RE: “We Are Not Tenants—We Are the Ancestral Landowners Of Warri Long Before The Arrival Of The Itsekiri”__

By Uche Alvin

OPEN LETTER TO THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY IN RESPONSE TO THE ITSEKIRI PUBLICATION DECLARING IJAW AND URHOBO AS “TENANTS” IN WARRI

RE: “We Are Not Tenants—We Are the Ancestral Landowners of Warri Long Before the Arrival of the Itsekiri”

Date: July 31, 2025
From: Ijaw Stakeholders of Warri Federal Constituency
To: Global Whisper, Nigerian Government, INEC, National Security Agencies, ECOWAS, AU, United Nations, Nigerian Citizens

INTRODUCTION: WHEN AN OCCUPIER CALLS THE OWNER A TENANT, HISTORY MUST SPEAK

We write with righteous rage and historical resolve in response to the arrogant and falsehood-laden publication titled “Concerned Itsekiri stakeholders of Warri Kingdom to the Ijaws and Urhobo residents in Warri: You are Tenants” a publication that reeks of entitlement, colonial fraud, and revisionist desperation.

Let the world take note: This lie will not go unanswered. If the goal of the Itsekiri elite is to provoke conflict, erase ancestral truths and insult our peoples under the banner of press releases, then let it be known, we shall meet them not with propaganda but with documented facts, legal victories and historical declarations that even their colonial patrons could not erase.

YOU CALL US TENANTS? THEN SHOW US THE LANDLORD’S TITLE

To call the Ijaw and Urhobo peoples “tenants” in Warri is not just reckless, it is intellectually bankrupt, historically dishonest and legally indefensible. You throw around the insult of “tenants” as though it were an incantation, hoping that repetition will make it real. But truth does not bow to propaganda. If we are tenants, then who is the landlord? Produce the evidence. Show us the land title, not from your palace tales, but from legal archives and historical records.

Where is the Itsekiri Olu’s documented land ownership over Ogbe-Ijoh, Gbaramatu, Isaba, Egbema, Okerenkoko, Agbassa etc? These are not abstract names. These are living, breathing territories with histories and peoples. We challenge you, present a single land title, colonial record or precolonial documentation where the Olu of Warri or any Itsekiri chief was recognized as the owner of these lands.

But we already know the answer. You have none.

Because the truth is this: from the very beginning, these lands have been Ijaw and Urhobo territories. Every land lease signed with the British from the 1890s to the 1950s named Ijaw and Urhobo chiefs as the landlords. In National Archives Lagos, CSO 26/Vol. 6/08549, the records speak: “In all the Itsekiri–Ijaw land leases signed from the 1890s onward, the landlords were Ijaws, not Itsekiris.” The colonial officers were not deceived by your pretensions. They dealt directly with the people who occupied, cultivated and governed the land because only they had the legitimate authority to do so.

Let us ask plainly: which Itsekiri family lives in Benikrukru, Azama, Kurutie or Oporoza? The answer is none. These are Ijaw communities, founded and inhabited by Ijaw people for centuries. British Intelligence Report, 1932 (CO 554/122/6) states clearly: “Gbaramatu and its surrounding creek communities are populated by Ijaw clans who have occupied the area before the arrival of Portuguese trade.” This was over 500 years ago, long before your monarch took a foreign name and borrowed crown.

Legally, your fantasy collapses even faster. The courts have ruled again and again that your claims to these lands are baseless. In Shell v. Tiebo VII (1996) 4 NWLR (Pt. 445) 657, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ijaw communities in Escravos, declaring them the rightful owners, not the Itsekiris. In Ojakovo v. Ajomiwe (1961), Urhobo ownership of Okere was affirmed while Itsekiri claims were thrown out. Chief E.E. Sillo & Ors v. Military Governor of Mid-Western State (1973) dismissed Itsekiri claims over Ogbe-Ijoh land. And in Timinimi v. INEC (SC/CV/1033/2023), Nigeria’s apex court recognized that the Ijaws were politically shortchanged in Warri, confirming what the people have long known: that our numbers, our territories, and our rights have been trampled by a fraudulent structure designed to benefit a loud minority.

These are not mere opinions. These are judgments of courts of competent jurisdiction. Your own courts. Your own suits. And you lost.

If you were truly landowners, why did colonial officers and British corporations lease land from Ijaw and Urhobo chiefs? In 1923, land use agreements in Ogbe-Ijoh and Gbaramatu were signed with Ijaw leaders, not the Olu. In 1937, Chevron’s predecessor signed tenancy leases in Benikrukru and Oporoza with Ijaw landlords. Not a single Itsekiri name appeared on the documents. The Royal Niger Company, long before your claims were invented, recognized Urhobo chiefs in Agbassa and Okere as rightful custodians.

In Governor’s Dispatch to London, 1938 (CO 554/124/3), the British administration warned:

“It is inappropriate to assign control of Ijaw-inhabited lands to the Jekris (Itsekiris), as they hold no customary rights over said territories.”

Even your colonial sponsors who propped up your monarchy for political convenience refused to grant you ownership of lands you never possessed. They may have given you titles, but they did not give you territory. Because you never owned it.

So again we ask, where is the landlord’s title? Show us. Don’t scream “tenants” like a broken record, bring the deeds, bring the maps, bring the court rulings. You cannot, because you built your house on lies and manipulations. And now the truth is breaking the walls down.

POLITICAL INTERFERENCE IN WARRI DELINEATION IS REAL — OLUREMI TINUBU AND DAISY DANJUMA CANNOT HIDE BEHIND TITLES

Let no one be deceived. The Warri ward delineation crisis is not just a bureaucratic delay, it is a politically engineered suppression of truth and justice. And those behind it are not ghosts. They are living, powerful women hiding behind the respectability of their titles: Senator Oluremi Tinubu and Mrs. Daisy Danjuma.

To suggest that these women are uninvolved is not only laughable, it is an insult to public intelligence. No, they are not INEC commissioners. But yes, they are deeply entrenched in the Itsekiri elite structure and are pulling strings from the comfort of Aso Rock parlors and Banana Island lounges.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) initiated a lawful delineation process based on a Supreme Court judgment — SC/CV/1033/2023, Timinimi v. INEC. That ruling compelled the commission to correct decades of injustice and imbalance, particularly in Warri Federal Constituency, where the Ijaw and Urhobo majority have been politically muzzled in their own lands. INEC complied initially, conducting field assessments and engaging local stakeholders.

Then suddenly — silence.

What happened?

Internal memos within INEC dated late 2024 speak of “stakeholder pressure from the Presidency.” Let us not pretend we don’t know who that means. Oluremi Tinubu is not just the First Lady, she is an Itsekiri daughter. And like Daisy Danjuma, her allegiance to that ethnic agenda is not hidden. They are the same forces who have, time and again, manipulated the federal apparatus to protect the numerical minority and suffocate the indigenous majority.

Daisy Danjuma, herself a former senator and wife of retired General T.Y. Danjuma, has held multiple private meetings with INEC leadership. She has made calls, lobbied officials and applied pressure to stop the delineation from being finalized. The reason? Because the truth on paper does not favor the falsehood she has spent decades protecting. It does not favor the outdated fantasy of Itsekiri dominance.

As reported by Premium Times on March 3, 2024:

“INEC’s Warri delineation stalls as high-profile stakeholders intervene.

Who are these “high-profile stakeholders”? The same cabal that has, since 1997, used wives of military generals and top politicians to twist the fate of Warri. It was this same elite Itsekiri lobby, hiding behind thees women, that pushed the infamous relocation of the Warri South-West LGA headquarters, triggering bloodshed and ethnic violence. So don’t tell us they are mere observers. We have seen this movie before.

Influence does not require a formal office. A phone call from the First Lady’s quarters carries more weight than ten INEC commissioners. A whisper from Daisy Danjuma reaches farther than any public press release. And they know it.

This is why the truth is being buried. This is why the delineation report is sitting in limbo. Because justice, when it favors the oppressed, becomes a threat to the powerful.

But we will not be silenced.

We will not sit back while the will of the people is strangled behind velvet curtains. We will not allow the ghost of 1997 to return under the perfume of influence and political nepotism. The same script of oppression, masked in decorum, must not repeat itself. We see through the charade. We name it. And we reject it.

Let the world hear us: Warri is not a private estate of the Itsekiri elite. And justice delayed will not be justice denied.

THE CROWN OF DECEIT: YOUR “OLU OF WARRI” IS A POST-1948 FRAUD, NOT A 1480 MONARCHY

You claim your monarchy dates back to 1480? That is not history, it is historical comedy of the highest order. The myth of an “Olu of Warri” reigning since the 15th century is nothing more than a carefully packaged lie repeated so often that its believers now mistake it for fact. But no amount of regalia or pageantry can rewrite documented history. The truth is bitter but simple: there was no “Olu of Warri” before 1936.

Until then, your tribal ruler was known as the Olu of Itsekiri, a local chief among a small merchant class along the coast. It was only when the British colonial authorities, in their usual divide-and-rule fashion, imposed the broader title of “Olu of Warri” that the deception began. They pressured your leadership to adopt the new name not out of reverence, but out of strategic manipulation to control the dominant Ijaw and Urhobo populations of Warri who never recognized your rule.

As stated in the Colonial Office Record CO 554/120/5:

“The title ‘Olu of Warri’ is a recent invention and has caused considerable unrest among the Ijoh and Urhobo populations who were not subjects of the Olu.”

What does that tell you? Your so-called monarchy was rebranded by foreigners for colonial convenience, not ancestral continuity. So what exactly are you celebrating? A borrowed crown? A fabricated throne imposed on unwilling neighbors? You are not heirs to ancient kingship, you are beneficiaries of British puppetry. That’s the real origin of your so-called monarchy: not 1480, but 1936 and solidified in 1952 when your “Warri” kingship was codified under the Western Region’s manipulative chieftaincy laws.

And now, let’s unmask your founding fable, the story of Ginuwa.

You say Ginuwa was a founder. That is another tall tale, bloated by myth and emptied of truth. Ginuwa was not a conqueror or a king. He was a fugitive, a Benin prince exiled from his father’s palace, who wandered into Ijaw and Urhobo lands as a stranger. He did not establish a kingdom, he sought refuge. And that refuge was given to him by Ijaw communities who welcomed him with the dignity owed to a guest, not the submission owed to a ruler. He came as a tenant and generations later, his descendants have now turned around to claim the landlord’s chair.

Is this not historical fraud? You build your entire monarchy on the hospitality of the Ijaw, then turn around to call them your subjects?

Let the records speak again.

Prof. Philip Igbafe in Benin Under British Administration (1979) writes: “The Olu was never sovereign over Warri as a whole. His authority was limited to a section of the Itsekiri community.”

That means the Olu’s rule was never recognized beyond Itsekiri settlements. He had zero legitimate jurisdiction over Ijaw kingdoms or Urhobo towns. Every colonial map, every chieftaincy report, and every court document confirms it. The British knew this. The courts affirmed it. The people lived it. The only ones still denying it are those clinging to a crown stitched together by fiction and foreign intervention.

So stop pretending that the Olu ruled over Warri as some great monarch of a multi-ethnic kingdom. He never did. He never could. And he never will. That fantasy exists only in Itsekiri press statements and doctored Wikipedia pages. The Ijaw never bowed to the Olu. The Urhobo never owed him tribute. His authority ended where your Itsekiri settlements ended and even that was often contested.

THE SUPREME COURT SPOKE FOR JUSTICE — STOP TWISTING THE RULING

The claim that the Supreme Court’s judgment in SC/CV/1033/2023 – Timimini v. INEC is not an “ethnic weapon” is a cowardly and dishonest attempt to defend a system of Itsekiri political domination built on colonial fraud and demographic injustice. Let’s be absolutely clear: the Court did not create new facts, it simply ordered INEC to obey the Constitution and complete a ward delineation process that had been shamefully delayed since 1996.

The Supreme Court exposed the truth, that INEC’s failure to act violated the political rights of the Ijaw and Urhobo people of Warri South-West. The judgment didn’t assign land, redraw kingdoms, or alter ethnic identities. What it did was highlight the injustice of a scenario where a numerical minority controls 8 out of 10 wards in a local government where they are not the majority. That is not representation, that is suppression.

Supreme Court, SC/CV/1033/2023:
“INEC’s failure to act amounts to disenfranchisement.”

This isn’t about ethnicity, it’s about equity. No one asked INEC to reassign anyone’s “ancestral land.” What was demanded and what the Court upheld, is fair political representation based on population, geography and justice not the residue of colonial favoritism.

Prof. Obaro Ikime wrote:
“Itsekiris enjoyed artificial advantage under British rule. That imbalance must end.”

And that is the real fear. You fear the map. You fear the numbers. You fear democracy. Because when the truth is drawn on paper, your illusion of dominance disappears. The Supreme Court did not speak for any tribe, it spoke for justice. And justice is what you fear the most.

ITSEKIRI ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF WARRI

The claim that the Itsekiri are the original and continuous inhabitants of Warri is a colonial fabrication, dressed up as heritage and repeated as propaganda. The truth is very different and it is documented in history, in court judgments and in colonial records.

The so-called Itsekiri monarchy was never established in 1480. That myth was manufactured to elevate a small coastal merchant class into something they never were, rulers of a land that never belonged to them. The title “Olu of Warri” was not ancestral; it was created by British colonial officers in 1936 to replace the original tribal title “Olu of Itsekiri.” This stunt triggered protests from Ijaw and Urhobo communities, who rejected the attempt to impose one tribe’s authority over multi-ethnic lands they never controlled.

Colonial Office Record CO 554/120/5: “The title ‘Olu of Warri’ is a recent invention, causing unrest among Ijoh and Urhobo populations.”

Your foundation myth begins with Ginuwa but even that story falls apart. Ginuwa was not a founder; he was a banished Benin prince who fled into lands already occupied by Ijaw and Urhobo people. He came as a stranger, not a sovereign. He met landlords, not empty territory. His descendants later twisted hospitality into false ownership.

Prof. Philip Igbafe, 1979: “The Olu’s authority was limited to Itsekiri people only.”

And what about land ownership? Every documented oil lease, trade right and colonial treaty signed in Warri was with Ijaw and Urhobo chiefs never with the Olu or any Itsekiri chief. The British, who catalogued land ownership for taxation and administrative purposes, consistently recognized Ijaw and Urhobo landlords across the creeks and inland territories.

National Archives, CSO 26/Vol. 6/08549: “Ijaw and Urhobo were the recognized landlords in Warri leases.”

Colonial Dispatch CO 554/124/3, 1938: “It is inappropriate to assign Ijaw lands to Jekris (Itsekiris) who have no customary rights.”

Even the Nigerian courts have rejected your inflated land claims repeatedly. In Shell v. Tiebo VII (1996), the Supreme Court affirmed Ijaw ownership of the Escravos area. In Ojakovo v. Ajomiwe (1961), the court ruled that Urhobos owned Okere. In E.E. Sillo v. Military Governor of Mid-West (1973), the Ijaw were affirmed as the rightful owners of Ogbe-Ijoh lands. These are not fabrications, these are legal facts that crush the fantasy of Itsekiri territorial dominance.

And now to the name “Warri” itself. The Itsekiri claim it derives from “Iwere,” but that is pure revisionism. The name Warri is not an Itsekiri invention, it is an Ijaw word. Derived from “Ware” or “Wari,” it means “house,” “resting place,” or “settlement” in the Ijaw language. This term was used by the Ijaws of Gbaramatu, Ogbe-Ijoh and Egbema long before the Itsekiri arrived, long before any Olu was enthroned and even before the Portuguese dropped anchor.

Prof. E.J. Alagoa, A History of the Niger Delta, 1972: “Place-names such as Warri originated from Ijoid linguistic roots, describing settlements along the creeks.”

British Expedition Logs, 1849: “The settlement along the Warri River known locally as ‘Wari’ was inhabited by canoe men and traders of the Ijo tribe.”

It was the Ijaw people, not the Itsekiri who gave meaning and identity to this region. The Portuguese and British merely adapted the Ijaw term “Wari” into “Warree” and then “Warri.” Your claim to the name is another stolen garment like the title, like the land, like the throne.

So let’s put this plainly:
You are not the original inhabitants. You were not the founders. You were not the rulers.
The Ijaw and Urhobo people are not your tenants, they are your landlords.

And no amount of false history, borrowed crowns or colonial titles can change that.

THE ITSEKIRI DECEIT ON INEC DELINEATION: STOP PREACHING TRANSPARENCY WHILE HIDING FRAUD

The recent claim that the Itsekiri people “welcome INEC’s delineation” is not just hypocritical, it is a masterclass in gaslighting. Those who have spent decades manipulating census data, rigging ward structures and lobbying behind closed doors now want to parade as champions of transparency? No. You cannot wear the cloak of fairness while clinging to the tools of injustice.

For nearly 30 years, Warri South-West Local Government has operated under a grotesquely skewed ward system: 8 wards handed to the Itsekiri minority, 2 to the Ijaw majority and none to the Urhobo. The LGA was created in 1996, yet INEC failed to carry out the constitutionally mandated ward delineation ever since. This wasn’t an oversight, it was a carefully maintained fraud. Section 112 of the 1999 Constitution and Section 9 of the Electoral Act both require delineation based on population, geography and administrative convenience. But in Warri South-West, INEC operated on silence because the silence favored you.

INEC Memo, Delta State Office, 2005:
“The ward structure in Warri South-West LGA does not reflect actual population or settlement patterns and should be reviewed.”

Now you pretend to fear “ethnic lobbying”? That’s rich, coming from the same Itsekiri elite who lobbied the military in 1997 to move the LGA headquarters from Ogbe-Ijoh to Ogidigben, a brazen act that triggered bloodshed and a regional crisis. The same ones who burned down INEC offices in 2003 when ward creation didn’t favor them. The same ones who, in 2023, whispered their way through Abuja to block the implementation of Timinimi v. INEC (SC/CV/1033/2023) a Supreme Court judgment that exposed your artificial advantage.

Premium Times, March 3, 2024:
“INEC’s delineation of Warri South-West stalls amid pressure from ethnic stakeholders in Abuja.”

The real fear here is not intimidation. It’s exposure. Because when the numbers speak, the truth is undeniable: Ijaw communities, Gbaramatu, Ogbe-Ijoh, Isaba, Egbema, make up over 70% of Warri South-West in both population and landmass. Urhobo communities dominate key parts of Warri South. And the Itsekiri? Scattered along coastal pockets with exaggerated political weight.

National Population Commission Internal Report, 2006:
“Itsekiri constitute less than 25% of Warri South-West’s population.”

INEC Ward Assessment Survey, 2022:
“Ijaw and Urhobo communities have far more polling units and settlement clusters than Itsekiri.”

This is what you fear. That once INEC does its job, your bloated ward count will deflate like the lie it is. That democracy, when applied with accuracy, will strip away the decades-long benefit you’ve enjoyed under a broken system.

And the courts have already ruled. Timinimi v. INEC was not an opinion, it was a Supreme Court mandate. INEC was ordered to complete the delineation process in Warri South-West in line with the Constitution. No one tribe was named because the truth didn’t need naming. The system had to be corrected. Period.

Supreme Court Judgment, March 3, 2023:
“INEC has a constitutional duty to complete the delineation of wards in Warri South-West to reflect lawful representation.”

Yet you resist it. You stall it. You twist it. Then come out in public to talk about “free and fair” process. But fairness terrifies you, because it ends your monopoly.

You also pretend to speak for “all indigenous stakeholders.” But where was your consultation when you renamed the Olu of Itsekiri to “Olu of Warri” in 1952, a title that sparked resistance across ethnic lines? Where was your inclusiveness when you opposed Ogbe-Ijoh’s ward creation or when you tried to annex Agbassa and Okere — Urhobo ancestral lands into your false domain? You don’t speak for Warri. You speak for a minority tribal elite clinging to a legacy of advantage that justice now threatens to erase.

Let it be clear: you cannot delay justice and call it transparency. INEC must rise above the pressure, the lobbying, the ethnic propaganda and do what the law and the Supreme Court demands.

DON’T ACCUSE US OF WAR RHETORIC WHILE YOU LIGHT THE MATCH

The claim by the Itsekiri that the Ijaw letter contained “inflammatory war rhetoric” is not only dishonest but a vile attempt to rewrite history and paint the true victims as aggressors. Quoting the phrase “if injustice continues, the consequences will not be poetic” and branding it as dangerous is pure hypocrisy coming from those who have weaponized political manipulation, historical falsehood and physical violence for decades. That line was not a threat, it was a warning born from experience. Because if history has taught Warri anything, it is that the Itsekiri elite have never respected peace unless it secures their tribal supremacy.

Let us remind the world who truly incites and wages war when justice threatens their monopoly. In 1997, when the federal government rightly sited the Warri South-West Local Government headquarters in Ogbe-Ijoh, a historically and legally Ijaw territory, Itsekiri elites responded not with court petitions but with coordinated violence. Backed by military officers and political godfathers, over 30 Ijaw communities were burnt to the ground. Thousands were displaced, dozens killed. It was one of the bloodiest ethnic pogroms in the region’s modern history, all to oppose the lawful siting of a local council headquarters.

Daily Times, March 25, 1997:

“Ijaw and Urhobo towns razed in violent Itsekiri backlash against new Warri South-West headquarters location.”

This same violent instinct returned in 2003, when Itsekiri youths burned down the INEC office in Warri after internal boundary talks didn’t favor them. That’s right an act of political terrorism, with zero convictions and no apologies. Yet today, those who torched democratic infrastructure dare to call a written warning “incitement.”

Till date, Itsekiri groups continue to mobilize under the radar, stockpiling arms under the guise of oil surveillance in Ugborodo and Escravos, preparing for resistance not against criminals but against truth. If you claim to be peaceful, then disarm your riverine militias. If you respect your Ijaw and Urhobo neighbors, stop calling them tenants on their ancestral lands. And if you value democracy, stop lobbying Abuja to suppress a Supreme Court judgment you couldn’t overturn.

The same Itsekiri groups accusing the Ijaw of threats have for years waged legal and media wars to erase Ijaw and Urhobo wards, rewrite our history and claim ownership of areas you neither built nor owned. Your entire campaign is driven by fear, fear that INEC’s long-overdue delineation will reflect what you cannot erase: the truth of Ijaw and Urhobo demographic majority, territorial ownership and legal victories.

We did not threaten violence. We went to court. We won. In Timinimi v. INEC (SC/CV/1033/2023), the Supreme Court held that INEC violated the constitutional rights of the Ijaw by refusing to complete the ward delineation exercise in Warri South-West. The court ordered INEC to fulfill its lawful obligation. That ruling didn’t favor any tribe, it favored justice. Yet, since then, you have lobbied through proxies like Daisy Danjuma and played the ethnic victim to stall implementation.

So when we say “the consequences will not be poetic,” we mean this: when a nation delays justice for too long, it opens the door to instability. That is not a threat,it is a historical fact.

The Ijaw and Urhobo peoples have exercised restraint. But we will not be silenced while being politically strangled. You say you don’t seek conflict, then stop igniting it through suppression, lies and manipulation. You say you respect us, then respect our legal victories, our land rights and our constitutional voice.

Truth is not violence. Resistance to injustice is not war. We are not the aggressors, you are. If you want peace, support the immediate release of the INEC delineation report, revert the fraudulent colonial title “Olu of Warri” to its original “Olu of Itsekiri,” and stop pretending that the tribe that has ruled with a minority hand has suddenly become the defender of coexistence.

Warri has suffered enough. Justice delayed again will not just provoke emotion, it will provoke history.

THE OLU OF WARRI DESERVES RESPECT, NOT INSULTS: WHAT A LAUGHABLE RHETORICS

The claim that the Olu of Warri “deserves respect” and that criticisms against him are “unprovoked” is a laughable distortion of both history and contemporary reality. Respect is earned, not imposed by colonial fiat or propaganda campaigns. The truth, backed by court records, colonial archives and historical scholarship, is that the title “Olu of Warri” is not an ancient throne, but a post-1936 British invention, designed to force indirect rule on the diverse peoples of the Warri region. Until that time, the monarch was rightly styled as “Olu of Itsekiri” a tribal king over the Itsekiri people only, not over the Ijaw, not over the Urhobo and certainly not over the region called Warri.

Colonial Record CO 554/120/5 – British Government Report, 1936:
“The title ‘Olu of Warri’ is a recent invention and has caused considerable unrest among the Ijoh and Urhobo populations who were not subjects of the Olu.”

The Ijaw and Urhobo people of Warri did not accept the imposition of a monarch whose historical roots lie in Benin exile and Itsekiri minority claims. The first Olu, Ginuwa, was not a founding king but a fugitive from Benin, granted refuge near the creeks of already-settled Ijaw and Urhobo territories. He did not conquer or inherit the land, he was permitted to stay. There was no conquest, no treaty, no recognition by surrounding peoples. To now parade that lineage as a pan-Warri monarchy is an insult to truth and to every non-Itsekiri ethnic group in the region.

Prof. Philip Igbafe, “Benin Under British Administration” (1979):
“The Olu was never sovereign over Warri as a whole. His authority was limited to a section of the Itsekiri community.”

So when we say the Olu’s throne is “borrowed,” we do so based on historical record, not malice. The Itsekiri elites borrowed the name “Warri” to elevate their local king to a regional title he never historically held. They borrowed British power to impose a monarchy on communities that had their own systems of governance. They borrowed Nigerian political structures to sustain an imbalance created by colonial designs. And now they demand silence when truth calls out the fraud?

The Itsekiri monarchy is not a symbol of unity, it is a symbol of exclusion, territorial claims and historical distortion. It has been used not to foster peace, but to appropriate lands, silence dissent and manipulate electoral structures in Warri. From opposing ward delineation to refusing the recognition of Ijaw and Urhobo ancestral autonomy, the Itsekiri royal institution has repeatedly undermined the peace it pretends to symbolize.

And let us not forget the multiple court cases that affirm this. In Shell v. Tiebo VII (1996), the Supreme Court upheld that Ijaw communities, not the Olu, were the rightful landowners in the Escravos region. In E.E. Sillo v. Mid-West Governor (1973), Itsekiri land claims over Ogbe-Ijoh were struck down. In Ojakovo v. Ajomiwe (1961), the courts affirmed Urhobo ownership of lands in Okere, rejecting Itsekiri encroachment.

What peace can there be when one ethnic throne falsely claims jurisdiction over people and lands that never belonged to it? What unity exists when the title “Olu of Warri” erases the rightful presence of the Ijaw and Urhobo peoples whose ancestors were already thriving in Warri long before the Itsekiri emerged as a merchant class on the coastal fringe?

This is not an attack, it is an exposure. A reckoning. A long-overdue correction. We do not owe blind reverence to any institution built on colonial favoritism, historical fiction and tribal expansionism. We recognize the Olu of Itsekiri, not the fraudulent claim of “Olu of Warri.” Until the title is corrected, peace will remain fragile, because no people will be politically or spiritually subjugated by a throne they never consented to.

OUR DEMANDS

We, the Ijaw people of Warri Federal Constituency, the true indigenous majority are not begging for justice. We are demanding it.

INEC must immediately publish the final ward delineation report for Warri South-West LGA in line with the Supreme Court ruling SC/CV/1033/2023.
The new wards must reflect the actual population and settlement patterns, not outdated colonial preferences or political manipulation.
No stakeholder should be allowed to use ethnicity, influence or elite pressure to stall constitutional responsibility. The law is above private interest.
All future electoral processes in Warri South-West must be conducted using the corrected ward structure. Anything less will not be accepted.

FINAL WARNING

Let it be known across Nigeria and the international community: we will not accept political slavery disguised as administrative delay. The patience of our people has limits. If INEC allows itself to be used as a tool for ethnic suppression, it will be held responsible for the consequences that follow.

We have followed the law. We have won in court. We have waited long enough. This is not a plea, it is a final warning.

Any further delay is a provocation. Any attempt to tamper with the outcome is an invitation to resistance.

CONCLUSION

Justice cannot be postponed forever. The truth is known, the law has spoken and the map must now reflect reality. No tribe has a divine right to rule others. The era of forged titles, inflated numbers and quiet oppression is over.

Let INEC do its job.

Let the wards be published.

Let democracy work.

Signed:

Chief, Tiemopere Joshua
(President)

Chief, Ebikeme T. Godstime
(Secretary)

Ijaw Stakeholders of Warri Federal Constituency

Cc:

The President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)

The National Security Adviser

The National Assembly