Rebuttal To The False Claims Made By Itsekiris On Establishment Of Warri Local Government -

By Uche Alvin

The attempt by Itsekiri propagandists to cite the Instrument Establishing the Warri Local Government Council, 1980 as proof of Itsekiri ownership of Warri lands is both legally misconceived and historically false. Let us analyze the facts comprehensively.

Legal Context of the 1980 Instrument

The Instrument Establishing the Warri Local Government Council (23rd January 1980) was an administrative law, made pursuant to Section 3 of the Local Government Establishment Law. Its purpose was to delineate administrative authority for governance, not to adjudicate land ownership.

No section of that law conferred radical title of land on the Itsekiri or any group. It merely listed administrative districts for ease of governance. By constitutional doctrine, administrative laws cannot override ownership rights as established in court judgments and customary law.

This aligns with Section 44(1) of the 1979 Constitution (in force at the time) and Section 43 of the 1999 Constitution, which protect the rights of every Nigerian citizen and community to acquire and own immovable property anywhere in Nigeria.

Historical Origin of Warri Township

The Warri Township itself was a British colonial creation in 1906. Before then, Warri as an urban township did not exist. The lands on which the township was founded belonged to the Ogbe-Ijoh people (Ijaw).

This is confirmed by the Warri Township Intelligence and Assessment Report (Mr. Prethero, 12 June 1928, CSO File 20653, National Archives Ibadan), which stated:

“The original Warri Township was a surveyed land of 360 acres belonging to Ogbe-Ijoh hamlet, inhabited largely by Ijaw fishermen, with trade connections to Agbassa Sobos and later contact with Okere Jekris.”

Thus, the Ijaws were the aboriginal landowners and the British superimposed Warri Township upon their territory.

Colonial Records Disproving Itsekiri Ownership

Numerous colonial files debunk Itsekiri’s land monopoly propaganda:

CSO 26/Vol.6/08549 (1932): The District Officer cautioned against fraudulent claims by Itsekiri over lands belonging to Ijaw and Urhobo.

CO 554/120/5 (1948 Colonial Office Report): Stated categorically that Ijaw and Urhobo were the actual landowners, while Itsekiri were given representation disproportionate to their numbers.

Warri Province Intelligence Report (1938): Reiterated that Itsekiris were migrants from Ode-Itsekiri, not original owners of Ogbe-Ijoh or Gbaramatu lands.

Judicial Authorities

The Nigerian courts and even the Privy Council consistently refused to grant blanket ownership to the Itsekiris.

In Ometan v. Dore Numa (1933, Privy Council), the court held that Dore Numa acted as a government trustee, not as owner.

In Shell v. Tiebo VII (1996) 4 NWLR (Pt. 445) 657, the Supreme Court reaffirmed Ijaw ownership of certain Warri lands, awarding compensation to the Ijaw.

In Timinimi v. INEC (SC/CV/1033/2023), the Supreme Court ruled in favour of equitable ward delineation to reflect Ijaw and Urhobo presence, further invalidating Itsekiri’s monopoly claims.

Constitutional Mandates on Equity and Representation

Section 14(4) of the 1999 Constitution mandates fair and equitable representation in governance to reflect the character of communities.

Section 287(1) of the 1999 Constitution compels all persons and authorities (including INEC) to enforce Supreme Court judgments—hence the final delineation must reflect Ijaw and Urhobo rights.

Therefore, to wave the 1980 Instrument as proof of Itsekiri ownership is a misuse of law and a distortion of constitutional intent.

The Tenant Fallacy

Itsekiri elites love to label Ijaw and Urhobo as “tenants.” This is a linguistic fraud. Historical evidence (Portuguese accounts like Duarte Pacheco Pereira, 1485) recorded Ijaw settlements along Escravos and Warri rivers centuries before Itsekiri migrations. No community can be tenant to a later comer.

Even under Nigerian property law, a trustee or administrative authority cannot become landlord over the beneficiaries (see Ladunni v. Kukoyi (1972) 3 SC 31).

Conclusion:

The Instrument Establishing Warri Local Government Council (1980) was never a land ownership decree, it was merely an administrative framework. The Ijaw and Urhobo peoples remain the aboriginal owners of Warri lands, backed by colonial records, constitutional rights and judicial precedents.

To continue to brand the rightful landowners as “tenants” is not only a lie but also a reckless distortion of history.

As Section 1(3) of the 1999 Constitution makes clear: “If any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and that other law shall, to the extent of its inconsistency, be void.”

Therefore, no administrative instrument, no propaganda and no Itsekiri manipulation can erase Ijaw and Urhobo ancestral ownership of Warri.