Group Makes Rebuttal To Publication Made By Itsekiri Historical Front, Says The Great Lies Of Warri Will Be Exposed -

By Uche Alvin

THE GREAT LIES OF WARRI EXPOSED: A REBUTTAL TO THE DECEITFUL ITSEKIRI HISTORICAL FRONT

Issued by: Ijaw Stakeholders of Warri Federal Constituency
Date: July 13, 2025

Let it be made abundantly clear: the Itsekiri Historical Front’s rejoinder dated July 13, 2025, is a glaring act of historical distortion, an insidious and desperate attempt to falsify facts, suppress indigenous truth and drown the legitimate voices of the true aboriginal people of Warri, the Ijaws in a flood of colonial fiction and legal manipulation.

The so-called Itsekiri crown rests on manufactured myths, propped up by colonial favoritism and sustained by systemic injustice. This rebuttal is not just a correction, it is a declaration of historical and legal truth: unfiltered, unapologetic and unrelenting.

OPC INTERVENTION & THE FALSE “YORUBOID” CONNECTION

The Itsekiri Historical Front’s justification for OPC’s involvement, citing a “shared Yoruboid linguistic and cultural heritage,” is a tragicomic distortion.

The Itsekiri are not Yoruba, even their own scholars affirm this.

J.O.S. Ayomike in Defenders of the Realm (1982) wrote:

“While there are Yoruba influences in the court of the Olu, Itsekiri identity is distinct and has evolved separately for centuries.”

Prof. Eghosa Osaghae, in Federalism and Ethnic Conflict in Nigeria, stated:

“The Itsekiri speak a Yoruboid language but their political identity is not Yoruba. Attempts to align them with Yoruba nationalist goals are a post-independence political invention.”

The OPC’s intrusion is therefore an opportunistic alliance, an act of external aggression designed to intimidate minority groups. We recall the bloodshed of 1997. We say it again: Stay away from Warri and it environs.

THE INEC DELINEATION: EXPOSING THE “10 WARDS” LIE

The Itsekiris’ obsession with the so-called “original 10-ward structure” in Warri South LGA (as referenced in FHC/B/109/97) is legally bankrupt.

The Supreme Court ruling in SC/413/2016 did not mandate a return to 10 wards. Rather, it directed INEC to review delineations in line with population, inclusivity, and equity. That is exactly what INEC has done.

The 12-ward structure is both legal and democratic, reflecting the overwhelming Ijaw and Urhobo majority, as evidenced by PVC registration statistics and national census data.

We ask:

Why should a minority Itsekiri group dominate Warri South-West LGA politically?

Why have Ijaw-dominated Gbaramatu and Ogbe-Ijoh Kingdoms been denied LGAs despite larger populations and greater landmass?

Answer: Colonial favoritism, not justice.

THE MYTH OF “OLU GINUWA” & STOLEN LANDS

The Olu of Warri was never the original title of the Itsekiri people.

They arrived as settlers in the 15th century, led by Olu Ginuwa I, a Benin prince in exile, not an indigenous founder. Prior to their arrival, Ijaw and Urhobo communities thrived along the Forcados, Escravos and Warri rivers.

1925 Intelligence Report (Major H.F. Marshall) stated:

“The Ijo and Urhobo tribes are the dominant ethnic groups in the creeks and uplands around Warri, having occupied the lands from time immemorial.”

COURT CASES & THE TRUE LEGAL POSITION

Ijaw Victories in Court

SPDC v. Otoko & Ors (1990) 6 NWLR (Pt. 159) 693

Outcome: Supreme Court upheld Ijaw possessory rights.

Quote: “Possession in law is as good as ownership unless the contrary is proved.”

FHC/WR/CS/38/99 – Gbaramatu Ijaws v. Chevron & FG

Outcome: Chevron was ordered to negotiate directly with Ijaw owners, not Itsekiri middlemen.

Ijaw v. Mobil Producing Nigeria (2002) – FHC/UY/CS/3/2002

Quote: “Customary title and long occupation matter more than colonial overlordship.”

Gbaramatu v. Agip & Ors

Multiple suits affirming Ijaw direct ownership of oil-bearing lands.

Ekeremor Zion v. Itsekiri Land Trustees (W/148/56)

Though withdrawn under pressure, later rulings affirmed Ijaw land compensation rights.

Colonial-Era Itsekiri Cases Debunked

Ogegede v. Dore Numa (1925) and Ometan v. Dore Numa (1926)

These were not about Ijaw lands. They validated colonial leases, not native law and custom.

Dr. J.P. Mackintosh (1944):

“Courts affirmed titles based on colonial convenience, not on occupation or lineage.”

Chief Apoh v. Perememighan (1928)

Based on hearsay, lacking ethnographic verification.

SC/328/1972 – Itsekiri Land Trustees v. Warri Div. Planning Authority

Concerned Warri Township only, not Ijaw ancestral territories.

FAKE ROYALTY: THE FRAUD OF THE “OLU OF WARRI” TITLE

The title “Olu of Warri” is a colonial fraud. It was unilaterally changed in 1952 from “Olu of Itsekiri” without multi-ethnic consent.

Hansard, Western House of Assembly, 1956 (pp. 287–291):

“We must not allow one ethnic group to use an artificial royal title to claim ownership over multi-ethnic Warri.”

Ijaw and Urhobo leaders opposed and continue to reject this title.

POPULATION: TRUTH VS. PROPAGANDA

The Itsekiris do not have the numbers to back their claims.

1921, 1952, 1963, 1991 censuses: Ijaws vastly outnumbered the Itsekiris.

INEC PVC Records (2011–2023): Ijaws constitute over 68% of voters in Warri South-West.

The Itsekiris have inflated their population through colonial manipulation but numbers don’t lie. We welcome a referendum anytime.

ODE-ITSEKIRI: IJAW LAND MASQUERADING AS “CAPITAL”

The claim that Ode-Itsekiri is the ancient capital without ijaw trace Ijaw ownership is a laughable myth. The land is Ijaw by ancestry, occupation and historical record.

Rev. A. Clarke (1843):

“The Itsekiris dwell near Ijo villages and rely on their navigation. They are not numerous and are guests in many of these communities.”

1894 British Naval Charts mark Ijaw settlements around the Warri River and Ode-Itsekiri long before any Itsekiri palace existed.

WE ARE THE LAND, WE ARE WARRI

Who lives on the land? The Ijaws and Urhobos.
Who own the oilfields? The Ijaws.
Who are the natives? The Ijaws.
Who collaborated with colonialists for power? The Itsekiris.

We fed you. Sheltered you. Protected you.