HH MUST FOLLOW WHAT HE AGREED WITH KK IN 2012 ON BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT: “We know why KK signed it and why he violated it”- Chris ZUMANI Zimba

Chris Zumani
Zumani Zimba

HH MUST FOLLOW WHAT HE AGREED WITH KK IN 2012 ON BAROTSELAND AGREEMENT: “We know why KK signed it and why he violated it”

By Chris ZUMANI Zimba

“At no point was there Northern Rhodesia and Barotseland or Zambia and Barotseland: from 1911 to 1969, the special status of the Litunga was within one sovereign state. This is the most important fact for everyone to know and take note”

1. Introduction

President Hakainde Hichilema (HH) must know that as long as we have ‘Bulozi’ or ‘Barotse’ to refer to ‘Lozi people’ living in some area in Zambia, we shall always have “Barotseland”. This name is more to do with this ethnic group of people and their land. In other words, there is Barotseland just like we talk of Nsenga, Tonga, Soli, Bemba, Bisa, Lunda, Lenje, Chewa, Lamba, Ngoni, Kaonde or Tumbuka land. There is nothing anyone can do to change or delete these ethnic groups in Zambia.

To start with, ethnic groups anywhere are the most important aspects of what constitutes a nation. Scottish have Scotland, Jews have Israel, English have England, Sweden is for Swedes, China is for Chinese, Portuguese have Portugal, Arabians have Saudi Arabia, Italy is for Italians, France for French, Germany for Germans, Swanas have Botswana, Greeks have Greece, Poland is for Polish, Romans have Rome, Norway is for Nords, etc.

These examples are what constitute the original definition of “classical nations”. It is a homogeneous group of people bigger than a community with distinct ethnic identities such as common heritage, language, religious cultures and are willing to continue living together.

Hence, Zambia is not supposed to be a nation. The name comes from a river, (Zambezi river) in what was called Barotseland and now Western province. Therefore, originally “Zambians” are supposed to be living creatures of the Zambezi river and not us the people. This is because there is zero connection between the name of the country and any group of people anywhere within the territory.

2. Did the British South African ( BSA) Company of Cecil Rhodes conquer modern Zambia as one territory?

The answer is no. The BSA company took over two separate states at different times and in different fashions in this country we now call Zambia.

In Barotseland, the BSA company was voluntarily invited by the Litunga, King Lewanika Lubosi himself in 1890 to take over his entire territory for commercial interests and imperial purposes in exchange with military protection, financial and material annual support.

There was no amount of bloodshed or death in the BSA company take over of this Lozi kingdom called Barotseland. It was based on friendly negotiations, dinning and smiles. After securing this ‘state’, the BSA company called this territory Barotseland North Western Zambezi.

There after, the BSA company eyed for North East of Zambezi river for mineral explorations and heavy mining activities since the firm was already in Southern Rhodesia and Nyasaland.

Here, they faced opposition from the Ngoni people (not Chewa, Senga, Tumbuka, Kunda, Bemba, or Bisa people) as all these groups were peaceful and didn’t have an organized standing army like the Ngoni king. Mpezeni’s Ngoni kingdom was renowned, fearful and powerful for everyone as bloody warriors.

After refusing to surrender voluntarily and peacefully their land to the imperial company, a plus or minus 10,000 army of Ngoni warriors led by Crown Prince Nsingo Jere, son of King Mpezeni waged a bloody war from December, 1897 to February 1898 against these European invaders.

On 4th February, 1898, Nsingo Jere was captured: on 5th February, 1898, he together with his two wives were openly executed by the BSA army using a firing squad in modern Chipata. The few surviving Ngoni warriors and people were so broken, terrified and forced to surrender to Cecil Rhodes imperial army.

So, old and mourning king Mpezeni I, Tuto Jere surrendered and submitted to the BSA company in 1898 and North Eastern Zambezi was taken over too by these British imperialists. The whole now Zambia was completely in Cecil Rhodes’s hands.

3. So, when did Barotseland North Western Zambezi of Litunga merge with North Eastern Zambezi of Mpezeni?

The BSA company decided to merge the two originally separate territories of North Eastern Zambezi with headquarters in Fort Jameson (modern Chipata) and Barotseland North Western Zambezi with headquarters in modern Mongu in 1911.

Thus, before 1911, the two ‘British protectorates’ under Cecil Rhodes’s business administration were administered as separate units. By merging them, the company was trying to reduce management costs since the two territories were now under one company, the BSA company and under one business leader, Cecil Rhodes.

In fact. it was in 1911 that these two territories were merged and named “Northern Rhodesia”. In 1924 at the point of being handed over to the British government, the BSA company left and handed over one entity-Northern Rhodesia.

Between 1924 and 1964 at independence, there was only Northen Rhodesia. In the federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, it went in as one and came out as one (from 1953 to 1963). And it got its independence as one sovereign state on 24th October, 1964 as Zambia and killed its old name, Northern Rhodesia.

At no point was there Northern Rhodesia and Barotseland or Zambia and Barotseland. The special status of Barotseland was within and under Northern Rhodesia during colonization and within and under Zambia after independence. This is the most important fact for everyone to know and take note.

4. Why was Kenneth Kaunda made to sign The Barotseland Agreement in 1964 with The Lozi Litunga before Independence?

Before Northern Rhodesia could be given independence, the British government realized that this colony was a ‘federal state’ consisting of originally two separate territories that had separate imperial and colonial agreements with the BSA company and then its successor the British government itself.

From the word go, Barotseland had special treaties and royal treatments with the British government and monarch. Both the British monarch and the King of the Lozi people wanted this arrangement and treatment to continue after independence under Zambia.

Although the Ngoni king was in attendance during these independence negotiations, Mpezeni did not push for any treaty or agreement with the British monarch and government for whatever reasons. But the Litunga did insist and secured his special status.

So, five months before 24th October, 1964, as part of the independence constitutional arrangements for Northern Rhodesia, in May 1964 in London, Kenneth David Kaunda, then Prime Minister at the head of the Self Government of Northern Rhodesia signed the Barotseland Agreement with the Litunga of the Lozi people, Sir Mwanawina Lewanika III.

The Barotseland Agreement of 1964 recognised the Litunga of Barotseland (Bulozi) as the principal local authority for the government and administration of Barotseland, with powers to make laws of Barotseland in respect to matters such as land, natural resources and taxation under the national framework of one sovereign territory called Zambia.

The Barotseland Agreement of 1964 did not promise the creation of a separate state: it only created a local governance system where the Litunga had semi autonomous political and economic powers within his territory.

By signing this agreement, Kaunda agreed that Zambia was to run as a ‘loose federal system’ where Barotseland will use its traditional political system to run their local authorities under the supervision of the central government in Lusaka.

In other words, after signing the Barotseland Agreement, Dr Kaunda confirmed that the new state called Zambia shall have two local government systems: one for Barotseland under the Litunga with his traditional institutions in Mongu and the other under central government for the rest of the country within the Ministry of Local Government in Lusaka.

6. Why did Kaunda quickly abolish the Barotseland Agreement after independence?

There are so many theories to this question; factors that have been advanced to explain and justify why the UNIP government of Zambia aborted and abolished the Barotseland Agreement few months later. Below, we itemize and explain few of them:

Some people claim that Kaunda discovered that the Litunga did not have proper geographical boundaries about what he termed as his Royal territory-Lozi kingdom called Barotseland. The Lozi king is accused of claiming other peoples land everywhere without any official proof of occupation and control before colonization.

For example, at some point, Barotseland was claimed to be stretching into Angola, DR Congo, Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana. Others claim Barotseland stretched from Chavuma up to Luangwa river and Muchinga hills. Hence, Kaunda and his cabinet thought abolishing the Barotseland Agreement was politically safer and better for everyone to strengthen a unitary system across board.

Some people believe that after Independence, ongoing political tensions in the sub region forced Kaunda to quickly bring the entire territory called Zambia under one state and one unitary government. Kaunda feared that oppressive minority white governments in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola and Mozambique then could have antagonized and divided Zambia using other political entities.

To Kaunda, creating a formidable and powerful central government in Lusaka was the only way to guarantee national unity, secure peace and independence for both Zambia and our neighbors. This is equally important in understanding why Kaunda abolished the Barotseland Agreement first in 1965 and finally in 1969.

In addition, politics of regionalism, tribalism and ethnic nationalism started to emerge in Luapula, Eastern, Northern, North Western, Western and Southern provinces immediately after independence. Kaunda believed sticking to the Barotseland Agreement would worsen these divisions hence abandoning it very fast.

Another school believe that Kaunda quickly abolished the Barotseland Agreement because he failed to convince the Ngoni people and king on why the Litunga was given a semi self rule status in London during the 1964 independence negotiations and Mpezeni was not. Why did you sign Barotseland Agreement without Ngoniland Agreement in London? KK could be asked by some genius Ngoni people.

After independence, it is believed that Mpezeni and some of his Ngoni people started to claim their special status like Lozi people in Zambia. Ngonis believed that they also had “a treaty” with the BSA company and lost thousands of their subjects in bloody Anglo Ngoni wars of 1897-1898. Hence, keeping the Barotseland Agreement became a huge risk for KK under such political circumstances.

It is also argued that other tribes and ethnic groups outside the bigger Lozi people but within ‘Barotseland’ did not want to be directly associated and controlled by the Litunga at Local government level. The Mbunda, Nkoya, Sala, Luvale, Lenje, etc speaking tribes petitioned Kaunda to abandon the Barotseland agreement as they opposed the Lozi Kuta system. They just denounced the Litunga.

These non Lozi speaking ethnic groups who are the majority in the so called Barotseland ( Western province) believed the Lusaka central government under its local government system was better, fair and neutral in meeting their developmental needs than a local monarchy system that had exploited and abused them in the past. KK faced this opposition and rejection for siding with the Litunga on the BA.

Lastly, others believe that the so called Barotseland Agreement was a selfish making of the Litunga and the British government. It is said that Kaunda was only made to sign it as the Prime Minister of Northern Rhodesia. They schemed it as a precondition for independence when KK was already the Prime of the entire Northern Rhodesia as one solid country.

Since Kaunda was the Primie Minister of both Barotseland North Western Zambezi and North Eastern Zambezi which was called Northern Rhodesia, some of his cabinet ministers persuaded him to get rid of this ‘unnecessary agreement’ as it only represented the political interest of the Litunga and his few ‘Kuta’ leaders.

This debate was even made worse when some freedom fighters, nationalists as well as other kings and chiefs started to question why Kaunda signed this agreement for the Litunga to have special privileges than the rest in a country the Litunga is blamed to have helped to bring imperialism and colonialism. Thus, KK was criticized and opposed for signing this agreement with the Litunga.

Under all these factors, KK and his government urgently introduced the Local Government Act of 1965 which abolished the traditional institutions that had governed Barotseland and brought the kingdom under the administration of a uniform local government system just like other kingdoms, chiefdoms and regions in Zambia. This is what brought political healing, unity and harmony in KK’s cabinet, government and the rest of Zambia.

In 1969, Kaunda’s government arbitrary passed the Constitutional Amendment Act which abolished the Barotseland Agreement of 1964 completely. Yes, this was done without any consultations or engagements of the key stakeholders in Mongu because Kaunda was aware that their input had nothing to influence or change anything. This gesture was just formality.

7. What did Kaunda say in 2012 about Barotseland Agreement which HH agreed to?

At the peak of this Barotseland political tensions between 2010 and 2012 when Barotseland radical groups and violent activists were being hunted down, shot and arrested, Zambia’s first president was called upon to guide the country as to why he signed and later abolished the Barotseland Agreement.

I was in Germany doing my Masters Degree and was one the Zambians who demanded for KK to provide leadership and direction on this matter. There was no way the Barotseland issue was boiling and fueling like lightning and thunder with citizens dying while Kaunda was alive and made to remain mute.

In a press statement made available to the media on 3nd April, 2012, by office of the First President chief of staff Godwin Mfula, Zambia’s founding republican President, Dr Kenneth Kaunda finally spoke. He said that the Barotseland impasse between Government and the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) and the Barotse National Council (BNC) required collective rational interaction and the wisdom of all Zambians (collective wisdom of Zambians).

KK didn’t say much but he clearly guided that Zambians needed to engage and dialogue on the matter in a respectful manner. “There is imperative need for a purposeful and peaceful interaction with all the stakeholders relating to the question of the Barotseland Agreement of 1964,” part of Dr Kaunda’s statement read.

In response, on 3rd April, 2012 in an interview with QFM Radio, UPND opposition leader then, Mr. Hakainde Hichilema thanked Dr Kenneth Kaunda’s call for genuine consultations on the Barotseland agreement and observed that what KK said was a good start.

Mr. Hichilema said the advice by the first republican president was long overdue and should be the guidance to resolving the Barotseland agreement of 1964. This President HH as an opposition leader then was in full agreement with KK’s proposal on how to resolve this matter in 2012.

So, what has changed now that he is in state house with the full voter support of the same people of Barotseland? Why is president HH not consulting and engaging key stakeholders and other informed Zambians to resolve this issue?

Why is the president now responding with political terror, military jets and authoritarian thuggery when he promised them peaceful dialogue and resolutions? Why did HH mislead and cheat the people of Barotseland during campaigns? Is it not HH who condemned President Sata for failing to restore the Barotseland agreement in 2011 and 2012?

In 2022, Her Honour the Vice President of Zambia, Mutale Nalumango told parliament that the UPND government was studying the Barotseland Agreement and will give its position later. People are still waiting for this promise.

Zambians and everyone want this government to give a formal position on this matter than impulsive outbursts like President did at Mulungushi International Conference last week. Reactive statements are politically dangerous: that’s what HH did last week.

Let this president at once stop cheating, abusing, intimidating, oppressing and fooling the Litunga and his people. As KK said in 2012, the Barotseland Agreement needs collective wisdom and peaceful dialogue for all actors

Yes, HH has been clear for years that Zambia is one country and shall remain so. This is correct and commendable. But at the same time, he gave them so much hope to resolving this matter within the framework of what Kaunda guided in 2012. It’s time to walk the talk Mr President based on what KK guided and you endorsed.

8. Should Barotseland zealots supposed to discuss secession and demand independence?

The demand for secession or actualization of independence from the rest of Zambia is both unfounded, wrong, illegal and hot political extremism. It is a demand too radical, a demand off the rails and completely baseless both politically and legally.

Since 1911, the entire territory we now call Zambia has never been treated as two separate entities because the BSA company, our colonial powers merged the two. What existed since 1911 until 1965 was one territory with a ‘loose federal system’ where the Litunga had special privileges at local government level like a “Supreme Council Chairperson” of Barotseland

Therefore, any reasonable discussion and meaningful demand must be anchored on these historic, legal and political facts. Anyone who comes to the table with a wrong notion that Barotseland can be separated from Zambia is both off side and must be red carded.

That is why, l believe that the Movement of the Restoration of Barotseland Agreement (MOREBA)is the best interest group and has the right agenda if any. But then, all stakeholders invited to this national dialogue on Barotseland needs to factor the basis as to why Kaunda signed it and why he immediately abolished it.

9. Conclusion

Generally, education fosters critical thinking, problem-solving abilities and enables one’s understanding in managing and improving various aspects of human life. No Zambian President will resolve the issue of Barotseland without relying on the wheels of education through scientific approaches outside politics.

This is the mistake President Hakainde Hichilema (HH) is making when he said “there is no state called Barotseland in Zambia but a province called Western province, Zambia is a unitary state “.

While he is correct, HH just like most past Zambian presidents is relying only on old heavy politics of state arrogance, government arbitrariness and authoritarian tendencies to address and resolve a bigger national mountainous fire that needs empirical scientific analysis, historical data, diplomatic engagements, legal reviews and political solutions.

He has the solution in his face. Let President HH review what the president who signed it in 1964 and violated the Barotseland Agreement in 1965/69, Dr Kenneth Kaunda said in 2012. Moreover, HH openly supported and agreed with Kaunda 12 years ago.

Let this president at once stop cheating, manipulating, abusing, intimidating, oppressing and bullying the Litunga and his people. Their demands needs honest political engagements, sober discussions, diplomatic relations and legal solutions because they have some reasonable basis. This is the hallmark of civilized leaders in all democratic countries.

Dr Chris ZUMANI Zimba is a Political Scientist, Researcher, Author & Consultant specialized in Comparative Global Governance and Democratic Theories. He holds a PhD, MA, BA and Cert in Political Science. Zimba was President Lungu’s Political Advisor from December 2019 to August 2021.


  1. Chris Zumani Zimba, was political advisor to ECL and found this issue unresolved so to say. He did not bring out what he is saying now.
    2 years, after UPND takes over power with HH in the seat and after being held in detention accused of the gassing saga, he finds it appropriate to talk about what KK said about the BA. Why now, what is the motive? In my opinion, he does not mean well. These are people wishing the down fall of the New dawn government. Why did he conceal this info from ECL.

  2. Zambia is not ready for such talking as at now, please let the Jayant Lion sleep mwebantu , give HH space to rule this country. You ruled this country and your time is up so learn to give chance to your fellow Zambians also to rule without disturbing them from executing their mandate well. One Zambia one nation , stop involving KK in your selfish motives , he is not there to defend himself. KK ruled this country for 27 years without even hearing this find of nonsense from any single Zambian, him he used to crush foolish people like you.kkkkkkkkk

  3. Is this guy and his people working on pulling the rag from under HH’s feet? Support the Barotseland Agreement and if it works out launch a Ngoniland Agreement, etc. In the end HH will have no real power or no country to run.

  4. Barotse activists raise the BA1964 issue with every new President of Zambia. They surely raised it with President Edgar Lungu. So wht did Lungu say to them?

  5. Chris. I hope you do not cheat your political science students with that fake history that the ngoni were the only ones with a standing army and were powerful. That is preposterous because the Bembas were the most powerful and most courageous ethnic group thanks to their disputes and physical in-fighting at succession after the death if the chiti mukulu “big tree” – there were no rules or favoured family dynasty owning political power. They were the first to acquire guns first from Portuguese slave traders from Zumbo and Feira then more guns from Swahili-Arab slave traders from the East coast of Africa which they used to capture slaves from the south among mostly the Mambwe, Lungu, Soli, Lenje, Tonga, the Lunda to the west, the bisa to their immediate south who were their subjects. This happened between the early1800s and 1850 when the ngoni arrived and contrary to your claims you ngonis, you did not retreat voluntarily from our several fights with you. Our guns were superior to the assegais and we defeated and humiliated you and Mpezeni abducted and ran away with chiti mukulu’s daughter hence the CHIMBUYA STARTED THERE. The other tribes like Tongas, Lenjes, Solis, Tumbukas etc call us thieves because – they are right though – we raided their lands for slaves with our guns and got their goats, cattle, women etc to feed our raiding armies since our land lacked valuable resources despite good rains, was tsetse fly infested and no men were available to do farming as they were busy fighting – we are a fighting tribe even today…we even fight as siblings with no proper love for each other. IT WILL NEVER BE EASY TO EVER HAVE A PURE BEMBA PRESIDENT IN ZAMBIA. We are fighters not leaders….I rest my case and I want any fellow bemba to challenge me here…

  6. The captured women were integrated into bemba wives and impure bemba children were born. This trend is happening today with several Bemba-Muzungu, Bemba-Tonga, Bemba-Lozi, Bemba-Lenje etc children all over the country. No province can claim there are no Bembas because of our adventurous nature. Other tribes have cross-breeds but not as many as Bembas. Both men and women not ethnic skittish and we integrate others easily like we did Kenneth Kaunda, late Sikota Wina was a fluent Bemba speaker too.

  7. Love it or hate it, there is one thing that the Litunga and his admistration should be held in awe and admiration. The management of land. The nonsense that is happening in other provinces involving greedy chiefs selling huge parcels of land to foreigners/investors resulting in displacement of people is not done, it is not entertained, and it is not tolerated. The Litunga and his officials always stand with the people on the question of land. That is real royalty. There is none like The Litunga.

  8. There we go again. Stirring up tribal drivel whilst the Chinese, Lebanese and Boers are reaping resources and externalizing all profits from this babazonke country

  9. When you write an article, please try by all means to distinguish between facts and opinions (or speculation), otherwise you will be deemed to advance a partisan agenda. Please note that it is NOT true that the non-Lozi speaking people are the majority in Barotseland. Silozi is a language spoken by all ethnic groups everywhere in Barotseland. In fact it is the only local language taught in schools in the province.

  10. There were no violent groups in the police riots of 2010. The police attacked people who were going to attend the meeting and later extended arrests to all men they came across. Please be factual.

  11. Total betrayal and evil mind. Chris has chosen to bring the Barotseland issue at to deliberately support it so that he can indirectly justify the Ngoni uprising. Why have you started mentioning the Ngon issue now? so that you can show that you have also kingdom to claim.
    You couldn’t advise ECL to honour Barotseland in your time and with your evil mind you tell HH to honour now why?
    I hope the desperation of PF are not funding anything evil.

  12. Abamano nabapwa pabalemba ilyashi mu nyushi. Ba Mmembe buwelewele fye, ba Sean zero Tembo nabo bene busali bwekabweka, ba Zumani Banda fyabushilu fye, ba Chintala Derrick Mbita bafunya fye ifyamuselu!

    Bonse aba ilyashi talipwa ukwabula ukubijamo HH.

    Iluse ine ukumona fimbula Mano lyonse efileleta ilyashi ilyabula amano!

  13. Zumani is even confusing us more because this long story he giving us is not the issue at hand and it’s not the information we need. To make matters worse, Zumani is bringing in anther kingdom called Ngoni kingdom, and tomorrow if someone says there is no nation called Ngoni land, he will be the first person to blame and condemn that person. These things are documented in history and are taught in schools. The history I learnt at school agrees that the amalgamation of the two nations was done in 1911 but they were not known as Northeastern Zambezi and Northwestern Zambezi. The correct history is that the two nations which were annexed were Northeastern and Northwestern Rhodesia to make one country called Northern Rhodesia on the north of Zambezi river. Then Northern Rhodesia and Southern Rhodesia on the south of Zambezi river were joined by Nyasaland to form the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland in 1953 and went on until 1963 when the Federation was disbanded. During all that period, Barotseland existed within the Northwestern part of Northern Rhodesia. According to the history we learnt, Barotseland territory had its capital in Mongu with the Litunga as its supreme ruler or king. Unless I have forgotten my history, Barotseland boundaries never reached Eastern Province or Muchinga escapement which Zumani has mentioned in his story. So this is where the bone of contention is because if false history is allowed in school syllabus, it can greatly mislead the people. I say so because this information we have is from the history we were taught at school and at times you can be blaming us and yet it’s not our fault. For example, at school we learnt that the source of Zambezi river is at Kalene Hills but that information is not true. Zambezi source is half way between Mwinlunga and Kalene Hills along the Congo DR and Zambia border. So the truth of the matter is that the history we were taught was that, after Independence, the country known as Northern Rhodesia ceased to exist and to date, we don’t have a country called Northern Rhodesia. In the same vein, we were taught that about 5 months prior to Independence, the Barotseland Nation which existed within the Northwestern part of Northern Rhodesia went into a voluntary Agreement with the Zambian Government to have the Barotseland Nation as part of the newly Independent united Zambia. This implied that Zambia now became one nation under the burner of ONE ZAMBIA ONE NATION and these words are there embedded in our Coat of Arms backed by the NATIONAL ANTHEM. We were taught that immediately the Barotseland Agreement was signed, the Barotseland ceased to exist as a nation and as young learners, we were convinced and it made a lot of sense to us, otherwise the slogan of one Zambia one Nation could have been meaningless if we still had two nations. And since 1964, we have been singing our National Anthem, for example, the third stanza says; one land and one nation is our cry, dignity and peace Neath Zambia’s sky. Definitely these words in this song do not in any way suggest that we have another country called Barotseland which exists within Zambia. If that question was thrown to me, I would answer it in the same way the President answered it because that is what history says and that’s what I know. So people should not try to politicize the issue, the President gave the right answer because answering it in any other way would be contradictory to our moto of one Zambia one Nation. Actually those people who are blaming him should be ashamed because that question was more of testing him than seeking his opinion on the matter.
    What is the way forward then? In my opinion, the best way to handle this issue and resolve it once and for all; we need to be told the conditions of the Barotseland Agreement, the actual terms and conditions which the two parties signed for. Is there some information which the Zambian Government doesn’t want us to know?
    If the conditions say that Barotseland would remain as an autonomous nation within the nation of Independent Zambia, then we should know that information and we shall know that we have been fed with wrong or false history and the Zambian Government indeed abrogated the Agreement.
    We should also know the BA boundaries of the Barotseland because Western Province is not in the Agreement, it came much later. We also want to know if the BA was legally bound because it can be much easier to resolve the contentious issues through the Courts of law.
    So instead of the blame game, finger pointing, insulting, the two parties need to sit together and make corrections where the Agreement could have been violated so that we resolve this issue and put it behind us. Imagine, the President was only two years old when the BA was signed and 59 years down the line we are still talking about the same issue. Instead of blaming the President, maybe it’s history which needs to be corrected.

  14. Zumani and shuwa2 both MCU PhD conquests of fuledi championing stupidity clearly thinking from their behinds. Somehow now they’re wise to talk om BA64 when 10yrs of managing the country in their pfools the couldn’t think!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here