expatriate civil servants, the expatriate police and others. Curiously enough, my first contact with Rhodesia was with the police. When I was a young law student, a friend of mine, believing that he had not done very well in the Sandhurst examinations, went along to the recruiting office and, without my knowledge, put us both down as recruits for the Rhodesian Mounted Police. I thought this was a very good idea, but my parents did not, and that was the end of my association with the Rhodesian Mounted Police.
I hope that these various African majorities will realise how important it is in any country to have expatriate communities. If we look at our own country, assuming we are one, which we are not, and omitting the fact that basically we are English, Welsh, Scots and Irish, we see the immense contribution that expatriate communities have made to this country throughout the centuries. In their various ways, the Huguenots, the Flemings, the Jews and others have made a tremendous contribution, and I am quite certain that we should not be in the position we are now without them. So it is important, I think, for African Governments and Oppositions to realise that they can never do without a great amount of assistance from European and Asian expatriates in their country. If they try to do without them, it will put back by many years their own progress in the economic, social and political fields.
We shall, of course, need to give them considerable help. I was interested to learn from the noble Duke how much that help is likely to be. It is not very great in comparison to some help we are giving elsewhere, but I suppose they have made an agreement on this and are comparatively happy about it. As to assistance other than financial help, I can do no better than refer to the brilliant speech of the noble Lord, Lord Howick of Glendale, in your Lordships' House on June 24. In my opinion he said everything on that subject that could be said of assistance to these countries. I only wish that that speech could be made compulsory reading for everyone, either in Parliament, in Whitehall or at the United Nations, who has any impact on aid to these territories. I do not think I have ever heard a speech which was 469 so good and comprehensive on this subject as the maiden speech of the noble Lord, Lord Howick of Glendale.
With regard to Southern Rhodesia, I would particularly ask the Zambia Government to treat this issue with great delicacy. I am quite sure that if everybody keeps cool and calm everything will come out all right in Southern Rhodesia. I understand that at the moment there are difficulties over such things as visas and controls to go from one country to the other. In fact, a friend of mine who was at a conference at the Victoria Hotel not long ago had to cross the border six times in the same day, because it happened that the Conference was on one side and the hotel on the other. Every time he had solemnly to go through the process of getting his documents stamped. This is really nonsense, and I hope that very soon this sort of thing can be overcome, and that we shall not have any more of it.
The noble Earl, Lord Listowel, referred to the presidential system and said that this was the first time in which this system had come into effect immediately on independence. It gives very wide powers to the President. The first election is by secret ballot by the Legislative Assembly, but on subsequent occasions the election is to be by the electorate as a whole; so there is in itself a safeguard for democracy. I agree with the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, that this is right. I believe that our Parliamentary system in certain parts of Africa—I do not say elsewhere; for instance, in Malaysia they certainly work it extremely well—is difficult for them to work, because it does not accord with the tribal system. Of course, it did here in the beginning when this was the only House and certainly not an elected one—it is not now, for that matter. In those days, it was the only legislative body, the only consultative body, there was, and it was only much later that the idea of an Opposition grew up. The whole idea then was to prevent an Opposition. That is why in our Writ this mandatory and threatening language is used to get us here. It was not the idea that we came to oppose, but to bless the various proposals of the Sovereign. The same thing happens in Africa. The idea that you have an Opposition which is paid to 470 oppose the ruling faction in the tribe is unheard of. The tribe has a baraza, a meeting, and they all discuss at great length. Everybody has a word in it, and eventually the tribal leader sums the thing up and that is that—there is no further argument about it. So I think the presidential system now proposed for Zambia will probably be a very good one and will last very well.
I do not want to say much more. We are not taking up a great deal of the time of the House; there are only three of us speaking on this Bill to-day, but, after all, this is the last time we shall have an opportunity of discussing the affairs of this country and I should like to mention the Judicial Committee. I have been raising this point for about eight or nine years on every single independence Bill that has come up. I am happy to say that in these last two Bills the Government have met to a large extent, though not entirely, my views on this matter. Here again, in this Bill, is a proposal that there shall be a right of appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and I would make three requests to the Government, because this again gives us the opportunity of showing a little initiative in this country in this way. First of all, I would ask the Government, as I have done for many years past, to make the Court peripatetic occasionally, not always sitting in Whitehall as it has done up to now. Secondly, I would ask that there shall be more members of the Court from Commonwealth countries other than this country; thirdly, that younger members should be appointed to the Court. They need not all be Lords of Appeal in Ordinary; and this rather follows, of course, from my first suggestion that it should be occasionally peripatetic.
Whenever our Judges have gone out—the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor has just been out to Malawi, and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Denning, and others have been elsewhere—they have always been tremendously well received. I am sure that in this way, with these members, the Judicial Committee would form a very strong and potent link with the Commonwealth. I for one (and Zambia have gone some way to meet us on this) object to these links being weakened by anything we 471 are not doing, when they can in fact be strengthened.
I was going to say something about civil servants, but there is now no need because the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, has laid the case before your Lordships extremely well this afternoon, and I support what he said. I think something should be done for those particular civil servants about whom he was speaking; that is to say, the locally-recruited officers other than of African descent—the ones for whom not enough seems to be done. They will not come under the overseas services aid schemes by which the British Government guarantee terminal benefits to the officers appointed from Great Britain. They are left out and they are going to be affected very badly. In places like Northern Rhodesia, with its great copper mines, a number of these people were affected, more, possibly, than in some other territories which are not so prosperous.
Furthermore, I welcome the Barotse-land agreement which has been proposed, and I should like to commend the wise statesmanship of all those who took part in the negotiations over Barotseland, because without it there might have been very serious difficulty.
That is all I wish to say this afternoon, except that I wish more noble Lords had been speaking. These territories still like us to lake an interest in their affairs, and this is the last time we shall have the opportunity of dealing with the circumstances of Zambia. As I say, I wish that more noble Lords had thought of taking the opportunity to speak this afternoon but, nevertheless, the few of us who have spoken make up, I hope, with the warmth of our support for the paucity in our numbers. On behalf of myself and my noble friends on these Benches, I wish Zambia every possible happiness and success in the days ahead.
Back to PUBLIC LIBRARIES AND MUSEUMS BILL
Forward to B.O.A.C. AND THE SUPER VC 10 AIRCRAFT
Noticed a typo? Report other issues © UK Parliament






Feel free to access the attachments above for your reading pleasure and brain storming.


"Knowledge is indeed Power"

For more information you may google search me by typing : NAMAKANDO NALIKANDO SINYAMA
and enjoy alot more of my writings or kindly go to:
http://www.namzybraveheart.blogspot.com/

On this site Please use the BLOG ARCHIVE to access older posts.I welcome to a joy ride through my inner sanctum.
G