Connect with us

news

THE MENTION OF THE NAME, PERE OF OLODIAMA CLAN, EVOKES UGLY MEMORIES

Published

on

        In 1986, one Timothy Ofunama, issued a statement saying that Gelegele belonged to Ijaw and that the Oba of Benin had no jurisdiction over it in the welcome address I presented when Omo N’Oba Ewuare II visited Obazuwa on January 28, I enumerated some of the provocative acts of the Ijaws. We wish to state some of them here again.

        In 1985, Philips Oil Company established business in Ughoton. It built a Flow Station in Gelegele. Ijaw fishermen, who lived in stilt-houses around the swamps, came out and began to supply labour to the company. Many of the Benin youths in Ughoton and Gelegele had left the villages in search of a better life in the City. When they heard of the new company and the job opportunities if offered, they returned home to seek employment. The Ijaws were not happy at their return. They feared they would displace them (the Ijaws) in competition for jobs. Suddenly, they attacked the returnees. The attack was so violent and widespread that the government setup an administrative panel, headed by Mr. S. Jamgbadi, a Senior District Officer, to look into it. Part of the panel’s report reads:

“… it is however established that the Ijaws have been resident in Gelegele for many years and that during these years they have acquired landed property and cultivate farms but from the facts in evidence they qualify as TENANTS on the land  their long period of occupation notwithstanding…”

        The Ijaws were not done yet with agitation. They agitated again, the same year, against Philips Company itself. The cause of the agitation was that the company also gave employment to non-Iyaw persons. Government again set up an inquiry to look into the crisis. Part of the panel’s report reads:

“… The inquiry further revealed that the claims by the Ijaws to the monopoly of employment provided by the oil company are not only unpatriotic but also preposterous. The Ijaws have no right whatsoever to prevent the oil company from employing persons of their choice; they should stop threatening the oil company from employing other persons who are not Ijaw…”

        On Thursday, November 20, 1986, as said earlier, Timothy Ofunama, in the publication in the Nigerian Observer said that Gelegele belonged to Ijaw and that the Oba of Benin had no jurisdiction over it. The government reacted to the publication through a press statement issued by the Honourable Commissioner for Local Government, Engr. Enoch Ejofodomi. I reproduce the statement here in full.

1.     My attention has been drawn to a publication at page 4 of the Nigerian Observer Newspaper of Thursday, 20th November, 1986 titled “Public Notice” and credited to one Timothy Ofunama who styled himself as the “Ama-Okosuwei of Gelegele”. In which he gave the impression that the traditional administration of Gelegele was under the “Pere of Olodiama Clan” and other Ijaw Chiefs in Ovia Local Government Area of Bendel State.

2.     From records available in my Ministry, there is no chieftaincy title known as the “Pere of Olodiama Clan” in Ovia Local Government Area. Also there are no chieftaincy titles known as “Ama-Okosuwei of Gelegele” and “Amanana-Owei of Gelegele”, as claimed in the above mentioned publication. In this regards the Government couldn’t have appointed anybody to these non-existent chieftaincy stools.

3.     The author of the above mentioned vexations publication also gave the impression that the Oba of  Benin has no right to confer the chieftaincy title of “Okao of Gelegele” on Chief I. Iyonmahari and that Gelegele and some other Ijaw towns in Ovia Local Government Area are not under the jurisdiction of the Oba of Benin. In this regard, my Ministry wants to make it abundantly clear that the Oba of Benin who is the traditional paramount ruler in Benin kingdom is the Prescribed Authority for Oredo, Orhionmwon and Ovia Local Government Areas by virtues of Bendel State Legal Notice 44 of 1979 published in the Bendel State Legal Notice 44 of 1979 published in the Bendel State of Nigeria Extraordinary Gazette No. 51. Vol. 16 of 28th, September, 1979; He therefore acted within his constitutional powers: as the prescribed Authority for the area ‘when he appointed Chief I. Iyonmahan as the Okao of Gelegele. It is also pertinent to point out that Gelegele in Ovia Local Government Area is part and parcel of Bini land under the jurisdiction of the Oba of Benin having regard to the judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria delivered on 11th August, 1983 which made it clear that the land known as Gelegele belongs to the Binis.

4.     In the light of the foregoing, Government sews the action of Timothy Ofunama who calls himself the “Ama-Okosuwei of Gelegele” as an attempt to incite the law abiding Ijaw citizens in Gelegele against their host as capable of causing serious disaffection among the entire community in that part of Ovia Local Government Area. I want to stress that Government will not tolerate that state of affairs which is capable of jeopardizing the peace, order and good government in the area.

5.     For the purpose of clarification, it is considered necessary to inform the general public that it is not only contemptuous to reopen an issue on which the Supreme Court had already delivered judgment but that it is also unlawful for anyone to call himself a chief or allow himself to be so called or addressed if he has not been conferred with a chieftaincy title by a competent authority and has not been registered by the Ministry of Local Government as a Chief.

6.     Finally, I want to warn that all those who are party to the aforementioned publication should desist forthwith from parading themselves either as traditional rulers or as traditional chiefs as the penalty for their actions under Sections 20 and 26 of the Traditional Rulers and Chiefs Law, 1979 is imprisonment for six months and two years respectively without an option of a fine.

(Engr. Enoch Ejofodomi)

Commissioner for Local Government

Ministry of Local Government

Benin City.

10th December 1986

        The Ijaws still claim ownership of Gelegele. Yet, the question of who owns Gelegele had gone through litigation and had long been settled.

        At the High Court of Justice, Benin, in suit B/44/1970, Judgment was delivered in favour of Benins by Honourable Justice Ekeruche on December 22, 1978. Part of the judgment reacts.

        “…finally, I enter judgment in this case as follows: for the avoidance of all doubts, argument or controversy, I hear say unequivocally, that Gelegele village and its environs and bushes are Benin land. They do not belong to the Ijaws of Gelegele as owners. The Ijaws are tenants of His Highness Akenzua II the Oba of Benin. Apart from above, the plaintiffs’ claims are dismissed in their entirety”.

Dissatisfied with the judgment, the Ijaws went to the Court of Appeal, Benin. The court dismissed their appeal and delivered judgment in favour of Benin. The lead judgment was read by Honourable Justice Abdul Ganiyu Agbaje on December 16, 1981.

Still on satisfied, they headed for the Supreme Court. In Suit SC. 131/1/1982, Honourable Justice, Muhamadu Lawani Uwais (CJN) and four (4) others, on August 19, 1983 also dismisses their appeal and up-held the judgment of the lower courts. The CJN concluded thus:

“… For three reasons I am of the opinion that the appellants’ argument in support of the sole ground of appeal should be discountenanced. The appeal therefore fails and it is dismissed with N300.00 costs to the respondents. The decision of the Federal Court of Appeal is affirmed…”

The Supreme Court awarded costs against the Ijaws. Despite these judgments, the various reports and government statements, the Ijaws still claim ownership of Gelegele!

In 1987, they attacked Benin indigenes in Iko and Isekiri and Urhobo settlers there. They destroyed the Ogua-edion in Iko, they moved up-hill, to Ikonoke and unleashed mayhem. Benin indigenes in Ikonoke and in Ikonugboghodo fled, giving room to the Ijaws to entrench themselves in both places. At that time and up till the early 90s, one Pa Igbinosun, a Benin man, was the Odionwere of Iko, they have forayed into Agbomoba, Ozomu, Igbobi, Ekete, Ite, Orogo, Ewudu, Abiala, Eki-ohuan (now known as Ekewan), Okomu and Gelegele. They maim the Benin people in these communities and destroy their properties.

In June 2011, we, offered a parcel of land to Edo State government for the erection of a model school block. The Government sent a team led by the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education, then Mrs. Idaho is now the Head of Service. In anticipation of the inspection, we directed Obazuwa boys to demarcate the plot. As the boys were measuring it, Ijaws militants descended on them with machetes, guns, and clubs. Without any provocation, they brutalized the boys and abducted two of them. Obazuwa boys were unnamed and defenseless.

We sent an S.O.S to the Governor who directed his Chief of Staff, then Barr. Osarodion Ogie, to take up the matter with the Commissioner of Police. The Police Commissioner promptly dispatched a team of policemen from Evbotubu Police Station to rescue the abducted boys. He sent another team from SARS to arrest the militants who brutalized the boys, destroyed their motorcycles and a car. Those arrested were charged to Okada Magistrate’s Court where the case is still pending up till now.

In order to strengthen their claim of ownership of Gelegele, they have now coined names, Gelegelegbene and Gelegele-ama. These names are new. In all their previous write-ups and the dispatches by early European visitors. Gelegele had always been known and spelt as Gelegele. The use of Gelegelegbene and Gelegele-ama which they have only recently coined is ludicrous and intellectually dishonest.

Our people got judgment in the Supreme Court 34 years ago. Now they want to claim their judgment right. Those who were driven away from their homeland, Abiala, and Ikon’oke, want to return home. They want to erect a house in Gelegele for the Okao of Gelegele who was installed there by the Oba of Benin.

The Edo State Ijaws are bellicose, belligerent, militant, quarrelsome and unfriendly. They are fighting the Itsekiris in Warri; they are fighting the Urhobos, the Ibibios and the Ilajes. They are claiming land whereas they traditionally live in swamps along the coastal areas in houses they build on stilts.

The so-called Beni-Ebe, Toru-Ebe Kengama and Abadi States which they requested the Senate to create for them in 2009, traverses the whole of the Nigerian coastline, encroaching of Benin, Ibibio, Ilaje and Itsekiri territories.

We plead for your support in curbing the Ijaw aggressiveness and in enforcing the Supreme Court Judgment for which the Ijaws have rudely insulted the highest court in the Country, Honourable Justice, and the Chief Justice of Nigeria whom they contemptuously described as fraudulent.

This press statement was endorsed by HRH Prince Edun Akenzua, MFR, FNGE, Ogie-Obazuwa and six other Enigie for on behalf of 48 communities in the affected areas in the Benin Kingdom.

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

news

Update : UK Lauds Nigeria’s Recovery Under Tinubu, Urges Others to Learn

Published

on

The United Kingdom (UK) has commended the economic reforms being implemented by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration, describing Nigeria’s ongoing recovery as a success story that other countries can draw inspiration from.

The UK National Security Adviser, Jonathan Powell, made the remarks on Tuesday at the opening of the 4th UK-Nigeria Security and Defence Partnership Dialogue, held at Nigeria’s Office of the National Security Adviser in Abuja.

Powell said the reforms had required difficult decisions but were beginning to yield tangible results in economic growth and recovery.

“The economic reforms undertaken by the government have not been easy, but the remarkable progress Nigeria is making today in terms of growth and economic recovery demonstrates that difficult decisions can produce significant results. It is a success story from which many can draw inspiration,” he said.

The UK official described Nigeria as an “African superpower” whose influence and strategic importance would continue to grow as its population, capabilities and economic strength expand.

“For the United Kingdom, Nigeria is a vital partner—our foremost partner in Africa. Nigeria is an African superpower, a nation that is already influential and one whose importance will continue to grow,” he said.

According to Powell, the UK has strong confidence in Nigeria’s future and remains committed to deepening bilateral relations through a partnership founded on mutual respect, shared objectives and practical outcomes.

“We want that relationship to be a mature and equal partnership, one in which we share strategic objectives and work together to deliver tangible outcomes.

“We have immense respect for Nigeria’s leadership role within the country, across the region and throughout Africa, and we are committed to supporting that leadership,” he added.

Powell also acknowledged the professionalism and dedication of Nigeria’s security services in addressing the country’s security challenges, stressing that Nigeria remains indispensable to regional stability and collective security.

“Nigeria remains central and indispensable to regional stability and collective security. There is simply no substitute for Nigeria’s role in promoting peace and stability across West Africa and beyond,” he said.

He expressed satisfaction with the continued success of the UK-Nigeria Security and Defence Partnership Dialogue, describing it as a cornerstone of the two countries’ growing security cooperation.

Continue Reading

news

El-Rufai Confesses to Intercepting NSA Communications

Published

on

A Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday heard that former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai admitted, in a television interview, that he intercepted the phone conversations of the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu.

The second prosecution witness in El-Rufai’s ongoing trial, Deji Adeyanju, told the court that he was at the same television station, awaiting his turn to be interviewed on February 16, the day El-Rufai allegedly made the administration on the same station.

Led in evidence by the prosecution’s lawyer, Oluwole Aladedoye (SAN), the witness quoted El-Rufai as saying in the course of the television interview: “We listened to the conversations of the NSA.”

El-Rufai is being prosecuted by the Department of State Services (DSS) over his alleged contravention of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment Act (2024) and the Nigerian Communications Act (2003) following his alleged interception of Ribadu’s phone conversations and compromising public safety, national security and instilling reasonable apprehension of insecurity among Nigerians.

Adeyanju, a subpoenaed witness, said he knew El-Rufai as a former governor of Kaduna State, adding that he issued a statement following reports that the former governor was to be arrested by security operatives.

Shortly after the television interview in which El-Rufai featured was played in the open court, Adeyanju confirmed it to be the one he saw in which the ex-governor allegedly admitted to the act.

Aladedoye also tendered a video recording of the interview featuring Adeyanju, which the court admitted.

Adeyanju said the DSS invited him after television interview and was asked to explain what happened while he was at the television studio.

The witness said he told investigators that he was present when El-Rufai made the statements on air and that when pressed further, in the course of the interview, the ex-governor said someone did the phone tapping and passed the information to him.

During cross-examination by El-Rufai’s lawyer, Paul Erokoro (SAN), Adeyanju said he did not hear El-Rufai specifically say he hacked Ribadu’s phone lines but that he heard him say, “We listened to the conversations of the NSA.”

When asked whether or not he knew the means through which the NSA makes calls and if he would be surprised to learn that DSS investigators did not ask the NSA which of his devices was allegedly compromised, the witness said those were not his business.

The prosecution tendered an official gazette without objection from the defence. Following this, the court admitted it in evidence.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik has adjourned further hearing till today.

El-Rufai is facing a three-count charge.

* That you, Mallam Nasir El Rufai, adult, male, on February 13, 2026, while appearing as a guest on Arise TV station’s “Prime Time” programme in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this court, did admit during the interview that you and your cohorts unlawfully intercepted the phone communications of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 12(1) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment, Act, 2024.

* That you, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, adult, male, on February 13, 2026, while appearing as a guest on Arise TV station’s “Prime Time” programme in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this court, did state during the interview that you know and relate with certain individual, who unlawfully intercepted the phone communications of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, without reporting the said individual to relevant security agencies and thereby committed an offence, contrary to and punishable under Section 27 (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment, Act, 2024.

* That you, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, adult, male, and other still at large, sometime in 2026, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this court, with others still at large did use technical equipment or systems which compromised public safety, national security and instilling reasonable apprehension of insecurity among Nigerians by unlawfully intercepting the phone communications of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, to which you admitted during an interview on February 13, 2026, on Arise TV station’s “Prime Time” programme in Abuja and thereby committed an offence, contrary to and punishable under Section 131(2) Nigerian Communications Act 2003.

Continue Reading

news

Major Legal Blow as Court Orders Deregistration of ADC, Accord, Three Other Parties

Published

on

The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and four other political parties.

The other political parties the court directed the electoral body to deregister are the Action Peoples Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), Accord Party (AP), and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP).

The court order followed a judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu.

The National Forum of Former Legislators had, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, prayed the court to determine whether INEC has a constitutional obligation to remove political parties that fail to meet the electoral performance thresholds set out in Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), as reinforced by the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC’s regulations.

It was the position of the plaintiff that the five political parties listed as defendants in the matter had persistently failed to meet the constitutional benchmarks required to retain their registration.

The former legislators stressed that the requirements include winning at least 25 per cent of votes in a state during a presidential election or securing at least one elective seat at the national, state, or local government level.

They told the court that the ADC and the four other parties performed poorly in both the 2023 general elections and by-elections conducted by INEC, thereby failing to win seats across key tiers of government.

The litigants insisted that the continued existence of the ADC and the other defendants as recognised political parties is unlawful and undermines the integrity of the country’s electoral system.

Among other reliefs, the plaintiff urged the court to declare that INEC is duty-bound to deregister such parties.

It further urged the court to compel the commission to deregister the five political parties before preparations for the 2027 elections advance further.

Beyond declaratory reliefs, the plaintiff prayed the court to restrain the five affected parties from participating in general elections or engaging in political activities such as campaigns, rallies, and primaries.

It also sought a court injunction restraining INEC from recognising or dealing with the parties in any official capacity unless and until they strictly comply with constitutional provisions.

The judgment may affect the chances of candidates of the affected political parties, including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, to contest the 2027 presidential poll.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025 Newsthumb Magazine | All rights reserved